Without doubt, what seemed so hopelessly remote and improbable only two years ago appears to be moving at an unprecedented pace towards the deceptive Mideast peace that sets the stage for the final sequence of events leading to the Lord’s return. Just what form this will take or how long it will be in its development remains to be seen, but prophecy clearly shows that a disarming illusion of peace is the necessary prelude to the shock that must come to Israel and the world.

The danger that besets these exciting developments is the tendency to make premature announcements that discredit prophecy just when its greatest potential for witness and warning is nearing the appointed time when it will be time to say with assurance and authority, “this is that!” (Acts 2:16). Even now, well meaning prophecy watchers are making premature declarations that the final seven has already started.

Others are more cautious to say only that the conditions necessary for the peace that begins the final seven are falling fast into place. Although a necessary first step, the enforcement of a multi-national peace arrangement is not by itself sufficient to signal the start of the last seven, UNLESS this is accompanied by certain equally foretold conditions and signal events. This is what we want to look at in what follows, as it will be a safeguard against the false alarms and premature announcements that are sure to fill the air.

It might be time well repaid for serious students of the scripture to become at least somewhat familiar and respectful of the kind of difficulties and perplexities that have baffled Daniel scholars of all schools (Prov 18:13<; 2Tim 2:15). It is well to remember that according to Daniel’s prophecy, certain outstanding details will not be unsealed till the end is very near (Dan 12:4, 9). Yet, the scripture is equally clear that these things will be revealed well enough before the end to ‘prepare a people to prepare a people’ (Dan 11:33; 12:3, 10).

So while we can expect the signs that Daniel reveals to come into increasing clarity as the time nears, caution, patience, and humility is appropriate, since no other book has given rise to more diverse and conflicting interpretations.

Not only this, but Daniel has been the most tortured object of critical attack by so-called higher criticism than any book of the canon. This should not surprise us, since Satan knows that the end of his rule has been set according to Daniel’s timeline (Rev 12:12).

The difficulties that have plagued Daniel scholarship is not a call to resigned despair or neglect, but to prayer and patient waiting for the promised unsealing that is divinely set to serve its greatest purpose at “the time of the end” (Dan 8:17; 11:27, 35, 40; 12:4, 9, 13). Part of that purpose will be the compelling witness of fulfilled prophecy and its meaning as a catalyst for what scripture more than hints will be the greatest worldwide harvest of souls in history (compare Dan 11:33; 12:3; Mt 24:14; Rev 7:9, 13-14; 14:6).

Paradoxically the great number that will be saved out of “the tribulation, the great one” (double use of the definite article in the Greek) will take place during the time of the greatest deception and revolt against the truth (Mt 24:4-5, 11, 24; 2Thes 2:11; Rev 13:14).

The difficulties that have baffled and divided Daniel scholarship only further confirms that God has chosen to keep certain mysteries under wraps till the appointed time (Isa 8:14-17; Dan 9:24; 12:4, 9). It is also no surprise that Satan is fully invested to obscure and discredit this most embattled of all biblical books.

The unequaled tribulation of the final half week begins with a war in heaven. Michael “stands” to thrust Satan down to earth. This is the moment Satan fears most, since it means his tenure as “the god of this age” has been reduced to a final 3 ½ years (compare Dan 12:1, 11; Mt 24:15, 21, with Rev 12:7-14).

Because “he sees his time is short” (Rev 12:12), his total focus will be to defeat the promise by wiping out the Jewish race before it reaches the finish line at Jesus’ post-tribulational return to “finish the mystery of God” (Amos 3:7 with Rev 10:7). Hence, it may well be said that the downfall of the devil is in the details of Daniel, since the unsealing of Daniel’s prophecy sets in motion the final unmasking of Satan in the revelation of the ancient mystery of lawlessness in the revelation of the man of lawlessness (2Thes 2:3-4, 7-8).

Until then, there is much that can be known that will be decisive in whether we are prepared to recognize what is most urgent to know in the time most urgent to know it. Until then, we should approach the mysteries of Daniel with humility and patience, in the faith conviction that difficulties that seem to defy easy resolution do not exist by chance but by sovereign design. God intends that His children know they are searching out a divinely ordained mystery that is not intended to yield its full light apart from the mercy and grace of our sovereign teacher, the Holy Spirit.

Those will be most blessed in the time of full disclosure who have “searched and inquired diligently” (1Pet 1:10). Blessed are those who, in trembling dependence on the Holy Spirit, have “set their heart” to understand (Dan 10:12) the divine secrets that it has been God’s pleasure to conceal from the prideful, self-reliant wisdom of this age (Mt 11:25-26; 1Cor 2:7-8).

Not that we will resolve every question, but we want to know what the evidence rules out, rules in, or leaves open to question till the time. We want to identify any safeguards that the scripture provides that will protect us from the peril of presumption, as prophecy has been so marred and discredited by the false alarms of prophetic speculation.

But there is a time to sound the alarm, and it is always time to study and prepare ourselves to recognize the time when it arrives. We want to be neither early nor late when it is time to announce that “the time is fulfilled” (Dan 11:33; 12:3; Hab 2:2-3; Mk 1:15).

From our study, it seems most probable that the scripture intends that we look for the Antichrist to arise from somewhere to the north of Israel. Since the pattern of the past often prefigures the future in Hebrew prophecy, it becomes significant that the final aggressor, whose end coincides with the redemption of the great day, is specifically called “the Assyrian” in the typology of the pre-exilic prophets, Isaiah and Micah (Isa 10:5-6, 24:17; 11:4; 14:25; 19:23; 30:31; 31:8; Mic 5:1-7).

In Isaiah and Jeremiah, the foe from the north (“north country”) is identified with the Chaldeans under the king of Babylon (Isa 14:4, 12-14, 25-26, 31-32; 23:14; 47:1, 6, 9; Jer 6:22; 10:22; 50:9). In Ezekiel, the last aggressor is Gog. Clearly, this is the final aggressor, long foretold, not only by Ezekiel but by the many prophets of Israel (see Eze 38:17).

The nations under his command surround Israel from all sides (Eze 38:5-7, 9), but his descent is always depicted as coming from the “far north” (NKJV; NIV) / “uttermost parts of the north” (ESV; ASV) / “distant north” (NLT) / “remotest parts of the north” (NASB / CSB  (Eze 38:15; 39:2).

Here too, there is cause for caution. Who is Gog? When does he attack and how long does the battle last? How far north is his country or countries of origin?

Since Gog’s multinational invasion begins when Israel is in a state of unsuspecting false security (Isa 28:14-18; Eze 38:8, 11, 14; 39:26; Dan 11:23-24; 1Thes 5:3) but ends with Gog’s destruction at the Armageddon “great day of God Almighty” (Eze 39:8 with Rev 16:12-19) and Israel’s everlasting salvation (Eze 39:22, 28-29), the only conclusion that fits all the evidence is that this battle comprehends the entire 42 months of the great tribulation. It starts with the shock of an unexpected invasion that violates the illusory presumption of peace and ends with Israel’s post-tribulational regeneration and everlasting salvation.

This is significant because the full cast of nations that are gathered by the seduction of demon spirits to Armageddon (compare Dan 11:40-45 with Rev 16:12), do not join the fray until very late towards the end of the tribulation (compare Dan 11:40-45 with Rev 16:12-17; Eze 39:8). This means Ezekiel’s comprehensive vision of Eze 38 & 39 may include nations that come in at the end and are not necessarily one of the union of ten that strike Israel at the beginning of the tribulation.

Furthermore, since Gog is called a “chief prince” over many nations (Eze 38:2-3; 39:1), this may imply something more than only a human leader. According to Paul, “his coming is after the working of Satan with ALL power, signs, and deceiving wonders (2Thes 2:9). Never before has the world seen anything like this.

The case is too involved to enter upon here, but we believe the “mystery of lawlessness” (2Thes 2:7) that is revealed in the man of lawlessness is the revelation of Satan in the flesh, the antithesis of the mystery of God manifest in the flesh (1Tim 3:16). I mention this because the scripture calls the archangel, Michael, “one of the chief princes (Dan 10:13).

This suggests that “THE chief prince” over the nations of the gentiles (Gen 10) could be Satan himself, cryptically referred to as Gog. Gog would then double as both Satan and the Antichrist because he fulfills the mystery of Satan in the flesh. This understanding explains why this title is again used to apply to Satan’s post-millennial release for the “little season” of futile threat to the everlasting peace of regathered Israel (Rev 20:3, 7-9).

But beyond this general reference to the southward descent of the northern invader, depending on how certain debated passages in Daniel are interpreted, it is possible that the typology of the scripture points us to a much narrower, more specific territory from which the final Antichrist may be expected to rise. The passages in question are Dan 8:8-9 & Dan 11:3-21. These verses specify the territory ruled by Antiochus Epiphanes IV. He was the Greek tyrant who attacked Jerusalem and famously desecrated the temple by sacrificing a pig on the altar and erecting a statue of Zeus in 167 BCE.

Because Antiochus arose out of one of the four primary divisions of Alexander’s kingdom, scholars usually identify him as the “little horn” of Dan 8:9 who also abolished the daily sacrifice in Dan 8:11. But while Antiochus IV was certainly a type of the “coming prince” (Dan 9:26), we will show in what follows why we cannot accept that he was the complete and ultimate fulfillment.

In notable contrast to Antiochus, the coming “little horn” of Dan 7:8 (the final Antichrist) is one who rises up from among ten nations to lead them in a united invasion Israel. The end of the little horn comes, not three years after the abomination of desolation is placed, as in the case of Antiochus’ desecration (Dec 164 to Dec 167), but 3 1/2 years later with the completion of the predestined half week of Dan 7:25; 9:27; 12:7, 11).

Such often neglected distinctions are placed in the text to protect the careful interpreter from a hasty presumption that a near parallel or partial fulfillment in the past has sufficiently satisfied the language of the text. It is certain that Jesus was not satisfied that Antiochus’ desecration sufficiently fulfilled Daniel’s reference to the abomination of desolation. He puts it fully in the future in relation to the unequaled tribulation that ends with nothing short of His return in glory and the resurrection of the righteous (compare Mt 24:15, 21, 29-31 with Dan 12:1-2).

