Who are the 2 Witnesses in Revelation?

[rwb]

The two lampstands are two churches.

"As for the mystery of the seven stars which you saw in My right hand, and the seven golden lampstands: the seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches (Rev. 1:20)."

Two candlesticks symbolizing the church under the new covenant, and two olive trees symbolizing faithful remnant of Israel under the old covenant.

Ecclesiastes 4:9-12 (KJV) Two are better than one; because they have a good reward for their labour. For if they fall, the one will lift up his fellow: but woe to him that is alone when he falleth; for he hath not another to help him up. Again, if two lie together, then they have heat: but how can one be warm alone? And if one prevail against him, two shall withstand him; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken.

Exodus 4:14-16 (KJV) And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Moses, and he said, Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know that he can speak well. And also, behold, he cometh forth to meet thee: and when he seeth thee, he will be glad in his heart. And thou shalt speak unto him, and put words in his mouth: and I will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do. And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people: and he shall be, even he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou shalt be to him instead of God.

Acts 7:37-38 (KJV) This is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear. This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:

Exodus 4:17 (KJV) And thou shalt take this rod in thine hand, wherewith thou shalt do signs.

Mark 6:7 (KJV) And he called unto him the twelve, and began to send them forth by two and two; and gave them power over unclean spirits;

Mark 16:15-18 (KJV) And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

The Kingdom has been and is being built as the faithful church is sent out to proclaim the Gospel of Christ. Through the Law and Prophets of old and the Gospel of Christ and indwelling Spirit of the new.

 

[Veritas1]

Revelation 11:3 'And I will grant my two witnesses authority to prophesy for 1260 days, wearing sackcloth.'
According to Jewish tradition, Moses and Elijah would return to preach repentance before the Day of the Lord. (Dt 18:15 and Mal 3:22-24). In the New Testament, Moses and Elijah represented the Law and the Prophets bearing witness to Christ. (Lk 9:28-36). So, it follows that the two witnesses represent the entire Church bearing living and perpetual witness to Christ. What did Christ say to His disciples just before He ascended to heaven? 'It is not for you to know the times or seasons that the Father has set by His own authority. But you will rrceive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria and to the ends of the earth' (Acts 1:7-8).
Were not two witnesses required as an essential condition of valid testimony? (Dt 19:15; Jn 8:17; Mk 6:7).
This passage is also connected to Zechariah 4:2-7.
The phrase 'wearing sackcloth' is a sign of mourning or penance (Gen 37:14; Jer 4:8; Jonah 3:5). When people came to Jesus and asked Him why His disciples did not fast like the Pharisees and John the Baptist's disciples, Jesus said: 'The days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast on that day' (Mk 2:20).
In Zechariah 4:1-14, the two olive trees represent Zerubbabel and Joshua, two anointed servants of the Lord. The 7 branched lampstand represented God who inspired and strengthened these two leaders who had been entrusted with the political and religious reconstruction of Israel and the Temple in Jerusalem.
The two leaders appointed to build the New Temple, the Church of Christ are symbolised here, namely Peter and Paul. Like Moses and Elijah who were witnesses to the transfiguration, Peter and Paul were witnesses to the Resurrection.
In Revelation 11:4 the two olive trees and lampstands stand for similar realities. In Revelation 1:12, 20 the lampstand signifies a Christian community. Hence, in Rev 11:4, the symbolism refers to the Church, nourished by the Spirit and shining like a lamp to bear witness to the divine Light. Standing before the Lord are Christians living in the presence of God and serving Him by their testimony.
Elijah had brought down fire from heaven upon his enemies (2 Kings 1:9-12; Sirach 48:1-3). The Lord said to Jeremiah: 'I am now making my words in your mouth a fire, and this people wood, and the fire shall destroy them' (Jer 5:14). And here in Revelation 11:5, the words of these witnesses are like fire. Only when they have completed their witnessing will they be killed.

