eli-kittim

[eli-kittim]

Are Christians Required to Support the Nation of Israel?

The restoration of Israel in Acts 1:6 is the answer to the disciples’ question in Matthew 24:3, when they asked: “Tell us … what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” In other words, Acts 1:6 is the answer to the question in Matthew 24:3! How did I arrive at this conclusion? Well, that’s the topic of this article. In Acts 1:6, the disciples asked what appears to be a rhetorical question (from the point of view of the author): “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?” It appears that this question is asked in order to make a point rather than to get an answer. The Greek text reads: ἀποκαθιστάνεις τὴν βασιλείαν τῷ Ἰσραήλ; The word ἀποκαθιστάνεις means “to restore.” Therefore, the author is seemingly tying the future coming of Jesus to the restoration of Israel. In this way, the restoration of Israel (Acts 1:6) becomes a key sign of Jesus’ coming and of the end of the age.

In other words, Israel becomes the key focal point of the end of the age, which tells us how, when, and where it will happen. In fact, the various references to future Israel in the Bible act as prophetic signs or clues that tell us how the end time will begin, where (or at which location) it will commence, and when (or at which point in time) it will happen. That seems to be the sole purpose of the various references to the future restoration of Israel in the Old Testament (see e.g. Ezekiel 36; 38:8; Daniel 9:24-27; Zechariah 12-14)!

In other words, the only reason Israel is mentioned is because it is the key prophetic sign of the times, not because Christians are obligated to add a Jewish flag to the cross or to support the State of Israel lest a curse of God might come upon them. To separate the Jews and Christians on racial grounds is a position that politicizes scripture and endorses all the things that Paul argued against in Galatians. This dispensational view upholds racism and Jewish supremacy by proclaiming the existence of an ethnic religion, a religion based on race and nationality (not on the condition of the heart; as in Jeremiah 31:33). And if it is called “national Israel,” it obviously discriminates against other peoples, races, and nations, while showing a total and complete disregard for the New Testament and for proper Biblical Exegesis!

In order to understand this topic, we need to begin with the basics. Christians are not biblically obligated to support the modern state of Israel. Even though some Christians, particularly Christian Zionists, believe in a theological and prophetic obligation to support Israel based on their own interpretations of the Old Testament, this is not, by any means, a universally held view within Christianity.

The Bible is not about ethnicity, racism, or nationalism. Galatians 3:28-29 explains that there is no national, racial, ethnic, social, or gender based discrimination among the people of God, for we are all one in Christ! In Romans 2:28-29, Paul redefines what the term Jew means in scripture as a spiritual term, not as a reference to race or ethnicity.

In essence, the Jews were simply custodians of the scriptures, not the only people chosen or loved by God: "For God does not show favoritism” (Romans 2:11). And their covenants were conditional, with blessings and curses accompanying their actions. They ultimately breached God’s covenant, that is, they failed to fulfill their obligations under the agreement, which led to exile and suffering, including the destruction of their two kingdoms. In fact, in Jeremiah 3:8, God gave Israel an official certificate of divorce. Similarly, in Matthew 21:43, Jesus promised that the kingdom of God will be taken away from the Jews and given to another nation. This doesn’t mean that God totally abandoned Israel, but it does show that the Bible is not about races or ethnicities. That’s why Paul reminds us that “It is not the children of the flesh … but the children of the promise [who] are regarded as descendants [of Israel]” (Romans 9:6-8).

In the Bible, there are not two people of God, with 2 different plans of salvation, but only one: those who are in Christ. Clearly, the New Testament teaches that there is only one people of God, united by faith in Jesus Christ and partakers of the same covenantal blessings. Bottom line, you’re either in-Christ or not-in-Christ. If you are in Christ, then you’re a child of the promise and a descendant of spiritual Israel (see Romans 9:6-8). Therefore, the modern concept of God’s two different plans of salvation for Jews and Christians and the exhortation to support Israel (a secular political entity) are both unwarranted and without merit. A Christian is not obligated to support a flag, a nation, a government, or a race, but rather to be reborn in Christ. That is the only requirement. Christ is not associated with any particular political party, government, nationality, ethnicity, race, or flag.

Thus, many mistakenly think that because the future restoration of Israel is mentioned in the Old Testament, this implies that the Jews are the chosen race, that God has a different plan of salvation for them (rather than Christ), that their covenants are still valid (even though Hebrews 8:13 says they’re obsolete), and that Christians are obligated to support the secular nation of Israel, or else they will be cursed by God. This couldn’t be further from the truth.

So why is the future restoration of Israel mentioned in the Old Testament? As I explained earlier, the references to future Israel in the Bible act as prophetic signposts or clues that tell us how the end time will begin, where (or at which location) it will commence, and roughly when (or at which point in time) it will happen. That seems to be the sole purpose of the various references to the future restoration of Israel in the Old Testament (see e.g. Ezekiel 36; 38:8; Daniel 9:24-27; Zechariah 12-14)!

In the New Testament, Revelation 9:13-18 refers to an army of 200 million that will cross the Euphrates river causing a the third of mankind to be killed. The location of this great battle (which seems to go nuclear, killing a third of mankind) is near the river Euphrates. Revelation 16:12, a parallel passage, also mentions the Euphrates river as the location of the colliding armies, but it mentions an additional invasion by the kings of the east. Leon Morris, an expert on the Book of Revelation, says in his book (Revelation. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990, p.130) that the Euphrates may suggest the Parthian Kingdom (an Iranian empire) who controlled that geographical area. In other words, the location for the start of this great battle is near Iran.

What is more, Zechariah 12:4 says that on the Lord’s day “all the nations of the earth will be gathered against” Israel, which will be sieged on every side. The question is, why will all the nations be united against Israel? What have they done to deserve such condemnation? In fact, Zechariah 14:12 seems to describe nuclear explosions, when people’s flesh will disintegrate instantaneously before they can even hit the floor. Ezekiel 38 also names a confederacy of Muslim nations led by Russia that will invade Israel in the last days. Remarkably, Iran, which is currently at war with Israel, is one of those nations!

So all these key passages talk about the events leading up to WW3 or Armageddon, aka as the Great Tribulation or Nuclear war. They refer to the time, place, and the way in which it will occur. All of them have one thing in common, namely, Israel. That’s precisely why the restoration of Israel is the eschatological sign of the end-time. For example, the how (or the manner or way in which it will begin) seems to center around some kind of nuclear strike that will most likely be instigated by Israel. This would explain why “all the nations of the earth will be gathered against” it. The where (or the location of this great battle that is “unequaled from the beginning of the world until now” Matthew 24:21) will take place near the river Euphrates, which is closely tied to Iran. This is the location where 200 million troops will battle, killing a third of mankind. And the when (or the timeframe of this event) is signified by the restoration of Israel (see Ezekiel 38:8; Matthew 24:16; Zechariah 12:3). By the way, in order for all these nations to be gathered against Israel on that future day, it means that Israel must exist as a nation. And Israel was restored in 1948.

So, the eschatological references to the restoration of Israel are signs that point to Jesus’ coming and to the end of the age. The point is, Israel is simply a prophetic signpost, not a nation or a government that Christians must unyieldingly support. I’m not suggesting that we should oppose Israel. No, not at all! Biblically, we are required to love all people, but, as Christians, we don’t pay homage to Heads of State:

“Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's.” — Mark 12:17

[eli-kittim]

When is the End of the Age?

🎥 https://rumble.com/v6v3a0z-when-is-the-end-of-the-age 🎥

In Hebrews 9:26, the timing of Jesus' death is said to occur "once at the end of the ages" (NKJV) or "once in the end of the world" (KJV). The Contemporary English Version translates it "near the end of time." These are English translations of the Greek expression "hapax epi synteleia ton aionon."

So we need to ask the following question: is the end of the age a reference to the end of the Jewish age, which came to an end with the destruction of the temple in 70 CE, or is it an allusion to the end of human history? In order to determine whether this is literal language, referring to first century Palestine, or figurative, pertaining to the end-times, we must look at how Jesus repeatedly uses this particular phrase in the Greek New Testament, and the specific meaning he attributes to it. This short video features some of the parables of Jesus, with special attention given to the characteristic theme known as "the end of the age."

For more information, watch the above-linked video!

[eli-kittim]

Eli Kittim In a Nutshell

Eli Kittim’s theological framework, in a nutshell, emphasizes the centrality of spiritual rebirth and the authority of the Holy Spirit in understanding the Bible and Christian life. He views the Bible as a "prophetic story" which unfolds through history, culminating in the endtimes Messiah who will fulfill all the promises of scripture. His work focuses on Biblical languages, advocating for a less historicized understanding of scripture and a re-evaluation of various theological, christological, and eschatological doctrines.