Moreover, so far from being a “little horn” who “becomes strong with a small people” (Dan 11:23), Antiochus rose to power in the largest of the four “notable horns” of Alexander’s divided kingdom (Dan 8:5, 8). The territory of the Seleucid Empire stretched from Antioch (named after his father, Antiochus III) to the Mesopotamian regions of Babylonia and Assyria, all of which had been under Macedonian control after the division of Alexander’s kingdom among his successors (Dan 8:8-9; 11:3-21).

On this basis, it has been long expected that someone would rise up from within that general territory towards the end of Hosea’s 2nd millennial day (Hos 5:15-6:2). For this reason, many were reasonably considering whether Jolani (aka Amed al Sharaa) might be the fulfillment of one who would stand up in the estate of Antiochus IV, the great eschatological prototype of the final AC.

The problem with Jolani’s candidacy for the one who enters into an alliance with Israel (Dan 11:23) is that he did not come into power “peaceably”, nor by deceit and smooth promises, as stated in Dan 11:21, but by force of arms. I’m aware that some translations translate, Dan 11:24 “at a time of peace, or tranquility” but that too fails to fit the conditions by which Assad of Syria was so suddenly replaced.

And yet, never has there been a more credible and promising prospect for the kind of deceptive, false peace that the scripture depicts as necessarily preceding the sudden and unexpected outbreak of the final tribulation as we’re now seeing unfold before our eyes (compare Isa 28:14-18; Jer 30:3-7; Eze 38:8, 11, 14; 39:26; Dan 9:27; 11:24; Mt 24:15-16, 21; 1Thes 5:3; Rev 11:2 with Joel 2:1-3). Ominously, this is all taking place after the greatest upsurge of rabid world antisemitism, not seen since the Hitler time. By any fair reckoning, the stage is being set.

Whether the territory once ruled by Antiochus IV significantly narrows the general area of the AC’s origin will depend on our answer to a very important question debated by scholars. Does the “ vile / despicable person” of Dan 11:21 refer to Antiochus or the future Antichrist, or both? If to Antiochus, this would mean that the willful king who exalts himself over all forms of deity in Dan 11:36-37 is someone else entirely, already nearly 22 centuries removed from Antiochus’ time. You see the puzzle.

The far greater consensus among Daniel scholars is that Dan 11:21 & Dan 11:36 are speaking of two distinct individuals separated by many centuries. This means that both do the same thing, as described in nearly precisely the same words. Both take away the daily sacrifice (regular burn offering) and place the abomination. To reiterate, this would mean that Dan 11:31 (assumed to be past) is a completely different event from Dan 12:11 (assumed to be future).

So, is it only Antiochus, (as a highly descriptive type of the coming Antichrist) who is introduced in Dan 11:21? Or is it the Antichrist himself? All will agree that Antiochus functions as a type, but “if” Dan 11:21 does not introduce the Antichrist, then looking for him to rise somewhere within the estate (general vicinity) of Antiochus IV loses its primary support. It opens the field for him to come from a more expansive area, albeit necessarily to Israel’s north.

Antiochus came into the estate of his deceased brother, Seleucus IV, who succeeded his father, Antiochus III. This becomes significant if Antiochus is a type of the Antichrist, but especially if the person who comes to power in verse 21 is the same person who exalts himself in Dan 11:36-37. I want to show in what follows that there is no exegetical justification to find the break between antiquity and the time of the end between verse Dan 11:35 & Dan 11:36, but much more likely between Dan 11:20 & Dan 11:21.

We begin by pointing out where agreement is almost universal. Due to Paul’s verbatim quotation of Dan 11:36-27 in 2Thes 2:4, few will dispute that Daniel’s willful king is Paul’s man of lawlessness. Nor is there any disagreement that Jesus quotes the language of Dan 11:31 & Dan 12:11 to identify the sign that He expects His disciples to recognize as the event that starts the unequaled tribulation (Dan 11:31; 12:1, 11 with Mt 24:15-16, 21).

But is the abomination of Dan 11:31 the same event as the abomination of Dan 12:11? This is the very question that has divided Daniel scholars. It will decide whether the events spanning from Dan 11:21-35 have relevance for the future.

Though several reputable commentators over the years have offered a compelling defense of the position we take (I have a few in my library), we remain in the comparatively rare minority. This is not the place to recount them all, but there are notable details in Dan 11:21-35 that do not agree with certain aspects of the well documented history of Antiochus Epiphanes IV’s career leading up to his desecration of the temple. We will look at just a couple of examples:

With rare exception, most conservative scholars assume that because Antiochus was such a remarkable type of the coming man of lawlessness that the references to the removal of the sacrifice in Dan 8:11 & Dan 11:31 can only apply to him as the complete and final fulfillment, leaving only Dan 9:27 & Dan 12:11 to have a future fulfillment.

Let us look more closely at what this postulate implies. If Dan 11:31 has in view a different time and event than Dan 12:11, this would mean that mention of the abomination and removal of Tamid (regular burnt offering) of Dan 12:11 is NOT referring back to the familiar event mentioned earlier in Dan 11:31. Instead, it means that Dan 12:11, while a very similar event, is already nearly 22 centuries removed from the abomination of Dan 11:31, despite its being described in so nearly the same words.

These are the very words that Jesus will use to describe the sign that marks the beginning of the final tribulation that will surpass anything in the past or future (Mt 24:15-21). Even His reference to the unequaled time of trouble in Mt 24:21 is a direct quotation of Dan 12:1. Therefore, to NOT expect a future repeat of a very similar act in “Judea”, comparable to Antiochus’ desecration, amounts to a blatant denial of Jesus’ own, manifest understanding.

This is why Jesus sends His disciples to read and understand Daniel’s account of this particular event (Mt 24:15). He knew that by these unmistakable connections the time and nature of this massively transitional event would be recognized by His sheep, visibly, unmistakably, beyond any question (Mt 24:15; 2Thes 2:4). This will be their strategic advantage for the final thrust of the gospel before the end (Mt 24:14).

Should we then accept the verdict of the far greater number of commentators who believe that Dan 11:21-35 should be interpreted to apply to Antiochus, not as an archetypal foreshadowing of that last aggressor, but as completely fulfilled in 167 BCE by his desecration of the temple? This would also mean that Dan 11:32-35 are applied, not to the tribulation of the end, but to the ensuing persecution of Antiochus that ended in the triumph of the Maccabean warriors and rededication of the temple almost exactly three years later in 164 BCE.

While not all agree that 11:21-35 is past history, there is broad consensus that the abomination and removal of the daily sacrifice of Dan 12:11 is the start of the half week of Dan 7:25; 9:27; 11:12:7; Rev 11:2-3; 12:6, 14; 13:5). On this we agree. We do not agree that Dan 11:21-35 can be consigned to the past. This means Dan 11:31 & Dan 12:11 are both equally future. Dan 11:31 was partially prefigured by Antiochus’ desecration, but both 11:31 & 12:11 have primary and ultimate reference to the same event.

So to summarize: Because Paul is so clear in his duplication of the words of Dan 11:36-37 applied to the man of lawlessness in 2Thes 2:4, most scholars locate the gap of centuries between versus 35 & 36. From this point to the end of the book, there is common agreement that the topic is the future Antichrist and the unparalleled tribulation of the final 3 ½ years.

This is not in dispute. Our difference lies with the view that Dan 11:21-35 has been fulfilled by Antiochus IV in the second century BCE. Antiochus was a type and pattern of the one to come but he did not satisfy some of the necessary details of the prophecy, thus demanding a future and more complete fulfillment, arriving at the end that is “determined” (Dan 9:24, 26; 11:36) / “appointed” (Dan 8:19; 11:27, 35).

In several notable particulars, Antiochus does not well enough match the profile that history provides. His rise to power certainly did not begin in the way described. He was certainly no “little horn”, since he never began with a “small people” but inherited directly and at once his father’s and brother’s rule over the greatest of the four “notable horns” (Dan 8:9; 11:5).

To argue for the break of centuries to be located between verses Dan 11:35 & Dan 11:36 would mean that the “willful king” of vs 36 introduces another individual entirely, but the continuity of the preceding succession of pronouns militates against such a conjecture. In all, the cumulative evidence weighs against the view that Dan 11:31 & 12:11 are completely different events, signifying two different ends of two different times, centuries removed, despite being described in by the words in the the same prophecy. How likely? You decide.

The stakes are high in this decision, because “if” commentators are wrong in their consignment of Dan 11:21-35 to antiquity, a substantial number of revealed details about the first half of Daniel’s 70th week risks being robbed from the knowledge and witness of the church. We can hardly begin to estimate how invaluable this knowledge will prove to be in its appointed time.

So much is at stake whether the godly remnant will be able to recognize and benefit from a knowledge of the events that occupy the first half Daniel’s 70th week that run from Dan 11:23-30.

So, we ask, does the “appointed time of the end” in Dan 11:27, 35 refer to a completely different end than the “time of the end” in Dan 12:4, 9, 13? The far greater number of scholars think so. What do you think? Will it matter then? Doesn’t matter now?

Notice too that the reference in Dan 11:27 to “the appointed time of the end” comes before the first mention of the abomination of desolation in Dan 11:31. How then can we say that the same “appointed end” mentioned in Dan 11:35 refers to a different end than described in Dan 12:4, 9-13? The details of the text must take priority whether history confirms a complete fulfillment or only partial fulfillment, designed to function only as a type and pattern of a more complete and comprehensive fulfillment in the future.

As mentioned, many, actually most commentators make “appointed time of the end” in Dan 11:27 & Dan 11:35 to be speaking about the end of the Maccabean struggle over the Seleucid armies of Antiochus IV. According to this interpretation, this is NOT the same “time of the end” referred to in Dan 11:40, 45; 12:4, 8-13. Instead, most commentators treat this undeniable similarity as two distinct ends of two different (albeit very similar) times of assault on Jerusalem, its temple and sacrifice, nearly 22 centuries apart.