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

Moses makes a lot of sense but I cannot get past the fact that he would have to die twice and the Scripture is clear than we die only once. That is why I think it has to be Enoch and Elijah and not Moses IF it is Old Testament Saints doing the witnessing during the upcoming tribulation. I do think John meant two literal humans and not symbols, but I am not at all sure who they will be. It does seem like God saved exactly two people from dying (Moses and Elijah) and we know at one point some thought John the Baptist was a returned Old Testament Saint so the concept seems Scriptural but Revelation doesn't tell us for sure who this will be. But I don't know why else God would have spared Enoch and Elijah though I know they were holier than most people but no one has lived a sinless life except the Lord Jesus so it just makes sense that Enoch and Elijah will be the two prophets in Revelation because otherwise they would never die, but then again God can do anything He wants to do and I'm just a mere mortal trying to understand Scripture.

 

[rwb]

Revelation 11:3 (KJV) And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

John was told that he must prophesy, and the two witnesses prophesy, it seems they have something in common. Since John is a believer, he is the Church, and the two candlesticks are the church. Does this not indicate the church has been called to be witnesses of Christ on earth?

Revelation 10:11 (KJV) And he said unto me, Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.

 

[Timtofly]

Moses makes a lot of sense but I cannot get past the fact that he would have to die twice and the Scripture is clear than we die only once. That is why I think it has to be Enoch and Elijah and not Moses IF it is Old Testament Saints doing the witnessing during the upcoming tribulation. I do think John meant two literal humans and not symbols, but I am not at all sure who they will be. It does seem like God saved exactly two people from dying (Moses and Elijah) and we know at one point some thought John the Baptist was a returned Old Testament Saint so the concept seems Scriptural but Revelation doesn't tell us for sure who this will be. But I don't know why else God would have spared Enoch and Elijah though I know they were holier than most people but no one has lived a sinless life except the Lord Jesus so it just makes sense that Enoch and Elijah will be the two prophets in Revelation because otherwise they would never die, but then again God can do anything He wants to do and I'm just a mere mortal trying to understand Scripture.

Unless Enoch and Elijah are the same person.

Moses told people he was going out to die. That does not mean he did. Satan was never given Moses' dead body. Probably because there was not one to give.

Two people in the OT who literally walked with God in God's presence. I think Moses was given an incorruptible physical body on Mount Sinai. But even an incorruptible physical body can be killed. That body that was lying in Jerusalem for 3.5 days never decayed nor decomposed. At the end, those bodies just got up like nothing had happened, then ascended to heaven.

The verse about dying once and then the judgment, is just letting us know all have to shed Adam's flesh and blood. That flesh cannot enter Paradise. Adam's flesh is dead and corruptible with sin. All have to give account for the choices they made. And some claim we have no free will. Why would we have to answer for everything God made us do, if it was God making us do everything?

Enoch was given an incorruptible physical body as well. Probably came back as Elijah, and probably more than once. But John the Baptist was not Elijah returned. Two separate individual humans. John the Baptist came in the spirit of Elijah. John in Revelation claims 4 witnesses though. Two olive trees and two lampstands. Moses and Elijah witnessed in the OT. Two others would witness in the NT.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Moses told people he was going out to die. That does not mean he did. Satan was never given Moses' dead body. Probably because there was not one to give.

Huh?? I quote God in Joshua 1:2. "Moses my servant is DEAD; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel."

But even an incorruptible physical body can be killed.

HUH?? The very definition of the word "incorruptible" means that it can never experience corruption again, once that body is resurrected to life again. "Neither CAN they die anymore: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection." (Luke 20:36).

John in Revelation claims 4 witnesses though. Two olive trees and two lampstands.

Naww, that was only two witnesses total in Revelation 11:4. The word "kai" does not necessarily mean two olive trees in addition to two candlesticks. The word "kai" is often used in an explanatory sense, and concerning the two witnesses, it would read "These are the two olive trees, (kai) namely, the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth."

Back in Ezekiel 44:15, the "anointed ones" were the anointed high priests, whose job description included "standing before the God of the earth" when they entered the holy of holies.

The two witnesses of Revelation 11 were two men who had been high priests in Israel. And since there are no longer any high priests in Israel, (and haven't been since AD 70), this prophecy must of necessity be fulfilled before those high priests went out of existence at that time.