Eli of Kittim argues that the Bible’s truth claims should not be confused with historical accuracy, as the text is a work of faith, not a history book, emphasizing spiritual knowledge over empirical evidence, which aligns with his broader critique of secular historicism in biblical studies. He critiques liberal scholarship for reducing the Bible to historical analysis, arguing that the existential experience of spiritual rebirth provides a stronger epistemic basis for knowledge of “being” than historical or scientific validation.

Kittim emphasizes the importance of being “born-again-in-Christ” as the core of Christianity, using Bible verses like Jn 3:3 and Eph. 4:22-24 to highlight spiritual rebirth over academic or institutional religious credentials. Drawing from his personal encounter with God and biblical examples like Paul’s conversion on the road to Damascus, he argues that accurate biblical interpretation comes from divine revelation through the Holy Spirit, not from religious institutions or doctrines. He asserts that neither the Bible nor the church holds ultimate authority over the Holy Spirit, which he believes guides all truth, as supported by Jn 16:13 in the New Testament (NT).

Eli Kittim’s work is grounded on translation studies of the Greek NT, challenging conventional interpretations of scripture with a focus on prophetic rather than historical views of Jesus. This view reflects Kittim’s broader work in biblical criticism, published in journals like the Journal of Higher Criticism, where he critiques conventional methodologies and epistemologies used in historical Jesus studies, advocating for a new approach to understanding Christ’s identity, which he grounds in biblical Greek exegesis.

Eli of Kittim argues that the NT is not a historical record but a collection of prophetic writings based on visions and revelations, challenging the traditional view that the gospels document real historical events about Jesus. He argues that the gospels are theological fiction, not historical accounts, as they lack eyewitness support and were written approximately 50-70 years after Jesus’ supposed time, while mirroring Old Testament (OT) narratives. Kittim argues that the gospel’s message is inspired but not literal, asserting that the epistles reveal the “real” Jesus. Based on hermeneutical principles, Eli Kittim argues that the NT epistles, being more explicit and didactic, should take precedence over the gospels in interpreting Jesus’ timeline, placing his birth, death, and resurrection in an eschatological future rather than historical past. He emphasizes the importance of the “priority of the epistles,” arguing that the Greek NT epistles, some of the earliest Christian writings, provide the most authentic account of Jesus’ story, challenging the traditional focus on the gospels, a view supported by scholars like Richard Carrier who argue the epistles reflect early Christianity more accurately.

Eli Kittim challenges traditional Christian theology by proposing that the death of Christ is a future event, not a historical one. He bases his theory on NT epistles, such as 1 Pet. 1:20 and Heb. 9:26b, which he interprets as placing Christ’s appearance “at the end of the ages,” challenging traditional Christian views by suggesting the gospels’ accounts are theological constructs meant to prepare believers for a future messianic arrival. Kittim suggests that Jesus’ birth, death, and resurrection in the gospels are symbolic events tied to apocalyptic prophecy. For him, biblical texts like Heb. 1:2 and 1 Pet. 1:20 place Christ’s birth, death, and resurrection in the last days, during the “end of the world,” contradicting mainstream Christian doctrine. Kittim cites Heb. 9:26 to support his claim that Jesus’ sacrifice occurs “at the end of the age,” a phrase linked to apocalyptic times in Matt. 24:3, challenging the traditional gospel narrative by aligning it with apocalyptic prophecies in Dan. 12:1-2 and Rev. 12:5.

Eli of Kittim introduces “proleptic eschatology,” arguing that the NT gospels depict Jesus’ life (which is essentially a prophecy) as if it has already happened, using a theological narrative device called “prolepsis” to “biographize the eschaton” (end times). He also highlights intertextuality, noting that gospel stories, such as the Feeding of the 5,000 (Jn 6:5-13), are literary constructs that borrow heavily from OT passages like 2 Kgs 4:40-44, questioning their historical authenticity and aligning with Kittim’s eschatological reinterpretation. Eli Kittim’s work challenges mainstream Christian assumptions and disputes the biographical reading of the gospels, which aligns with scholarly views that the gospels reflect community theologies rather than eyewitness testimony. He argues that the gospels’ anonymous authorship and lack of firsthand accounts undermine their historical reliability. He cites NT epistles (e.g. Heb. 9:26, 1 Pet. 1:20) to argue that Christ’s timeline is eschatological, occurring “at the end of the age.” This interpretation contrasts with mainstream biblical scholarship, which often views the gospels as theological but historically rooted, while Kittim’s approach emphasizes prophetic and symbolic readings, potentially redefining Christian eschatology.

Kittim argues that biblical texts like Isa. 2:19 and Dan. 12:1-2 place the Lord’s resurrection in the “last days,” not 2,000 years ago, challenging traditional Christian theology by interpreting Hebrew and Greek terms like “qum” (arise) and “anastasis” (resurrection) as eschatological resurrection events. He cites the Septuagint’s Greek translation of Isa. 2:19, where “arises” (anastasis) implies resurrection during the Lord’s Day (“when He rises to shake the earth”), and Dan. 12:1, where “Michael” (a figure Kittim associates with Christ) dies and resurrects at the end of days, aligning with Heb. 9:26’s timing of Christ’s sacrifice “in the end of the world.” Kittim’s view challenges the mainstream Christian belief in a historical resurrection, suggesting instead a future event tied to Judgment Day, supported by linguistic analysis of scripture (see e.g. 1 Cor. 15:54 where death is conquered in the end times).

Eli of Kittim interprets the birth of Christ in Gal. 4:4 as a future event tied to the “fullness of time,” which Eph. 1:9-10 defines as the consummation of the ages, challenging traditional views that place this event in antiquity. He argues that the NT epistles, being more didactic, should take interpretive priority over the gospels, which are more theological and symbolic. He supports his view with broader scriptural references, like Zeph. 1:7, Dan. 12:1-2, Heb. 9:26, 1 Pet. 1:20, and Rev. 12:5, asserting that the Messiah’s timeline aligns with end-time events, challenging traditional historical interpretations of Jesus’ life.

Eli Kittim argues that the NT term “revelation” (Greek: apokalupsis) for Christ’s future coming implies a first-time unveiling, not a second coming, challenging traditional Christian eschatology by suggesting Jesus’ appearance will occur only once, at the end of the age. Kittim’s interpretation hinges on Heb. 9:26–28, where he posits that Christ’s “second appearance“ refers to his resurrection, not a second coming, aligning with his broader thesis that Jesus’ life and sacrifice are future eschatological events, not historical ones. This perspective, rooted in Kittim’s 2013 work The Little Book of Revelation, contrasts with mainstream Christian views by reinterpreting biblical prophecy, drawing on Greek linguistics and textual analysis to propose a singular, end-times manifestation of Christ. As N.T. Wright correctly points out, the eschatological references to Jesus in the NT don’t mention a second coming but rather a future appearance or manifestation!

Kittim challenges traditional biblical scholarship by arguing that the NT is a collection of prophecies about future events, not historical records, and that Jesus’ coming will occur at the end of days. Kittim’s method, grounded in Greek NT exegesis and special revelation, critiques mainstream theology as consensus-driven, suggesting that events like the death and resurrection of Jesus are yet to happen, which contrasts sharply with conventional Christian interpretations. His theory aligns with some biblical scholarship, like James Dunn’s view on Jesus’ future resurrection (cf. 1 Cor. 15:22-24) as well as with extrabiblical historical texts, as evidenced by Philo’s silence on Jesus, despite being a contemporary, suggesting Jesus' story may not have been historical in the first century.

His methodology critiques historical Jesus studies as epistemologically flawed, proposing new criteria for understanding Christ’s identity and timing, supported by his translations of Koine Greek and scholarly analysis of messianic prophecies. Specifically, Kittim’s method challenges traditional historical Jesus studies by prioritizing epistles over gospels, viewing the latter as “proleptic” (future events written as if past), a perspective supported by passages like 2 Pet. 1:16-19, where “eyewitness accounts” are described as visions, not historical observations. Similarly, Kittim’s interpretation of Pauline epistles, such as 1 Cor. 15:8 where Paul describes himself as being born before the due time, using the word eschaton (ἔσχατον), suggests a prophetic rather than historical framework for Jesus’ life, supported by similar prophetic language in 1 Pet. 1:10-11, 2 Pet. 1:19, Acts 2:23, and Acts 10:41, which emphasizes foreknowledge over historical fact.