The extreme awkwardness of this view can be illustrated by juxtaposing two parallel passages of undeniable similarity, but are they the same? Do they signify the same time? Most say yes. A few say no. You make the call.

Dan 11:35:

“And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white, even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.”

Dan 12:9-10:

“And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.”

This alone is enough to cast doubt on the Antiochus interpretation, not that he did not prefigure and typify the coming Antichrist in his attack on the holy covenant centered in Jerusalem, but he falls significantly short in certain particulars that do not match some of the details of Dan 11:21-35. This argues for a fuller, more exact and complete fulfillment of every yet outstanding detail.

Alls to say, if Dan 11:21-35 is wrongly relegated to the past, then the witnessing, prophetic body of Christ risks being robbed of crucial end time information that is intended for their advantage and the greater glory of an infallible scripture that requires that not a single jot or tittle pass unfulfilled.

On the other hand, if we are correct that the AC is introduced in Dan 11:21, we are justified to be looking for one who has or will come to power in an initially small country of modest beginnings somewhere to the north of Israel. This will not be through natural succession, but apparently, seizing upon a momentary vacancy, he snakes his way to the top by “flattery” (slippery fair promises), as implied in Dan 11:21-23. This description stands in notable contrast to the historical account of how Antiochus came to power by wresting the throne from a usurper accused of assassinating his brother, Seleucus IV. Again, there are points of notable variance between the details of the prophecy and the historical record of Antiochus’ accession to the throne.

So, unless we are overlooking something (always a real and present danger), there may yet be a longer wait between what we’re seeing now and the “alliance” of Dan 11:23 that ‘appears’ (?) to be the same time that “he” (i.e., the coming prince of Dan 9:26) “confirms” (makes firm / strengthens) the covenant with the many to begin the final seven (Dan 9:27).

If Dan 11:21-35 is retrieved as yet future, then from the alliance of Dan 11:23 to the abomination of Dan 11:31, we have been given a clear chronological sequence of events that occupy the first half of the week.

Sometime after the alliance of Dan 11:23, but before the abomination of Dan 11:31, the sacrifice (regular burn offering) will be restored. If not already apparent, this will remove all doubt that we have crossed over into the final seven.

But there is more that will confirm that we are in the final seven. “AFTER the league made with him” (11:23), he attacks and overcomes a king to his south (Dan 11:25-27). This conquest of the southern king does not appear to impinge on the security of Israel. The conquered king is not killed but joins his conqueror in a secret plot to destroy the holy covenant at Jerusalem, but the plan comes to nothing because the time is not right (Dan 11:27).

These are things those living at that time will see. From this, they will be able to anticipate what comes next, play by play.

Manifestly, the alliance of Dan 11:23 is made with Israel in particular, but since Dan 9:27 says he confirms the covenant “with many”, it seems possible, I think probable, that the AC will be only one among many other nations that are united in common consent to recognize (confirm) Israel’s right, not only to a portion of their promised Land, but also their return to the temple service in Jerusalem as commanded in the law.

This is why the covenant that is confirmed by political expedience while fiercely hated by the AC is called “the holy covenant” (Dan 11:28, 30). It is this recognition of the “holy covenant” in particular either by the AC alone, or more likely an international cast of several nations that starts the seven.

So is the league / alliance of Dan 11:23 the same event described in Dan 9:27? It appears likely, but can’t say with final certainty. If the alliance and the confirming of the covenant are part of a single event, then we can see a certain sequence of specific events that will precede the abomination.

After the alliance of Dan 11:23, the Antichrist makes two distinct southward advances before a third whereupon he invades the Land and places the abomination of desolation (Dan 11:31).

The first is the successful conquest of a nation to his south that increases his power base (Dan 11:25-28). The second southward move is intercepted and repulsed by the “ships of Chittim” (Kittim in some translations). This momentary frustration fills him with rage against the holy covenant centered in Jerusalem (Dan 11:30).

It is inviting to speculate that it is just here that he secretly unites the ten nations that have waited for an opportunity to destroy the peace and recapture Jerusalem for the Caliphate. The check and restraint of the guardian naval power stationed in the Mediterranean is short-lived, as the now fully united ten nation confederacy floods the Land with overwhelming force (Isa 28:2, 15; 59:19; Dan 9:26, 11:22; Eze 38:9, 16; Rev 12:15-16), whereupon he captures Jerusalem (Zech 14:2), enters and defiles the “holy place” by taking away the regular burn offering and placing the abomination of desolation, as he exalts himself “above all that is called God or that is worshipped” (Dan 11:31; 36-37; Mt 24:15; 2Thes 2:4) and begins 3 1/2 years of treading down the holy city (Isa 28:18; 63:18; Mic 5:5; Dan 8:13; ; Lk 21:24; Rev 11:2).

Now the question: Why and how would Israel in the modern context ever so completely relax their guard as to be taken as much by surprise as they were on Oct 7? How does Israel come to such a presumption of peace as described in Isa 28:14-18; Eze 38:8, 11, 14; 39:26; 1Thes 5:3?

I would propose that this comes, not only when peace is initially declared and internationally imposed upon dissenters, but it comes with the glaze of false security that will steal over the minds of the population when the ships of Kittim (US? NATO?) turn back the threat of the AC’s second southward advance. This is when the boast of peace and safety will soar (Amos 9:9-10; Isa 28:14-18; 1Thes 5:3).

I’ve always speculated that the ill-fated declaration of 1Thes 5:3 has most particularly to do with what Israel will feel after the ships of Chittim have successfully checked the second southward advance of the northern king. After such a show of seemingly impregnable protection, the peace will ‘seem’ invincible.

Now ask this question: How formidable would the naval power have to be that can halt and turn back the man who in just the next verse (Dan 11:30-31) will rally and return, this time with a confederacy of ten nations united in their commitment to overwhelm and destroy, not only unsuspecting Israel, but the west may very well find itself suddenly incapacitated, unable to mount a successful resistance against the Antichrist’s all prevailing military supremacy? (Dan 11:31with Rev 13:4).

Could this happen in conjunction with an unexpected nuclear strike on the west? That’s where I see the cumulative evidence pointing.

There will be gaps in our knowledge and doubtless surprises, as more becomes un-sealed as the day approaches, but who will not consider that the unprecedented alignment of foretold events happening right before our eyes represent giant steps that perfectly align with what prophecy gives us to expect?

A fragile peace appears to be in the making, potentially unprecedented and against all odds only two years ago. When consolidated and set in place, a growing sense of security will doubtless follow. At length, the growing presumption of lasting security will become the ill-fated boast of Isa 28:15, 18; 1Thes 5:3. That boast is against the warning that prophetic witnesses will be sounding throughout the nations (Ps 19:4).

The warning will be generally dismissed at first, it will continue to speak to Israel during the time of their wilderness flight from the face of the Antichrist (Isa 28:16-19; Dan 11:32-33; 12:3; Rev 12:6, 7-14). The Antichrist’s pursuit of Jewish blood must continue until the light of the gospel breaks through the veil, as the penitent Jewish survivors of the tribulation see the one whom the nation pierced coming in the clouds of divine glory (Zech 12:10; Mt 24:30; 26:64; 1Thes 4:17; Rev 1:7). It is no accident that our president confidently announced, “eternal peace in the Mideast!”.

That declaration, while the equivalent of Jeremiah’s, “Peace, peace!” When there is no peace (Jer 6:14; 8:11), is no less a piece of sovereign divine providence. Such an extravagant expression of optimism reveals the very self-reliant humanism that boasts of accomplishing by natural means what God has reserved to Himself alone, namely, “eternal peace in the Mideast” by the long-awaited advent of the Prince of Peace. “Not by might nor by power but by My Spirit says the Lord!”

So let us guard against the tendency to assume that the long-awaited peace will necessarily include the Antichrist’s confirmation of the covenant that starts the last seven. It may but it may not.

Recognition of the futurity of Dan 11:21-35 leads us to consider that the covenant of Dan 9:27 may be more than a presumed “peace treaty” with the Antichrist. It is more likely his confirmation (strengthening / support / endorsement) of the “holy covenant” of Dan 11:22, 28, 30, 32.

This has implications for the revival of the ancient sacrifice and restoration of the “holy place” in the temple at Jerusalem (Mt 24:15; 2Thes 2:4). Hence, we must be careful and cautious to distinguish things that are not the same, lest we misidentify and thus mislead.

To be sure, at some point, what could hardly be imagined only two years ago, will exist. There will be a disarming illusion of peace, doubtless protected by one or more of the great world powers.

In its early stages, this remarkable achievement may not immediately include the AC’s “confirmation” (recognition) of the covenant of Dan 9:27, but it will be the framework that makes provision for it.

Why this caution? According to Dan 9:4; 11:22, 28, 30, 32, the covenant is not merely a peace pact, as many have perhaps too hastily assumed. In all other uses of the word throughout the book of Daniel, the covenant is God’s covenant with Israel. So if the covenant of Dan 9:27 signifies nothing more than a peace pact, this one verse would be the only exception. However, if the covenant of Dan 9:27 is the same as THE “holy covenant” of Dan 11:28, 30, a whole new vista comes into consideration.

This would mean that the AC, with “many” others, will be confirming the very covenant that has come down through Abraham’s promise of the Land, through Moses’ institutions of temple service, and through David’s acquisition of the elect city of Jerusalem. If this is the “covenant” that the AC confirms to begin the final 7 [years], then it is more than a peace pact with the AC.

Yes, a preceding peace agreement will certainly need to be in place for the “holy covenant” to be confirmed, whether as part of the initial peace plan or a later event made possible by the peace plan. In other words, it is at least possible that the covenant (assuming it is the same as the “holy covenant” of Dan 9:4; 11:22, 28, 30, 32), may not be confirmed at the same moment the peace is first initiated. It remains to be seen.

In this case, it is NOT the peace agreement that starts the seven years but the confirming of the covenant, even the covenant that Dan 11:28, 30 calls the “holy covenant”. Although inextricably related, the peace plan that may soon be implemented may not immediately include the confirmation of the “holy covenant”.

