The post Caution Concerning Important Distinctions that Help Avoid Misleading False Alarms appeared first on Mystery of Israel.

Exactly what event begins the last seven years? With what certainty can this be recognized?

The usual teaching is that the Antichrist signs a peace treaty with Israel. This is based on Dan 9:27.

27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. Daniel 9:27

“Which covenant is in view?” has been the question that has occupied interpreters. Is it the covenant that God made with Israel on Sinai? Is it God’s covenant to give Abraham’s descendants the Land as an everlasting possession?. Or is it referring to the New Covenant established in Christ’s blood? Commentators of different schools of thought are quite divided.

So, how this verse is translated and interpreted becomes a very delicate matter, in light of nearly identical terms found within the book (e.g. Dan 8:11-14; 11:31; 12:11) as well as other places, whether the reference is to the desecration of the sanctuary (Ps 74:3, 7-8; Isa 63:18; 64:10-11; Mt 24:15; 2 Thess 2:4; Rev 11:2), or to the half week that begins with this event (Dan 7:25; 9:27; 12:7, 11; Rev 11:2-3; 12:6, 14; 13:5).

Whether the last seven years of Daniel’s 70th week is understood as past or future will depend on which of the two princes mentioned in the preceding two verses puts an end to the sacrifice (Dan 9:25-27). If it is Messiah, then the final seven years will be seen to follow the preceding 69 weeks in unbroken sequence. If, on the other hand, the sacrifice is stopped by the future man of lawlessness, then one must recognize a gap between the 69th and 70th weeks.

A gap between the Roman kingdom and the final Antichrist must be observed in chapters 2 & 7 of Daniel. In chapters 8 & 11, the leap is made between the divided Grecian kingdom and the final Antichrist. Rome is passed over.

In many places throughout scripture there is often this mingling and overlapping of near and distant events with no clear distinction of the time that would lapse between them. Often, contemporary events on the near horizon would be portrayed against the background of the climactic completion of the final day of the Lord. This often observed phenomenon, unique to Hebrew prophecy, has been called ‘the near and far” view of prophecy.

This, and the pattern of partial, first-fruits fulfillment that anticipates further completion in the future, lies at the heart of what the NT reveals as the mystery of the kingdom of God, and the mystery of the gospel that reveals an unseen period between the advents. It’s all about the unseen gap! This pattern of a first-fruits, partial fulfillment is seen in the blending of the prophecies that envisioned Israel’s first return from captivity and the ultimate millennial end of exile.

All of this is in perfect keeping with the mystery of Christ’s twofold coming, and the two great mysteries of incarnation that circumscribe this age. The first is the “mystery of godliness” (1 Tim 3:16), fulfilled in Christ’s incarnation and atoning death at the end of the 69th week. The second is what Paul calls, “the mystery of iniquity” (2 Thess 2:7). This is fulfilled when the spirit of Satan is fully manifest in the flesh of the risen beast, in the middle of the final seven years.

Nothing else so well explains the mystery of the gap as these two mysteries, which perfectly incarnate the woman’s seed in Jesus, and the serpent’s seed in the now-fully empowered man of sin (“all power” …2 Thess. 2:9). The age is appropriately bounded by these two climactic mysteries embodying the great enmity originally put between the two seeds.

This is not the place to enter upon a defense for the view that the 70th week of Daniel is yet future and that the one who removes the regular sacrifice is not the Messiah, but the self-exalting “prince who shall come” (Dan 9:26 with Dan 8:11; 11:31, 36-37; 12:11; 2 Thess 2:4). My question is to those who already take our view: What is the nature of this covenant that begins the seven years?

Is the covenant of Dan 9:27 a newly formed peace agreement, or is it a covenant that already exists? Does the one who ends the sacrifice make ‘a’ firm covenant? Or, does he make firm ‘the’ covenant (in the sense of strengthen, recognize, endorse, or cause to prevail)? On a strictly linguistic, technical basis, either translation is equally legitimate, but what does the context indicate?

Our first interest should be to discover how the word is used in all other instances within the book. We should also be very reluctant to conclude that the reference to the covenant would be something entirely different than Daniel’s first readers would have understood.

The covenant with which they were familiar is the “holy covenant” mentioned in Dan 9:4; 11:28, 30, 32. As understood at the time, this would include more than God’s covenant oath to Abraham concerning the Land, or His new covenant promise to Jeremiah. It would also include all the holy assignments and ordinances connected to the temple and the law.

We see this in the use of the term in Dan 9:4, where Israel’s violation of the covenant receives all the penalties threatened in Lev 26, Deut 28-32, and Dan 9:7-14. Clearly, Daniel’s first readers would have made no such dissociation between the covenant of Dan. 9:27 and the holy covenant mentioned in Dan 11:28, 30.

What then has inclined interpreters to so completely dissociate the covenant of Dan 9:27 from the holy covenant of Dan 11:28, 30? Since Paul so clearly cites Dan 11:36-37 in 2 Thess 2:4, there is usually little disagreement that the Antichrist and the final events of the end are in view from Dan 11:36 to the end of chapter 12.

With only a few very notable exceptions, the consensus among most contemporary academic commentaries is nearly monolithic: Dan 11:21-35 was all fulfilled within the 2nd century B.C., between the rise of Antiochus IV in 175 B.C. and the end of his persecution of the Jews (167-165 B.C.). This means that conservative scholars of all schools will usually (but not always) put the gap between verses 35 and 36.

Those who see the covenant as confirmed by Jesus consider it to be the everlasting/new covenant promised in the prophets, not the ‘holy covenant’ that was attacked by Antiochus. Accordingly, they see the covenant as a peace treaty or alliance signed by a future Antichrist, but make no connection at all between this and anything that could be called holy.

Others, most often those of liberal leaning in their view of prophecy, see Antiochus Epiphanes as the one who removes the sacrifice in all four references in Daniel (Dan 8:11; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11). For them, the covenant in view is the same throughout, as most readily recognized by Daniel’s first readers.

The discussion is too involved to enter upon a defense of our position at this point, but all lines of evidence, both from within the text and a careful reading of the documented history of Antiochus IV, lead us to conclude that many commentators have been far too hasty to assume that all the events of Dan 11:21-35 were entirely fulfilled in the person of Antiochus. Other scholars (some highly acclaimed – Jerome, Tregelles, Watson, Keil, Lang, Emerson) argue that many of the details of the text were not sufficiently met in the history of Antiochus’ rise and fall. This, of course, demands that we look for a future fulfillment.

Futurists very reasonably infer that the covenant is related to a peace agreement, since a number of scriptures show that the Antichrist invasion of the Land takes place at a time when the fledgling new nation is dwelling securely (Eze 38:8, 11, 14; 39:26, with Isa 28:15, 18; Dan 8:25; 11:21, 24; 1Thess 5:3).

Ezekiel depicts Israel as dwelling securely, enjoying millennial-like conditions. However, this security is very clearly not millennial, but a false security, since the attack by Gog ends, not with the eternal state, but with the day of the Lord (Eze 39:8 with Rev 16:17), the burying of bodies and burning of weapons (Eze 39:9-16), but most importantly with Israel’s final and complete redemption (Eze 39:22-29). This tells us that the invasion of Gog takes place before Israel comes to faith on the day of the Lord (Eze 39:8, 22 with Rev 16:14-17).

Furthermore, some translations of Eze 39:26 show this interval of security to be a period during which Israel’s sins increase, placing it in marked contrast to the righteousness that attends the security that will be Israel’s in the millennium. This raises the question: is this peace the result of the Antichrist’s support for the “holy covenant” that implies recognition of Israel’s right to the Land and acceptance of Jewish worship on the forbidden Temple Mount?

Isaiah will show that the final desolation comes when Jerusalem’s rulers will lightly dismiss the prophetic warning of impending invasion because they have (evidently very recently) entered into a “covenant with death and hell” (Isa 28:15-18). Paul is doubtless referring to these OT prophecies when he speaks of those who will be “saying ‘peace and safety’” when sudden destruction comes upon them like birth pangs upon a woman (1 Thess 5:3 with Isa 13:8; 26:16-17; 66:8; Mic 5:3; Jer 30:6-7; Dan 12:1).

Daniel, however, will speak of one who comes in ‘peaceably’ (KJV), “in time of security” (ASV), “in a time of tranquility” (NASU), “when its people feel secure” (NIV), and obtain the kingdom ‘by flatteries”, variously translated as fair words, intrigue (Dan 11:21). Depending on which translation best captures the meaning, it appears there is already some measure of security already existing in the region  when he comes to power.

Can we imagine this? Our translations differ, but the question will depend on whether we understand the best reading as “at a time of peace”, or “peaceably”. The translation that seems most consistent in its use of similar language in Dan 8:25; 11:21, 24 appears to indicate that perhaps not peace itself, but the promise of peace is being extended, but as a strategy of deceit, to obtain political advantage.

And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with a small people. Daniel 11:23

It appears that immediately after the fateful “league” is made with him, he begins to work deceitfully, and from the larger context, this deceitful working takes the form of plotting against the conditions that were caused to prevail by his confirmation of the covenant centered at Jerusalem.

If we are correct to interpret Dan 11:21-45 of the future Antichrist as only prefigured by Antiochus, it appears that this alliance takes place at the same time that he, with many others, confirms “the holy covenant”. This would seem to suggest that the covenant of Dan 9:27 is being confirmed at the same time that the alliance of Dan 11:23 is being made between the Antichrist, Israel, and evidently many other nations.

Commentators have also taken different views of the identity of the “many” in Dan 9:27. Is the covenant being ratified between Israel and the Antichrist only, or is this something that the Antichrist does together with other participating nations? We think the latter.

In any event, the single most important question, decisive for all else, is whether or not the covenant of Dan 9:27 is the “holy covenant” of Dan 11:28, 30.  We note that in both places, there is the abolition of the sacrifice. This is often overlooked by the popular view. The covenant in Dan 9:27 stands in the same connection with the sacrifice as the holy covenant in Dan 11:28-32. This must not be missed!

Therefore, if the taking away of the sacrifice in Dan 11:31 is the same event described in Dan 12:11, then how can it be reasonably denied that this is the event that begins the half week of Dan 7:25; 9:27; 12:7, 11? From Dan 12:1-2, 7, 11, it becomes clear that the half week ends in nothing short of the deliverance of Israel and the resurrection of the dead.  By solid, irrefutable exegesis, it is the same covenant violated by the same act of desecration.

But this brings the supreme paradox. How does the AC “confirm” (in the sense of approve or strengthen) a covenant that is holy if this is indeed the same covenant that he so vehemently hates and conspires to destroy? (Dan 11:23-24, 28-31). We are about to see why this is such a mystery that has defied clear resolution until these end days (Dan 12:4, 9).

Whatever else recognition of the holy covenant might include (such as Jewish right to the Land), it must also include the presence of the “holy place” in Jerusalem (Mt 24:15-16; 2 Thess 2:4). The standing again of the “temple of God” (2Thes 2:4) is certainly required if there is to be a sacrifice that is taken away only 3 ½ years (the half week) before the end (Dan 9:27; 12:1-2, 7, 11).

A comparison of texts within Daniel will show the following: the Antichrist begins as a “little horn” (Dan 7:8; 8:9). Is this metaphor only to indicate that he will arise in a kingdom that is lesser in size and strength than any of the four divisions of Alexander’s kingdom? If we observe the language of Dan 11:23, it seems that the term ‘little horn’ signifies a “small people”. This may suggest a kingdom that is even lesser in size and strength in its beginning than the ten kingdoms he unites in common cause against the covenant.

He comes from the north of Israel. According to Dan 8:9; 11:20-21, this could be anywhere within the general region of the ancient Seleucid (Syrian) empire that ruled from Damascus to Babylon.

Judging from the use of the prepositions in Dan 7:8, 24, it appears that the kingdom that gives rise to the Antichrist is one that comes up “among” the ten, sometime “after” they have already been established as kingdoms. Taken together, the evidence suggests that the Antichrist takes his rise in a fledgling new power after a predecessor has ruled only a “few days” (Dan 11:20). Nothing in history has adequately fulfilled these details of Daniel’s prophecy. Antiochus, whom most commentaries credit with fulfilling vs. 20, ruled, not a “few days” (even if taken metaphorically), but a full twelve years!

From the text, we see that after rising to power an ill-fated alliance is struck by Israel with the AC (Dan 11:23-24) – the proverbial ‘deal with the Devil’. Is this human alliance the same as the holy covenant that the Antichrist does not make, but only confirms? There is an important difference.

It appears that there are two sides to the arrangement: as part of a treacherous human alliance, the Antichrist apparently agrees to confirm (support and endorse) what the Jews regard as holy. This is something he personally hates and begins very shortly to plot against (Dan 11:23-24, 28-30).

On one side, it is confirmation of the holy covenant that recognizes Jewish right to land and temple service. On the other side, Jewish obedience has been made to depend on the frailty of a human alliance, this time the Antichrist himself. This is what Isaiah is calling an ill-fated “covenant with death and hell” (Isa 28:15, 18).

This resolves the paradox of how it is that something can be at once a covenant with death and hell where the Jews are concerned, yet show the great desolator who will take away the sacrifice to be one among many who confirms the holy covenant (Dan 9:27; 11:23).

[Note: Contrary to popular opinion, the anger of God does not burn against the Jews because some want to rebuild the temple and offer sacrifice according to the law. Far from it, His deep umbrage with them will be on the basis of what it has always been: trust in the arm of the flesh. This longstanding misplaced trust will at last sell them into the hand of the final Antichrist. It is the deadly presumption that lasting peace can exist apart from lasting righteousness, that is, the “everlasting” righteousness” (Dan 9:24) that can come only through the Spirit of “the Lord our righteousness” (Jer 23:5-6).]

For these reasons we are led to expect a multinational peace agreement between many nations. This particular peace must include within its provisions a formal recognition of the holy covenant. This will necessarily include, not only recognition of safe borders, but rights of access to the presently forbidden Temple Mount, particularly to attend to the service of the temple according to the law of Moses.

Many nations will oppose and rage against what the Antichrist with many nations have agreed to confirm. We know this because it is with such nations that the Antichrist will have secret intelligence, plotting to overthrow the covenant and recapture Jerusalem (Dan 11:28-30). We can safely add the word, “secret” intelligence, because it is plain from scripture that Israel will not be expecting the invasion of the united forces under the Antichrist.