In summary, Eli of Kittim’s book, The Little Book of Revelation, argues that Jesus’ first coming is a future event, not a historical one, challenging traditional Christian doctrine by interpreting the Bible as prophecy rather than history. The book, published in 2013 and winner of a 2015 Goodreads award, has been reviewed positively by BlueInk Review, a professional service linked to the American Library Association, suggesting credibility among independent literary and academic circles. Eli Kittim critiques modern Christianity, arguing its teachings are deceptive and lack divine revelation, citing biblical verses like Matt. 24:4 and 1 Tim. 4:1 that predict widespread false teachings in the end times.

Christ didn’t fail the first time so that he needs to come back multiple times to finish the job. He completes the mission “once in the end of the world” (Heb. 9:26)!

[eli-kittim]

Is the Bible Just a Bunch of Metaphors of Spirituality?

By Eli of Kittim

Jesus’ atoning death is the raison d’être of the spiritual life and the ultimate basis of salvation! Jesus is the beginning and the end, the alpha and the omega of the spiritual awakening and transformation. Without his atoning death nothing whatsoever is achieved. This is in fact what the New Testament teaches. In 1 Corinthians 2:2, Paul says that the death of Jesus is the ultimate foundation of the New Covenant:

“For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.”

To drink the blood of Jesus means to partake of his sufferings and to drink the cup that he drank. It means to undergo a death to the self. In Galatians 2:20, Paul writes:

“I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.”

Without Christ’s death (giving himself for us) this new birth is not possible (Jn 3:16-17)! These are realities, not mere symbols or empty metaphors. And it’s not about sacred violence or literary abstractions. Jesus is not a “model”. He is a real person who literally dies to recreate humanity (see 1 Cor. 15)!

It’s one thing to say that certain things should not be taken literally or historically, but quite another to go overboard and say that nothing in the Bible should be taken literally. That would make the Bible nothing more than meaningless dribble without any corresponding spiritual reality or existential purpose but essentially comprised of nonsensical or pointless spiritual talk. Its passages would be devoid of any real significance or metaphysical meaning but would be rendered as endless mystical chatter rambling on and on.

In the subreddit called ChristianMysticism, there are many mystics who have made such claims. This tells me that these spiritual seekers have not yet made any real discoveries. They haven’t gained any insights or experienced the ultimate reality that enlightened mystics talk about. In fact, they don’t yet know Christ intimately or personally! The whole point of the New Testament is to teach us to ecstatically experience the revelation of Jesus Christ beyond the mind or discursive thought (Jn 3:3; Acts 2:1-4; Rev. 3:20)! All that Paul knows about Christ is in fact based on revelations (see Gal. 1:11-12)! Here’s what the New Testament rebirth looks like:

1). The person is no longer controlled by the flesh but by the spirit (Rom. 8:9).

2). The person can finally “see” the kingdom of God, whereas before their regeneration they couldn’t “see it” at all (Jn 3:3).

3). The person has lost his/her identity (self) and has put on a new identity (self) in Christ in so much as they have renewed their mind and transformed it (Eph. 4:22-24).

4). There is also a spiritual death that you undergo in which you lose your persona and are temporarily lost, in a desert, as it were (Rom. 6:3; 2 Cor. 5:13; Gal. 2:20).

5). The person is beside himself/herself (2 Cor. 5:13). He/she has been possessed by the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:1-4).

6). The person is consciously aware of a new spirit entering & indwelling them that was not there before (Ezek. 36:26; Jn 12:24; Rev. 3:20).

7). This is the transformation that must take place during this rebirth (Jn 3:3), in which our carnal nature subsides as we put on a new personality or a new identity in Christ (Eph. 4:24).

8). Then, what happens is that God pours so much love into your soul that you cannot contain it. You fall madly in love with Jesus (head over heels)! And suddenly GREAT PEACE reigns in your heart. A miracle occurs and you lose all your fears and hang-ups. In a word, you become a completely different person! A beautiful person!

9). This is a painful existential experience that truly makes us a new creation. That’s why people get new names after undergoing this experience. For example, a murderer named Saul was suddenly transformed into a lover named Paul.

Has this ever happened to you?

Salvation is not an act of the will or the intellect. Rather, it’s a transformation of the mind: a rebirth! It’s a radical existential experience in the Kierkegaardian sense!

“Work out your salvation with fear and trembling” (Phil. 2:12).

In other words, regeneration and rebirth require suffering (Heb. 12:6), pain (Acts 14:22), fear (Phil. 2:12), and profound changes to the personality, to such an extent that a murderer like Saul could become a lover like Paul:

“Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here!” (2 Cor. 5:17 italics mine).

These are not mere words, symbols, or metaphors. They're existential spiritual realities. They're not hallucinations but rather real experiences! Real Miracles. Christ is real. He’s not simply an obscure consciousness or a cosmic force aimlessly floating in space. To reduce these very significant scriptural realities to “slogan theology” or meaningless metaphors is equivalent to a complete misinterpretation of scripture!

Various mystical atheist/agnostic approaches ignore or deny these existential biblical realities, while pretending to have an imaginary relationship with an imaginary Christ consciousness. That’s not what being born-again means at all. It’s a DELUSION!

And since they can’t see the kingdom of God (Jn 3:3), but turn it into meaningless symbols and metaphors (such as the figurative Christ-within concept, which is devoid of a real or literal Christ), it’s quite clear to me that they have not yet been reborn. They are not yet saved. This explains their atheistic, or at least agnostic, points of view.

[eli-kittim]

The Systematic Theology of Eli of Kittim

Systematic theology is a discipline within Christian theology that attempts to synthesize a coherent account of the various doctrines of the Christian faith. It addresses what the Bible teaches about certain doctrines, such as the Word of God, Salvation, and Jesus Christ. Systematic theology is essentially trying to find the “truths” that were laid down in Scripture and to unify the different doctrines under these common truths or “facts.” The Bible urges all Christians to search the Scriptures (Acts 17:11) and to rightly handle the Word of truth (2 Tim. 2:15).

The study of systematic theology offsets our natural tendency to impose our own ideas on Scripture. And it gives us a deeper understanding of what we believe and why we believe it. So it helps us with doctrinal controversies, debates, and apologetics.

However, there are also potential confounds related to such studies because, in trying to formulate a system of theology, certain components may be "forced" into a structure, or even eliminated, in an attempt to maintain the coherence of the system. For example, the role of theology and bias in Bible translation has been addressed in numerous books and discussions. That’s why it is extremely important to get our Christology right! The doctrine of Christ is the beginning and the end of Christian systematic theology. If we don’t have a firm understanding of who Jesus is (i.e. his identity, as well as the timing of his coming), then we will inevitably misinterpret the rest of the Scriptures, and our systematic theology will ultimately be based on confirmation bias rather than objective “truth.”

In this regard, Eli of Kittim’s special revelation and biblical scholarship help us to understand the Scriptural teachings with regard to the person of Christ. The most significant aspects of the doctrine of Christ are his origin and timing. That is to say, Kittim focuses on two key questions. Who is Jesus? And when is the timing of his coming? The answers to these questions inform the rest of Kittim’s systematic theology.

Although Eli of Kittim specializes in Eschatology, he has written on various topics related to Systematic theology, such as Bibliology, Hamartiology, Christology, Soteriology, and Theology proper. But his greatest contribution is his translation and exegesis of Biblical Greek, as well as his emphasis on the Priority of the Epistles. That’s because Kittim’s research has unravelled the mystery of Jesus’ story by focusing exclusively on the Greek New Testament Epistles. According to Kittim, the epistles give us the real Jesus. If you follow the epistles, you'll piece together the whole story!

These concepts were originally communicated to him via special revelation! His is the only view that appropriately combines the end-time messianic expectations of the Jews with Christian scripture! Remarkably, both the Biblical and extrabiblical data support his conclusions. Eli of Kittim himself has done extensive scholarly research to confirm his views. His translation work is especially noteworthy. This new hermeneutic is worthy of serious academic consideration.

In his work, Kittim shows the scriptural basis for each doctrine. He uses a translation and exegesis approach, while taking into account the full scope of biblical scholarship. Thus, he combines special revelation with Scripture! Kittimism, therefore, is a systematic theology and a belief in the Bible as it is interpreted and understood by Eli Kittim!