It is possible the peace plan may come into play and be agreed on by the major parties and exist for some time before the AC confirms the holy covenant. It is also possible that the he is only one of “many” nations that will unite to acknowledge, not only Israel’s right to exist, but their right to temple access to sacrifice again.

As remote as such an eventuality may seem at the moment, it MUST come about, since for the sacrifice to be stopped, it must first be started, and it must conform to the pattern of the past in the passages where Antiochus serves as an importantly instructive type.

So we must guard the delicate balance between watchful vigilance and hasty presumption, but we must also be prepared in the scriptures to “instruct many”, not only in the tribulation but even now. We need to show others how to show others how the signs that confirm certainty can be recognized with certainty.

In short, God doesn’t waste ink! These things were revealed to be unsealed in their appointed time, that the one who reads may run (Dan 12:3 with Hab 2:2-3).

There may be much that remains unclear, but sufficient clarity is given that many of the false alarms of prophetic speculation can be safely ruled out as incongruent with the scripture.

“Hope deferred makes the heart sick” (Prov 13:12). Great confusion threatens where these distinctions are not taken into account and carefully considered.

In His precious service, Reggie

The post Discerning the Beginning of Daniel’s Seventieth Seven appeared first on Mystery of Israel.

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

As never before, the whole flow of history is moving exactly in the direction that the plain person’s plain reading of prophecy would have led them to expect. God Himself has made the issue of Israel and the so-called, “Jewish question” a watershed of international division.

Just imagine trying to explain the irrevocable election of Israel, based on grace alone, to a generation that is being fast pre-conditioned, almost overnight, to despise the very suggestion of such an unthinkable notion. Talk about a calculated offense!

So yes, how we see the times we’re in does indeed come down to a question of one’s hermeneutics, but also to a question of the heart.

The pragmatic pastor will want to ask, how is this relevant to the gospel? If a pure gospel is well established in the heart, isn’t that enough? Shouldn’t such details of prophetic speculation be left to the mystery that God intended, nice to know but not critical, since the sheep will surely make it through, come what may?

Indeed, the gospel and the saving righteousness of Christ is centermost. But this center has a Divinely chosen context that must not be neglected, not only for our benefit, but much more importantly, for the glory that God has invested in His foretold plan, precious to savor at all times, but particularly now, as chaos and deception is about to explode on a scale eclipsing anything ever witnessed before.

We must remember that the NT revelation of the mystery of the gospel is built around Christ’s coming, departure, and return to Israel, specifically the Mount of Olives from whence He ascended. He must return to the place where He was crucified under the placard that said, “This is Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.”

Why end the age just there, in that physical locality? Why has God constructed the end of the age around an ancient land dispute that is divinely calculated to plunge the nations into an insoluble crisis from which none will be able to extricate themselves? (Zech 12:2-3). Why would God bind together the issue of the mystery of the gospel with the mystery of Israel?

I would submit that part of the answer regards His deliberate intention that both comings would be surrounded by an element of mystery, designed to elude the pride of self-reliance (Mt 11:25-26), just as Paul warns in Ro 11:25. Just as the mystery of Christ’s twofold coming so deeply searched and tested Jewish hearts, just so, the mystery of Israel is designed to test and sift the hearts of the nations, even gentile believers.

But there is one important difference: The mystery of Christ’s cross and twofold coming was not only hidden from Peter and the disciples (Mt 16:22; Lk 18:34); it was hidden even from the angelic powers (1Cor 2:7-8). Not so the mystery surrounding the Lord’s return.

Those well marked days will only come “as a thief” upon the unregenerate church and the unbelieving world, but not upon the faithful children of the light (1Thes 5:4). We know this because Daniel’s prophecy is clear that the vision will be unsealed and known to the wise (maskilim) at the time of the end. They will be doing great exploits, instructing many, and turning many to righteousness, even a countless number will be saved out of, “the tribulation, the great one” (Rev 7:14; noting the significant double use of the definite article).

But the larger answer to the question has all to do with the completion of an ancient covenant promise. It is the age-ending climax of the “everlasting covenant” that forms the framework of the future. In the larger context of God’s eternal purpose in Christ, this is what defines how and why the age ends just as the prophecy of both testaments so fully describes.

Towards the goal of seeing the big picture, I believe the Lord Jesus Himself has given us the key to establish what I like to call a “plumbline of simplicity” that will align and pull many of the strands together into a coherent clarity. The object will not only be to know what is most important to know, but how best to show others how to make the case from scripture without getting bogged down in details, in a way that will equip others to equip others.

If observed, I believe God has given us an amazing, and now especially timely, provision to equip the body, not only to escape the manifold forms of end-time deception, but to have the Lord’s own, personally commended key of interpretation that will enable them to “instruct many” and “turn many” to righteousness” (Dan 11:32-33; 12:3, 10).

I would like to expand a little on how Daniel aligns and sets in order, not only the end-time events, but also the whole covenantal framework of the judgments and promises, as traced from Gen 3:15 to the final perfection of the last two chapters of Revelation.

Daniel is the key to organizing the whole of scripture around the main themes of kingdom, covenant, and mystery. But it is Jesus’ Olivet prophecy in particular, and the emphasis He puts on one centermost event, that becomes the key that opens not only Daniel, but also sets all the prophecies spoken concerning the coming day of the Lord in clearest covenant context.

Referencing and building upon Moses and the earlier prophets, Daniel gives us not only the timeline and the order of events related to both comings, but he also reminds us of the covenant curses that must continue until Israel’s everlasting deliverance and final security in the Land, all in glorious analogy to the story of Joseph and his brothers (compare Mic 5:3-4, with Zech 12:10).

Rightly instructed believers will weep with those who weep, not only in their bitter distress, but in the glory that will break upon the beleaguered survivors of Israel when they will look upon Him whom they pierced and say with one voice, “Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!” (Mt 23:39).

In this way, we can begin to see God’s mind and purpose behind the great judgments and the unrestrained evils that would be otherwise inexplicable, and the occasion for the greatest offense to the natural mind.

But back to my point:

In my experience I found that when I chose to take very seriously Jesus’ command to read and understand Daniel’s prophecy concerning the abomination of desolation, I was challenged when I saw that this light did not come to him until he first, “set his heart to understand”. Looking to understand this particular event and its full significance, I would be astonished at just how much more this simple obedience would open to discovery in pulling the great strands of biblical themes together. Jesus well knew what simple compliance to His wise directive to pay attention to Daniel would set in motion.

Not only did I discover the event, and the events that follow throughout the second half of the week, I discovered a number of events that would mark and distinguish the first half. What a priceless advantage this first half of the week will provide the body for their readiness for the second half. We will see it coming!

But more than all of this, Daniel became the key to what I like to call, “the glory of the story”. This is because Daniel, like no other book, reaches all the way back to Israel’s beginnings and outlines the whole sweep of Israel’s history of crisis and covenant discipline, reaching to its glorious resolution in the kingdom that has come on earth as it is in heaven.

It is important to note that the abomination of desolation is the very event that Paul was careful to elaborate during his short, three-week stay with the Thessalonians. This should underscore the importance he attached to Jesus’ Olivet prophecy and His emphasis on Daniel’s order of events.

We know this because when the false alarm arose that Christ’s return was immediately imminent, he corrected the error by appealing to what he had gone over with them on his earlier visit. “Do you not remember that when I was yet with you, I told you these things?” (2Thes 2:5).

Paul speaks of a coming man who is yet to be revealed. He will be possessed of “all power”, capable of signs, wonders, and cunning deception. He will enter the temple of God in Jerusalem (Mt 24:15-16), and there, exalt himself above all that is called God or that is worshipped (2Thes 2:4). But there are some dots we need to connect.

Jesus doesn’t mention the man, but only this event and its location (“Judea”). But both Paul and Jesus use language that is taken almost verbatim from Daniel chapter 11, where both the man and the event are described within four verses of each other (see Dan 11:31-37). So the scripture itself shows us how the dots should be connected.

Manifestly, Paul did not regard knowledge of the basic order of endtime events as a matter of no serious concern. Notice Paul’s urgent tone when he echoes the Lord’s similar grave warnings concerning the peril of deception on this very matter. “Let no man deceive you by any means!”

You can almost hear the exclamation point.

That sounds like the beginning of Jesus’ opening answer to His disciple’s question, “What shall be the sign of your coming and the end of the age?” Significantly, Jesus’ first words were, “take heed that no man deceive you”, again, the exclamation point. No other theme is so repeatedly reinforced throughout His prophetic discourse.

Paul’s response to the error concerning the order of events preceding the Lord’s return implies that something far more serious was being threatened than to merely prompt the slackers and busybodies to return to their ‘day jobs’ and occupy till He comes, as some commentators seem content to assume. Rather, Paul is seeing where this error can lead in light of the confusion that Jesus warned would reign, particularly over thie time and manner of His return (Mt 24:23-31).

The abomination of desolation is THE prophetic key to the believer’s preparation to instruct many of the meaning, not only of the events of those days, but the great issue of the promise of an “everlasting righteousness” that is the Lord’s own righteousness, available to believers now, but promised to come to all the penitent survivors of Israel in that great day (Isa 45:17, 24-25; 54:17, Jer 23:5-6; Dan 9:24). This is the glorious free gift that gives hope and meaning and comfort, even in the face of the staggering evil, deception, and suffering of those days, like the shattering event we so recently witnessed on Oct 7, a tragic foretaste of Zech 14:2.

But clarity concerning this decisive event achieves much more than might first appear. The abomination of desolation cannot happen in a vacuum. It must be preceded by certain definite, traceable events and preconditions.

For one thing, before a sacrifice can be removed it must exist. If it does not now exist, it must start. But before it can start, a long-standing stalemate must yield to a radical change in the current status quo. For these kinds of necessary preliminary conditions to come about, we may expect seismic changes to come to the region, sufficient to move nations from their former intransigence to make unprecedented concessions for peace.

