4 gospels : after Lazarus [we]  
comes the foreshadowing as
‘the triumphal entry’: our Date
[+birthright/appointed time !] 

[restored buildup and text]
[version ; 2023-03mar.31]


[second attempt of first ,                                                                                                    restored context : 100%
reduced to 10% text
hoping it’s readable now ,
the [sic]  will show you the main points


                                                   the ‘triumphal entry’ right after ‘Lazarus’
             … in this case , the only right thing to do is spare you and start with the conclusion  instead ;
             before you read please remember two things   — 
             that Esau fanatically cut & pasted the themes , and that his present corrupted text in KJV is 
             a form of Sorcery  [-to the mind]  : so please look with us cautiously to every word and theme
             Lazarus (or ‘the valley of bones’)
             we did that (see index) so there is no reason to repeat that here , right ,
             important is that now it shows that this immediately preceded the Entry and because 
             we always need the context  of events , the Entry therefore *must* foreshadow His return ;
             just Esau remóved every context , turning both Lazarus and the Entry into events ‘an Sich’  
             the Entry
             okay – please forget any romantic idea about “some royal entry into Jerusalem” 
             because there never was any ‘donkey’ ,
             the picture that ‘the population of Jerusalem cheered their new king’ is not true , 
             those are all based upon Esau’s presentation —  creating a false image in the mind :
             but don’t worry : the real event is much more impressive , and you’ll appreciate it
             [concerning the four gospels :] 
             … if you take a look at  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triumphal_entry_into_Jerusalem
             you will see the text overview of all four gospels side-by-side : but in reálity the mess
             that we face is even larger  which will become clear in the next conclusion section ,
             where we will use the latter to restore the entire text by ;   
             having said that , we’ll keep calling it “the entry” for now as not to complicate things ,
             but please remember that in fact it was “a double event”         

                                                  restored buildup (-of the double event)
a) Lazarus :
… the point is that He showed his disciples “the sons Ishral” being revived in the time of the end ,
but “they would still have to do their job” so to speak , just Like Lazarus was still ‘in the flesh’ ;
important to remember is that He always explained  his disciples about the future – so they KNEW ,
and were not the somewhat ignorant farmers as Esau has portrayed them , 
     location :
     likely in ‘Bethany’ , a settlement upon the rather large “hill of olives” which stretched out beyond 
     the walls of Jerusalem , so that in fact Bethany was what we now call ‘a suburb’ ,
     and this will help you better interlink both events
b) the Entry :
… Christ departs from Bethany and starts to descend the olive hill , together with his disciples ,
starting to explain to them  what will happen next — when they will reach Jerusalem ,
saying ‘how the sons (you + we) will question whý the people received Him like that’ :
         because they will have understood the scroll [-by then] and KNOW about “the three years”
         but “the 144 will fail to understand why He did not return” ,                                           [sic] 
         and that thérefore they will investigate “what was going on with that entry”  —
         you see how He already knew that we would do that ….
no donkey
… immediately Esau’s corruption of the above  becomes clear : it was never about 
          “the disciples + will find + a tied + donkey” , but 
          “the sons + discovered + the corrupted + scroll” !!
continuing ,
          “the man + ask + why + loose him” , was ofcourse
          “the sons + ask + why + we still wait” : etcetera — it all only shows Esau’s fanatical hate
the prophecy
… whenever NT refers to ‘prophets’ it is always a huge Red Flag to us ofcourse :
and indeed this so-called prophetic “entrance upon a donkey” is utter Nonsense in itself  
yet all the gullible concordances also ‘spiritualize’ this by equating this purported donkey with
the “the heifer of 3 years old that had not been yoked (used for work)” of the old-Tabernacle ,
completely missing the point who then was the real Heifer ;
then the mentioned prophecy herself ,                                   
the Zech.9:9 “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold,  
thy King cometh unto thee: he [is] just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass,  
and upon a colt the foal of an ass.”   is so incredibly corrupt that the eyes hurt reading it    — 
the only trúe section of that KJV line is “rejoice , daughter of tsiun” [=Eden]  ,
while Esau copied that exact entire line into Zephaniah 3:14 :
but we know that all of Zephaniah is about “the birth right being restored to Eden” which’ loss 
has been the first and greatest disaster to her , resulting in the gigantic Mess ever since 
                  prophecy (-restoration)                                                                                                                              [sic] 
                  it’s true , we haven’t got to that line yet – we can only do so much at a time , right – 
                  because after ‘the four horses’ Zechariah became so corrupted it was hopeless 
                  (and at that time we did not know that the 6th seal would open by birthright ) :
                  however , first part of that line can only be ‘birth-right’ (-bKre) and not ‘king’ (-mlK) ,
                  reading “rejoice , daughter of tsiun (‘eden’)  [……..]            
                because your king=birthright (mlK=bKre) will come to you […….]  
                colt=brought by the foal=sons (ben=ben , same !) of ass=Ishral (athnuth=ishral)  —