If you want to explore these themes in greater detail, I highly recommend reading The Little Book of Revelation, which covers all these topics and more: https://www.xlibris.com/en/bookstore/bookdetails/597424-the-little-book-of-revelation

Readers are also advised to read Eli of Kittim’s official blog, which acts as a companion study-guide to The Little Book: https://www.tumblr.com/eli-kittim

[eli-kittim]

The Apocalyptic New Testament: The Greek Jesus

by Eli of Kittim

Apocalypticism is the view that God will eventually defeat the heavenly forces of evil and establish an eternal kingdom of righteousness at the end of days. Christianity is an apocalyptic messianic movement, and Jesus is considered to be an apocalyptic prophet or eschatological teacher. The apocalyptic visions and revelations about Jesus fill the pages of the New Testament (see e.g. Lk 24:23–24; Acts 10:40-41; Rom. 16:25-26; 1 Cor. 1:7; Gal. 1:11–12; 1 Pet. 1:10-13; 2 Pet. 1:19-21; Rev. 1:1; 22:18-19).

That’s why Jesus’ resurrection has always been seen as an eschatological event, which will signal the beginning of the end times and the fulfillment of bible prophecy (cf. 1 Cor. 15:22-24)! This view is actually in line with the New Testament epistles, which demonstrate that all these events will occur at the end of the world (see e.g. Gal. 4:4; Eph. 1:10; Heb. 9:26; 1 Pet. 1:20; Rev. 12:5). So, if the apocalyptic New Testament is presenting a future story, then why have we placed it in the past? It's no wonder why Philo, the most prolific commentator on the Bible, and a contemporary of Jesus, who visited Jerusalem, had no knowledge of Jesus and didn’t write about him.

Throughout history, bible scholars have created a variety of portraits for Jesus. Some have constructed the profile of a Jewish apocalyptic prophet. Other portraits include the Jewish messiah, the magician, the exorcist, the insurrectionist, the zealot, the cynic philosopher, the charismatic healer, the politician, the social justice advocate, the liberator of the oppressed and disenfranchised, and so on. We’ve seen all these portraits. But how about Jesus the Greek messiah of the endtimes? This has never been proposed, let alone studied, in academia, even though it meets scholarly and academic parameters.

That’s why in the gospel of John (8:48) the Jews categorically call Jesus a “Samaritan” (i.e. a Gentile) in order to demonstrate that he is not a Jew (cf. Matt. 4:15-16; 26:69)! And this explains why all the messianic figures in the Bible are essentially depicted as Gentiles, including Cyrus the Persian and King David the Moabite! That’s exactly why God says: I have chosen “a man for My purpose from a far-off land” (Isa. 46:11). In fact, there were quite a few early 20th century scholars——including Oxford classicist G. A. Williamson and New Testament scholar Walter Bauer——who argued that Christ was not a Jew!

But there is more. From early on, the Church fathers translated the Hebrew Name of God into Greek as Ἰαὼ and even thought that it had something to do with the name of Jesus (aka as Ἰωσουὲ). The name Ἰαὼ can also be found in the universal history of Diodorus of Sicily as well as in the Dead Sea scrolls, among other places. But here’s the catch. The Greek name of God (IAO) also represents the ancient Greeks (known as IAONES), the first literary depictions of which are found in the works of Homer (Ἰάονες) and Hesiod (Ἰάων).

Not only that but the Hebrew name of God (Yahva) is also the Hebrew name for Greece (Yavan). This verbal agreement is not coincidental. Therefore, the secret name of God in both Greek and Hebrew apparently represents Greece! This is precisely why the New Testament was written in Greek and why Christ constantly uses Greek letters to denote his identity (Ἐγώ εἰμι; Rev. 1:8):

“I am the Alpha and the Omega.”

That is also why Paul presents Jesus as a Greek God in Acts 17! According to his own statement, this is precisely why John of Patmos is in Greece. It’s not by accident. He’s there to symbolically proclaim the revelation of the Greek Jesus according to the word of God (Rev. 1:9):

“I, John, … was on the island of Patmos because of the word of God and my testimony about Jesus.”

This explains the New Testament's linguistic and theological shift from Israel to Greece (see Matt. 21:43):

“Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to [another] people who will produce the fruit of it.”

If you want to explore these themes in greater detail, I highly recommend reading The Little Book of Revelation, which covers all these topics and more:

[eli-kittim]

Have you read this book? It’s the most important book for our time! 🇬🇷 🇺🇸

It presents a new revelation about Jesus that the Holy Spirit has disclosed to many believers, but which most people don’t know about. I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that this revelation is not of human origin. The author did not invent it. He did not receive it from any man, nor was he taught it; rather, he received it by revelation from God.

We must enlighten those who have no connection to the Holy Spirit——who are constantly being brainwashed by the media——and pull them out of the Matrix.

So Grab your copy now! Read it and share it with as many people as possible!

“The book is beautifully written.”

— Blueink Review

The Little Book of Revelation: The First Coming of Jesus at the End of Days

Available on Xlibris Bookstore

[eli-kittim]

The Greek Jesus

Eli Kittim

We know by revelation that Jesus is Greek. But we can also confirm it through Scripture. In the New Testament there are several ways by which Jesus is portrayed as a Greek (i.e. as a non-Jew). One of these portrayals is found in the Gospel of Matthew (4.15-16), which tells us that Jesus does not come from the Kingdom of Judah (from the Jews) but from the region of Galilee (from the Gentiles; see also Luke 1.26). Ever since the 10th century BC, Galilee was settled by foreigners and pagans. Already by the 8th century BC the prophet Isaiah referred to this region as "Galilee of the Gentiles" (Isaiah 9.1). In addition, in John 8.48 the Jews categorically call Jesus a “Samaritan” (i.e. a Gentile) in order to demonstrate that he is not a Jew. Not to mention that Jesus' sentence was not death by stoning, which was the standard form of execution for Jews, but crucifixion, a Roman method of capital punishment. And he was tried in a Roman court of Law that was reserved only for Roman or Greek citizens, thereby demonstrating that Jesus was not a Jew. In fact, there were quite a few early 20th century scholars——including Oxford classicist G. A. Williamson and New Testament scholar Walter Bauer——who also held the view that Christ was not a Jew!

The notion that people protested against Jesus because he did not come from Bethlehem of the Jews but from Galilee of the Gentiles is especially emphasized in the Gospel of John (7.41-43):

“Others said, This is the Christ; but others said, Does the Christ come from Galilee? Has not the Scripture said that the Christ comes from the seed of David, and from Bethlehem, the town where David was? There was a division among the people because of him.”

In John 7.52, Jesus defies Jewish messianic expectations:

“Look, and see, for out of Galilee no prophet arises.”

What is more, most of the books of the New Testament were written in Greece: Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, Titus, and the book of Revelation. None of the books of the New Testament were written in Palestine. And most of the letters are addressed to Greek communities: 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and 2 Thessalonians! Is this a coincidence or does it have something to do with Jesus?

It’s also important to note that when the New Testament writers quote from the Scriptures they often quote from the Greek Old Testament rather than from the Hebrew writings. This indicates that the New Testament writers were not familiar with the Hebrew language. And given that they were fluent and highly articulate in the Greek language, their exclusive use of Koine Greek shows that the writers of the New Testament were not Jews but Greeks. So why would the New Testament be written in Greek rather than Hebrew?

Most people are under the impression that the New Testament was written in Greek because Greek was the lingua franca (or the common language of the day). But if that was so, then we would expect to find all the Scriptures to be written predominantly in Greek. But that’s not what we find. In fact, most of the Dead Sea Scrolls (which were written around the same time period) were written in Hebrew, not Greek. This demonstrates that the lingua franca hypothesis is wrong.

So why didn’t the New Testament writers complete God’s story in Hebrew? What better way to convince the Jews that Jesus is the messianic fulfillment of Hebrew Scripture than to write it in Hebrew? But they didn’t do that! Why? The reason is Jesus. He’s not Jewish but Greek! So the narrative must be written in Greek to reflect the Greek protagonist. This is precisely why the New Testament was written in Greek, not Hebrew. And this explains why all the messianic figures in the Bible are essentially depicted as Gentiles. From Abraham (Chaldea) to Noah (Mesopotamia) to Job (Uz) to Joseph and Moses (who are portrayed as Egyptians, members of Egyptian families/Egyptian Royalty), all the messianic figures in the Old Testament are basically depicted as Gentiles. That’s precisely why Cyrus, a gentile, is called God’s Messiah in Isaiah 45.1! Not to mention that King David himself was not a Jew; he was a Moabite! Similarly, in Isaiah 46.11, God says: I have chosen “a man for My purpose from a far-off land.” This would certainly drive home the idea that the Messiah is a non-Jew!