 

[Timtofly]

Huh?? I quote God in Joshua 1:2. "Moses my servant is DEAD; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel."



HUH?? The very definition of the word "incorruptible" means that it can never experience corruption again, once that body is resurrected to life again. "Neither CAN they die anymore: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection." (Luke 20:36).



Naww, that was only two witnesses total in Revelation 11:4. The word "kai" does not necessarily mean two olive trees in addition to two candlesticks. The word "kai" is often used in an explanatory sense, and concerning the two witnesses, it would read "These are the two olive trees, (kai) namely, the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth."

Back in Ezekiel 44:15, the "anointed ones" were the anointed high priests, whose job description included "standing before the God of the earth" when they entered the holy of holies.

The two witnesses of Revelation 11 were two men who had been high priests in Israel. And since there are no longer any high priests in Israel, (and haven't been since AD 70), this prophecy must of necessity be fulfilled before those high priests went out of existence at that time.

Are you going to say there was not a single lampstand in the OT connected to the two olive branches as well? Just the two olive branches?

Did God lie when He said Adam was dead, yet still lived 900 years. God did not lie when he said Moses was dead. Yet Moses was alive with God, because Satan did not get the body, meaning the body was not dead. Moses was no longer among the living on earth. Neither was he in Abraham's bosom in sheol, under the death, David called sleep, or the valley of the shadow of death.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Yet Moses was alive with God,

Yes, although Moses's physical body was dead on Mount Nebo, Moses' spirit was alive (since there is no soul sleep), but his soul was not yet in God's presence in heaven when Joshua 1:2 was written. Moses's spirit was in Paradise (which is not heaven). Paradise was where Jesus's spirit went for those 3 days and nights before He ascended to heaven that first time on His resurrection day.

We are told exactly when the spirits of the saints were allowed access to heaven. It was after Christ's ascension on His resurrection day, as specified in Revelation 14:13 when Christ had just risen from the dead and raised the bodies of the Matthew 27:52-53 saints. From that time forward, it was "Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth..." From that time onward, for the spirits of the saints, once they were absent from the body in death, they would be present with the Lord in heaven, as Paul also said in 2 Corinthians 4:8.

Also, we are told exactly when the resurrected bodies of mankind were to be allowed entrance into heaven for the first time. It would be after the seven plagues had been poured out (Revelation 15:8). "And the temple was filled with smoke from the glory of God, and from his power; and no man was able to enter into the temple, till the seven plagues of the seven angels were fulfilled."

Until that time when the seven plagues were done, no man was able to ascend into heaven yet, as Jesus told Nicodemus in John 3:13. Christ had to be the very first one to bodily ascend to heaven as the "First-begotten" and the "First-born from the dead" to arrive there. And He arrived in heaven with a glorified body of flesh and bone that had come out of the grave, just as we also in heaven after the final resurrection will eventually share this same type of changed, glorified resurrection body that Christ had. The "First-fruits" of the resurrection "harvest" is of the very same nature as the rest of the "harvest".

Are you going to say there was not a single lampstand in the OT connected to the two olive branches as well? Just the two olive branches?

I'm saying that Revelation 11:4's two witnesses were identified as being the fulfillment of the two candlesticks which were also the two olive trees. It doesn't change the number of the witnesses, which only amounted to two men total - two men who had been high priests, that is.

 

[Guojing]

Moses makes a lot of sense but I cannot get past the fact that he would have to die twice and the Scripture is clear than we die only once. That is why I think it has to be Enoch and Elijah and not Moses IF it is Old Testament Saints doing the witnessing during the upcoming tribulation. I do think John meant two literal humans and not symbols, but I am not at all sure who they will be. It does seem like God saved exactly two people from dying (Moses and Elijah) and we know at one point some thought John the Baptist was a returned Old Testament Saint so the concept seems Scriptural but Revelation doesn't tell us for sure who this will be. But I don't know why else God would have spared Enoch and Elijah though I know they were holier than most people but no one has lived a sinless life except the Lord Jesus so it just makes sense that Enoch and Elijah will be the two prophets in Revelation because otherwise they would never die, but then again God can do anything He wants to do and I'm just a mere mortal trying to understand Scripture.