As noted, some translations imply that the alliance with the AC takes place at a time of security (Dan 8:25; 11:21, 24). Others indicate only trickery and surprise. Even now, as of the recent “Abraham Accords”, regional nations, some of longstanding antagonism, are beginning to pursue normalized relations with Israel. So it is entirely possible that there will be a comparative measure of peace before the many confirm the covenant. It appears that the Antichrist is one among many who “confirm the covenant” (holy covenant) at the same time the “league” is being made with him (Dan 9:27; 11:23).

In this way something holy is being confirmed (supported, endorsed) by one who secretly (or perhaps not so secretly) despises what he has so recently confirmed. This is the great paradox! Little wonder it has not been more recognized by the exegetical commentaries. What scenario of political expediency could possibly incline the Antichrist to enter into an agreement (alliance / league) that will evidently entail his support for something that he vehemently hates and begins almost immediately to plot against? (Dan 11:23-34; 11:28-30). Does his compliance owe to some political pressure?, or, is this a planned strategy intended to pretend compliance until the passionately pursued opportunity presents itself?

If we are correct to identify the covenant of Dan 9:27 with the holy covenant of Dan 11:28, 30, it would appear that the holy covenant is confirmed at the same time certainly Israel, evidently with other nations, enter into the deadly “league” with the man who will prove their greatest adversary. This is the dark side, the “human” side of the agreement that is rightly called, “a covenant with death and hell,” precisely because its basis is a naive trust in man. This is the very deep contention that God has always had with His covenant nation.

So all scriptural evidence, duly considered, contemplates a two sided phenomenon that takes place paradoxically at the same time. This is how something can be at once a covenant with death and hell, even while unholy nations unite to confirm an ancient covenant that is holy. Most apparently, this is a multi-national agreement to recognize Jewish right to the Land of promise and freedom to practice their commanded worship in the appointed place. This will likely take place in connection with a human peace arrangement that will be enforced by a multinational peace keeping force.

But note carefully:

The peace that will be in place when the AC confirms the covenant to start the last seven years must be one that is completely without precedent. We know this because scripture shows that Israel’s guard is relaxed, leaving the nation quite unsuspecting of what’s about to hit them (Isa 28:15-18; Eze 38:8, 11, 14; 39:26; Dan 11:23-24; 1Thess 5:3). And not only Israel, but I speculate that this shock and the fire that the ten will bring upon the harlot (Rev 17:16) will doubtless include, not only Jerusalem, but the west, with even some of the moderate Arab nations that were favorable toward  the peace. This would include the Gulf States of the Arabian Peninsula (ancient Sheba and Dedan; see Eze 38:13), and most certainly Egypt (see Isa 19).

If, with all of this, one could remain uncertain of the time, it will soon enough become very clear that the covenant so lately confirmed by the Antichrist is the one that begins the seven years. This will be known by the starting again of the daily sacrifice. According to Dan 8:11-14, the sacrifice does not start immediately after the covenant is confirmed. It starts 2300 days (6 1/3 years) before the end, and is stopped 3 1/2 years before the end (Dan 12:7, 11).

This means the sacrifice begins somewhere between the eighth and tenth months of the first year after the covenant has been confirmed. The reason the exact time is not easy to fix is because the 2300 days do not end with the return of Jesus (the precise day and hour unknown), but with the “cleansing of the sanctuary” (Dan 8:13).

Since this point has most likely to do with the “anointing of the most holy place” as one of the end goals of Dan 9:24, the reference to cleansing the sanctuary seems to be part of the dedication ceremony of the new temple. Precisely where this event will fall within the mysterious extension of days in Dan 12:11-12 is difficult to say.

In all other instances where the sacrificed was stopped (Nebuchadnezzar; Antiochus, Titus), it had been in session for centuries. Unlike any of these examples, the sacrifice is one that has not been only recently restarted. Our interpretation of Dan 8:11-14 as future is further confirmed by the observation that the temple that the Antichrist enters to desecrate is one that has only recently come back into Jewish possession (see Isa 63:18; 64:10-11).

By this we know that well before the Antichrist invades Israel and enters the temple, the saints will have opportunity to see many things that will confirm that they have entered the final seven. This will be a tremendous gift to the body and the world. But for those who persist in unbelief in the face of such massive evidence of fulfilled prophecy will become much more accountable and without excuse.

It is another discussion, but knowing the time when it is ‘time to know the time’ will be an unspeakably invaluable gift to the saints. This is because of all that God has invested in the use he intends to make of that complete certainty when the time comes.

“When this agreement shall have been confirmed, the wise will know that the final Seven of years has commenced, that the end days are present, that the consummation of the age has arrived. They will expect the violation of the covenant after three years and a half, and will not be overwhelmed with surprise, have been told beforehand by this prophecy. Then will it be seen in fullness that the knowledge of the prophetic Scripture is simply priceless.” (G.H. Lang, “The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel”; 1940)

The post How will we know when the final week has begun? appeared first on Mystery of Israel.

The particular peace agreement that begins the last seven years must be one that not only includes multi-national support for a peace arrangement that brings unprecedented peace to the region (Isa 28:15, 18; Eze 38:8, 11, 14; 39:26; Dan 8:25; 11:21, 24; 1Thes 5:3). It must also include recognition and support for “the holy covenant” in particular (see Dan 9:27 in light of Dan 11:28, 30, 32). This is something far more than a mere peace agreement signed by the Antichrist. That theory is in timely need of serious re-examination!

So what is the “holy covenant”? In Dan 11:28, 30, where this particular phrase is used, it clearly has to do with Jewish temple worship at Jerusalem. Whatever else the holy covenant includes (Jewish right to the Land promised to Abraham’s descendents, etc.), it must include the presence of the temple (or at least the beginnings of a temple) and Jewish return (recent return; Isa 63:18; 64:10-11, with Dan 8:13-14) to the daily offering of sacrifice on the temple mount in Jerusalem (Dan (9:27; 11:31; 12:11; Mt 24:15-16; 2Thes 2:4). It is precisely “the holy covenant” situated at Jerusalem that the AC so vehemently hates and, with other dissenting nations (Dan 11:27, 30), conspires to destroy (Dan 11:23-31).

The single question that so greatly affects our interpretation of all else is this: is the covenant that is “confirmed” in Dan 9:27 the same covenant that is called “holy” in Dan 11:28, 30? If it is, this brings the consummate paradox. How does the AC “confirm” (in the sense of approve or strengthen) a covenant that is holy? We are about to see why this is such a mystery that has defied clear resolution until these end days (Dan 12:4, 9).

From the larger context of Daniel, with key related passages in Isaiah and Ezekiel especially, we see that the AC takes advantage of what appears an already existing peace (he comes in ‘peaceably’; Dan 8:25; 11:21, KJV; others translate, “at a time of security / tranquility” ASV; NASB, “when its people feel secure” NIV). It is in this already existing climate of relative security (many translate “prosperity”; cf. Eze 38:12-13; Joel 2:3; Dan 11:41) that he “obtains the kingdom (already existing kingdom) by flatteries / stealth / treachery (Dan 11:21).

Whether at that time, or some point shortly after, “many” (we infer ‘many’ nations; see Dan 9:27) enter into an alliance with him.

23”And AFTER the league (treaty) made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with a small people.”

Remember, compared to other regional powers, he is called a “little horn” (Dan 7:8; 8:9).

It appears that he has very lately risen to power in a comparatively small, possibly new nation somewhere to the north of Israel (Dan 8:9). Judging by the use of prepositions ‘in’ and ‘among’ in Dan 7:8, 24, we may safely infer that the ten nations that he will later unite against the covenant are already in existence when he comes to power in what is evidently a fledgling new nation that has recently emerged. (“out of one of them”, i.e., one of the four primary divisions of Alexander’s empire; Dan 8:9; 11:20-21).

From the text, we see that after rising to power in a comparatively small (and possibly recently formed nation from somewhere within the former Seleucid kingdom that once stretched from Damascus to Babylon), during a time of what appears an already existing regional security (Dan 11:21, 24), an ill-fated alliance is struck with the AC (Dan 11:23-24), the proverbial ‘deal with the Devil’. Is this human alliance the same as the covenant that is ‘confirmed’ in Dan 9:27?

If the covenant of Dan 9:27 is indeed the “holy covenant” of Dan 11:28, 30, then the answer is no; they are not the same. There is a crucial distinction, but this alliance is, without doubt, the “covenant with death and hell” (Isa 28:15, 18) that we may infer takes place at the same time that the AC confirms the holy covenant “with the many” (Dan 9:27).

This suggests a satisfying resolution to the paradox of how something can be at once a covenant with death and hell, while at the same time ‘the’ holy covenant is being confirmed by the Antichrist (probably as one among others; Dan 9:27; 11:23). It is different sides of the same coin, evidently occurring at the same time.

[Note: Contrary to popular opinion, the anger of God does not burn against the Jews because some want to rebuild the temple and offer sacrifice according to the law. Far from it, His deep umbrage with them will be what it has always been, trust in the arm of the flesh, which long standing misplaced trust will at length sell them into the hand of the final Antichrist. It is the deadly presumption that lasting peace can exist apart from lasting righteousness, that is, the “everlasting” righteousness” (Dan 9:24) that can come only through the Spirit of “the Lord our righteousness” (Jer 23:5-6).]

Apparently, a multinational peace agreement includes within its provisions, formal recognition of Israel’s right to exist in the land that will now, at last, be recognized as theirs, not by all, but by the moderate nations seeking normalization at the probable expense of Turkish, Iranian, and Palestinan insult and rage.

[Note: I have shown elsewhere that the best interpretation of Dan 8:11-14 argues that the sacrifice does not start immediately after the covenant is confirmed, but somewhere between the eighth and tenth months of the first year, depending on where one sees the finishing point within the added days of Dan 12:11-13.]

We know the alliance with the AC takes place at a time of security / tranquility (implied in Isa 28:15, 18; Eze 38:8, 11, 14; 39:26; Dan 8:25; 11:21, 24). Could this state of affairs pre-exist the AC’s confirmation of the covenant? I think that is a possibility. Even now, as of the recent “Abraham Accords”, regional nations, some of long standing antagonism, are beginning to pursue normalized relations with Israel. So it is entirely possible that there will be a comparative measure of peace before the peace. But note carefully. The peace that will be in place when the AC confirms the covenant to start the last seven years must be one that is completely without precedent. We know this because scripture shows that Israel’s guard is relaxed, leaving the nation quite unsuspecting of what’s about to hit them (Isa 28:15-18; Eze 38:8, 11, 14; 39:26; Dan 11:23-24; 1Thes 5:3). And not only Israel, but I think this shock and the fire that the ten will bring upon the harlot will doubtless include, not only Jerusalem, but the west and evidently the moderate nations that were favorable of the peace. This would be the Gulf States of the Arabian Peninsula (ancient Sheba and Dedan; see Eze 38:13), and most certainly Egypt (see Isa 19).

It seems clear that the AC confirms the covenant at the same time he and other nations enter into the deadly alliance that ends in disaster for Israel. We also know that disaster comes 3 ½ years after the covenant of Dan 9:27 has been confirmed by the AC, evidently as one among ‘many’ others.

As stated above, it is one thing to enter into an agreement with Israel and other nations that secures a regional peace. It is quite another matter to “confirm” (not make in the sense of create, but to ‘make firm’ in the sense of strengthen, support, give formal approval or recognition) a covenant that is shown within the same book of Daniel to be, not ‘a’, but THE “holy covenant” (Dan 11:28, 30). So why would the AC “confirm” (in the sense of approve or strengthen) a covenant that is holy? No wonder this has been so overlooked by commentators!

If we are correct to understand that the “holy covenant” of Dan 11:28, 30 to be none other than the covenant that the AC confirms in Dan 9:27, we see that from the beginning of the alliance of Dan 11:23, he immediately begins to “work deceitfully”, as he swiftly increases in power.

If we are correct to make the connection between the covenant of Dan 9:27 and the holy covenant of Dan 11:28, 30, this means that the AC despises and plots to overthrow the same holy covenant he has so recently confirmed (Dan 11:27, 30). Of course, with few exceptions, this is not recognized by scholars in most of the commentaries on Daniel. This is because most tend to apply Dan 9:27 either to Antiochus IV (died 164 B.C.), or to Jesus who, it is claimed, terminated the sacrifice, not literally or actually (until 40 years later in 70 A.D), but ended its spiritual efficacy (it was never efficacious) by the once and for all sacrifice of His blood.

The interpretation will depend on which prince stops the regular sacrifice. Was it Antiochus, Jesus, or a future Antichrist (man of lawlessness)? If Antiochus, the math is fuzzy at best, as even admitted by the advocates of that view. If Jesus, then we must ask what great “consummation” or end came exactly seven years after He confirmed the covenant?

Moreover, if Jesus caused the sacrifice to cease, this is at variance with every other mention throughout the book. In every instance, it is always the evil, self exalting “prince who shall come” who stops the sacrifice, and this event always sets in motion the “time of the end” (cf. Dan 8:11; 9:26-27; 11:31; 12:11). What significant “end” did the seventh year after Jesus’ baptism bring? Advocates of this view are divided, but usually suggest that the end of the seventieth week came with either the death of Stephen or the conversion of Paul. Rather anticlimactic I’d say; especially when the whole book of Daniel designs to answer the question, “how long”?. The nation will be delivered at the “time of the end”, the same time the dead are raised (Dan 12:1-2), and this will happen exactly “a time, times, and a half”, somewhere within the approximate range of the 1260 -1290 -1335 days AFTER the stopping of the daily sacrifice. Clearly, this is the half week of Daniel’s 70th week that so greatly occupies the Revelation (Rev 11:2-3; 12:6, 14; 13:5).

It is also typical for scholars (certainly not all) to apply Dan 11:21-35, not to the future Antichrist who enters the temple “in Jerusalem” (Mt 24:15-16; Rev 11:2), takes away the sacrifice, and declares himself God above all (Dan 11:31, 36-37; Mt 24:15; 2Thes 2:4), but rather to Antiochus IV of the second century B.C. But such an interpretation makes poor observation that while Antiochus may have been a significant type of the coming Antichrist, in so many particulars within the text itself, he falls far short of the many outstanding details that received no adequate fulfillment in the second century B.C., clearly demanding a much more complete and plenary fulfillment in the future, but that’s another rather involved discussion.

It appears then that it is the holy covenant itself that the AC confirms, apparently at the same time Israel (with many other nations), enters into an alliance with him. We judge this because this marks the time he begins to “work deceitfully” (evidently against the covenant). This he does as he “comes up and becomes strong” (grows swiftly in power), either by means of “a small people”, or perhaps by his exploitation of a small people (insignificant people, or few in number?, the word, “number” is supplied by the translators in some translations).