Furthermore, if Christ were a Jew he would have said that he was the Aleph and the Tav. Instead, Christ constantly uses Greek letters to denote his identity and to designate the divine “I am” (Ἐγώ εἰμ��; Revelation 1.8):

“I am the Alpha and the Omega.”

Besides, it’s important to emphasize that the Hebrew name of God (Yahva, pronounced as Yava) is also the Hebrew name for Greece (namely, Yavan). This verbal agreement is not coincidental. There is further evidence regarding the Greek name of God. In some rare Septuagint manuscripts the Tetragrammaton is translated as Ιαω (known as the Greek trigram). That is, the divine name Yahva is translated into Koine Greek as Ιαω (see e.g. Lev. 4.27 Septuagint manuscript [LXX] 4Q120). This fragment comes from the Dead Sea Scrolls, found at Qumran, and dates to the 1st century BC.

What is of great importance is the fact that the name IAO seemingly represents the ancient Greeks (known as IAONES), the first literary depictions of which are found in the epics of Homer (Ἰάονες) and also in the works of Hesiod (Ἰάων). Bible scholars agree that the Hebrew name Yavan represents the Iaones, i.e. the ancient Greeks. Moreover, there are independent attestations that come from the Patristic writings about the Tetragrammaton. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia (1910) and B. D. Eerdmans: Diodorus Siculus (1st c. BC) translates the name of God as Ἰαῶ. Irenaeus (d. c. 202) states that the Valentinians use the divine name Ἰαῶ. Origen of Alexandria (c. 254) writes Ἰαω. Theodoret of Cyrus (393 – c. 458) also writes Ἰαω. Therefore, the secret name of God in both the Greek Old Testament and the Hebrew Bible seems to represent Greece! This is why John of Patmos is not in Greece by accident. He is there to proclaim the revelation of Jesus and the word of God (Revelation 1.9):

“I, John, … was on the island of Patmos because of the word of God and my testimony about Jesus.”

[eli-kittim]

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Debunked

Eli Kittim

The Latter Day Saint movement is a Christian Restorationist movement that was founded by Joseph Smith in the early 19th century. Currently, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (aka “LDS Church”) boasts 17 million members.

There is a theme in the Old Testament that is echoed in the New Testament's Book of Revelation 22:18-19. It effectively nullifies all extra-biblical sources of interpretation or additions to scripture, including Talmudic hermeneutics and 3 out of the 4 Standard Works of the LDS Church. Deuteronomy 4:2 reads:

“You must neither add anything to what I command you nor take away anything from it, but keep the commandments of the Lord your God with which I am charging you.”

Yet the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have added additional material, such as the noncanonical Book of Mormon, which is neither authorized nor accepted by mainstream Christian Churches. According to Latter Day Saint tradition, the so-called golden plates are the original source from which Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon (which is now called Another Testament of Jesus Christ). Paul writes in Galatians 1:8:

“But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse!”

As the story goes, Smith allegedly found these plates in the 1820s after an angel named Moroni directed him to a buried stone box. He claimed that the angel instructed him not to show the plates to anyone until they had been properly translated from their original "reformed Egyptian" language.

However, there are several problems with these claims. The notion of “reformed Egyptian” comes from a narrative in the Book of Mormon, in which it is described as the language employed to inscribe the text on golden plates. And yet, historians, linguists, archaeologists, and egyptologists have not found any substantiated examples of such a language in the historical or archaeological record. In other words, the claim that the golden plates were written in a language called "reformed Egyptian” is bogus because such a language is basically unknown to linguists and egyptologists. Besides, there’s no linguistic, historical, or archaeological evidence of the use of Egyptian writing in Pre-Columbian America!

There are many other problems with Joseph Smith’s claims. He mentioned that he received his revelation from an Angel named Moroni. The said angel is mentioned in the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants, another LDS book, but not in the Bible. According to the Book of Mormon, the said angel added information to the teachings of Jesus. In fact, the Book of Mormon is more about Moroni than Jesus because the word "Mormon" itself is actually derived from the name of the angel Moroni! The fact that this angel substitutes itself for Christ by giving its name to a book——and given that the name Moroni is never once mentioned in the 66 canonical books of Holy Scripture——suggests that it is probably not on God’s payroll. Joseph Smith’s account reminds us of another so-called prophetess and channeler, namely, Esther Hicks, who currently claims to receive revelations from a non-physical spirit named Abraham. Thus, the LDS movement——featuring a spirit-guide who offers a new or alternative teaching THAT IS NOT IN THE BIBLE——has all the hallmarks of a cult!

It is important to note that Joseph Smith and his close associates were practicing folk magic, scrying, second sight, and divination, practices that are strictly forbidden in the Old Testament (Lev 19:26; Deuteronomy 18:10-12)! Both Smith and another seer named Samuel T. Lawrence reportedly used a seer stone to view the golden plates. What is more, eyewitnesses reported that Smith translated the golden plates not by looking directly at them but by looking through a transparent seer stone in the bottom of his hat! So, Smith allegedly translated the Egyptian not based on any scholarly knowledge or expertise but rather on psychic messages that were channeled to him.

There were allegedly 11 men who claimed to have seen the plates, aka the so-called Book of Mormon Witnesses. Then, after the translation process was completed, Smith claimed that he returned the plates to the angel Moroni, thereby conveniently making them magically disappear from sight so that they could not be investigated or re-examined.

However, there are various discrepancies and contradictory accounts. Some of Joseph Smith’s close associates accused him of being a fraud and of having “filthy” adulterous relationships. Moreover, Martin Harris, one of the alleged Three Witnesses to the golden plates, recounted his witness as a visionary experience. John Gilbert, the printer of the first edition of the Book of Mormon, asked Harris if he had seen the plates with his own eyes, to which Harris replied "No, I saw them with a spiritual eye.” In 1837, Joseph Smith excommunicated 28 members. A year later, in 1838, Smith said the following about the Three Witnesses (Cowdery, Harris, and Whitmer): “too mean to mention; and we had liked to have forgotten them." So much for the eyewitness reports!

In the same year (1838), Harris publicly confessed that "he never saw the plates with his natural eyes, only in vision or imagination." In fact, Harris openly denied that any of the Witnesses to the Book of Mormon had ever seen or handled the golden plates. As a result, Harris's announcement convinced several key members to leave the church. Over 30 years later, Harris’ account never changed. He gave another interview in which he admitted "I never saw the golden plates, only in a visionary or entranced state."

The Pearl of Great Price is part of the canonical books of the LDS Church. It was originally written as a pamphlet published in England in 1851, and was later revised and canonized by the LDS Church. The current version of the Pearl of Great Price contains several sections. One section is called the Book of Moses, which includes Smith's own revisions (i.e. the “Joseph Smith Translation” of the Bible, aka JST) regarding the first 6 chapters of the Book of Genesis, which include two extraneous chapters of "extracts from the prophecy of Enoch.” So, Joseph Smith is essentially rewriting the Bible according to his own private interpretations.

Another section in the Pearl of Great Price is the Book of Abraham. Joseph Smith produced it in 1835, and claimed that it was based on Egyptian papyri that were purchased from a traveling mummy exhibition. According to Joseph Smith himself, the book was "a translation of some ancient records... purporting to be the writings of Abraham, while he was in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham, written by his own hand, upon papyrus". What a story! It has all the earmarks of occultism! This book also maintains that God did not create the universe ex nihilo (out of nothing) but rather through a reorganization of eternal, pre-existing elements. Not to mention that Joseph Smith retranslated portions of Matthew’s gospel, a work which contains significant changes and additions to the original biblical text.

In summary, Joseph Smith added another book to the Bible which was based on a discovery of certain golden plates that no one ever saw. This was a book translated from a supposed reformed Egyptian language that doesn’t exist in the historical or archaeological record, let alone in ancient America. And later, it magically disappeared so that it could not be examined. The witnesses themselves did not actually see the plates with their own eyes. And some of them even called Smith a fraud. Joseph Smith and his companions were all involved in divination and magic, which often attracts demonic spirits. As a matter of fact, the Spirit who introduced Smith to these extra bible additions is a suspicious familiar spirit who is never once mentioned in the Bible. Taken together, the evidence strongly suggests that the LDS Church is a heretical cult that has very little to do with Christianity! Not to mention their theology which is completely bogus (e.g. that God has a physical body of flesh and bones, that God was once a man on another planet, that just like him we can all become gods, that there exist many gods, that Jesus is the spirit brother of Lucifer/Satan, etc.)!

[eli-kittim]

Does the New Testament prove the deity of Christ?

Question: Does the New Testament prove the deity of Christ?

Answer: Yes, indeed!