If you believe the main objective of the Tribulation is for God to deal with the nation of Israel, it makes more sense for the 2 of them to be Moses and Elijah, everyone from the nation is familiar with them.

Enoch has no connection with the nation of Israel.

 

[3 Resurrections]

If you believe the main objective of the Tribulation is for God to deal with the nation of Israel, it makes more sense for the 2 of them to be Moses and Elijah, everyone from the nation is familiar with them.

It makes even better sense that these two witnesses had been high priests of the land of Israel; the only ones under Mosaic law that could directly "stand before the Lord" in the holy of holies.

 

[DavidPT]

Also, we are told exactly when the resurrected bodies of mankind were to be allowed entrance into heaven for the first time. It would be after the seven plagues had been poured out (Revelation 15:8). "And the temple was filled with smoke from the glory of God, and from his power; and no man was able to enter into the temple, till the seven plagues of the seven angels were fulfilled."

And this appears to destroy pretty much everything you have been arguing and continue to argue in regards to this. Obviously, and I am meaning that, as in undeniably obvious, none, as in zero, of the last 7 plagues have been poured out yet. The first one can't even get poured out until there are first those that have the mark of the beast, and have been worshiping his image.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Obviously, and I am meaning that, as in undeniably obvious, none, as in zero, of the last 7 plagues have been poured out yet. The first one can't even get poured out until there are first those that have the mark of the beast, and have been worshiping his image.

That mark of the Roman Sea Beast imposed by the Judean Land Beast on their own people the Jews began back in 19 BC and only lasted until AD 66. It's a matter of ancient history by now. It was the Roman-authorized, high priesthood-sanctioned production of the imitation Tyrian shekel minted in Jerusalem, with its abominable images and inscriptions giving honor to the gods of the Romans. In clear violation of God's laws, the high priesthood required that this coin alone be used in the temple for buying and selling sacrificial items for worship.

If John wrote that his revealed prophecies of the future in Revelation were "at hand" in the time of his generation (Revelation 1:3 and 22:10) and were composed of "things which are about to be hereafter" (Revelation 1:19), then these 7 plagues have already been poured out. I do not agree that it is "undeniably obvious" that they have not happened yet. John is very clear as to the imminent timing of his prophecies' fulfillment.

After all, the "unclean spirits" coming out of the mouth of Satan, the Scarlet Beast, and the False Prophet in Revelation 16:13 were going to "pass out of the land" after the AD 70 siege (Zechariah 13:2). If those unclean spirits were gone after AD 70, then they can't very well show up again in the future.

In addition, the high priest "kings of the earth" which were gathered together at Armageddon in Revelation 16:14 are something that doesn't exist in the world anymore since AD 70, so this prophecy had to occur while there were still high priests around to participate in this.

In addition, those who were worthy of having blood to drink in the third plague were specifically said to be those who had shed the blood of saints and prophets. This was the accusation made by the martyr Stephen and Christ against the Jews and Old Jerusalem. Stephen accused the Pharisees, "Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One...." Christ also accused the city, saying, "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee..." This third plague would be poured out on these who were said to be guilty of this offense of shedding blood of the saints and prophets, which is not a future punishment to be doled out, since that offending generation is long since passed away.

In addition, John said the Scarlet Beast of Revelation 17:8 was "about to arise out of the pit" (in his days), and was also about to go into destruction (also in John's days). If the Scarlet Beast was mentioned in Revelation 16:13 with an unclean spirit coming out of its mouth, this had to be accomplished before that Scarlet Beast went into destruction - in John's days.

There is a problem when no attention is paid to the time-relevant terms in Revelation. It sends interpretations off in the wrong direction. Every one of those seven plagues have already been poured out on their intended target. Which means access to heaven's temple for bodily-resurrected saints was opened up after those seven plagues were done back in the first century.