The logic is clear. In order for the Jews to have sufficient access to the forbidden Temple Mount, some kind of political peace arrangement, however presently remote, seems necessarily implied, and indeed foretold in scripture (compare Isa 28:15, 18; Eze 38:8, 11, 14; 39:26; Dan 9:27; 11:21, 23-24, 31; Mt 24:15-16; 1Thes 5:3). You see then how those who will have obeyed the Lord’s command to search out and understand this particular event foretold by Daniel, will also be able to recognize at least some of the preceding events that signal its approach.

This is where an understanding of Daniel’s 70th week will prove invaluable for the church’s readiness. For this, we must see God’s investment in the first half of the week as a divine strategy to prepare the church for the second half. But for this, we must see that the 70th week did not follow the 69th week in unbroken succession.

I will give only the briefest possible argument why the 70th week must be seen as future. The basic, highly condensed argument is this:

Dan 12:1-2, 7, 11, particularly vers 11, will show beyond reasonable dispute that the abomination of desolation, with the simultaneous removal of the daily sacrifice, starts the last 3 ½ years (the half week of Dan 7:25; 9:27; 12:7; Rev 11:2-3; 12:6, 14; 13:5). It is the ‘time like no other’, also called, “great tribulation” and “the time of Jacob’s trouble” (Jer 30:7; Dan 12:1; Mt 24:21: Rev 7:14).

Observe that this last and greatest tribulation on earth ends with nothing short of the final deliverance of Daniel’s people and the resurrection of the righteous dead, including Daniel’s personal resurrection (Dan 12:1-2, 13). Thus, it is not far to see that this is the event that divides the final week in two equal halves in Dan 9:27.

So far as it is agreed that the 69th week terminates at the cross of Christ (i.e., Messiah “cut off”; Dan 9:26 with Isa 53:8), nothing within the range of the seven years following the cross arrived at the kind of “end” / “consummation” as described in Daniel, most particularly Dan 12:1-2. Advocates of the unbroken continuity of the 70 sevens are hard pressed to identify what events within that time frame can be said to fulfill the goals reached at the end of final the 3 ½ years, most specifically and undeniably the deliverance of Daniel’s people (Jews / “natural branches”) and the resurrection of the righteous (Dan 12:1-2, 7, 11).

Therefore, to speak of an unbroken continuity between the 69th and 70th weeks is highly anticlimactic, to say the least. Such would be a complete short-fall of the end goals, not only of Dan 9:24, but of Daniel’s apocalyptic visions in general, all of which were aimed at the final and eternal end of exile and the coming in of the post-tribulational kingdom of God on earth at the end of the last persecution.

Time forbids an account of the genius and logic of all six goals of the seventy sevens (Dan 9:24) and the mystery of the interim that divides the 70th seven from the former 69 weeks of years, but for now, our purpose must be limited to underscore how invaluable this knowledge will be in preparing the church, now, but even more especially in the first half of the week for what it must be to Israel and the nations in the second half that ends in Christ’s post-tribulational return at the Day of the Lord.

This strategic advantage threatens to be lost to the church’s benefit unless we are able to identify the distinguishing markers that show we have entered into the first half of the week. I offer this brief quote from G. H. Lang (beloved mentor of F. F. Bruce) from his, “The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel”:

“When this agreement shall have been confirmed, the wise will know that the final seven 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, having been told beforehand by this prophecy. Then will it be seen in fullness that the knowledge of prophetic scripture is simply priceless.”

I conclude with this appeal: Certainly every inch of ground in the confusing smorgasbord of eschatological options is hard fought and hard won, but there are keys of simplicity that make a plain path through the maze. One of those keys I have mentioned, but just how best to use that key to equip the church belongs to another discussion.

But regardless, whether you believe the preterist position that the abomination and the great tribulation is past already, or the classic dispensational view that the Olivet prophecy is to be seen as “Jewish ground”, not directly applicable to the church that is expected to be gone during this time. In any event, I soberly appeal to you to at least treat the grave warnings of deception and the antidote that Jesus prescribes with at least a ‘just in case’ sense of responsibility for the sake of your flocks.

If Jesus put such stress on the relationship of this event to offset some of the prevailing deceptions of “those days”, such as the present massive upsurge of antisemitism, just reflect on how regrettable it would be if you had failed to prepare those under your care with at least the means to recognize these things if you might just happen to be sincerely mistaken.

All’s to say, a careful knowledge of Daniel’s prophecy of the end is a pain well worth taking. It is only as we are instructed that we will be in a position to instruct (Dan 11:33; 12:3).

If Paul can rightly call the living church of the living God “the pillar and ground of truth” (1Tim 3:15), it would seem inconceivable that the last witness of the gospel to Israel and the nations would be made in its absence. If we take the view that to be alive “in Christ”, whether before, during, or after the tribulation, is necessarily to be part of His body, then it follows that “the voice of the bridegroom AND of the bride” (Rev 18:23) will be heard far and wide during a final witness, sealed in the blood of the tribulation martyrs (compare Dan 7:21; 11:35; 12:10; Mt 24:14; Rev 6:10-11; 12:11; 13:7, 15; 14:6; 20:4).

The post The Olivet Key to Daniel’s Prophecy of the End appeared first on Mystery of Israel.

Where in Scripture is it revealed that we should expect an indefinite time gap between weeks 69 and 70?
This cannot be obtained from a straightforward reading of the text.

The gap is what can be called a necessary inference. As with many great truths of scripture, it is not based on one single, obvious text but the cumulative evidence of many verses, scattered here and there, forming a mystery that must be searched out.

What is clear and, as you say, “straightforward”, is that scripture puts the last half of Daniel’s 70th week as arriving at “the consummation / the end”. This end of the age, reaching to the end of the final tribulation, the destruction of the “beast” (Dan 7:11) / “little horn” (Dan 7:8: 8:9) / “vile person” (Dan 11:21) / “wilful king” (Dan 11:36), the deliverance of Daniel’s people, and the resurrection of the righteous dead (Dan 12:1-2) is the same “end” so prominently in view throughout the book of Daniel. There is great, I would say decisive evidence that the final 3 ½ years of this age is the last half of Daniel’s 70th week.

This final 3 1/2 years (the half week) of unequaled tribulation clearly begins with the taking away of the daily sacrifice. This removal of the sacrifice is coupled with the placing of the abomination of desolation by the Man of Lawlessness in the temple of God in Judea (This is seen by a careful comparison of Dan 9:27; 11:31, 36-37; 12:11; with Mt 24:15-16, 21; 2Thes 2:3-4).

This question becomes of supreme importance when we see that in Mt 24:15 Jesus instructs His disciples to read about this particular event in Daniel’s prophecy and to be careful to “understand” it. This is important because this is the specific sign that starts the great tribulation that ends in His return.

The decisive question then becomes: which of the two princes distinguished in Dan 9:25-26 stops the sacrifice in the middle of the week in Dan 9:27? If it is said to be Jesus stopping the sacrifice by the shedding of His blood, this argues for a spiritual cessation, since the sacrifice was not literally stopped but continued for some 37 more years until Jerusalem was destroyed by Titus. Also, Jesus did not confirm any covenant for only 7 years. And what kind of “end” was reached 3 1/2 years after the sacrifice was stopped?

Notice that in every other place in Daniel where the sacrifice is mentioned, it is always the wicked, self-exalting “little horn” / “vile person” / wilful king that takes it away (Dan 8:11; 11:31; 12:11). So, if Dan 9:27 is NOT the AC who starts the final 3.5 years of great tribulation (cf., Dan 12:1; Mt 24:21), then Dan 9:27 becomes a curious exception.

This would be to suppose that the sacrifice that is stopped 3.5 years before the end in Dan 9:27 is NOT the same sacrifice that is taken away 3.5 years before an entirely different “end” in Dan 12:1-2, 7, 11-13. In such a case, it becomes an entirely different and separate event in both time and circumstance, accomplished by different persons, and bringing about a different “end” that is not the same as the “end” mentioned in every other reference throughout the book.

If, on the other hand, the last half of the week begins WHEN the self exalting “prince that shall come” of Dan 9:26 stops the sacrifice and places the abomination (the event that brings on the final desolation of Jerusalem), then it follows that just as the 7 weeks, followed by the subsequent 62 weeks bring us to the cross (Messiah “cut off”; Dan 9:26 with Isa 53:8); in the same way, the 70th week is reserved to bring in the final seven years to fulfill the mystery of lawlessness in the revelation of the man of lawlessness, the event that Paul puts as necessarily preceding Christ’s return to gather together His elect (compare Mt 24:31 with 2Thes 2:1-4, 7-8).

So if the one who stops the sacrifice is indeed the prince that shall come of Dan 9:26 (the one who brings on the final desolation of Jerusalem), then this is indeed the second half of the week that ends with the destruction of the “desolator” at Christ’s return (Dan 7:11; 9:27; 2Thes 2:8). And since the one who stops the sacrifice is the same who confirms the covenant, it follows that as surely as the career of the AC does not immediately follow the 69th week, so surely the 70th week must be future.

Lastly, some of the goals that are reached by the 70 weeks concern Jerusalem and Daniel’s people in particular. Some of these were certainly NOT fulfilled seven years after the cross. The full balance of the six goals will, however, be gloriously fulfilled for the languishing Jews (“natural branches”) when the Deliverer comes (roars) out of Zion to turn away ungodliness from Jacob (Joel 3:16; Isa 59:20-21; Ro 11:26).

If this all sounds strange on first hearing, be patient, and pray for light and the Spirit to be your teacher, remembering too that the book of Daniel contains mysteries that were intended to remain closed up and “sealed” till the “time of the end”. These sealed mysteries are not automatic to Bible reading. They are precious, divinely guarded secrets designed to be revealed to babes while at the same time eluding human self reliance. They are grace given.

Proverbs 25:2
It is the glory of God to conceal a thing:
but the honor of kings is to search out a matter.

There is so much more connected to this question. I wrote a little piece called, “The Glory of the Gap” where I give many examples throughout scripture where prophecies blend and combine events that prove in hindsight to be fulfilled at great distances apart. You’ll also recall that many messianic prophecies combined events that would be fulfilled at both His first and second comings.