After a strategic power grab (of a nation to his south, not necessarily Egypt; Dan 11:25 with Dan 11:42), he begins to secretly court the support of other dissenting nations in his plot against the holy covenant. This obviously implies his passion to capture Jerusalem (compare Dan 11:27, 30). I insert the word, “secretly”, because the “intelligence” he has with those who share his hatred of the covenant is manifestly a secretive conspiracy to invade. This is evident since the final destruction comes suddenly and without notice (see Isa 28:15-18; Eze 38:8-13; Mt 24:15-16; 1Thes 5:3; Rev 12:6, 14).

So from the very first, immediately “AFTER the league made with him”, he is seen plotting and planning against the “holy covenant” that he confirmed with other nations, granting Israel’s right to exist, not only exist, but to practice their ancient worship on the divinely designated temple mount. This is the covenant he confirms with many. There may be other peace treaties, signed by any number of participants, but this is what begins the seven years, nothing less!

Whether out of necessity or strategic opportunity, the AC confirms what he, with other dissenting nations, passionately despises. Yet he apparently breaks ranks with the others who vehemently oppose the covenant (Iran, Syria,Turkey, etc.). Until his strategic plotting solidifies into the union of the ten, the AC is apparently only one among the “many” more moderate nations that confirm the covenant. This means he pretends an initial support for what he begins very early to plot against. As events of the first half of the week progress (Dan 11:23-30), his intentions are disguised as he secretly courts compliance and unification with the disaffected resistors who evidently refuse this powerfully imposed, but passionately hated peace that includes forced recognition of the holy covenant.

Whether under necessity or opportunity, the AC will agree to make this highly deceptive concession to Jewish worship on the Temple Mount, but only for a time. From the very beginning of the alliance, he “works deceitfully” to plot and plan against what he so recently confirmed. When the time is right, he covertly courts the union of the ten. This is apparently those nations who are stalwart resistors of the peace, particularly any peace that grants Jewish ritual and worship on the forbidden temple mount.

A modern application of Dan 11:21-32 will suggest that those “who forsake the holy covenant” in Dan 11:30, 32 are not only the dissenting nations that wanted no part of the peace, but also those who after the peace is broken, begin to forsake and flee from any identification with the Jews in flight. Favorable relations with Jews will be a death sentence, as experienced, not only be Christians, but be some of the moderate nations that supported the peace (compare Eze 38:13, Sheba and Dedan, modern Gulf States, and Egypt; Isa 19). to Israel will certainly attract Antichrist rage, as so well demonstrated in the tribulation assault on Egypt (Isa 19). Relation to Israel association with the Jews .

In modern terms, this would be recognition, (whether voluntarily or constrained) of Israel’s right to exist in their own land, with particular formal recognition and acceptance of the right of Jewish attendance to situate their sanctuary on the forbidden Temple Mount and to shortly begin the regular sacrifice. That is what the idea of the “holy covenant” in Dan 11:28, 30, 32 (and therefore, we would argue, Dan 9:27) has particularly in view.

As best I can see, this is what the cumulative evidence, taken in strictest context, would seem to indicate. This is not to minimize the huge, on time stride in the right direction that the Abraham Accord represents. We do well to take heed, especially if we believe that we are nearing the end of Hosea’s two days (Hos 5:15 – 6:2). It is just to say, there remain some formidable political mountains that must be removed before the seven years can begin.

Recognizing this will keep us from premature declarations, so that when the time does confirm itself beyond question by the more definite signal events, we may move as one man with holy boldness, instructing many, and turning many to righteousness (Dan 11:32-33; 12:3, 10; Rev 7:9, 13-14). It will be the church’s finest hour!

These be the days! Reggie

The post Lest We “Jump the Gun” appeared first on Mystery of Israel.

 

(1hr:25min)
 

Right Click to Download The Final Chapter of God’s Work – by Reggie Kelly (39mb)
 

The post The Final Chapter of God’s Work [Audio] appeared first on Mystery of Israel.

It may be attractive to calculate symbolic numbers, 7’s, 40’s and 70’s, Sabbath years and feast days and so on. There may or may not be validity to some inside track detectable to those with the inside knowledge, but none of this is what Jesus specified. He tells us plainly what to look for and mark. And He tells in a way that can be plain to all the sheep, provided they obey His simple directive to read and understand Daniel’s prophecy, with particular attention to one very specific event. This requires no special historical or astronomical knowledge better known to NASA and brainy meticulous chronologers and historians than to the average believer.

I just know God would never put His sheep at the mercy of such endless, mind boggling ‘data’, available only as it comes down from the experts who often are not agreed among themselves. Jesus gave us just enough, no more, no less to be prepared and to escape the ultimate deception when it would count the most. And though it seems to elude the most advanced biblical scholars; it’s marvelously simple!

You begin by simply following His command to search out Daniel in special reference to the abomination that must stand in Jerusalem (Mt 24:15-16, as found in Dan 8:11; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11). From there, it is sufficiently plain what precedes and what follows. Beyond this, a prophet may warn of local earthquake or famine etc., Such specific knowledge, if true, can help the church, just as false prophecy tends to scandalize and shame the church, as it emboldens unbelief and blasphemy. Otherwise, the threat of imminent calamity is always a possibility for every generation, as Jesus showed that such things would belong to the general ebb and flow of the history of a world that lies in wickedness.

When these general characteristics of the age appear, and even when they begin to abound in both frequency and intensity, still, Jesus warns against a premature and misleading excitement, as these are NOT “the sign” that the end has arrived. “See that you are not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.”

This is exactly what Paul is addressing in 2Thes 2:1-8, but carefully note: Paul does not set light by the foretold sign of Jesus’ imminent return. On the contrary, his whole emphasis it to make it unmistakable. His interest is not only to quell a distracting false alarm, but to underscore something he was careful to teach on every occasion, even when his time in Thessolonica would be extraordinarily brief. Paul is no less interested that the critical sign NOT be lost to a lie. This is precisely because he knew that when the time would come, this knowledge will be a critical bulwark of defense from the deception that Jesus said would attend that time. In its proper time, it will be vital and this is why Paul rallies with such great urgency to put down a lie that threatened much more than a premature excitement that enticed some in the church to leave their jobs and become idle.

No, the “end” begins with the abomination, nothing less. Show us something leading directly to the abomination and you will have our attention. Until then, we are to be sober and always watchful as a life style, knowing that desolations are determined (not to be confused with the ultimate desolation of Jerusalem) as characteristic of an age under judgment.

I always think of when the book of the Law was found in the temple. Josiah needed no course in fine prophetic details of eschatology to see the writing on the wall. The only reason God may yet bear the pride of this nation a little longer and of many nations is precisely because it the cup of Babylon’s iniquity is being permitted to fill all the way to the full. Otherwise, if we were to be humbled before the time, it seems to me something deeply humbling would have already come, such as our own Civil War or something of that scale.

Even more fearful than temporal humbling is the greater judgment that permits the cup of wrath to fill to the point of no return. Though the end of the age is full of much judgment, there is an entity called, ‘mystery Babylon’ that is being permitted to become very successful, prosperous, secure, and increasingly oppressive of all godliness. This ‘apparent’ non-judgement is the greatest and most fearful judgment of all.

Our tower is being permitted to reach unto heaven for a purpose. This is the time we must work while it is day, but the greatest impediment to the work is the disarming intoxications and sedation of the spirit of Babylon, the spirit of the age, as most of professing Christendom is ‘at ease in Zion’. As with the northern kingdom at the Amos’s prophecy, a sleepy worldly church only imagines that it wants the day of the Lord to hasten (Amos 5:18).

In one sense, the judge has always been ‘at the door’. Since John wrote his epistle, it has been “the last time.” It is always time to flee from the wrath to come, and to hasten to call out the penitent remnant from the city of destruction. The days of every great empire are numbered, as every individual’s life span. In that sense, the day of the Lord is always ‘at hand’. That can be seen by the use the prophets’ make of that language, applying the same terms of imminence to different times and different threats facing Israel on the contemporary horizon, against which backdrop they would describe the more ultimate and final day of the Lord.

While I fully believe we are at the threshold of the last call before closing, with most (certainly not all), the signs amazingly in place, the urgency of fleeing Babylon and being separate from the world remains no less true in every generation. But now, as never before, most of the long awaited signs are in place. We are nearing the end of the two days of Hos 6:2, and the signs that remain are showing strong evidence of falling, potentially very quickly into place. It is for this reason only that I believe Babylon is being permitted to wax more and more in its pride and false security, perhaps even a more abounding prosperity, till the cup of iniquity has reached to heaven.

Apart from the simple plum line that Jesus gives, all the vain speculations will ultimately have an hardening influence that is calculated to disarm and disaffect the credulous from the real thing when the time does come. That’s just one price we pay for the false alarms of prophetic speculation that make men rich while it emboldens the world. His judgments are perfect in their wisdom to show what is in the heart. That’s my take.

The post “Prophetic False Alarms” – UPDATE appeared first on Mystery of Israel.

After listening to a number of preachers speak about the trumpets of Revelation already being fulfilled since World War 1, and that we are quickly approaching the sixth which speaks of a great war in the Middle East; Is this possible? Because I always thought of the trumpets happening within the last 3 and half years, and we have not yet seen ‘hail fire, mixed with blood, burning up a third of the trees”, or the star “Wormwood poisoning a third of the planet’s freshwater sources” and if we have, when? Am I missing something?

Concerning the timing of the trumpets, you are very correct. They most certainly begin at the middle of the week, at the time of the sealing of the servants of God (Rev 7:1-3 ff.) and continue to the ‘last’ or 7th trumpet, which is the Lord’s return and the beginning of His millennial reign (Mt 24:31; 1Cor 15:52; Rev 10:7; 11:15 ff.).

A careful comparison of Rev 8:12-13; 9:12-13; Rev 11:11-15 will show that the last three trumpets are the last three woes. This further contradicts the really bizarre notion that the first five trumpets are already past and the 6th is imminent. As you rightly ask, how could the 6th trumpet be the next to sound unless we are already well advanced into the great tribulation? That such a proposal could be made, or seriously entertained, underscores a really dangerous ignorance or misplacement of the events that signal the beginning of the tribulation, that let us know when it is approaching and when we’re in it.

Firstly, we know that the great tribulation cannot start until the necessary preliminary conditions are in place. Breaking the deadly peace arrangement, the Antichrist descends suddenly upon an unsuspecting Israel that is resting in a false sense of security (Isa 28:15, 18; Dan 8:25; 9:27; 11:23-24; 1Thes 5:3). Sweeping away all opposition (Dan 11:31; Rev 13:4), he forcibly enters the rebuilt temple of God which must again stand in Jerusalem (‘the holy place’ in ‘Judea’; Mt 24:15-16; 2Thes 2:4; Rev 11:1-2). He then stops the regular (morning and evening) sacrifice that has been only recently reinstated (Isa 63:18; Dan 8:13-14) and places the abomination that triggers the great tribulation (Dan 11:31; 12:1-2, 11; Mt 24:15-16, 21; 2Thes 2:4). It’s that simple. It was meant to be for our protection.

It is fitting that God would make it plain so that we would not be deceived by false reports and premature excitements to the contrary. There is only one antidote to end times deception: “But take ye heed! Behold; I have foretold you all things” (Mt 24:25: Mk 13:23). And, “Let no man deceive you by any means, for that day shall NOT come, except there come a falling away FIRST, and that man of sin be revealed …” (2Thes 2:3-4).

Jesus does not give all the details that are needful for His people’s knowledge of the end. Rather, He sends His disciples to Daniel’s prophecy to identify and understand the key event that signals the beginning of the tribulation (Mt 24:15-16, 21). If we would only follow His clear command, we would save ourselves a lot of abuse and needless diversion from the false alarms of prophetic speculation. By His interjection, ‘let the reader understand’ (to paraphrase, “pay attention to Daniel!”), Jesus is directing us to search Daniel’s prophecy for this event, and to read with “understanding” (a word that appears with significant frequency all throughout the book).

We find that the abomination that brings the final desolation of Jerusalem is mentioned four times (Dan 8:11; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11). Jesus knew that when we would carefully observe what leads up to this event and mark what follows from it, we would not be so easily mistaken or deceived concerning the time of His return, nor without understanding of the nature and meaning of the tribulation that must immediately precede (Mt 24:29). This should be the beginning point of any study of prophecy, since it is exactly where Jesus tells His disciples to begin, a divine directive that has been far too little emphasized.

Contrary to many prophecy scenarios, the abomination of desolation cannot be separated in time from the stopping of the daily sacrifice. Both are equally 1290 days before the end (Dan 12:11). I agree this would seem obvious, but many false views of prophecy live and thrive by separating the inseparable. For example, some insist that Christ stopped the sacrifice by His death, but move the abomination up another 40 years to 70 A.D or some other more distant place in church history.  Then, contrary to the clearest of evidence from the most simple comparison of scripture with scripture, they boldly proceed to disconnect these inseparable events from Paul’s description of the man of sin who enters the temple of God just shortly before his destruction by Jesus’ return (2Thes 2:1-9). These things cannot be split up and placed at different points in history!

Many of the false systems of prophecy can only be sustained by either separating the sacrifice from the abomination by either decades or centuries, or by spiritualizing one or both. Invariably, the temple must also be spiritualized, so that the temple that Paul mentions in 2Thes 2:4 (see also John’s reference in Rev 11:1-2) is usually considered to be representative of world Christendom. It is disconnected entirely from the temple mentioned by Jesus in His Olivet prophecy (Mt 24:15). And yet, both Jesus and Paul are clearly citing the words of Daniel to describe the same man who enters and defiles the temple of God to begin the unequaled tribulation (Dan 11:31, 36-37; 12:1, 11 with Mt 24:15-16, 21; 2Thes 2:3-4, 8).

What temple and where? How could Paul, without further qualification, have expected the Thessalonians to imagine any other ‘temple of God’ than the one that was standing in Jerusalem as a wonder of the ancient world when Paul was writing his epistle? What powerful presuppositions must be at play for interpreters to insist that Paul’s reference to the temple of God in 2Thess 2:4 is an entirely different kind of temple, separate in time, meaning, and location from the temple that Jesus refers to in Mt 24:15-16. This is especially awkward when both passages are so manifestly speaking of the same event that signals the great apostasy and and final tribulation.

If we will carefully compare Paul’s wording in 2Thes 2:4 with the identical language of Daniel’s prophecy in Dan 11:36-37, it cannot be missed that the same person is in view. It should be obvious that this is the same man who places the abomination of desolation only five verses earlier in Dan 11:31, the event which Jesus references using precisely the same language in Mt 24:15.