                  see where Esau got the ‘donkey theme’ from in regard to us ? 
      and in this Entry text :
      … now all starts coming together : the sons (‘144’) ask + birthright prophecy + the entry ,              [sic] 
      where the entry “into the city” represents “this world” just as it does everywhere in prophets :
      and this is the absolute core we can work with now 
b #1) further supportive aspects IN this text :
… this is similar Red flag for us as ‘prophecies’ 
since we saw that the Pharisees were but concerned with 1 thing : how to stop His return ;
we have not figured out exactly ‘what’ they said – due to corruption – but interesting is :
the appointed time
… in the Luke version Christ “weeps about Jerusalem” , saying something like ,
“but if you only had known the appointed time” (as ‘time of visitation’) : 
we’re not 100% sure yet whether this section indeed belonged to the Entry but there is a high
chance that it DID because of context  : because the Entry IS ‘the appointed time’ !                            [sic]  
            ofcourse it is not about “the Roman army destroying the city” because in all prophets the
            phrase ‘appointed time’ is only about His return — and evenmore so if it was said as ANSWER
            to (whatever-) the Pharisees objected to … you see ?
            ‘no one knows that day’ VS ‘if you only knew that day’ : so — which one is it ?
            … therefore we have an interesting question here :
            IF He [supposedly !-]  said “no one knows that day but my Father” , then how can he say the
            exact opposite here by “if you had only known that day”…. ? – obviously they could have !  
            that said , it is difficult to restore what réason He gave :
            (Lk.19:42) “Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things [which belong]   
           unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes”  — now suppose that ‘peace’ was original ,
            this would match prophets where Jacob will say “peace ! : but there will-be-no peace” ,
            read : they expect to get rescued before the Tribulation but will not ;
            hence 42 can have read “if you only had known the scroll you would not have said : peace !”  
the waiting people
… also this appears genuine , (Jn.12:17) “The people therefore that was with him when he called  
Lazarus out of his grave and raised him from the dead, bare record.”  ,
and the whole point is that they had understóod what it was about : they was not some ignorant
population which later cried “crucify him” as Esau tried to project unto us (as he did with the disciples) ,
but they (Lk.19:37b) “…began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the mighty works that 
they=He had=would seen=do” : again : “… they praised the mighty works  that He would do ” :
per unavoidable context , this (smaller-) group of people represented the full 144 !                       [sic]
              b #2) other aspects IN this text : 
palm-branches and garments ?
… though ofcourse it is possible  that palm-branches and ‘garments’ were used in greeting Him ,
the main question we must always ask is : did that make Sénse considering the context  — 
or can it be another deflection by Esau ?
       after endless pondering , the clue was in “… and they brought the donkey to Jesus” (Mk.11:7) :
       go away with that ‘donkey’ ! there was never one ! …. so what “was brought” … ?
       and the answer can only be : ‘their children’ ! they “brought their children to Him” !                    [sic] 
       the ENTIRE theme so far is about “sons .. first-born … firstborn-right … the future promise” : 
       Esau’s cut-up sections appear in Mt.19:3-5 , Lk.18:15-17 and Mk.10:13-16 , context-less there  ,
        but totally fitting here !
        “Then were there brought unto him little children,  that he should put [his] hands on them, and pray” 
        (followed by a corruption but in the same section is) “the kingdom of heaven”  — if not : ‘Eden’ ,
        and now we need to see how the Original text has phrased this ;
        again – ofcourse Christ loved all  the little ones (-of Jacob) but that is not the point here 
then ,
blessed he that cometh in the name of the Lord : present or future-tense  ?
… not even wanting to address the ‘hosanna’ : it’s Esau’s silliness and can even be a curse , who knows  —
but apart from that : what does “the one in name of the Lord” even mean ? 
then you see that Esau hid a proper subject with his ‘hosanna’ ,
and the line will read : “blessed are the children (when-) the Lord will come for name=them”  :
this makes absolute Sense – since they just bróught their children to Him !
          NO ‘kingdom of David’ here
          per the same context line 10 is ofcourse about “the kingdom of heaven” , and the affirmation
          reads : “that will blessed=begin [..] [=when] the Lord will come for name= them”  !                [sic]        
          they knew !
          so how much is the chance that they did not know about Eden ? — zero
           sub :
           … the question is whether it just wrote ‘children’ , or the more specific ‘sons’ or even ‘firstborns’ :
           both latter would greatly magnify the Clue of this whole event (-for us) , right , 
           but we always must be careful to not overdo things 
                                                                              closing :
… the only 1 thing that was nót deductible from the text is “the exact date when He returns” , 
but you can agree that it did contain a crucial aspect fór the return : by pointing to ‘the birthright’ 
(as an aspect we neither considered until the start of this year …) 
and that – arguably – the window has narrowed down immensely to a realistic ‘next 40 days’ 


                                                                                      PART II
                                                                                             restored text
                                                            (may take a while until she will be fully posted)




[for you Sir.]