Until the surprise discovery that the Messiah would come twice (Acts 3:18-21; 26:22-23), the gap would remain a mystery, even to the prophets, until the part that was fulfilled at Christ first coming opened to view the part that awaited His return. All would come to full, glorious light when the Spirit “sent down from heaven” would reveal the glory of the “the mystery of the gospel,” as fully foretold in the prophetic writings, but kept till the appointed time of revelation (Ro 16:25-26; 1Cor 2:7-8; Eph 6:19 with 1Pet 1:1-12).

Yours in the Beloved, Reggie

The post How Do You Justify the Gap Between the 69th and 70th Week? appeared first on Mystery of Israel.

“It is clear the nameless one (described in Dan 10:4-11:1) is the Lord Jesus given clear unity with Revelation 1. How do you understand His being delayed and receiving help from Michael to release the word?”

Even among those commentators who see verses 5-9 as depicting a pre-incarnate appearing of Christ, most will argue that beginning at verse 10, another figure has come into view. The proposed change from Christ to an angel is assumed only because it is thought to be inconceivable that the pre-incarnate Son could need angelic assistance to push past the resistance of the demon Prince of Persia to complete his errand to Daniel (Dan 10:13).

[And what a strategic errand it was! It was to be an exceptionally long, uninterrupted (two chapters), unparalleled, narrative style prophecy that would lay out in astonishing detail “what shall befall your (Daniel’s) people in the latter days.” No wonder the demonic realm was so invested to impede the messenger’s mission. It is important to note what this mighty, history-determining breakthrough of divine revelation cost Daniel, as well as the place that sovereign providence had brought him in preparation for it.]

Yet, does the view that an angel has stepped in in place of the glorious Christ really solve our problem? It still leaves the question, why would the holy angels, sent by God, ever be successfully detained? Wouldn’t it be expected that the only assistance they would need to fulfill their mission would be amply supplied by God Himself? What then is this mystery of demonic resistance? What is its purpose in the great scheme of God’s eternal purpose? Why the struggle?

Could it be that God desires a concerted effort of participation by those who are partakers of His divine nature in a relationship of union? I like the following explanation by commentator, Gleason Archer:

“While God can, of course, override the united resistance of all the forces of hell if he chooses to do so, he accords to demons certain limited powers of obstruction and rebellion somewhat like those he allows humans. In both cases the exercise of free will in opposition to the Lord of heaven is permitted by him when he sees fit. But as Job 1:12 and 2:6 indicate, the malignity of Satan is never allowed to go beyond the due limit set by God, who will not allow the believer to be tested beyond his limit (1 Cor 10:13).”

More than this, why has God made believing prayer so much the issue in His fluctuating war with the fallen powers of this age? Apparently, the holy angels receive their strength over the demon princes of this age according to this rule: when the flesh is weak and its power broken, when the heart is tender and contrite, the veil of the flesh gives way to life, light, and revelation. Where this deep breaking has occurred, there is a corresponding release of the Spirit that grants great access and mountain moving power in prayer.

This is the secret that gives prayer its power. It is the issue of the veil. The strength of the veil to hide and blind is through the strength of carnal self reliance. When the power of the flesh is broken, the veil gives way to transforming revelation of the liberating light of the gospel (Deut 32:36; Dan 12:7; 2Cor 3:14-18; 4:4, with Isa 25:7).

Therefore, my answer would be, the demonic resistance, like the mystery of lawlessness itself, exists for the glory of grace. As Paul says, we have been brought into the fellowship of a hidden mystery, namely, that through the church (composed of necessarily weak, the frail jars of clay), the manifold wisdom of God is being demonstrated, even to the principalities and powers. This is all “according to His eternal purpose” (Eph 3:9-11).

The design in this conflict comprehends the whole story of God’s foretold work. Manifestly, He hasn’t merely permitted the resistance, He has ordained it as indispensable to an eternal purpose that had no beginning in time. In this light, it is not inconceivable that Christ should choose to require angelic assistance, particularly if Michael’s arrival was inseparably related to Daniel’s self abasement and prayer.

Not only here in Dan 10:13-21, but all of history proceeds from a pre-ordained purpose to permit a demonic resistance under Satan to hinder and oppose the coming of the kingdom on earth (compare Dan 10:13, 20; Rev 12:10). These are the opposing angelic powers that stand over and behind the great usurping kingdoms of man.

So the resistance was perfectly ordained from the beginning to serve the greater plan of God, since in no other way could His eternal purpose in Christ be realized (see Ro 8:19-21). By the same pre-creation decision, God has predetermined the bounds of this resistance (“who says to the proud waves, this far and no further”).

This is why we see the threefold seven (21 days). It is also why we see such language as “the set time to favor Zion” (Ps 102:13), with many such predetermined time indicators, (e.g., “time appointed” (Dan 11:27); “seventy weeks are determined” (Dan 9:24); “that which is determined shall be done” (Dan 11:36) and many more.

Yet, none of this takes place apart from the equally preordained, indispensable means of grace, chiefly, in this case, as in so many since, “the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man.”

We may be sure that nothing of the end time victory of the church over the beast, and the witness by which gentile believers will make Israel jealous, will happen apart from this supreme grace of prevailing prayer.

This brings to mind what I see as a principal divine use of the first half of Daniel’s 70th week. I call it the “straightening (or constraining) of the church”. This is when the well defined signs of the first half of the week mark the near approach of the tribulation, which begins with the removal of the regular sacrifice and the placing of the abomination in the temple in Jerusalem (Dan 9:27; 11:31; 12:11; Mt 25:15-16; 2Thes 2:4; Rev 11:2).

The signs that confirm the final week has begun are divinely calculated to move the living members of Christ’s body to a deeper place of corporate intercession.

Through deep self-abasement and a Daniel-like depth of spiritual travail (Gal 4:19), not only will the church come to the promised maturity (Eph 4:13), but the mighty Michael will again be sent, this time to fully and finally expel Satan himself (not merely one of his ‘princes’) from his present position of hindrance in heaven. This happens significantly in the middle of the week at the threshold of the final persecution.

With Michael’s middle of the week expulsion of Satan (Dan 12:1; Rev 12:7-14), the mystery of lawlessness can be revealed in the full empowerment (we believe incarnation) of the man of lawlessness (2Thes 2:7-9). It is this great event in heaven that intersects with the key, signal event on earth (the abomination of desolation) that sets the last 3 1/2 years in motion (the half week of Dan 7:25; 9:27; 12:7, 11; Rev 11:2-3; 12:6, 14; 13:5). This great transition in heaven and earth must first take place before the the “mystery of God” can be “finished” with Christ’s return at the 7th trumpet (2Thes 2:3-8; Rev 10:7; 11:15; 12:10)

Seeing then that these things must be fulfilled before Christ’s can come, how urgent must the church become with strong cries that the necessary events fall soon into place, so that Satan might be dislodged from his position in heaven as the one who hinders? (compare Dan 10:13 with 1Thes 2:18; 2Thes 2:7; Rev 12:7:14). Perhaps we will not see this degree of intensity until the door of the final seven has closed fast behind us, but the evidence is strong that we will see it.

When the church will travail, Michael will prevail! That is to say, a considerable body of evidence from the scripture leads us to expect a convergence of God’s set time with a Daniel-like depth of holy travail of intercession. When this corporate cry comes up before God, Michael will prevail to cast down Satan. This makes possible the revelation of the mystery of lawlessness in the man of lawlessness that brings the overarching mystery of God to its predestined conclusion (2Thes 2:3-4; Rev 10:7).

This certainty of well marked, well defined events that establish the certainty of the time will prove a priceless provision for the preparation of the church and the release of kingdom power and authority that God has invested in “those days” of greatest transition from this age to the next (Dan 12:1; Mt 24:19, 21-22, 29)

By these clearly foretold events, the “wise” who “understand” (Heb. “maskilim”, simply the godly remnant) will be able to instruct many and turn many to righteousness (Dan 11:33, 12:3, 10; Rev 7:9, 13-14). From what we can observe by a careful comparison of parallel scriptures, the great transition that takes place in heaven to start the final tribulation will also result, not only in the revelation of the mystery of lawlessness, but also, on the side of light and truth, a mighty, Pentecost-like outpouring of power and strength (Rev 12:10) that will come upon, not only the two witnesses, but also the ‘maskilim’ (defined as the forerunner remnant appointed to teach and evangelize; Dan 11:33; 12:3, 10).

This can be seen by observing that the scripture reports a mighty power to do exploits coming upon the maskilim. This is significantly reported immediately after the placing of the abomination of desolation has been placed in Dan 11:31. Noting what we have seen about the great transition that removes the accuser from his long held access to heaven, and noting that the two witnesses receive power at this time (see below note), is it not significant that just now, with the placing of the abomination, the scripture announces the power of the maskilim to perform exploits amidst the final martyrdom? (Dan 11:32-35).

… the people who know their God shall be strong, and carry out great exploits … (Dan 11:32 NKJV)

[Note: That the ministry of the two prophets occupies the second half of the week is shown by observing that their death and ascension happens in connection with the 6th trumpet, which is also the 2nd woe. This is very “shortly” prior to Jesus’ return at the 7th trumpet, which is also the 3rd woe (compare Rev 8:13-9:1, 12-13; 11:11-15).]

Note too, it is just after Michael has cast Satan down that Satan begins his “short time” of rampage upon the “earth dwellers” (Rev 12:10-12). Again, it seems most significant that just here, we are told of the triumph of the saints.

“And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto death” (Rev 12:10).

Is it too far to infer that this glad boast of spiritual triumph (unparalleled?) is shown to immediately follow upon the removal of the accuser of the brethren (2Thes 2:7; Rev 12:10)? Surely this intends to indicate that something without equal or precedent has only now taken place in heaven that has completely and forever removed Satan, not only from his position of hindrance to the arrival of the kingdom by holding back the necessarily preliminary “mystery of lawlessness” (2Thes 2:7; Rev 12:10); he is also denied access to the now fully liberated consciences of sealed and fully secure believers.