Notice too that Rev 12:7-14 puts the ‘short time’ of Satan’s rage as following immediately upon Michael’s heavenly victory over Satan. This is exactly what we see in Dan 12:1-2. Michael stands up and then begins the unequaled trouble (Jacob’s trouble; Jer 30:7) that ends with the deliverance of Daniel’s people and the resurrection. In such a context, it would be a violence against plain language to separate these events, whether by decades or centuries. No, the abomination is placed at the same time the sacrifice is removed in the middle of Daniel’s 70th week, precisely 1290 days before “the end”, i.e., the end that accomplishes the final salvation of Israel in connection with the resurrection (Dan 9:27; 12:1-2, 11-13). That end! The text could hardly be plainer, and if a plain reading of plain language is not a sufficient ground for interpretation, then the sky’s the limit!

With the temple spiritualized to stand for the church, the man of sin becomes a symbol for either a long line of Roman emperors or more commonly, the succession of popes, spanning, not a short period of approximately 3 1/2 years, but many centuries, as each of the days of Daniel’s half week (1260, 1290, 1335; Dn 9:27; 12:11-12; Rev 11:3, 12:6) is understood to represent a year. This is the presupposition of the so-called ‘historicist’ interpretation that has been the dominant view since the Reformation until modern times and remains prevalent today among both Reformed and Seventh Day Adventists.

In this view, the sacrifice of Dan 12:11 is either put in the past or spiritualized. It cannot conceivably refer to a literal sacrifice that is being offered in a literal Jewish temple in a Jewish Jerusalem that will be stopped by the Antichrist just 3 1/2 literal years before the end. Why? Because this would require a prophetically significant reconstitution of the Jewish nation, such as we see before our eyes.

(Note: The so-called ‘year day theory’ has been a principal cause of most of the failed dates for Christ’s return, most notably Jehovah’s Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists).

The end result of all is to transfer prophecy out of its original Jewish context into a more symbolic and spiritualized fulfillment in the church. The rule seems to be (I’ve heard it stated) that the original and literal Jewish context must be abandoned if any progress is to be made in prophetic interpretation.

It is the separating of what God has joined that brings all the error and confusion. Keep these few events together and in their manifest relationship and alignment, and you’ll be much better prepared to detect any deviations from the basic criterion (plum line) that Jesus gives in His Olivet prophecy as safeguard against deception.

Failure to hold these inextricable parts together has led to many disappointed expectations that have notoriously discredited prophecy all throughout the history of the church. The net result is to create what I like to call, the ‘wolf! wolf! syndrome’ that has led many to conclude that nothing definite or certain can or ‘should’ be known concerning the time of the Lord’s return, whether now or at some point in the future. In this way, many have been diverted from the specific instruction that Jesus presents as His provision against a deception that will particularly concern the time and manner of His return (see Mt 24:23-29; Mk 13:21-23; 2Thes 2:3). The urgency of the language that both Jesus and Paul uses to warn and correct of any deviation from this basic criteria may prove much more decisive when the time comes than we can presently conceive.

Recently I was sent something from a youtube clip of the Jim Bakker show where someone was on declaring that “we missed the 5th trumpet.” But as I mentioned, a careful comparison of Rev 8:12-13; 9:12-13 with Rev 11:11-14, in their contexts, should put beyond question that the 5th trumpet is the first woe. The 6th trumpet which is also the second woe coincides with the great earthquake that attends the ascension of the two witnesses. Manifestly, this is close to the end of the tribulation. Then, with the passing of the second woe in the aftermath of the ascension of the witnesses (Rev 11:14), announcement is made that the third woe is coming quickly. According to Rev 8:13 with Rev 9:12, the third woe is manifestly the 7th trumpet that finishes the mystery of God with the Lord’s return to judge the wicked and reward the righteous (Rev 10:7; 11:15-18).

The tribulation is sufficiently defined that no believer who regards the plain meaning of scripture can miss it. I believe a clear case can be made from scripture that all 7 of the trumpets are within the last 3 1/2 years, but what is clear beyond any reasonable dispute is the impossibility that we missed five trumpets so that only one more remains between us and Christ’s return at the 7th trump. That such a ludicrous proposal could get to first base is sad commentary on how vulnerable we are to deceptions of a much more serious nature.

As for the ever present threat of upheavals and disasters and judgment upon nations, Jesus says we are not to be troubled (in the sense of distracted or moved off course; compare 2Thes 2:2). Regardless of what we see, until we have seen the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet; the end is not yet! This is very important, as apocalyptic enthusiasm will grow ever more distracting and misleading with premature announcements of an imminent end. By such false alarms, the really significant events that do indeed mark the time with clarity and final certainty are lightly regarded or dismissed. Thus it is that despite the most prolific and visible display of prophecy in human history, that day is able to come upon the world completely unawares. That’s amazing; but it also removes all excuse.

It is a sobering paradox that despite the great clarity of at least the most important sign events that Jesus gives, the angelic messenger can say to Daniel, “the wicked shall do wickedly and none of the wicked shall understand” (Dan 12:10). That is very sobering. How else could such manifest fulfillment overtake the world as a thief?

Finally, I think the great question is what does all of this confusion mean? Why are things as they are? I believe the answer lies in what the Lord did at His first coming. Concealed within the prophetic writings was a mystery that was not to be revealed until the appointed time (Mk 5:43; 8:30; 9:9; 1Cor 2:7-8; Ro 16:25-26; 1Pet 1:10-12). All things were indeed foretold, albeit in such a way that for some, it would be a trap and snare, a stone of stumbling and rock of offense (Isa 8:14-18; Lk 2:34-35), designed by God to elude carnal confidence, while for babes, God Himself would undertake to reveal His hidden wisdom, ordained to their glory (Mt 11:25-26; Jn 15:15; 1Cor 2:7; Rev 10:7 with Amos 3:7).

All things were being tested by the mystery that confronted the nation in the person of Jesus. It will be so again at the end. God intends that the world be confronted with a mystery that is designed to test and search the depths of every heart. By their nature, the prophetic scriptures are designed to elude the pride of human self reliance, not because they are difficult or clouded in mystery; quite the contrary, they are plain and simple to the plain and simple. That is to say, they are clear and transparent to plain persons of simple trust who have been emptied of their own self sufficiency to know anything of themselves. Such find their only hope in a trembling dependency on the Holy Spirit, and in the reliability God’s plain use of plain words for plain, everyday people. Everything will try to move us from the simplicity and clarity of what Jesus gave us to protect us from the subtleties of well meaning religious zeal, “But take heed; see, I have told you all things beforehand. Therefore, if they say to you … (any deviation) … believe it not!”

The post The Tribulation Timing of the Trumpets and Three Woes appeared first on Mystery of Israel.

“Let no man deceive you … the end is not yet!”

Certainly any war in the region has always the potential of acting as a catalyst bringing about the changes that prophecy requires.  We certainly do expect a great transforming event sufficient to change and dramatically realign the political landscape of Israel at some soon point, and this may well (even probably) take the form of war.  We may infer from scripture that events will move Israel into a posture of non-compromise concerning its absolute sovereignty over the city of Jerusalem.  We can think of nothing more likely to produce such an inflexible stance than a war that threatens the nation’s very survival, demonstrating again the futility of peace initiatives that imperil national defense.

Jewish intransigence over the Jerusalem question, the ultimate threat to world peace, is the most probable source for the final “flood” of anti-Semitism that will sweep over the world.  Also, scripture implies the necessity of orthodox control over the holy places of Jerusalem (Isa. 63:18; 64:11; Dan. 8:13; 9:26; 11:31; 12:11; Matt 24:15 et al), and the imposition of strict Sabbath observance impeding flight out of the region of “Judea” (compare Matt. 24:20; compare also Isa. 28:14-22 with Dan. 9:27; Dan 11:21-45; 12:1-13; Zech 12:2).  This we believe and expect.  However, in no way is it possible that the current threat of war with Iraq can be the final world tribulation precipitated by the anti-Christ.  There is just too much in prophecy that describes, in definite detail, a certain sequence of precursory events and requisite antecedent conditions that do not match the current scene; not least a deceptive peace arrangement (“covenant with death and hell” Isa 28:15) that relaxes Israel’s guard (Ezek. 38:8; 1 Thess. 5:1-3), and opens the way for the restoration of the appurtenances of the “holy covenant” (temple, sacrifice etc. (Dan 9:27; 11:31; 12:11; 2 Thes 2:4 et al).

This all goes to show how easy it is to “jump the gun” when the basic outline of Daniel’s prophecy is neglected or misinterpreted.  According to Dan 11:23-30, there is a whole detailed sequence of regional conflicts, stratagems, and events that occur after the “league” (false peace), but before the desecrating sacrilege that initiates the period of Israel’s final desolations (the so-called “footsteps of Messiah” of rabbinic eschatology). This foregoing sequence of events is, regrettably, by an impossible exegesis, attributed to the actions of Antiochus Epiphanes in the 2nd century B.C.  He was indeed a type that remarkably followed the pattern of the final oppressor, but as Keil and a host of other of the best exegetes will point out, there is a great deal of unaccounted non-fulfillment that fails to match in adequate detail the actions of the Syrian tyrant, pointing to a greater and more precise fulfillment in the future.  After all, Antiochus was not destroyed by the Son of Man as will be true of the “little horn” of Daniel’s prophecy (Dan 7:11-27; 8:9-14, 23-25 and Dan 11:21-45), and of “the man of sin” of Paul’s epistolary warning (compare esp. 2 Thes 2:3-8 with Dan. 11:35-37).  Neither did the persecuting career of Antiochus IV end in Israel’s final deliverance and the resurrection of the righteous (Dan. 11:45; 12:1)

We conclude with the verdict of scripture that anything short of this highly descript and definite order of events comes under the Lord’s restraining caution, “for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet,” and of Paul’s urgent warning, “Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except …”

Jump to a later statement of the same title

The post Avoiding the False Alarms of Prophetic Speculation appeared first on Mystery of Israel.

There wasn’t anything allegorical about the recent events in Israel. These are concrete reality out-workings of the eschatology of the covenant appearing before our eyes. – “Doc”

So true. It’s the age ending conclusion to the quarrel that began in Abraham’s tents. Ezekiel calls it “the everlasting hatred” (Eze 35:5; compare also Eze 35-36 with Obadiah and Ps 83). It is the ancient envy and hatred of Jacob’s election that the Antichrist will be able to exploit to full advantage. Esau’s fury against Jacob is a preview of the rage that the Antichrist will have against what the scripture calls ‘the holy covenant’ (Dan 11:28, 30).

What is little conceived or considered is that the ‘covenant’ that the Antichrist confirms with many for one week (Dan 9:27) is something more than another peace agreement. It is that; but it is more. In what follows, I hope to show that it is an agreement, not only between the Antichrist and Israel (Dan 11:23), but very probably among many nations that will formally recognize, not only Israel’s right to exist as a nation, but also Jewish right of access to the forbidden temple mount.

Currently, the “noble sanctuary” is off limits to Jews. To presume to set foot on the ground held sacred by the Muslim world is, to use their words, to “open hell.” That’s got to change. What will be sufficient to change such adamant and rabid Muslim intransigence on the Jerusalem question, and the even more exasperating question of the temple mount? I’m thinking nothing less than a regional war on a much larger scale than we’re seeing now, though, of course, it only takes a spark to set the world on fire.

Before Jacob’s trouble can begin, there must be a restored sacrifice on the forbidden temple mount in order to fulfill the prophecy that says it will be stopped just 3 1/2 years before the end (Dan 9:27; 12:11). A comparison of the following scriptures will show that the daily sacrifice is taken away at the same time the abomination of desolation is placed in the holy place at Jerusalem (Dan 9:27; 11:31; 12:11).

Note that both Dan 9:27 and Dan 12:11 are especially clear in showing that the daily sacrifice is removed 3 1/2 years before the end. Some commentators, however, see the reference to the “end” in Dan 9:26-27 as limited to the 70 A.D. destruction of Jerusalem. However, in nearly every other reference throughout the book of Daniel, the point of reference for the term, ‘the end,’ is the end of the unequaled tribulation, the destruction of Antichrist, the resurrection, and the saints’ possession of the kingdom (Dan 7:25-26; 8:17, 19; 11:27, 35, 40; 12:2, 4, 6-9, 13). It is common in prophecy for the near type to overlap with the far antitype of the eschatological future. In this view, the 70 A.D. destruction is not the ‘end’ but a type of a yet future desolation of the city that begins with the desolating sacrilege (Dan 12:11 with Mt 24:15; Rev 11:2) and ends in the return of Christ and the resurrection (Dan 12:1 with Mt 24:29).

Rather than connecting the half week of Dan 9:27 with the 3 1/2 years of Dan 12:11, many commentators believe that it is ‘the anointed (Messiah) prince’ who stops the sacrifice in Dan 9:27 while it is the Romans who stop it in Dan 12:11. The second half of the seventieth seven in Dan 9:27 is not considered to be the 3 1/2 years of Dan 12:11. The 3 1/2 years that follow upon the stopping of the sacrifice in Dan 9:27 is thought to be an entirely different event and time from the 3 1/2 years that follow upon the stopping of the sacrifice in Dan 12:11.

In this view, the first half of the week is reckoned from the beginning of Jesus ministry with His baptism of John. Since it is reasonably well determined that Jesus’s ministry lasted 3 1/2 years, the stopping of the sacrifice “in the middle of week” is taken to mean that the atoning death of Jesus rendered the temple sacrifice forever obsolete. The second half of the week is believed to follow the first half in unbroken succession, expiring at some undesignated point 3 1/2 years later in the earliest years of the fledgling church. Some suggest the death of Stephen or the conversion of Paul. In this view, the Roman general Titus is seen as the “coming prince” that destroys the city and the sanctuary (Dan 9:26), but the desolator is believed to be the risen Lord, since the text makes clear that the one who confirms the covenant and puts an end to the sacrifice is also the desolator.

Most conservative scholars are agreed that Daniel’s seventieth week, like the former 69 sevens, is rightly understood as seven literal years, divided into two halves of 3 1/2 years each (Dan 9:24-27). However, when it comes to the interpretation of Dan 12:11, there is a great parting of the ways. In an effort to distinguish the second half of Dan 9:27 from the 3 1/2 years of Dan 12:11, many fanciful and contradictory theories have been offered.

When texts of such similar language and evident meaning can be interpreted so differently, we are made to wonder why. Why aren’t interpreters able to see the plain use that Jesus (Mt 24:15, 21), Paul (2Thes 2:4), and John (Rev 11:2-3; 12:6, 14; 13:5) make of Daniel’s prophecy? We believe it is because the evidence points in a direction that is incompatible with prior theological commitments.