Titus 2:13:

τῆς δόξης τοῦ μεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν ⸂Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ.

Translation:

“the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.”

2 Peter 1:1:

τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ·

“of our God and savior Jesus Christ.”

What about Colossians 1:15:

“our God and Savior Jesus Christ”

John 1:1 says that “the Word was God,” and in verse 1:3 he says that this Word or Logos is the creator of the universe. Then, in verse 14, John adds that the logos became a human being. All bible scholars know that John depicts Jesus as the pre-incarnate God who took on human flesh.

Similarly, Hebrews 1:2-3 says EXPLICITLY that Jesus is the creator of the universe, “sustaining all things through the power of His word.” There is only 1 God. If that God sustains all things, then obviously there’s no other God.

What about Colossians 1:16:

"For by Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible.”

The phrase ἐν αὐτῷ means both *in him* and *by him* in Greek. And all these verses obviously mean that Jesus is God because no one other than God can create and sustain the universe by himself.

Ok. But what about Philippians 2:6? Philippians 2:6 says that even though Jesus is God, he nevertheless became man and temporarily gave up his status in order to save mankind. The phrase μορφῇ θεοῦ means he had the form or nature of God:

Philippians 2:6:

“Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage.”

Thus in his great humility, God became a nobody; a man of no reputation for our sake.

What about John 1:3 and Hebrews 1:2? Well, God creates by himself. He doesn’t use secondary sources or intermediaries, otherwise they would be God and the creator. Besides, Hebrews 1:2-3 says EXPLICITLY that Jesus is the creator of the universe, “sustaining all things through the power of His word.” If Jesus creates and sustains the universe, then how is he not God? Moreover, John 1:3 says πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, namely, that all things came into being BY HIM (δι’ αὐτοῦ). And nothing came into being without Christ. And then John goes on to say that Jesus is “Life” itself, which is another way of saying the supreme being or the “ultimate Being” or God. And Hebrews 1:2-3 says EXPLICITLY that Jesus is the creator of the universe, “sustaining all things through the power of His word.” There is only 1 God. If that God sustains all things, then obviously there’s no other God.

What about Colossians 2:9:

ἐν αὐτῷ κατοικεῖ πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος σωματικῶς.

Translation:

Col. 2:9:

“in him the whole fullness of the godhead dwells bodily.”

This means that even in a human body, Jesus is fully God!

Conclusion

There are simply too many passages which corroborate that Jesus is Yahweh. That’s why the New Testament translated YHWH as “Lord” and attributed it to Jesus Christ. The phrases “alpha and omega” and “first and last” that Jesus attributes to himself are Old Testament phrases that refer to Yahweh. Daniel 7:13-14 also talks about Jesus as if he were Yahweh. And Jude 1:5 says in the original Greek New Testament that it was Jesus (YHWH) who led Israel out of Egypt (Ἰησοῦς λαὸν ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου σώσας; cf. 1 Corinthians 10:1-4). That’s why Revelation 1:8 calls Jesus the almighty (παντοκράτωρ) who is coming to earth. Hence why Jesus says “I and the father are one” (John 10:30).

So, when we add up the accumulated New Testament proof texts, the evidence is overwhelming that Jesus is in fact God (cf. John 14:1)!

There is also corroborating evidence about the deity of the messiah in the Old Testament as well (see Leviticus 26:12; Zechariah 2:10; 12:10; Micah 5:2; Daniel 7:13-14; Isaiah 9:6; 53:3-5; Psalm 2:12; 110:1)! But that’s another topic for another day!

[eli-kittim]

What is the Unforgivable Sin?

Eli Kittim

I ran across a Tiktok video by Michael Jones of “Inspiring Philosophy,” who often provides thoughtful, intelligent, and well-researched answers to critics of the Bible. This was a reaction video featuring a Muslim apologist who was trying to convince a young Christian woman that Jesus couldn’t have possibly died for all the sins of the world because there happens to be a sin for which you cannot be forgiven, namely, the so-called “unforgivable sin.” So, if there’s a sin that cannot be forgiven, then how could Jesus have died for all sins? This is a typical Muslim attack. The idea behind this underhanded tactic is to try to undermine the legitimacy of Jesus’ atonement, thereby discrediting his status as the savior.

However, Michael Jones’ reactions to this video didn’t strike me as theologically accurate. He created a false dichotomy by saying that Jesus only died for every sin this woman has committed, not for every other sin in existence. But this suggests that Jesus didn’t die for all the sins that have ever been committed in the history of humankind. He then went on to quote New Testament scholar Craig Keener who believes that the unforgivable sin is unbelief in Jesus.

Unfortunately, there are several problems with this commentary. First, the unforgivable sin is mentioned only in connection with the Holy Spirit, not with Jesus. Second, Jones suggests that Jesus didn’t die for every sin that has ever been committed on this planet. Third, he suggests that Christ died for all sin except for the sin of unbelief. However. Christ died for all sin (past, present, and future). His atonement covers the sins of the entire world. First John 2:2 states that unequivocally and categorically:

“He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.”

So what about the unforgivable sin? Did Jesus die for the unforgivable sin as well? Yes! Jesus died for the unforgivable sin as well. In fact, Jesus died “for the sins of the whole world” (whether individual or corporate). So then why is this sin unforgivable? Well, it’s actually forgivable if God’s offering to obtain forgiveness is accepted by faith, but it’s not forgivable if it is rejected. Let me explain.

The unforgivable sin doesn’t represent a degree of sin on a scale from bad to worse, as if this is the most serious mortal sin that cannot possibly be forgiven. In other words, it’s not a degree but rather a quality of sin. So what exactly is the unforgivable sin? Simply put, the unforgivable sin is a rejection of the Holy Spirit. It is to utterly reject the very means of salvation. You can neither be forgiven nor saved without accepting the Holy Spirit. That is precisely why it’s unforgivable. Because without the Spirit you cannot be forgiven. The sin is not unforgivable because you insulted the Holy Spirit but because you rejected him. You can insult Jesus or the Father, but if you reject the Holy Spirit you cannot be forgiven, justified, regenerated, reborn, or saved.

The reason this sin is unforgivable is not because Jesus didn’t die for it or because it’s so heinous that it cannot be forgiven. The reason it’s unforgivable is because it represents a rejection of the very means by which forgiveness is made available, namely, the Holy Spirit! By analogy, you can insult a doctor who prescribed a medicine, but if you reject the medicine you cannot be cured. Likewise, the Holy Spirit is the only means of salvation. How can you be forgiven if you reject the very means by which you can be forgiven?

[eli-kittim]

The Fifth Quest for the Historical Jesus: The Kittim Factor

Kittim’s eschatology is a view in biblical studies that interprets the story of Jesus in exclusively futurist terms. This unique approach was developed by Eli of Kittim, especially in his 2013 work, The Little Book of Revelation. Kittim doesn’t consider Jesus' life as something that happened in history but rather as something that will occur in the last days as a fulfillment of biblical claims. It involves a new paradigm shift! Kittim holds to an exclusive futurist eschatology (i.e. future/anticipated history) in which the story of Jesus (his birth, death, and resurrection) takes place once and for all in the end-times. Kittim’s eschatology provides a solution to the historical problems associated with the historical Jesus.

Kittim views God's revelation of Jesus in the New Testament gospel literature as a proleptic account. That is to say, the gospels represent the future life of Jesus as if presently existing or accomplished. They are written as historical fictional stories, meaning that they are fictional narratives set in a specific historical period, incorporating real events and details while allowing for invented characters and plotlines to drive the stories. The term “prolepsis,” in this particular case, refers to the anachronistic depiction of Jesus as existing prior to his proper or historical time. This is based on a foreshadowing technique of biographizing the eschaton as if presently accomplished.

By way of illustration, Second Peter 1:16-19 demonstrates that the so-called “eyewitness accounts” were actually based on visions that were then written down as if they had already happened (proleptically). The same holds true in Acts 10:40-41 in which we are told that Jesus’ resurrection was based on visions because it was only visible “to witnesses who were chosen beforehand by God.” We find the same motif in Luke’s gospel! No one saw Jesus during or after the so-called resurrection. The women saw a “vision” (Lk 24:23–24). Likewise, Paul’s knowledge of Jesus is based entirely on visions (Gal. 1:11–12).

Acts 3:20-21 also says that Christ will not be sent to earth until the consummation of the ages (cf. Mt. 19:28). Put differently, the gospel stories were written down as if the events they were depicting had already happened (proleptically). Similarly, First Peter 1:10-11 claims that the New Testament prophets “predicted the sufferings of the Messiah” in advance (cf. Isa. 46:10)!