 

[DavidPT]

That mark of the Roman Sea Beast imposed by the Judean Land Beast on their own people the Jews began back in 19 BC and only lasted until AD 66. It's a matter of ancient history by now. It was the Roman-authorized, high priesthood-sanctioned production of the imitation Tyrian shekel minted in Jerusalem, with its abominable images and inscriptions giving honor to the gods of the Romans. In clear violation of God's laws, the high priesthood required that this coin alone be used in the temple for buying and selling sacrificial items for worship.

If John wrote that his revealed prophecies of the future in Revelation were "at hand" in the time of his generation (Revelation 1:3 and 22:10) and were composed of "things which are about to be hereafter" (Revelation 1:19), then these 7 plagues have already been poured out. I do not agree that it is "undeniably obvious" that they have not happened yet. John is very clear as to the imminent timing of his prophecies' fulfillment.

After all, the "unclean spirits" coming out of the mouth of Satan, the Scarlet Beast, and the False Prophet in Revelation 16:13 were going to "pass out of the land" after the AD 70 siege (Zechariah 13:2). If those unclean spirits were gone after AD 70, then they can't very well show up again in the future.

In addition, the high priest "kings of the earth" which were gathered together at Armageddon in Revelation 16:14 are something that doesn't exist in the world anymore since AD 70, so this prophecy had to occur while there were still high priests around to participate in this.

In addition, those who were worthy of having blood to drink in the third plague were specifically said to be those who had shed the blood of saints and prophets. This was the accusation made by the martyr Stephen and Christ against the Jews and Old Jerusalem. Stephen accused the Pharisees, "Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One...." Christ also accused the city, saying, "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee..." This third plague would be poured out on these who were said to be guilty of this offense of shedding blood of the saints and prophets, which is not a future punishment to be doled out, since that offending generation is long since passed away.

In addition, John said the Scarlet Beast of Revelation 17:8 was "about to arise out of the pit" (in his days), and was also about to go into destruction (also in John's days). If the Scarlet Beast was mentioned in Revelation 16:13 with an unclean spirit coming out of its mouth, this had to be accomplished before that Scarlet Beast went into destruction - in John's days.

There is a problem when no attention is paid to the time-relevant terms in Revelation. It sends interpretations off in the wrong direction. Every one of those seven plagues have already been poured out on their intended target. Which means access to heaven's temple for bodily-resurrected saints was opened up after those seven plagues were done back in the first century.

IMO, it's a red flag when someone appears to have an answer for everything. No matter what I bring up, no matter what the subject matter involves, you have an answer for everything, apparently. It might be different if you were speculating about some of these things, and that you indicated you are, except you give the impression that you aren't, that everything is based on fact.

I knew an Amil years ago that no matter what I brought up, he had an immediate answer for what it was meaning, and that when I compared that with what the text involved indicated, I easily discerned that he was simply making the text mean whatever he wanted it to mean. I don't necessarily see you doing it in that manner, since you at least show how you are arriving at what you are. But what you two have in common though, you both seem to have an answer for everything no matter what the subject matter might be involving.

 

[3 Resurrections]

IMO, it's a red flag when someone appears to have an answer for everything. No matter what I bring up, no matter what the subject matter involves, you have an answer for everything, apparently. It might be different if you were speculating about some of these things, and that you indicated you are, except you give the impression that you aren't, that everything is based on fact.

Well, on the other hand, there are those on this forum and elsewhere who challenge Preterists (sometimes with scorn and mockery) that they don't have an answer for all the various questions about scripture prophecies. So I am sort of stuck between a rock and a hard place. Either I appear to you like someone forcing an answer on every question according to a so-called preconceived bias, or I am challenged that I don't have an answer for every question from scripture. No one can please everybody.

I believe scripture is available to answer questions on its own content. And I believe there will be historical or archaeological evidence that backs this up. Do I have remaining questions that I have no answer for yet? Of course, just like everyone else. But those things that I have found an answer for, these I put forward with a level of confidence. Not because of my own understanding, but from the surety that scripture itself provides . And I can respect everyone else who tries to do the same, even if we disagree.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Who do you think the 2 witnesses are in the book of Revelation? It seems to me that they have to be Elijah and Enoch, the only 2 people who have never died, because Hebrews 9:27 states "It is appointed to man to die once". Since Elijah and Enoch went to heaven without dying, and since angels cannot apparently die, it seems these are the only possible people. Thoughts?