For example, if it is accepted that Dan 12:11 is associated with a final 3 1/2 year persecution of the Antichrist, it would mean that Jesus’s reference to the abomination of desolation (Mt 24:15) is future. For many interpreters this is unthinkable, because a future Antichrist that is bent on the destruction of the Jewish people calls into question many strongly held assumptions that are not easily surrendered. A future Antichrist that will rise amidst an age ending crisis over the city of Jerusalem points to a still outstanding covenant election and millennial destiny of those whom Paul calls, ‘the natural branches’ (Ro 11:21, 24-29).

According to the eschatology of the day of the Lord, as conceived and depicted by the Hebrew prophets, this time of unequaled tribulation was seen as the last stage in the discipline of the covenant that ends in a transformational moment of revelation and regeneration of the surviving remnant (Isa 26:16-17; 66:8; Mic 5:3-4; Jer 30:6-7; Dn 12:1; Zech 12:10; 13:1). Never is Israel left to endless exile and the curse of the conditional covenant (Lev 26; Deut 28-32). Rather, in a transformational moment of revelation and repentance, ‘at the end of their power’ (Deut 32:36; Dan 12:7), Israel is brought into the “everlasting righteousness” of the “everlasting covenant” (Isa 45:17; 59:21; Jer 32:40; Dan 9:24). This deliverance is everywhere shown to come at the great transition called the day of the Lord. Jews rightly understood this to be the time of the resurrection of the ‘last day,’ which Daniel manifestly puts at the end of the unequaled tribulation (Dan 12:1-2, 13).

[Note: It is interesting to note with what great inconsistency Dan 12:11 is interpreted by those systems that deny special prophetic significance to natural Israel. One approach is to see Dan 12:11 as fulfilled in the second century B.C. when Antiochus IV desecrated the holy place and persecuted Jews loyal to the covenant. But a type is not an anti-type, as it is often the case in prophecy that a parallel fulfillment on the near horizon is only a type and pattern that points beyond itself to an eschatological fulfillment that will more perfectly match all the literal details of the prophecy, many of which were never fulfilled in the historical type. The other approach is to see the sacrifice as removed by the Romans, but since the sacrifice was not literally stopped until very near the end of the siege, this school of interpretation (‘historicist’) believes that each day should count for year, so that 1290 days becomes 1,290 years. However, there is little agreement among them as to which point in history ends the 1290 years.]

As mentioned, most conservative commentators interpret Dan 9:27 consistently as a literal seven year period, divided into two equal halves at the point where the sacrifice is stopped in “the middle of the week.” It becomes a question of consistency to find Dan 12:11 treated so differently, since it also speaks of the stopping of the sacrifice in connection with the time of desolation. In contrast to Dan 9:27, Dan 12:11 is either spiritualized as purely symbolic of a short time, or else converted into years.

Moreover, the specified time of 1290 days (3 1/2 years; 43 months) does not match the dates for the Roman siege. The sacrifice was not interrupted until only shortly (July 17th) before the Romans entered the temple (August 10th, 70 A.D). The actual siege lasted 134 days, a full four years after the beginning of the Jewish revolt. The events simply do not match. Most importantly, none of the events that Dan 12 associates with the time of the end were realized at that time.

It is better to see that the 3 1/2 years that follows the stopping of the sacrifice in Dan 9:27 is the same 3 1/2 years that follows the removal of the sacrifice in Dan 12:11, and that the sack of Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 A.D constitutes the first of two distinct destructions, the former typical of the latter. This means that the “end” in Dn 9:26-27 looks beyond the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. to the abomination of desolation (Mt 24:15) that begins the final 3 1/2 years of great tribulation (Dan 7:25; 9:27; 12:7, 11; Rev 11:2-3; 12:6, 14; 13:5) that ends in nothing short of Jesus’s bodily return, the resurrection, and gathering of the saints (Dan 12:1-2; Mt 24:29, 31; Acts 1:11; 2Thes 2:1, 8).

It seems most inconsistent to make the half week of Dan 9:27 to end at some undesignated point 3 1/2 years after the cross, while assigning the 3 1/2 years of Dan 12:11 to the Roman sack of Jerusalem. The language of cessation of sacrifice and desolation, common to both passages, would never, apart from prior theological presumptions, lead one to conclude that the stopping of the sacrifice should be seen as separated from the placing of the abomination by 40 years, or by 1290 years, as in the year day theory of the historicist school. The text simply will not bear it, because both in tandem, as two sides of the same event, start the last 3 1/2 years of desolation that arrive at the resurrection of Daniel (Dan 12:1-2, 11, 13).

[Note: Jerusalem did not actually cease from being a Jewish city until after the revolt of Bar Kochba in 132-136 A.D. After that, the Romans changed its name to Aelia Capitolina, forbidding Jews to set foot in the city on pain of death. From that time, scholars began to interpret Jerusalem allegorically of the church, particularly since a literal Jewish Jerusalem seemed now a forgone conclusion. The end of Jerusalem as a city inhabited by Jews, seemed to lend support to the theology of replacement that would make such great room for the vilification and persecution of the Jew by “the arrogant kingdom,” the telling name the Jews would use to refer to the church that they knew in their experience.]

In Dan 9:25-26 mention is made of two princes, “‘Messiah, the prince,’ and ‘the prince that shall come.’ Which prince puts an end to the sacrifice in Dan 9:27? It is hard to over emphasize the importance of this question, as it will greatly determine how we see the end, particularly in relation to the Jewish question.

We believe the question is answered decisively by the simple observance that in every other reference to the desolating sacrilege throughout the book of Daniel, the daily sacrifice is taken away by the one who exalts himself (compare Dan 8:11; 11:31, 36-37; 12:11 with 2Thes 2:4). Conclusion: If it is not Christ but the Antichrist who stops the sacrifice “in the middle of the week” in Dan 9:27, then Daniel’s seventieth week must be future. It could no more have followed the 69th week in unbroken succession than the advent and career of the Antichrist could have immediately followed the death (‘cutting off;’ Dan 9:26) of Messiah.

The “end” in Dan 9:26-27 is consistent with “the end” in Dan 7:26; 8:17, 19; 12:4, 6, 8-9, 13. It is the short time (3 1/2 years), the half week of the unequaled tribulation (Dan 7:25; 9:27; 12:7, 11; Rev 11:2-3; 12:6, 14; 13:5). It is completely inconsistent to interpret the seven years as literal years divided into two halves of 3 1/2 years each, and then spiritualize the 3 1/2 years of great tribulation to be nothing more than a general ‘apocalyptic’ symbol for a short period of indefinite duration. Yet this is what we see with many commentators.

A comparison of Dan 12:1 with Rev 12:7 will further show the inseparable relation of events. Rev 12 shows that the standing up of Michael at the beginning of the unequaled trouble in Dan 12:1 is to cast down Satan to begin his ‘short time’ of wrath bringing great woe to the earth (Rev 12:12). Clearly, Satan’s short time coincides with the 3 1/2 years of the persecution of Israel and the church (Rev 12:6, 12, 14, 17).

Clearly, Michael’s heavenly triumph coincides with the time that the Antichrist enters the temple of God to place the abomination of desolation (Dan 11:31, 36-37; 12:11 with Mt 24:15; 2Thes 2:4). This observance invites us to consider the relationship between the casting down of Satan and the Antichrist’s defilement of the temple, since the two events stand equally at the beginning of the tribulation.

Many scorn the suggestion that scripture compels recognition of a gap between the 69th and 70th weeks of Dan 9:24-27. A little reflection should soften the criticism when it is understood that every interpretation must recognize a gap of some length. A gap will either be located between between the death of Jesus and the destruction of Jerusalem some 40 years later, or it will be the almost 2000 years between the advent of Christ and the advent of Antichrist.

There is nothing inherently incongruous or inconceivable about such a gap. It agrees perfectly with the pattern of the prophetic mystery of Christ’s twofold advent. Until its divinely appointed time of revelation, the gospel was a prophetic mystery concealed in the writings of the prophets (Ro 16:25-26; Eph 6:19; 1Pet 1:11). With the key of the gospel, we can see in retrospect many examples where both advents are combined and blended, without clear distinction. This explains why the Lord’s first coming presented such a formidable puzzle to Israel.

We believe this definite knowledge of the time will be strategic in the church’s intercessory travail for Israel, and will be answered by Michael’s victory over Satan at the threshold of the tribulation. Scripture is clear that it is only with the prior revelation of the mystery of iniquity that day of the Lord can come (2Thes 2:3, 7-8). A comparison of Rev 12:7-10 with Dan 12:1 would lead us to conclude that the revelation of the mystery of iniquity in the final Antichrist is directly related to Michael’s heavenly victory at the threshold of the tribulation when Satan is cast down to begin is ‘short time’ of wrath (Rev 12:12).

Thus, the church that would pray for the coming of the kingdom cannot ignore the cost of that prayer in what must come first. But when our view of His glory is such that we can love His appearing more than temporal ease and blessing, all hindrance will be removed; the Accuser will be cast down, and the kingdom of God will come with power (Rev 12:10).

The last days implies a deep corporate self emptying of the church that is connected to the time and the further opening of the sealed vision of Daniel (Isa 8:16-17; 29:11; Dan 9:24; 12:4, 9). There is a relation between the time of fulfillment and the knowledge of revealed secrets that God has strategically ordained to overcome the hindering powers and to crowd and quicken the church to vital intercession and divine break through in conjunction with His ‘set time’ (Ps 102:13; Dan 8:19; 11:27, 35).

There is a profound philosophy of history contained in the mystery of the seventy sevens. The inferred break between the 69th and 70th weeks of Daniel is built around two mysteries that both culminate in an incarnation. The first is the ‘mystery of godliness’ (1Tim 3:16) which answers to the mystery of the woman’s seed (Gen 3:15), as realized in the incarnation and atonement of the Messiah. The second is the “mystery of iniquity” (2Thes 2:7), which answers to the mystery of the Serpent’s seed, as realized in the incarnation of Satan in the man of sin.

As the 69 weeks would terminate with the accomplishment of the atonement in Messiah’s death (Dan 9:25-26), the 70th week would be reserved to bring in the time that the mystery of iniquity will be completed in the final Antichrist (2Thes 2:3, 7-8) and Messiah’s return to “finish the mystery of God” (Rev 10:7) in Israel’s deliverance (Jer 30:7; Dan 12:1) and the resurrection of the saints (Isa 25:7-8; 26:19; Dan 12:2; 1Cor 15:52-54).

Rather than terminating Daniel’s last week at some vague point 3 1/2 years after the cross, it is better to let Dan 12:11 be our the authoritative interpreter of Dan 9:27. Not Christ but the Antichrist confirms the covenant (Dan 8:25; 9:27; 11:23-24). Not Christ but the Antichrist stops the sacrifice 3 1/2 years before the end.

It seems to us most incongruous to suppose that Daniel could have conceived of an end of the seventy sevens that did not attain to the full promise of the eschatology of the covenant, which guaranteed Israel’s deliverance at the day of the Lord, together with the resurrection of the righteous (Isa 25:7-8; 26:16-17, 19; Dan 12:1, 13). Since this is found only at the end of the unequaled tribulation, it is hard to see the second half of the last seven expiring rather quietly in the first century, 3 1/2 years after the cross.

Furthermore, it is far better to see the “end” that is shown to come 3 1/2 years after the sacrifice is stopped “in the middle of the week,” not as confined to the 70 A.D. destruction by the Romans, but the “end” that follows a future desolation of Jerusalem, which Jesus connects so clearly to the unequaled tribulation that immediately precedes His return (Mt 24:29) and the resurrection and gathering of the church (Dan 12:1-2, 7, 13; Mt 24:31; 2Thes 1:7; 2:1). When such harmony of the evidence is discounted, we are inclined to look for the cause in something other than careful exegesis of the texts within their context.

All is to say that without the Jewish sanctuary and sacrifice situated in the only location sanctioned by scripture, the end cannot be imminent. It may be near, but it is not yet here. Until this particular set of inseparably related events are fully aligned, and until the stage is fully set in such an unmistakable way, we may be sure that Israel will continue to prevail in any conflict that may arise to threaten the nation’s survival.

Significantly, God’s final dealings with Israel begins, not when Israel is in a position of manifest danger, but when the nation is prosperous and secure. According to Eze 38:8, 12-13, Israel exists as a recently restored nation that has grown very prosperous when invaded suddenly and unexpected by the Antichrist. Not only are they enjoying for the first time in 19 centuries the restoration of temple and sacrifice, but they are secure in their expectation of continued peace and safety, assured, no doubt, that the messianic era has either begun or is near at hand. This is the circumstance that prophecy predicts of Israel when the proverbial hammer falls (Isa 28:15, 18; Eze 38:8, 11, 14; Dan 8:25; 11:23-24; 1Thes 5:3). The point that God is making through such an unexpected set of circumstances is something profoundly instructive for how He intends to plead with Israel, much to probe and ponder for us here.

We may ponder what kind of changes will be necessary to force Muslim acceptance of the presence of a Jewish sanctuary and sacrifice on the fiercely guarded temple mount. We notice too that according to Isa 63:18, it appears that the holy places have been only recently restored (“a little while”) when Jerusalem is suddenly ‘trodden down’ by the adversary (Isa 64:10-11; Rev 11:2). This suggests that Israel has only recently recovered access to the the temple mount when the Antichrist invades.

This implies that sometime between now and the time that Israel can freely proceed build and sacrifice on the forbidden temple mount, something seismic has happened to force Muslim acceptance of such an otherwise unthinkable arrangement. How this will come about will be a wonder to behold. Therefore, if we would not be distracted by premature excitement (the ‘false alarms of prophetic speculation’), we must pay close attention to what must be in place before the Antichrist can fulfill all that is written of him.

Not only must the temple and sacrifice be in place, but Dan 11:23 thru Dan 11:31 gives us a definite sequence of events that take place in the first half of the seven years after the peace arrangement but before the abomination. We note that sometime “AFTER the league made with him” (Dan 11:23), he conquers a powerful king to his south (Dan 11:25-26). After the defeat of this king, the conqueror and the conquered sit at one table to plot against the ‘holy covenant’ (Dan 11:28, 30) that pertains to the sanctuary and sacrifice according to the divine grant that appointed this specific place to one elect people as the place of His Name and covenant claim.

Indeed, if reference to the ‘holy covenant’ in Dan 11:28, 30 can be demonstrated to have a future fulfillment, then the whole question of divine right to the Land that is so much debated among evangelicals is decisively answered, since the covenant is called “holy” despite the unbelieving state of those appointed to the discipline of Jacob’s trouble.