In contrast to the gospels, the epistles demonstrate that all these events will occur at the end of the ages, or at the end of the world. For example, Galatians 4:4 proclaims that Jesus will be born during the consummation of the ages, expressed by the apocalyptic phrase τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου, which is defined in Ephesians 1:10 as the end of the world! Christ’s birth in Revelation 12:5 is also set in the future. Verse 5 describes the birth of the messiah, and the immediate next verse talks about the great tribulation of the end times. Even Luke 17:30 claims that the Son of man has not yet been revealed! In First Peter 1:20 it is explicitly stated that Jesus will be initially revealed “at the final point of time”. Hebrews 9:26 leaves no room for doubt about what is being communicated when it states that Jesus will die for the sins of humankind once “at the end of the ages” (ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων)! A word study of the phrase ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων demonstrates that it refers to “the end of the world” (cf. Mt. 13:39-40, 49; 24:3; 28:20; Dan. 12:4 LXX). Revelation 19:10 also informs us that the testimony to Jesus is prophetic (not historical).

In fact, most of the evidence with regard to the Messianic timeline in both the Old and New Testaments is consistent with the epistles rather than the gospels. For example, Zephaniah 1:7-8 declares that the Lord’s sacrifice will occur during “the day of the Lord” (not in antiquity; cf. Zeph. 1:14-18). Isaiah 2:19 says that people will hide in the caves of the rocks when “the Lord … arises to terrify the earth.” In other words, the Lord’s resurrection is not separate from but contemporaneous with judgement day (cf. Rev. 6:15-17)! Similarly, Daniel 12:1 puts the death and resurrection of the anointed prince just prior to the great tribulation of the end times. In fact, First Corinthians 15:22-24 tells us explicitly that Christ will be resurrected in the end-times (an idea also entertained by James Dunn). That’s precisely why the New Testament accounts of Jesus are essentially futurist. Kittim’s method is therefore revolutionizing the field of historical Jesus Studies.

Kittim’s new findings falsify the conclusions drawn from the previous quests for the historical Jesus both epistemologically and methodologically. Epistemologically because what we thought we knew was derived from fiction, not fact. And methodologically because the approaches were not, in fact, based on historical or expository data. Therefore, if we take all the research into account, especially from the Greek New Testament epistles, the future story of Jesus makes the most sense and fits with all the evidence!

Eli Kittim’s work seeks to develop certain new criteria to the study of the historical Christ. His extensive research project is primarily based on translation and exegesis of Biblical Greek, with special attention given to the New Testament epistles. In his view, instead of using subjective criteria to evaluate sources, it’s best to employ a different approach to research methodology. The problem in the previous quests for the historical Jesus was that everything was centered on the gospels without much attention given to the epistles. For centuries, we’ve tried to interpret the explicit (epistles) in light of the implicit (gospels). And yet, it’s the didactic portions of the Bible that teach with clear and explicit statements. Thus, priority must be given to the epistles. This represents a significant paradigm shift, which certainly contributes to the historical Jesus studies and could, perhaps, be viewed as the fifth quest for the historical Jesus. Studies in New Testament Greek have confirmed Kittim’s unique interpretation of Jesus! In fact, both the biblical and extra-biblical sources complement rather than contradict Kittim’s findings. It's no wonder why Philo, the most prolific commentator on the Bible, and a contemporary of Jesus, who visited Jerusalem, had no knowledge of Jesus and didn’t write about him. If Jesus’ life in the New Testament epistles is, in fact, set in a different context than previously assumed, then it would necessitate that we revisit our previous considerations.

[eli-kittim]

Who is Jesus? And when is the timing of his coming?

These are the two key questions that the little book asks.

This work could be viewed as the fifth quest for the historical Jesus.

📚 The Little Book 📚

This book has a unique interpretation of the New Testament account of Jesus that provides insights into who Jesus is, as well as the timing of his birth, death, and resurrection. It draws more heavily on the epistles than the gospels, incorporating a different approach to research methodology. It also explores the sequence of end-time events, and examines central questions concerning the antichrist and the events leading up to the great tribulation.

This work is actually based on a revelation from Mount Sinai! So, it’s both inspired and scholarly. According to the author, a view must be based on revelation, with scholarship added. Otherwise it is grounded on guesswork and conjecture. Don’t you want to know what that revelation was, and how it fits with Scripture?

The author, Eli Kittim, is a Bible scholar who has published numerous articles in various Biblical journals and magazines, such as Rapture Ready and the Journal of Higher Criticism, among others. He’s the Award-Winning Goodreads Author of the Christian-Nonfiction, 4.3-star Book, The Little Book of Revelation.

Editorial Reviews:

“Beautifully written. Highly creative literary analysis. An intriguing study. Bible scholars and eschatologists may want to consider its thought-provoking ideas.”

— BlueInk Review

“Your illustrations are really good. You've mastered another world than I."

— Robert Eisenman, bible scholar and author of “James the Brother of Jesus.”

Available as an e-book for $3.99

[eli-kittim]

We Need Revelation Not Religion

Eli Kittim

I grew up in the Greek Orthodox Church. But I had an encounter with God that profoundly changed my life. I realized that the transformation and rebirth that both Jesus and Paul are talking about is personal and life-changing. It's similar to what happened to Paul. He did not meet Jesus in the church or in the synagogue, but on a dirty road to Damascus. The same holds true for the faithful in the upper room, on whom the Holy Spirit fell during Pentecost. They were in a secular place when the spirit transformed them.

Today, I am neither Protestant nor Greek Orthodox. Both of these wonderful traditions have important things to teach us. But my main concern is that we do not replace the truth of Christ with doctrines and rituals, or the church. The Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura, as important as it is, doesn’t mean that the Bible has the final say in all matters. The Spirit that inspired the Bible is the ultimate authority on all matters, not the Bible.

Neither does church tradition have equal or greater authority than the Holy Spirit. In scripture, infallibility is never mentioned as the prerogative of the subsequent church leaders who would succeed the apostles. In fact, scripture warns that many religious leaders would eventually err, and we know from history that the church tradition has not always held correct teachings. Thus, it’s a stretch, and somewhat irresponsible, to say that church tradition has the final say in all matters. The Spirit that inspired the church is the ultimate authority on all matters, not the church.

Neither is the church equal to Christ, or superior to Christ. The Pope recently made a shocking statement that it is dangerous to seek a personal relationship with Christ outside the Church. His statement implies that there is no salvation outside the Church. This is an aberration and a distortion of scripture, making the church in effect a savior and superior to Christ. As if without the authority and permission of the church, Christ can do nothing.

Christ is the Savior; not the Church. Nor is Sola Scriptura the ultimate authority. There is no verse in scripture that verifies this claim. Without the Holy Spirit’s divine revelation, we are lost and will consequently end up misinterpreting scripture. I am keenly aware of the fact that there are many inauthentic revelations and false prophets floating around. It’s sometimes difficult, if not impossible, to figure out which revelations are true and which are not. We must therefore steer away from some inordinate excesses of the pentecostal and charismatic circles——and their imitations of spiritual gifts, such as being “slain in the spirit” or “speaking in gibberish tongues”——and find the authentic divine revelations that really do come from the Holy Spirit. I John 4:1 reminds us to be vigilant and cautious:

“Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.”

But as Dr. Michael Brown has said in his book Authentic Fire, we must return to the truth of the Scriptures in the fullness of the Spirit. In fact, Jesus reminds us that it is the Spirit, not the Bible or the church, that is the ultimate authority on all matters. John 16:13 reads:

“But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.”

[eli-kittim]

What Do You Think of When You Hear the Name Eli Kittim?: The Priority of the Epistles

When you hear the name NT Wright, you immediately think of the New perspective on Paul. When you hear the name Michael Heiser, the divine council comes to mind. When someone mentions the name L.A. Marzulli, the word Nephilim pops into your head.

But what do you think of when you hear the name Eli Kittim? The key phrase that should immediately come to mind is The Priority of the Epistles. That’s because Kittim’s research has unravelled the mystery of Jesus’ story by focusing exclusively on the Greek New Testament Epistles. According to Kittim, the epistles give us the real Jesus. If you follow the epistles, you'll piece together the whole story!

If we could summarize Eli Kittim’s entire body of work in just one word, what would it be? It would be the word Epistles! Eli has put them back on the map! After tradition initially rejected the priority of the epistles in favor of the gospels——even though the former comprised some of the earliest writings of the New Testament——this bible scholar has decided to put them back on the table following a change in research methodology with special emphasis on the Greek text. Follow his work to gain further insights.