How will we find God's answer to this? To accomplish this, we do not lead, we follow the scriptures. Not imaginative of men. We do not struggle against the Word, we surrender to its authority. For interpretations belong to God, and the Word of God "IS" the Bible. In order for us to come to true interpretation and hold sound doctrines, we must not theorize blindly as walking in darkness, but consider what is being conveyed in the 'light' of the scriptures. We must consider factors such as the cryptic representations or symbols, their context or setting, where else they are found, what they signified, and any other pertinent or contributing element of scripture which will affect our exegesis concerning these things.

The curious thing about many theologians' methodology is that though the language of Revelation is obviously symbolic in nature, almost incomprehensibly there are many who will insist that the book should be taken very literally. For example, some insist that the two witnesses described in this chapter must be seen as two very literal people. Their reasoning is that:

'otherwise, the many details of the chapter that speak of the Witnesses actions and the reactions of others to them would be rendered meaningless.' But it seems to me that this is an indefensible and self-serving position. For we see very similar symbolism throughout the book of Revelation. For example, the twenty-four elders with crowns, the four horsemen, the harlot woman who rides the beast, the ten kings, the four living creatures or beasts, the 144,000 of Israel, etc., etc. These are NOT literal, nor does it make their actions meaningless that we don't see them as literal. On the contrary, a literal understanding would make for absurd, forced, and untenable interpretations. Likewise, understanding these two witnesses of Revelation 11 as literally two olive trees, or two candlesticks is absurd. They are quite clearly portraying the very same symbolism which is used throughout the Bible, and it is only by examining that symbolism that we will come to understand its true meaning. I do not believe that we can understand the two witnesses of Revelation chapter eleven as two literal supernaturally empowered people who can turn waters into literal blood, and who literally kill everyone who tries to harm them by breathing fire out of their mouths upon them. Moreover, I believe that it is prudent (rather than careless) for the sound-minded Bible student to understand that God uses imagery and figures to illustrate spiritual truths. And as we shall see in this study, it is very significant that the loosing of the beast from the bottomless pit can only occur 'at the conclusion' of the time which God has given the two Witnesses to testify.

When we read in the book of Revelation, we need to examine chapters and verses in the light of the scriptures. The purpose is to determine what God Himself intends by the symbolism which He has inspired and illustrated there. In the end, this is what really matters in sound biblical hermeneutics. Everything else beside a Biblical interpretation is a private (personal) interpretation. What man may think God means by these symbols (without having Biblical validation) is mere speculation, and thus is not profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, or instruction in righteousness (2nd Timothy 3:16). It is God's Word faithfully harmonized which is profitable for truth. Understanding of God's imagery must originate from scripture, and not from prominent authors, world events, the political arena, or tradition. Though some say that because people think differently, they can never or honest approach to it, in the Spirit of truth which will guide us. The careful study and discernment of the Word is not an accident, and scripture was not given to confuse the masses. God is not the author of confusion, but we must 'receive' it in humility, as it was intended.

It is widely held that the broad range of differing interpretations by theologians today is due to the interpretive methodology they use. In fact, Theologians often wax poetic about their systems through a mountain of writings elucidating on their merits. But the simple truth is, Christians come to different interpretations because:

1.) of the way they have been taught
2.) they handle scripture carelessly
3.) they are not led by the Spirit
4.) they are partial or unobjective
5.) they do not always allow the Bible to interpret itself.

It is human nature to gravitate towards a political and worldly interpretation rather than the concept as defined in the doctrine of 'sola scriptura.' It is much easier to use the world as its own dictionary rather than use the Bible as its own dictionary. It's much simpler to compare the imagery of Kings to worldly nations rather than to compare scripture with scripture. But the sound interpretation of the Bible is 'by the Bible' alone. Neglecting this rule has led to the popularity of false and disjointed end-time books and Apocalyptic writings which only serve to turn itching ears away from the truth.