[Note: Manifestly, God is holding the nations responsible to understand and revere His covenant with Israel, as it is clear that when the Antichrist presumes to lead his confederacy down to scatter His people (“My heritage”) and divide ‘His Land’ (Dan 11:39; Joel 3:2), a definite line has been crossed, a point of no return, as God’s fury “comes up into His face,” and a full end is declared (Eze 38:17; 39:8 with Rev 16:17). It is made to appear that this great presumption by the Antichrist is counted as the ultimate provocation, but note that it is particularly depicted as an assault against the ‘holy covenant.’ And what is that if it is not the Word of election and covenant that God has spoken concerning this particular people?]

Could the covenant that the Antichrist confirms with many at the beginning of Daniel’s 70th week be the same covenant that the Antichrist will hate, and conspire to destroy? We think so. In any event, the plans of these two kings do not prosper, because the time of the appointed end is not yet (Dan 11:27). Soon after this, the Antichrist (“vile person;” Dan 11:21) attempts another southward advance, but to no avail, as he is checked and turned back by the ‘ships of Chittim’ (Dan 11:29-30).

In biblical idiom, Chittim or Kittim was associated with the maritime coastlands of the northwestern Mediterranean. The prophecy suggests a formidable armada from the west that is able to momentarily check the movements of the one who will very shortly invade Israel with irresistible force (Dan 11:31 with Rev 13:4). This second move south is apparently perceived to threaten the security of the covenant.

In today’s world, the ‘ships of Chittim,’ would seem to indicate a western power such as the U.S. or NATO with a naval presence in the Mediterranean. We may safely assume that the ‘ships of Chittim’ represents a very formidable power, because it is able to turn back the one who will, in a very short time, command a military supremacy that none can hope to resist (Dan 11:31 with Rev 13:4).

The momentary success of the ships of Chittim will greatly reinforce the feeling that the security of the covenant is invincible under the guardianship of such a powerful force, as represented by the ‘ships of Chittim.’ But immediately after he is repulsed in his second southward advance, he begins to have secret intelligence with the other nations that apparently share his hatred for the covenant (Dan 11:28, 30, 32). We may safely assume that this intelligence (plotting) is indeed secret, because Israel, and the nations protecting the covenant, are taken completely by surprise by the invasion. Israel’s ‘presumption’ of security will be at its height when disaster strikes.

In addition to commanding the high ground in future negotiations over Jerusalem and the temple mount, we also may infer on the basis of Eze 38:12-13 that Israel has become the jewel of the Middle-East. This remarkable prosperity will further exasperate and vex the envy of the Antichrist and the cast of nations that will support his designs against the covenant. These are the nations that will seek opportunity to end western dominance over the resources of the region.

Not only Israel, but any nation that has backed the hated ‘Zionist’ state will be equally marked for destruction. Israel’s increasing prosperity exasperate not only Arab hatred, it will also excite the covetousness of the nations from the regions in the north (Eze 38:2, 5-6). It appears that the Antichrist will not only exploit Islamic hatred of the covenant, he may also gain support from nations that will support his plan to wrest the economic advantage from the west and restore it to its place of origin (Zech 5:5-11?).

A case can be made for a twofold destruction of Babylon. This brings harmony to a number of scriptures. The ten kingdoms under the command of the Antichrist will inflict a fiery judgment on the harlot, which in our view is primarily a reference to Jerusalem, but perhaps not only Jerusalem but the western powers that support and guard the covenant that is hated by the Antichrist and his supporters. Such nation or nations would be represented by the reference in Dan 11:30 to the ships of Chittim. The further second stage of the harlot’s destruction includes all of word-wide Babylon at the Lord’s return.

At the middle of the week, 3 1/2 years from the time that the covenant was confirmed (Dan 9:27; 12:7, 11), the invasion of the Antichrist will come in suddenly like an overwhelming flood (Dan 9:26; 11:22). The reversal will be staggering, not only for Israel, but also the nation or nations that pledged to guard the covenant (‘ships of Chittim’ ?) will be caught equally off guard when disaster strikes. That is when I can personally conceive, even expect, that the western powers that have pledged protection of the covenant may simultaneously come under nuclear attack against our major population centers and infrastructure. Whether that will be, one thing is very clear: The formidable western naval power that successfully repulsed the Antichrist such a short time before will be helpless to stop him.

Towards the end of the tribulation, it appears that some of these great powers such as China (“tidings from the east;” and “kings of the east”) and possibly some part or all of Russia or perhaps a western power (“king of the north”) will come against the Antichrist. This is little considered but very clear in the last verses of Dan 11 that describe a final ‘Waterloo’ for the Antichrist just before he is destroyed by the breath of the Lord.

The question is, were either or both of these super powers involved in a supportive role at the time of the Antichrist’s initial invasion of Jerusalem at the beginning of the tribulation? Daniel makes clear that a mighty nation from the north, another from the south, and “the kings of the east” will be pushing against him with great fury (Dan 11:40, 44; Rev 16:12-14) when he comes to his end in Dan 11:45.

Still, I don’t see anything so far that leads me to expect that the present crisis will necessarily lead immediately into the particular peace arrangement that will permit Jewish re-annexation, or even access to the temple mount. I would expect something more extreme, but anything is possible. If, however, this crisis escalates into a regional war that shakes things up and re-positions and re-shapes the current policy of accommodation by the secular state, then we can’t rule out that possibility. Things have the potential to change radically, almost overnight, as we saw in Russia.

A strategic and decisive victory for Israel (all the more if it proves very costly), coupled with the impressive prosperity that prophecy anticipates before the tribulation (Eze 38:12-13), would put Israel in a much more advantageous bargaining position requiring compromise from the Muslim world that would never be considered under the present circumstances. It suggests, not a complete subjugation of the Arab world, but a great and unprecedented advantage sufficient to induce compromise that would not, at the moment, be even remotely entertained. It is in such a climate and circumstance that I think we will see the confirmation of the covenant / peace arrangement that we’re looking for, but not until. We will know it’s the one because it will be attended by initiatives to restore the sanctuary and sacrifice on the temple mount.

This brings the further question: Is it possible that Jews will gain access to the temple mount before the last 7 begins? Or will this be a sign that we are in the last seven? I believe the latter. Here’s why: According to inferences based on what we consider the most credible interpretation of Dan 8:11-14, the regular sacrifice that is taken away in the middle of the week (see Dan 8:11; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11) has only recently been restored (‘possessed but a little while;’ Isa 63:18) when it is removed to begin the final 42 months of the prophesied desolation of Jerusalem (Isa 63:18; 64:10-11 with Dan 9:27; 11:31; 12:11; Mt 24:15-16; 2Thes 2:4; Rev 11:2), also called, ‘the time of Jacob’s trouble’ (compare Jer 30:7 with Dan 12:1; Mt 24:21).

We believe that the 2,300 day prophecy of Dan 8:12-14 comprehends the entire time from when the sacrifice is re-started until the end. Dan 9:27 with Dan 12:11 is clear in showing that from the mid-point of Daniel’s 70th week, there is 1290 days from the removal of the daily sacrifice to the end. The 2,300 days covers the longer period from the start of the sacrifice to the end.

In order for the sacrifice to be stopped 1290 days before the end, certainly it must first be started. We believe the purpose of the prophecy of the 2300 days is to show us that the sacrifice that is removed in the middle of the week has been only recently restarted very shortly after the covenant has been confirmed. If this is true, it greatly defines the nature of the covenant and how it can be distinguished from any other peace arrangement. I’ll come back to this, but this is much more than just one more peace arrangement in the Middle-East.

If the seven years is reckoned as an equal 1260 for both halves of the period, we have a total of 2,520 days. 2300 from 2,520 leaves 220 days. This would imply that the 2,300 days begins with the renewal of the sacrifice about 7 months and 10 days after the covenant was confirmed. However, the mysterious extension of days in Dan 12:11-12 prevents us from any such precision. Interestingly, the 1260 days, the 42 months, the time, times, and half of time of Dan 7:25; 12:7; Rev 11:2-3; 12:6, 14; 13:5, all seem to be reckoned from two nearly simultaneous events, one in heaven and one on earth. They are the abomination of desolation, which includes the removal of the daily sacrifice (Dan 8:11; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11; Mt 24:15), and the standing up of Michael in Dan 12:1 and Rev 12:7 at the beginning of the last 3 1/2 years of unequaled tribulation.

[Note: This correlation of events has been far too overlooked by commentators. It should not be missed that in Dan 12:1 Michael stands up at the beginning of the unequaled troubled. The same sequence is seen in Rev 12 where Michael prevails to cast down Satan to the earth. This results in Satan’s ‘short time’ (Rev 12:12), which is manifestly concurrent with the persecution of the last 3 1/2 years (Rev 12:6, 14-17). There can be no doubt that the same time is in view in both places. The standing of Michael to cast down Satan is clearly the heavenly event that is the catalyst for the earthly event of the abomination in the temple at Jerusalem. Both set in motion the unequaled tribulation that precedes Christ’s return.]

The difficulty in calculating the precise time that the sacrifice will start lies in the mysterious extension of days that we find in Dan 12:11-12. 1290 days is 30 days longer than 1260 days and 1335 is 45 days longer still, for a total of 75 days. What is the significance of this mysterious extension of days? We are not told specifically. We may, however, suppose such things as the time that the penitent remnant will go apart to mourn, or the cleansing of the sanctuary or dedication of the new temple (whether understood literally or symbolically, as this is a notable stumbling block for many). In any event, it is a time of special blessing of new beginnings for the newly regenerate nation.

It seems clear to me that none of the three terminal points (1260; 1290; 1335) can be the exact time of the Lord’s return, for the following 3 reasons:

1) Jesus said the exact day and hour of His return was unknown even to Him, at least during the time of His self-emptying on earth. Furthermore, I believe it is altogether possible that he had the mysterious extension of the days in Daniel specifically in mind when He gave that caveat.

2). Not only the 1335 but also the 1290 days appear to take us to a time beyond the the Lord’s return to destroy the Antichrist. This we conclude, because the Antichrist’s persecution of Israel and the saints is limited to 42 months (Dan 7:25; 12:7; Rev 11:2-3; 12:6, 14; 13:5), whereas the 1290 days is 43 months, and takes us to a point that seems a little beyond Christ’s return to destroy the Antichrist. Hence, the 1290 and 1335 are points of special significance in the earliest days of the millennium.

3). Nor does Jesus return at the end of the 1260th day. At the end of the 1260 days the two witnesses are killed and their dead bodies lie in the streets of Jerusalem for an additional 3 1/2 days. In the same hour of their ascent in the sight of their enemies, the ‘second woe,’ which is the 6th trumpet, is declared as past with the announcement that the ‘third woe,’ which is the 7th trumpet, is coming quickly. We may only wonder how quickly. Thus, it seems clear that the Lord’s return is somewhere between the 1263.5 days that conclude the 6th trumpet and the 1290th day. However, in view of the limitation of he Antichrist’s persecution of the woman and the saints to only 42 months, we must expect the Lord’s return at the seventh trumpet (Rev 10:7; 11:15-18) to come somewhere nearer to the expiration of the 1260 days than to the 1290th day, which amounts to 43 months.

[Note also that even so late as the 6th bowl of wrath, and just before the “great day of God Almighty,” which is clearly the seventh bowl (Rev 16:14-17 with Eze 39:8), we see the Lord interjecting between the 6th and 7th bowl these fateful words: “Behold, I am coming as a thief. Blessed is he who watches, and keeps his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame.” (Rev 16:15). In 2 Pet 3:10, 12, the day of the Lord is equated with the day of God, the only other place the day of God is mentioned in just those words other than here in the book of Revelation. It is ‘that day’ that Peter says will come as a thief, and here in Rev 16:15, after the 6th bowl but before the 7th, the Lord is warning that He is coming as a thief. Should we not understand that it is on “the great day of God Almighty” that He returns as a thief?]

All is to say that in order to calculate the 2,300 days of Dan 8:12-13 accurately, we would have to know the precise end-point for the event identified as the ‘cleansing of the sanctuary.’ From that point, counting backwards, we arrive at the starting point of the sacrifice. This means that the sacrifice that is started at the beginning of the 2,300 days is taken away approximately 3 1/2 years before the end, which “end” is shown in Dan 12:2, 13 to coincide with the time of Daniel’s personal resurrection at “the end of the days” (Dan 12:13). [It is exceedingly hard to understand the lengths to which some commentators will go to interpret such language as being satisfied by events that passed with the first century.]

As I see it, the precise day that the sanctuary will be cleansed, like the exact day of the Lord’s return, is deliberately veiled from us. We are not definitely told what happens at the end of the 1290th day or the 1335th day. We may speculate and infer but since the scripture does not say explicitly, we are not able to say precisely when the sanctuary is cleansed. It would be most reasonable to suppose that since the 1290th day is a further point, somewhat beyond the day of the Lord’s return, that it is the day that the sanctuary is cleansed. Perhaps so, but it is not definitely stated.

The full time from 1260 to 1335 is 75 additional days. That’s about 2 1/2 months. Given the additional terminal points beyond the 1260, and not knowing which, if either, of those specified days definitely mark the cleansing of the sanctuary, we can only say that sometime between 8 and 10 months after the covenant has been confirmed, the sacrifice will definitely be started again.

This does not require the completion of a temple (though, of course, in the modern world a temple could rise very quickly). We know this, because no sooner did the returning exiles under Zerubbabel return to the site of the altar, but they immediately began to offer sacrifice while work on the temple was only beginning. Furthermore, we know that the Greek word that Paul uses for the temple signifies its inner sanctum. This is in perfect keeping with Jesus’ mention of the inner room of the sanctuary called ‘the holy place.’ Therefore, a fully completed temple is not necessary for the prophecy to be fulfilled.

If we are correct that a restored sanctuary and sacrifice will be at the heart of the “holy covenant” (Dan 9:27 with Dan 11:28, 30, 32) that the Antichrist will ‘confirm’ (not create but ‘make firm’) with many (not necessarily ‘many’ Jews, but more probably many nations), then we will know when the seven years has begun regardless of who we may have thought the Antichrist would be or where he comes from. By this we will be able to distinguish it from any other peace arrangements along the way.

Even if we are ignorant or incorrect of exactly who the Antichrist is or where he comes from, we will nonetheless know with certainty that the seven years has begun. We will at least know that the Antichrist is among those heads of state that ratify the treaty that confirms Israel’s right to the appurtenances of the “holy covenant.” We will also know that “after the league made with him” (Dan 9:27; 11:23), the Jews will shortly begin to offer sacrifice again and evidently begin to build the temple that will house the ‘holy place’ that he defiles in the middle of the week.