He no longer has access to challenge or question the identity of the living members of Christ. Of course, this reality is available now to what the writer of Hebrews calls, “the full assurance of faith”, but here, this liberty of triumphant assurance and gospel clarity of conscience is being realized on, I would suggest, an unprecedented corporate scale as essential establishment in grace for the last battle. All’s to say, there has been a mighty, truly unprecedented breakthrough in the heavenlies, and this will have its outworking in the power that comes upon the saints who have been deeply processed by the events of the first half of the week.

This is not a metaphor for the entire inter-advent period, as some teach. It may indeed be a reiteration of the historical pattern of Christ’s victory over the Dragon, but this is clearly future, at the threshold of the final, very short tribulation. It particularly concerns Michael’s pre-tribulation victory over Satan, as foretold in Dan 12:1 and Rev 12:7-9). From this point on, in some unprecedented way, what Satan could do before, he can do no longer.

What will such a victory in heaven mean for the saints on earth when Satan will no longer have any more access to heaven to accuse them? That this has not yet come, even for such a saintly saint as Job is shown in Job 1:6, 9-12. The same removal of the accuser is foreshadowed in the case of Joshua, the high priest? (Zech 3:1), and will be even more fully enforced to the penitent survivors of the last tribulation when “… I will remove the iniquity of that land in one day.. (Zech 3:9 with Isa 66:8; Eze 39:22; Ps 102:13).

Such freedom from the accuser’s accusations will not, of course, be anything entirely new (Jn 5:24; Ro 8:1). It does, however, seem that from this point forward, as from no other, Satan will be completely cut off and cast down from whatever access to heaven he had before Michael’s pre-tribulational victory. Could this be why the saints of this time are spoken of as sealed, beyond reach of Satan’s accusations?

It certainly raises many interesting questions that will doubtless come to greater light as the time nears (Dan 12:4, 9).

The post Thoughts on the Mystery of Heavenly Hindrance appeared first on Mystery of Israel.

I am speaking of the “abomination of desolation”. This is the event that Jesus directs His disciples to “read and understand” (Mt 24:15). Jesus well knew that by obedience to His solemn command to identify and understand this event, it would become possible for His sheep to recognize a number of other preliminary signs that must precede and lead up to the abomination of desolation (Mt 24:15 with Dan 8:11-14; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11).

It is these well defined events, one that is particularly unmistakable, that will alert, awaken, and mobilize the saints for their finest hour of witness and triumph over Satan and the man of lawlessness. There is a divine strategy that God has invested in making the approximate time of His coming unmistakably clear to His saints when these key, preliminary signs will be in clear, unmistakable fulfillment.

But I don’t want to begin my answer by simply laying out the order of events leading to Christ’s return. We have done that often elsewhere. Instead, I want to point out the interpretive key that is essential to support and defend our view of the end from all other competing interpretations, both now and across the annals of church history.

It is crucial that this be in the hands and understanding of God’s people for the sake of the many that will be called upon to give an answer, as we expect that the manifest fulfillment of the prophecies on the open stage of history will prove the greatest evangelistic tool since the days of the early church (Dan 11:32-33; 12:3; Rev 7:9, 13-14).

This critical key of interpretation is found in the most unexpected place. By God’s design, the event that so clearly and indisputably holds all else in proper alignment is also the most misunderstood and commonly dismissed. I speak of the indispensable sign of the sacrifice.

I want to explain why this sign is such a gift to the body of Christ. It is not only an indispensable bulwark of defense against the great deception that will so profoundly test and expose the heart (Mk 13:23), but also the priceless advantage that this advance certainty will contribute towards the readiness and prophetic equipping of the coporate body of Christ for the final task of witness to Israel and the nations.

Without exception, every debacle of discrediting, disappointing false alarm can be traced to the misinterpretation or neglect of this event.

Although there are many other signs that will be visibly identifiable in advance of the tribulation, even in advance of the restored sacrificial ritual in the rebuilt sanctuary in Jerusalem, none are more unmistakable than this, and none more essential to avoid the common error of what I call, “separating the inseparable“.

Of all the signs that Jesus gives that He was careful to say are NOT a definite indication of the end (Mt 24:6, 14), He gives one sign in particular that marks the beginning of the unequaled, or “great tribulation” (Mt 24:15-16, 21). By deliberately sending His disciples to “read” and “understand” Daniel’s prophecy of this event, Jesus well knew they would be discovering a series of events that lead up to this great sign event. These events that must necessarily precede the abomination constitute what I’m calling, “the signs before the Sign“.

Jesus knew that when His command is obeyed, this key event would establish, not only what follows but what precedes. By locating the abomination, we discover other attending events that comprise a definite chronology of events leading up to this transitional event that will signal its approach well in advance of its actual arrival  (Isa 28:15, 18; Eze 38:8, 11, 14; Dan 9:27; 11:23-31; 1Thes 5:3).

The Hebrew word for those who will see the signs of the tribulation’s approach and understand their meaning are called the “maskilim”. The term means those having insight (Dan 11:32-33; 12:3, 10).  Armed with this knowledge, the maskilim of the end will rise to the occasion with mighty acts of soul winning witness that will “instruct many” (Dan 11:32-33; 12:3; Rev 7:9, 13-14).

When we obey the Lord’s directive to seek out this particular event in Daniel’s prophecy, we see that it is mentioned four times. Without exception, in every instance the abomination of desolation is immediately accompanied by the cessation of the daily sacrifice (Dan 8:11; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11). The removal of the sacrifice is manifestly part of the same event, since both take place at an equal distance, approximately 3 ½ years from the end (Dan 7:25; 9:27; 12:7, 11).

With rarest exception, since the earliest church fathers, every failed system of prophetic interpretation has this tendency to separate the removal of the sacrifice from the abomination of desolation. On this one error, they all run aground.

In order to stand, these systems of interpretation, whether amillennial, post-millennial, historicist (often subscribing to the infamous year day theory) must, necessarily, separate the removal of the regular sacrifice from the abomination of desolation. Yet, an honest exegesis will recognize that these are conjoined aspects of a single event that stand at an equal distance, approximately 3 1/2 years from the resurrection (Dan 12:1-2, 7, 11). How is this not plain to see?

Furthermore, it is typical to deny a future, literal temple. It is usually argued that the “temple of God” that the man of lawlessness enters at the end is metaphorical and not literal. But to maintain this, Paul’s reference to the temple in 2Thess 2:4 and the self exalting man of lawlessness must be disconnected from the abomination of desolation and the stopping of the continual sacrifice and located somewhere else along the biblical timeline.

But can the sacrifice be separated from the abomination that makes desolate? And can this event be separated from a literal “holy place” in Jerusalem? (Mt 24:15). And what of Paul’s nearly verbatim citation of Dan 11:36-37 to describe the man who exalts himself in the temple in 2Thes 2:4?

How can this future person who is destroyed by the Lord’s coming (2Thes 2:8) be separated from the event that Daniel mentions only five verses earlier? (Dan 11:31). Moreover, Dan 9:27; 12:1-2, 7, 11-13 will show decisively that the sacrifice is removed approximately 3 1/2 years before the final deliverance of Daniel’s people and the resurrection of the righteous. These inextricably related events cannot be separated and dislocated except by resorting to an elaborate system of side-stepping, which must deny or spiritualize the otherwise obvious.

What then should be the plain person’s reading of the plain language of the text? Regardless what other mysteries await the time of the end, one thing would have been clear to Daniel’s first readers: that is the manifest inseparability of the abomination of desolation from the removal of the daily sacrifice in the temple of God at Jerusalem. This is so important, because if this event can be established as impossible to separate exegetically, then God has graciously given us an unmistakable sign that will alert His saints of the approach of the tribulation in precious strategic advance of the outbreak of the final tribulation.

Note that this sacrifice and its removal is very distinguishable from any other similar event in history. According to Isa 63:18; 64:10-11, the tribulation temple that is appointed to destruction at the time of the end is one that has been only recently recovered to Jewish possession. Nothing in history answers to this description. In every other instance where the continual burnt offering has been stopped, it had been ongoing for centuries without interruption, whether in the case of Nebuchadnezzar, Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), or Titus.

This is without historical precedent. And if the holy place has stood only “a little while”, it follows that the sacrifice that will be stopped in the middle of the week has only recently been restarted. This is momentous! This kind of clarity and certainty will be a priceless mercy, not only to guard His saints against deception, but to unify, equip, and prepare them for the final thrust of gospel witness to Israel and the nations, with the sure and certain promise of an unparalleled harvest of souls as their reward (Dan 11:32-33; 12:3; Mt 24:14; Rev 7:9, 13-14; 14:6).

This brings me to my next point. I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the “strong delusion” that God Himself has decreed to send on those who will not receive the love of the truth (2Thes 2:9). What?! God sending a strong delusion?! This signals to us that a very provocative red line has already been crossed by much of the world’s population. I began to think about what this implies for the events leading up to this moment of the great divide.

I thought of the principle implicit in Jesus’ warning to the rulers of Jerusalem, “If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father (Jn 15:21). In the same way, we know that God would never send such a fatal strong delusion unless the world had not first been powerfully exposed to very compelling evidence (conspicuous prophetic signs), leaving them completely and totally without excuse.

The glorious upside of this dread reality for the persistently defiant is the blessed contemplation of what success and wide reach the message of warning and promise must have, even before the outbreak of the final tribulation. You see the logic.

Then there is the question of what will start the final week. Again, interpreters seem most always to separate the inseparable. Even among the few that recognize a future removal of the sacrifice in Dan 9:27; 12:11 3 ½ years before the end, most very wrongly regard the sacrifice in Dan 8:11; 11:31 as fulfilled entirely by Antiochus IV in the second century B.C.

Not only is this poor exegesis, it is a great loss, because there is great advantage to the saints in expecting a future fulfilment of the 2300 day prophecy, and especially the events of Dan 11:21-35, which are usually assigned to antiquity. This is to rob the body of Christ of a powerfully strategic checklist of future events that start with the “alliance” of Dan 11:23, and follow in perfect chronological order on to the abomination of desolation in verse 31.