[eli-kittim]

Does Mark 13:22 Suggest that there is More than One Antichrist?

Eli Kittim

Mark 13:22:

“For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.”

Is Mark referring specifically to the end-times when mentioning “false messiahs and false prophets [who] will appear and perform signs and wonders”? Or is he referring to succeeding generations of false messiahs and sorcerers who will appear throughout the ages claiming to be the Christ?

First John 2:18—-a verse which is thematically similar to Mark 13:22—-seems to suggest the latter view by making a distinction between the Antichrist to come and the “many antichrists [that] have [already] appeared”:

“Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour.”

Second John 1:7 also suggests that Mark 13:22 is a reference to a multitude of antichrists that will appear throughout history rather than to a single Antichrist who will be revealed in the last days:

“For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.”

What is more, 1 John 4:3 only talks about the “spirit of the Antichrist,” not the Antichrist per se:

“and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming, and now it is already in the world.”

Some say that the Book of Revelation doesn’t mention the Antichrist. But this is a bogus argument because the Antichrist is called by many names (e.g. little horn Dan. 7:8, 11; king of fierce countenance Dan. 8:23; master of deception Dan. 8:25; man of lawlessness, man of sin, son of perdition 2 Thess. 2:3; the prince who is to come Dan. 9:26-27; Apollyon Rev. 9:11; the beast Rev. 11:7; 13:1-8, 18; etc.), just as Jesus is called by many names as well, such as prince of peace (Isa. 9:6) Angel of the Lord (Jud. 1:5; Jn 8:58), Michael the great prince (Dan. 12:1), archangel (1 Thess. 4:16), son of man, Son of God, Christ, Messiah the Prince, the Anointed one, Immanuel, I AM, the Alpha and the Omega (Rev. 1:8), the offspring of David, the bright and morning star (Rev. 22:16), the Root of Jesse (Rom. 15:12), the seed of Abraham (Gal. 3:16), and so on.

I’m asking this question because according to all the Biblical books——i.e. Dan. 7:8, 11, 24-25; 8:9-12, 23-25; 9:26-27; Ezek. 38:2-3, 8-9, 17; 2 Thess. 2:3-4, 6, 8-9; Rev. 9:11; 11:7; 13:1-8, 12, 18—-there seems to be only one Antichrist!

So the question is: When we read the entirety of scripture in canonical context, is there one Antichrist or many?

Revelation 16:13 specifically mentions an Unholy Trinity which is made up of an incorporeal Dragon, a human Beast (or Antichrist), and a False Prophet, who forces all people to worship the Beast (Rev. 13:12). What is more, Hippolytus of Rome, one of the most important second–third centuries Christian theologians, wrote in his book “On Christ and Antichrist” that just like God came as a man, so the Antichrist will come as a man in the last days. And there is considerable support for this conclusion in the Biblical passages that have already been cited, particularly in Rev. 12:9 (cf. Lk 10:18; Rev. 9:1) which uses the language of “incarnation” to suggest that Satan will become human:

“the great dragon was thrown down, the serpent of old who is called the devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was thrown down to the earth.”

Therefore, although many false Christs and false messiahs have already come, using sorcery and magic, there is only one Antichrist who will receive a death blow, but then come back to life (Rev. 13:3, 14), wage war, and subjugate all nations to his one-world government. Revelation 13:16-18 describes this New World Order as follows (italics mine):

“And he [the false prophet] causes all, the small and the great, the rich and the poor, and the free and the slaves, to be given a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, and he decrees that no one will be able to buy or to sell, except the one who has the mark, either the name of the beast or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for the number is that of a man; and his number is six hundred and sixty-six.”

[eli-kittim]

Is Rebirth Based on the Sacraments or Experience?

Eli Kittim

The Pope recently made a shocking statement that it is dangerous to seek a personal relationship with Christ outside the Church. His statement implies that there is no salvation outside the Church. Yet, neither Jesus nor any of the evangelists ever said that “everyone who believes in the church of Christ will be saved” (Mark 16:16). Nor did Jesus ever say that one must be born-again into the church. The apostle Paul never said “if anyone does not belong to the church, he does not belong to Christ” (Romans 8:9). Rather, he said we are born-again only in Christ (Romans 5:12-21). The Bible is very clear that we are saved through a born-again experience of Jesus Christ (John 3:3-5; Acts 2:1-4). Philippians 2:12 says, “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling,” while Ephesians 4:22-24 teaches us to put on a new identity in order to renew the spirit of our minds . Romans 8:9 reminds us that unless the Holy Spirit has radically transformed us, and indwelt us, we do not belong to Christ. This is why 2 Corinthians 5:17 says that those who are born-again in Christ are a new creation. Their personality has changed. Their mind has changed. That’s why, in the Bible, those who are radically transformed receive new names (e.g. Abram/Abraham, Jacob/Israel, Saul/Paul, and so on). Unfortunately, nothing else can purify our carnal nature and make us vessels of holiness.

Many people are deceived into thinking that they are saved by their own personal acts of the mind or the will, that is, either by believing in Christ, or by making a public profession of faith, by praying the sinner's prayer, through rites, sacraments, dietary laws, through works of the law, or through an intellectual assent to the truths of Christianity. But all these behaviors, works, and food-rituals are not capable of radically transforming a sinner into a saint because they do not really purify our carnal nature, nor do they fill us with the Holy Spirit. Only an existential rebirth in Christ can do this. This is because a person is still carnal and his sinful nature continues to dominate his mind even after partaking of the sacraments or performing works of the law. Only a radical transformation of the mind can change all this.

So my question is this: how do we reconcile Jesus' command for us to be born of the Holy Spirit with the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox teaching of salvation through the sacraments?

This is an issue of the utmost importance in which people's lives are at stake. This is a very serious matter. We're talking about whether people are saved or not. If people are being misled into thinking that they will go to heaven, when that is not the case, then it is incumbent upon me to warn them. The New Testament does not suggest that the merits of redemption are appropriated directly through the sacraments, since this would constitute a carnal spirituality that is based on external props, which cannot possibly change us from within. The sacraments are an extension of the Jewish Passover and the Jewish dietary laws. Neither can truly change our carnal nature from within. In Matthew 15:11, Jesus explains that the dietary laws do nothing because it is not the foods you eat that cleanse or defile you but rather what comes out of your uncleansed and unregenerate heart that defiles you: “it is not what goes into the mouth that [cleanses or] defiles a person, but what comes out of the mouth; this defiles a person.”

According to the apostle Paul, before we are born-again (i.e. renewed in the spirit of the mind) we operate based on the lusts of the flesh (carnal-minded), but after we are born-again we get a new operating system that works through love, not lust (Ephesians 4:22-24)! Thus, partaking of the sacraments does nothing to change or cleanse our carnal nature (or sin-nature). We can conduct psychological experiments to demonstrate that the same carnal mind operates after partaking of the sacraments as before. If a Catholic or Orthodox Christian is honest, they’ll have to admit that the same sinful thoughts, inclinations, and lustful desires are still present after partaking of the sacraments. How then can the Catholic and Orthodox Churches claim that Holy Communion is an "atoning sacrifice" for the faithful and that we are born-again through the sacraments?

Do we really understand what the new birth entails? We need to read Acts 2:1-4, Ephesians 4:22-24, and Philippians 2:12, among other passages, to see how it is accomplished. It comprises a personal and existential experience of God where we surrender our mind and will to him. Read Galatians 2:20, where Paul says: “I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me.” Do you think that Paul’s crucifixion or death resulted from his participation in the sacraments? Of course not! Paul is referring to the death of the old self, as mentioned in Ephesians 4:22-24. This existential experience is known and written about by Catholic contemplatives, like John of the Cross, but rejected my the Magisterium of the Church, even though John of the Cross is a Doctor of the Catholic Church.

Being grafted into Christ (Rom. 11) means that we become part of the body of Christ. This can only occur when the Spirit recreates us through the baptism of the Holy Spirit, via a new birth, similar to the existential experience that the faithful had (Acts 2:1-4). Jesus said you must be born-again οf the Spirit, not from the earth. He didn’t say you must consume bread and wine or attend church to be born from God.

In conclusion, nothing external can change our carnal nature and fill our hearts with love, or give us the peace that surpasses understanding. This can only occur in a dark night of the soul when our identity is deleted and God himself becomes our new identity or our new self (cf. Galatians 2:20)! Unfortunately, there are no shortcuts to salvation.

For further details, see the following essay:

The Baptism of the Holy Spirit