If the language of scripture and historical precedent be given priority over conspiracy theory and speculation, this ‘holy covenant’ will certainly have to do with Jewish right to the Land and the city of Jerusalem, and particularly the temple mount. From the start, the Antichrist both hates and plots against the very  covenant that he confirmed with many (Dan 9:27; 11:23). This is the paradox. On one side, the treaty is a covenant with death and hell. It is unholy in that it trusts in man for its security. On the other side, it is holy in the sense that it recognizes, or rather pretends to recognize, Israel’s legitimacy and restored rights to temple and sacrifice. This is what the Antichrist will conspire against, first with a conquered king to his south (Dan 11:27), then with other nations who share a mutual hatred of the covenant (Dan 11:27-28, 30, 32).

I say that his intelligence with them who hate the covenant is “secret,” simply because scripture is clear that until he comes in suddenly “with the arms of a flood,” both Israel, and no doubt the western powers that are protectorates of the covenant (ships of Chittim), are unsuspecting of this sudden and overwhelming show of force (Dan 11:31 with Rev 13:4). At this point, Israel is basking in the presumed security of divine favor.

With the recent successful interdiction of the Antichrist’s southward initiative by the ships of Chittim, Israel will feel that the peace is more secure and invincible than ever and will securely dismiss the warnings of the prophetic witness that will be coming to them from within and without (Isa 28:11-12, 14-15). However, within whatever time may be considered to pass between Dan 11:30 and verse 31, a great shift of power has occurred.

Within a short time after he has been frustrated by the western armada, the Antichrist is able to secure the further backing needed to mount an irresistible invasion force against Israel.  Not only this, but a case can be made for the view that sometime after Dan 11:30 but before Dan 11:31, this beast has been resuscitated from a mortal wound to become the full incarnation of Satan, “with ALL power and signs of deceptive wonders” (2Thes 2:9). This is when the whole world wonders when they see the beast that was, and is not, and yet is (Rev 17:8).

It will be a demonic miracle, something much more deceptive and immediately compelling than the re-emegence of an empire, or an illusion of technology, as sometimes interpreted. It will be the ‘revelation of the mystery of iniquity’, which must be accomplished before Christ can return (2Thes 2:3, 7-8).

We believe this happens in immediate connection with Michael’s eviction of Satan in Rev 12:7-14, as also implied in Dan 12:1. It is then, upon the event of this supernatural empowerment from Satan (Dan 8:24 with Rev 13:2), that the Antichrist proceeds to enter the temple, claiming divine honors (Dan 11:36-37 with 2Thes 2:4). The Lord help you and give you grace to see the connection and the essence of things, as you search the scriptures to prove whether these things be so.

Yours in common waiting for the consolation of Israel, Reggie

The post Distinguishing The Peace We Are Looking For appeared first on Mystery of Israel.

Hi Reggie. If you get the time would you watch this video and let me know your opinion? It gets good about 17 minutes in. I don’t agree with the stance on Torah, but the prophetic timeline is very interesting!

I believe this is one that I’ve seen with some friends at their house. If I recall correctly, it held forth the somewhat ‘tentative’ but serious proposal that the evidence points to the revelation of the Antichrist on March 22, 2013. I say, ‘no way, Jose!’

When time permits, I want to compare notes with you a bit about your difference with my view on the full futurity of Daniel’s last week, something I can show not only exegetically, but from the church fathers (Hippolytus in particular), as no mid 19th century invention of dispensationalism. In the meantime, it is sufficient, I would expect, to appeal to something you and I happily agree on, namely our mutual view that Dan 11:23 to verse 31 describes the events leading up to the abomination.

Now, of course, if one sees no need for a peace arrangement that fulfills Dan 9:27; 11:23 and the covenant with death and hell (Isa 28:15, 18) that provides for Israel’s declaration of “peace and safety” (1Thes 5:3), and IF the revelation of the Antichrist is NOT (as I’m persuaded) at the threshold of the abomination in connection with Satan’s dejection by Michael in the middle of the week (Dan 12:1 with Rev 12:7-14). In other words, if the AC can appear completely independently of these preliminary events, then, of course, he’s subject to just appear at anytime. But then what events would distinguish his parousia? Surely, at very minimum, you’d agree it would be his violation of the holy place at Jerusalem.

Apart from such preliminary signal events, the revelation of the Antichrist can be just whenever anyone’s dates suggest that he’s on the scene. Apart from something tangible, as Paul’s identification of his appearing with standing in the temple, then its up for grabs and what is there to distinguish his presence? If the temple of God is NOT the holy place in Judea, then we may suppose the AC appears when he stands up in the church, or in the Holy See at Rome, and forces worship on Sunday, demanding worship on pain of death, as in the view of the replacement oriented 7th day adventists.

You’re agreed, are you not, that Paul is speaking of the abomination? If so, then you’d be agreed that Dan 11:23-30 must happen first. On my part, I believe the revelation of the man of sin is something more than merely identifying who the Antichrist is.That will become clear enough by the events of Dan 11:23-30 BEFORE the abomination. I see the ‘revelation’ of the man of sin to subsist in a transitional moment of demonic incarnation that emboldens his violation of the holy place at Jerusalem. I see this as the finishing of the mystery of iniquity in the incarnation of the seed of the Serpent in the coming prince. I understand, of course, that that postulate didn’t sit well with you, and when time permits I hope to take further pains to make the case and to distance my position from some unfortunate ‘guilt by association’ with dispensational presuppositions. I believe you’re confounding something of the ‘baby’ with the proverbial, ‘bath water,’ but that’s another discussion. In the meantime, if you believe that the manifestation of the man of sin is where Paul puts it in relation to Antichrist’s invasion of the temple at Jerusalem, it would seem to me that you’d want to ask, “where’s the preliminary and preparatory events of Dan 11:23-30? Can that much be squeezed in before March 23, 2013? I don’t think so, and I shouldn’t expect that you would either in view of our mutual position on Dan 11:21-31.

I’m also glad that you’re not impressed with their position on the Torah, as I believe it is a forerunner of a very great deception that will test the body of Messiah to the core. Furthermore, if their views are as close as they appear to 7th day adventism, then I wouldn’t be surprised if they do not also spiritualize all things regarding temple and Jerusalem, which would make it all the easier to expect Antichrist to just show up independently of such events according to some astronomical calculations based on a combination of the feasts and the constellations.

In appreciative friendship, Reggie

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Followup Question:

Let me ask you this…do you believe as I think Art (Katz) did that the second coming is very soon?

It is always time to be urgent and watchful, as the time of His coming is, in one sense, always ‘at hand.’ In one sense the church at all times live at an equidistance to His return, as none of the wicked will escape the terror, and none of the righteous will miss the glory of that day. It has also always been time to know the truth; and the truth has always been that before Jesus can come, the Antichrist must first be revealed. Even this does not happen in a vacuum, but in connection with a series of clearly foretold signal events that can only take place around a last days crisis over Jerusalem, a “Jewish” Jerusalem.

I’ve known Art since his arrival at the Ben Israel property in ’74. Years before I joined the community, a close brother from our community in Texas joined Art’s community in northern MN. I would come up and they would come down and we would go on ministerial forays with Art. At that time Art’s emphasis was not on Israel and the last days. That would come later, but even then we would often talk about the stance of the messianics in the Land, and really everywhere, who’s watchword in those days was, “comfort ye my people.”

As much as we were grateful and desirous of any comfort, however momentary, from Israel’s tragic course through history, and as much as we were tendered and grateful for the small measure of asylum that Aliyah might offer in terms of momentary respite from their long sufferings, still, I would often point out that this slogan was premature in terms of the big picture. Israel would NOT have this promised comfort until their “warfare is accomplished,” and that would only come AFTER Jacob’s trouble, which necessarily awaits the event of the abomination in Jerusalem. The messianics in the Land were simply NOT reckoning on this, at least not then, as confirmed by many statements from them.

This began a line of thought in Art that was more cross centered in his understanding of prophecy, which until this time, existed as almost a ‘studied avoidance’ of idle prophecy excitement that distracted from discipleship and the cross in the believer’s sanctification. We would often pray with great travail of spirit that Art would catch the importance of the prophetic scriptures, particularly the details of Daniel, as the Lord’s appointed mouthpiece. This came when he saw the outbreak of the intifada. The manifestation of such implacable hatred, such that would never be assuaged by any kind of political accomodation, was, to him, a clear portent of Israel’s necessary death before resurrection, a key motif that would characterize his word to the nations in the days to follow.

At first, his view was much like your own. He saw nothing in scripture that had to be fulfilled before the sudden rise of Antichrist and the advent of Israel’s last and greatest tribulation. This made him ‘persona non grata’ to many, really most, of the messianic leadership in Israel and elsewhere. This was about the time I joined the community and was usually the one that would travel with Art. Through our studies and conversations, he gave up the view that Jacob’s trouble was imminent. He took the view that you, at least for now, associate with dispensationlism.

My hope, in brotherly love, is that you will reconsider as I trust I can present some things to your attention on this question that you’ve not considered, but, of course, that remains to be seen. All is to say, I believe some things must happen before even the Antichrist can come. Those things, in my view are critical to the preparation of the body, both practically and spiritually. There MUST be something answering to the ‘temple of God’ on the forbidden temple mount that can count as the ‘holy place’ situated in Judea (2Thes 2:4 with Mt 24:15; Dan 11:31), as this will be the scene of the Antichrist’s initial desecration that signals the great tribulation.

There MUST be a restored sacrifice in that ‘holy place’ that he (the prince who exalts himself), NOT Jesus, ‘takes away’ (Dan 8:11; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11). There MUST be a false league with this dangerous enemy who, from the beginning, studies to destroy the covenant he confirms with the many (Dan 9:27; 11:23; Isa 28:15, 18; 1Thes 5:3, which I believe has the false security of Eze 38:8, 11, 14 in mind). This deadly league (Dan 11:23) among nations with the Antichrist being one participant among “many” will “confirm” (give formal recognition) the “holy covenant” (Dan 11:28, 30) that will be violated in the middle of the week (Dan 9:27) to being the last 3 1/2 years (half week) of unequaled tribulation (Jer 30:7; Dan 12:1, 7, 11; Mt 24:21).

If this be so, it means that some very seismic changes will have to come about in the region, because, as it stands now, the Islamic world threatens to “open hell” if Israel so much as assays to approach the sacred ground of the ‘noble sanctuary,’ this would “open hell.” So I believe a war is imminent that will completely re-configure the politics of the region and that Israel will have an advantage in the negotiations that they do not presently have. This may, of course, happen very soon. In my reading of Mic 5:1-4 and Hos 5:15; Hos 6:1-2, there is approximately 2000 years (the 2 days of Hos 6:2) before the Lord’s rejection and return to heaven and His return at the end of the tribulation. At that time, the rejected Messiah ben Joseph is revealed to His estranged brethren who will then answer, “blessed is He who comes in the Name of the Lord …” (Mt 23:39). I see the third day as the time when Israel lives in His sight throughout the balance of the the thousand years.

Until then, their house is left desolate. It is the designated ‘holy place’ that He appointed. It is the ‘temple of God’ that was consecrated by His Word and commandment, but the sacrifice is NOT, of course, one that He accepts. It is rather a statement of their abiding rejection of Jesus’ sacrifice. This is clear since those that offer it are appointed for the “days of vengeance and wrath upon this people that “all” things written in the prophets might be fulfilled.”

In all the great ‘until’s’ of prophecy it is clear that the Jew outside of Christ is under the discipline / wrath of the covenant. However, they are no less elect and beloved and appointed to be “born in one day” (Isa 66:7-8) after Zion’s travail at the post-tribulational day of the Lord. So while I don’t see the Lord’s return as imminent; I do see it as very soon. In fact, I believe it MUST be very soon, because I am firm in my conviction that we are at the very far end of the two days of Hos 6:2, which I believe speaks of the hidden interim between His advents that has come to light in the mystery of the gospel.

I am praying that you and your wife are led faithfully and graciously, with much mercy and kindness, to your appointed place of service, and that the Holy Spirit will lead you into all truth.

Your friend in the fray, Reggie

The post The Abomination of Desolation in 2013? appeared first on Mystery of Israel.

I have just read another article of urgency warning of an imminent war, which I do not doubt, but what concerns me is that attached to this ever present, and now even probable possibility, is the expectation that this will set in motion the world wide persecution of the Jews, and that now is the time to prepare all possible means of transport to get Jews back to the Land.

It is not the sobriety of the warning that concerns me, but the failure to distinguish events that belong to different times and circumstances. I believe such misplacement of the order of events can lead to premature decisions and expectations that further discredit prophecy and distract from the real thing when the real time comes. This concern has moved me to point out some important distinctions that might save some from needless confusion and decisions that are based on false assumptions.

I ask of those that have little enough patience with theological hair splitting to bear with me a little, as I feel I must go into some detail in order to show the order of events that we must keep in mind if we are to avoid the false alarms of prophetic speculation, since by these, many are further disarmed and unprepared for the real thing when it comes.

While it is true that antisemitism can break out anywhere anytime, it is usually possible to “some extent” to see it coming if we are indeed expecting it to increase suddenly and pervasively, particularly as Israel is made to appear the cause of the world’s woes.

We know that the Jews are not the object of the last world wide persecution UNTIL the last 3 1/2 years. Furthermore, we know that Jacob’s trouble comes 3 1/2 years after the covenant has been confirmed that brings the deadly false peace (Isa 28:15, 18; Eze 38:8, 11, 14; 39:26; Dan 9:27; 11:23; 1Thes 5:3). There may indeed be tribulation, but “the tribulation, the great one” of Jer 30:7; Dan 12:1; Mt 24:21 and Rev 7:14 cannot begin before there is a sacrifice and a temple that stands again, at least in some early stage of construction (Dan 11:31; 12:11; Mt 24:15; 2Thes 2:4). This alone is sufficient to make the time clear when it is time to know the time with that degree of definite certainty.

Therefore, even if Russia and China take out America, or any other conceivable combination of events in a world war III type scenario, we know that Israel survives as a nation, and evidently comes into an even greater political and strategic advantage in the region. Why? It is because Israel must make the false peace that provides for the conditions necessary for the abomination that comes in the middle of the week, 3 1/2 years after the great delusion that presumes a lasting peace for Israel can be possible apart from an everlasting righteousness.

Now certainly, the godly remnant that has foreseen the evil has made ready to hide Jews in flight, but once again, that particular flight does not begin until the beginning of the last 3 1/2 years. Now here’s why I point out what is too little considered. The body of Christ that has been hiding and preaching the gospel to persecuted Israel in a mutual experience of persecution and flight will NOT be the direct agents of Jewish return. This is because we will have been gathered to Christ at His return by way of rapture at the “last” trump (compare Mt 24:31; 1Cor 15:52; 1Thes 4:14, 17; 2Thes 2:1; Rev 10:7; 11:15).

The true bride will be the witness that prepares them for repentance and return, but they will not be the physical agents for that return. The world wide return of Israel that comes only after the destruction of Antichrist at the day of the Lord (2Thes 2:1-3, 8) will be by the assistance of gentiles that manifestly were not “in Christ” at the time of the rapture. I’ll return to this.

If plain language is permitted to plainly describe the time and nature of Jewish return, we can see that THIS return is by natural means of transport (Isa 60:9; 66:20), employed by thankful gentiles (Isa 49:22) who have manifestly survived the great tribulation, and count it greatest privilege to bring the sons and daughters of Israel home, as an holy offering to the Lord (compare Isa 49:22; 60:9; 66:20). Context and language, both here and many places, will show that this is AFTER the day of the Lord.

The language in its proper context will further show that these gentile survivors, along with the saved of Israel, enter the millennial earth in natural bodies. This stands in marked contrast with the translation and catching up of the bride into glorified immortality to rule and reign with Christ over the millennial earth.

The day of the Lord salvation of Israel happens in conjunction with the revelation of the returning Jesus (Zech 12:10; Mt 23:39; Acts 3:20; Ro 11:26; Rev 1:7). This is why the penitent survivors of Jacob’s trouble are not changed and taken up by way of rapture. It is because they were not already “in Christ” at the time of the rapture.

The Jews that get saved before the rapture will be changed and caught up with all who are “in Christ” at the point of the rapture. This is clear from 1Cor 15:23, 52 and 1Thes 4:14. However, the penitent survivors of Israel do not go up with the church, but are shown going into the millennium, as newly filled with the Spirit, but in natural bodies. The reason seems clear. Scripture is harmonized when we recognize that at the same instant the bride is being changed and caught up, the penitent remnant of Israel are, at that same moment, able now to “look upon Him whom they pierced” (Zech 12:10; Mt 23:39; Rev 1:7). That, by the way, is the look of faith and revelation, not a mere physical seeing. It will be like Paul’s seeing of Christ on the Damascus road.

“At once,” and “in one day,” the revived nation passes from death to life (Isa 66:8; Eze 39:22; Zech 3:9; 14:7). Clearly, this is the day of the Lord when the Deliverer comes out of Zion to turn away ungodliness from Jacob (Isa 59:19-21; Acts 3:20-21 with Ro 11:26). Many hasten to point out that the day of the Lord is much more than a 24 hour period. That is true; but this point of transition is even more precise than a single day. It comes “in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye” (1Cor 15:52), not only “in one day”, but “at once” (Isa 66:8).

A careful comparison of scripture with scripture will show that the spiritual regeneration of Israel comes immediately with the revelation of Christ in conjunction with the pouring out of the Spirit. The time is clear. It is the great and notable day of the Lord (compare Joel 2:28-32; 3:14-16, but especially Eze 39:29 with Zech 12:10; Mt 23:39; Acts 3:20; Rev 1:7). To make the time even more definite, note that both Jesus and Peter quote from Joel’s prophecy to show that the darkness that comes AFTER the tribulation (Mt 24:29) comes BEFORE the great and notable day of the Lord (compare Mt 24:29 with Acts 2:20; 2Pet 3:10, 12 with Rev 16:14-17 with Eze 39:8). So clearly, the ‘national’ salvation of Israel is at the end of Jacob’s trouble (Jer 30:7), but this does not mean that many Jews have not been saved all along the way with all that great multitude that comes out of ‘the tribulation, the great one’ (Rev 7:9, 13-14).

If we will “carefully” examine the context of the scriptures describing this last, and clearly post-tribulational return, we will see that it is not the preliminary return in unbelief that we see today (also foretold in prophecy, Eze 38:8; Zeph 2:1-2). We must distinguish, since this latter and final return will be world wide and complete, to the last person (Eze 39:28).

This return is AFTER Jacob’s trouble. It is AFTER the great and notable day of the Lord. It is AFTER the last trumpet (Isa 27:13; Mt 24:31; 1Cor 15:52; Rev 10:7; 11:15). It is the earliest days of the millennium. Christ has returned and the true bride has been translated into glorified immortality by way of rapture and resurrection. In contrast, the Jews are returning from every nation in natural bodies by every natural means of transport (Isa 66:20). They are NOT gathered to meet the Lord in the air. We are careless with the plain language of scripture if we do not make this distinction, since in no other way (of which I’m aware) can the scripture be harmonized. The day of the Lord will mean rapture for the true church (of this present age); it will mean repentance and return for the saved remnant of Israel.

The time is clear; and the manner and the means are just as clear. After the bride has been caught up and gathered (Mt 24:31; 2Thes 2:1) to meet the Lord in the air (1Thes 4:17) , gentiles are depicted escorting a contrite and penitent remnant back to the Land. They do not appear to be resurrected saints, but newly awakened seekers (Zech 8:23) who are implementing every conceivable ‘natural’ mode of transportation (Isa 60:9; 66:20) to get Jews back to the Land. Christ is here; the Antichrist is destroyed, and Jews can return home safely and dwell in truest eternal security, as an all holy nation forever.

We can see why the gentiles undertake this labor of love and reverence for the everlasting covenant. With the sounding of the seventh trumpet, the mystery of God has been finished (Rev 10:7), and the deeply humbled nations of the gentiles (those comparatively “few” that are left; Isa 24:6), now begin to understand the meaning behind Israel’s long and tragic experience in history (Eze 39:23, 27). This explains why these gentile survivors see their part in assisting the Jews back to the Land as an offering to the Lord (Zech 2:11; 8:23; Isa 49:22; 60:9; 66:20), but this is NOT us bringing them back; we have been taken up.

It is this clearly revealed activity of gentiles who have manifestly survived the tribulation that leads me to conclude, on the basis of 1Cor 15:23, 52 and 1Thes 4:14, that not all the unsaved of the earth take the mark of the beast, else they would not have survived Christ’s return. This seems clear, because many scriptures show that there will be some from among the nations that survive the judgments of the tribulation. These will enter the millennium in natural bodies (e.g., Isa 61:9; 65:20-23; 66:19-20; Eze 39:2, 9-16; Dan 7:12; Zech 14:16-18 et al). From this, it appears that that not everyone who is unsaved during the tribulation take the mark.

It is important that we distinguish how and by whom Jews return from all lands after the tribulation. It is clear that they do not return by way of rapture, but as newly born again, Spirit filled believers, assisted by surviving gentiles whose hearts have been lately turned towards God and His elect people, as the dust of Armageddon begins to settle.

I realize that such fine points of distinction can be difficult and even frustrating, but if we do not make these important distinctions we will be prone to engage in premature or misdirected activities. Even though the expectation of certain events may be correct, our actions and decisions must be based on an accurate reading of scripture, as to their proper time and order.

Many will, of course, simply exclaim that the Spirit has led them in a certain way. Well, that is well and good for them, but what about the rest of us? Our only truly “mutual” safety is the scripture, rightly interpreted, for which we need the greatest help of the Spirit, but this is what He has promised (Jn 16:13; 1Jn 2:27). So this is not for the “experts,” but it is for the diligent (“It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honor of kings is to search out a matter;” Prov 25:2).

All is to say, while I see it is our responsibility to anticipate and prepare for the flight of the Jews, it is NOT our job to get them back to the Land. It is, however, our responsibility to do all in our power to help them survive until the day of national salvation, which I am convinced is not accidentally the time of our translation. With the birthing of Israel, the church’s travail is complete and our unique task for this dispensation is finished in their return. The salvation of Israel does not come in a vacuum. It is the result of a combination of the church’s prophetic witness (Dan 11:33) amid an unequaled tribulation of fearful “signs” in earth and in heaven (Mt 24:3, 30; Lk 21:11; Acts 2:19) empty Jacob of his power (Deut 32:36 with Dan 12:7).

Indeed, we may say that now is the time to prepare spiritually and practically for a soon time when none can buy or sell, and when we know that not only Jews, but all true believers will be hated and hunted, but how is now the time to hide Jews? How can now be the time to prepare ships for their return? I can see where ships may indeed play a role in their flight and preservation during the tribulation, but the ships that bring them home are those put into use by the gentile survivors of the tribulation (Isa 60:9). The only reason I can imagine that we should work towards returning Jews to the Land before the time of Jacob’s trouble is if we ‘assume’ that that the greater potential for Jewish survival will be in the Land, but that is not what the evidence suggests.

I would just point out that when the great post-tribulational trumpet of Isa 27:13 sounds, it finds Jews who are near to perishing in Egypt and Assyria. Could it be that Jews have fled to these nations, because the prospect for Jewish survival is greater in these presently hostile nations than in the Land itself? This, and the clear evidence of scripture that Jewish survival will depend upon flight into the neighboring wilderness (Isa 16:1-5; 26:20; 42:11; Mt 24:16; Rev 12:6, 14) and into the “wilderness of the nations” (Eze 20:35) leads me to conclude that the time before an unequaled tribulation that begins and has its first concentration “in the Land” is NOT the time to encourage Jews back to the Land, at least not without fearlessly telling them what they’re in for.

I do not doubt the crisis or the urgency to anticipate the ever present probability of war, not only in Israel, but one that could very easily spread throughout the world. I expect just such a thing to bring about the conditions that will make the false peace possible. I do NOT, however, expect that this preliminary violence will particularly target Jews in the nations. There must be a false peace after the storm, which will be the delusive calm before the ultimate storm.

We can certainly expect that a war that begins with a strike on Iran will certainly bring an attempted retaliation on the nation. It is also possible, even likely, that terrorists cells will target Jewish population centers throughout the world, but this is not the time of the final flight of Jews, and it is not, in my view, the time to be trying to get Jews back to the Land.

Some of my closest and dearest brothers oppose me on this, but I will bear the reproach for splitting theological hairs if it can prevent well meaning believers from further embarrassing the prophetic scriptures by premature actions due to neglect of plain language in its context.

In the Beloved, Reggie

Q & A

Question: “If I read you correctly, do I understand that you believe there will be a period of time between the rapture of the saints and the second coming of Christ at the end of the tribulation?”

I’m glad you asked, brother. I should have been clearer. The answer is no; I see the two events as simultaneous. Both are triggered by nothing less than the Lord’s glorious coming in clouds “immediately AFTER the tribulation,” as He descends to the Mount of Olives (Zech 14:4; Job 19:25). At the very moment of His visible appearing (Mt 24:27; 1Cor 15:52; Rev 1:7), those who have remained alive will be caught up to meet the myriads of departed saints who are coming with him (compare Isa 13:3; Joel 3:11; Zech 14:5; 1Thes 3:13; 4:14). This becomes clear when we see that the day of the Lord is also the time of the rapture.

Question: “If so, how long?”

No time at all. The rapture happens at the last trumpet in manifest connection with the day of the Lord (Mt 24:29, 31 with 1Cor 15:52; 1Thes 5:2, 4; 2Thes 2:1-3). The day of the Lord, or the “day of God” Almighty, is everywhere shown to come AFTER the tribulation.(Compare Mt 24:29, 43; with Acts 2:20; 2Thes 2:3, 8; 2Pet 3:10. 12 with Rev 16:14-16). Note the relationship between these passages show that the ‘thief like’ day of the Lord is clearly AFTER the stellar darkness (Acts 2:20) that comes AFTER the tribulation (Mt 24:29). If we compare 2 Pet 3:10, 12 with Rev 16:14-16, we see that the day of the Lord, also called, ‘day of God’ and ‘day of God Almighty’ does not come as a thief until sometime AFTER the sixth bowel in Rev 16:14-15. This shows clearly that the thief like return of Christ is at the very end of the tribulation and not sooner.

Therefore, it is a fallacy to try to separate the Lord’s return from the day of the Lord, and the time of the day of the Lord is very clearly AFTER the tribulation. (Mt 24:29 with Acts 2:20; Rev 16:14-15). Although the day of the Lord comes as a thief, this does not mean that it takes the godly by surprise (1Thes 5:4). Contrary to popular opinion, Christ’s does not come without sign or warning, as in pre-tribulationism. Even if misinterpreted as to their proper meaning, the principal sign will be clear and outward for all to see (Mt 24:15). The only reason the signs will be ignored or misinterpreted is because of an unparalleled deception that scripture warns will prevail in those days (Mt 24:24). For this, Jesus prescribes only one safe antidote (Mt 13:23).

Question: “If I read you correctly, if unsaved Gentiles who survive until the end of the tribulation are going to be the ones who bring the Jews back to Zion, then this would imply a period of days, if not weeks or months. Would it not?”

Yes, it takes time to traverse sea and land on the long trek back home from the lands of their dispersion, but this is what a host of Old Testament passages depict. Again, the question will come to whether such passages are properly to be interpreted literally according to the original author’s intention, or some other way? From this we see that the saved remnant of Israel (such that survive the tribulation to go into the millennial age in natural bodies) were not members of the body (not yet “in Christ”) at the time of the rapture. Evidently, the penitent remnant are enabled to “look upon Him whom they pierced” (Zech 12:10) at the precise moment that He is coming in the clouds (Rev 1:7) to destroy Antichrist and to gather His elect at the last trump (Mt 24:31; 1Cor 15:52; 2Thes 2:1-3, 8; Rev 10:7: 11:15-18). At that same moment, the surviving remnant of Israel are being born (spiritually reborn) “at once” and in “one day” (Isa 66:8; Eze 39:22; Zech 3:9; 14:7). That is the day of the Lord. It is when ungodliness is turned away from Jacob (compare Isa 59:19-21 with Ro 11:25-29). It is the day the Spirit is poured out on the penitent remnant (Joel 2:28-32; Eze 39:27-29 with Zech 12:10; Rev 1:7). Because the Jewish remnant were not saved before the rapture, they were not changed into glorified immortality at the last trump, with “all” who were already in Christ (1Cor 15:23; 52; 1Thes 4:14, 17). If we let the day of the Lord be what scripture describes as “one day” after the tribulation, then we can see that the beleaguered remnant of Israel is being given the gift of repentance on the same day that the church is being caught up. That is why their experience is markedly different from that of those who were already in Christ at the time of the rapture. That is why their return to the Land in natural bodies and with the assistance of gentiles who have survived the tribulation is quite to be distinguished from the post-resurrection experience of the church.

The post Avoiding the False Alarms of Prophetic Speculation (More on…) appeared first on Mystery of Israel.