Antiochus was indeed an invaluable type and pattern of the coming prince (Dan 7:8; 8:9; 9:26; 11:21, 36), but there are many important details that he did not fulfill, which conservative scholars seem to try to ‘force fit’ in order to defend the miraculous fulfillment of prophecy, while neglecting numerous particulars that call for a much more complete fulfillment in the future.

That is another rather involved debate, but suffice to say,  we understand that the covenant that Dan 9:27 has in view is the “holy covenant” of Dan 11:28, 30, and that this covenant is not “made”, but “confirmed” (in the sense of strengthened, or caused to prevail). If this is true, the implications are massive. This covenant obviously is a recognition and endorsement of a renewed temple service, since this is precisely what is being called, “the holy covenant”.

This also proves beyond dispute that, even while those who preside over the service of the temple remain unregenerate, as often is the case throughout much of biblical history, still, the commanded institutions, and their assigned location are regarded as holy by God (Mt 24:15; 2Thes 2:4 with Jn 2:16-17), just as Jerusalem under judgement is no less, “the holy city” (Rev 11:2). For this reason, Jerusalem and the temple are special targets of the Antichrist’s intense hatred for the “holy covenant” (Dan 11:28, 30).

By implication, the covenant that the Antichrist confirms is not just another peace arrangement, but a formal recognition and ostensible support for Jewish access to their historic institutions of temple and sacrifice. Furthermore, it presents the most amazing paradox, namely, that the most unholy human in history is giving visible consent and support to something that God and the Jewish people regard as holy. What paradox of circumstance could ever bring such a thing about?

There are many theories, some more viable than others. I have my own tentative view, but how it comes about is not so critical as knowing how to distinguish and identify the event when it happens. But there is delicacy here and we must be careful about a natural tendency to over presume how this will come about.

When we know the nature of the covenant that is being confirmed (“the holy covenant” of Dan 11:28, 30), even if the Antichrist is not clearly distinguishable from the “many” who may participate in endorsing the covenant, it will still be possible to know that the seven years have begun, since it will be known that the sacrifice is soon to start. Then, soon “after the league made with him”, he will proceed to fulfill the things written of him in Dan 11:21-31.

As mentioned, for a futurist interpretation that is not satisfied with the partial, pre-typical fulfillment by Antiochus IV of the second century B.C., verses 21-30 gives us the first half of the week in an orderly chronological sequence from the “alliance made with him” (verse 23) to the abomination of desolation in 11:31. Verses 31-45 is the second half of the week that ends in nothing short of the deliverance of Israel and the resurrection (Dan 12:1-2, 7, 11).

That said, provided we can be settled that the events of Dan 11:23-30 are yet future, the believer will be able to observe his actions during the first half of the week. Immediately
“after the league made with him …”, Dan 11:23-30 reveals a clear chronological order of events that describe in great detail his strategic military movements and conquests leading up to the point where he places the abomination of desolation (Dan 11:31; 12:11). This begins the last half of the week that is chronicled from verse 31-45. Dan 12:1-13 is a recap of Dan 11:31-45 (compare also Rev 12:7-14).

We have charted out elsewhere why we believe he is a small, very likely fledgling new power (a “little horn — becoming strong with a small people”) in the region somewhere to the north of Israel. If so, he may very well be identifiable by the time he steps forward to confirm the covenant. But is the covenant he confirms, whether by expediency or political necessity, one that already exists?

If the covenant of Dan 9:27 is rightly identified with the “holy covenant” of Dan 11:28, 30, it has certainly existed since Abraham. Will recognition of Jewish right to sacrifice and worship on the temple mount be required to secure the peace? That seems to be the best inference to be drawn from a comparison of Dan 9:27 with Dan 11:23.

Evidently, the alliance of 11:23 takes place in conjunction with his endorsement and support of the covenant of Dan 9:27. In any event, even if some of this remains to be seen, what cannot, and certainly should not, be missed is that the end cannot come apart from the reinstatement of the regular sacrifice. This will be a sign before the Sign, certainly only one of many others.

This will be public. So the saints will have every opportunity to see the tribulation coming before it arrives when these things begin to take place, and those who will not see will have no excuse in the sight of God.

And while we know that Israel will be under a false, disarming illusion of peace when their final suffering comes upon them unexpectedly (though soberly warned in advance by prophetic witnesses; see Isa 28), it is possible, and from the context of Dan 11:24, probable that some measure of peace will already be in place when he joins the alliance. We must hold fast to the text and be restrained in our presumptions.

There will be much that may surprise when the time comes but Jesus gives us the key that sends us to Daniel to learn a number of things that will be no surprise at all, because they will be unmistakable and certain. There will be signs before the sign that will be public and knowable. When Jesus says, “when you therefore will see”, He certainly expects this event to be recognized and acted upon.

It is no mystery that if a sacrifice that has not been in existence since 70 A.D. is to be taken away 3 ½ years before the end, it must first be started. As a “sign spoken against”, the return of the sacrifice is calculated to spark tremendous controversy. It will be the proverbial, “talk of the town”. It will be a paradigm shift for an unwary Christendom. At first, we may expect it to be forthrightly rejected by many mainline denominations and traditions. Yet, we may hope and trust that as things progress, more and more will have their eyes opened to consider and begin to understand the much larger picture that this implies for the imminence of Jacob’s trouble and the refinement and purification of the Bride for the day of translation. It will be a trumpet call to awaken, correct, and unify the the body of Christ for its final mission to the Jew first and also to the nations.

As Joseph received revelation of the seven before the seven, even so, we have received knowledge of the marked off and well signaled 3 ½ before the 3 ½ . If God’s people are duly prepared to show the case from scripture, this will be the opportunity for the awakening and sending of many into the harvest. It is this certainty that will move the living members of Christ’s body to a Daniel-like intercession that will receive the same help from Michael in the casting down of Satan that Daniel received in the removal of the opposing prince of Persia (see Dan 10:13; 12:1 with Rev 12:7-14).

As the heavens are cleared of Satan’s ability to hinder and oppose, very significantly, immediately after mention of the abomination of desolation in Daniel 11:31, the scripture says, “and the people that know their God shall be strong and do exploits, and they that understand among the people shall instruct many, and they that be wise shall turn many to righteousness” (Dan 11:31-33; 12:3).

It is not incidental that it is just here, at the start of the final 42 months that the two witnesses receive power (Rev 11:2-3). Satan’s expulsion has cleared heaven of his presence and while this will mean great woe for the earth dwellers, with the revelation of the mystery of lawlessness and the rage of Satan (Rev 12:12-14), it is then that the army of watchful, waiting intercessors, sensible of the signs that mark the time, will receive a mighty, unparalleled unction of “salvation, strength, the kingdom of our God and the power of His Christ” (Rev 12:10).

This is in the middle of the week (Dan 12:1, 7, 11; Rev 12:6-14). This new strength and power will be shown in their complete freedom from the fear and joyful resignation to martyrdom (“they loved not their lives unto death”; Rev 12:10). Not only has Satan been cast out, but perfect love has cast out fear.

Time forbids going into further detail, but we simply cannot begin to contemplate what seismic changes this great transition in heaven will bring for Israel, the nations, and the living church of God. From this point, Satan will no longer be able to hold back (restrain) what he fears most. His expulsion from heaven will mean his time is now short (Rev 12:12). This is because this accomplishes what Paul will call, “the mystery of lawlessness”.

Paul tells us that this revelation of the “mystery of lawlessness” in the man of lawlessness is what holds back the coming of Jesus and the kingdom (compare 2Thes 2:1-8 with Rev 12:7-14). Paul is clear, and the book of Revelation confirms, that apart from this prior event, Jesus cannot return and the mystery of God cannot be finished (2Thes 2:3-4, 7-8; Rev 10:7; 12:10-12).

So, what is the mystery of lawlessness? It is the divinely ordained antithesis to the “mystery of godliness” in the incarnation of Jesus (1Tim 3:16). It is the incarnation of Satan in the body of the second prince, “the prince that shall come” (Dan 9:25-26). He is the self exalting, sacrifice removing little horn (Dan 7:8; 8:9, 11, 9:27; 11:31-37; 12:11).

This happens when Satan is thrust down and forced to enter into the body of the mortally wounded beast. As the revived beast, he becomes “the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.” The whole world of mankind will marvel at the sight of this public miracle of unthinkable power and deception, as the beast rises with “all power, signs, and deceitful wonders” (2Thes 2:8).

This utterly demonic miracle, for which the return of Christ has waited, cannot take place “until he (Satan) is taken out of the way” (2Thes 2:7). That is until Michael forcibly removes him (Rev 12:7-14). In the middle of the week, the event happens in heaven that is answered by the sign on earth that the tribulation has started. At this point, Satan will know that “his time is short” (Rev 12:12); he will have lost his ability to restrain this long awaited mystery from being revealed. The kingdom of God come in full power on earth can no longer be hindered by divine permission.

With Satan’s perfectly timed removal from heaven in the midst of the week, the saints in heaven and earth can jubilantly declare, “now is come salvation, strength, the kingdom of our God and the power of His Christ” (Rev 12:10). That power will not only be seen on the two witnesses but we believe on a growing army army of Elijah forerunners declaring the Word under great urgency and at greatest possible cost all throughout the earth.

So if the confirmation of the covenant will be a sign, with the sacrifice apparently soon following, and if believers will be able to predict with perfect accuracy the political strategies, military movements and wars that will take place between the alliance of Dan 11:23 and the abomination of Dan 11:31, what will it mean when prophetic witnesses will be declaring that the man you see doing these things is very soon to rise from the dead and enter the temple in Jerusalem claiming to be above all other forms of deity? (Dan 11:36-37; 2Thes 2:4). Never has there been a time like this — finally decisive for multitudes in the valley of decision.

With such things in view, we may take great confidence that the wise among the sleeping will awaken and wax mighty, like the deeply-humbled Samson, who rose up to slay more in his death than in all his life. You see the principle.

In His great grace, Reggie

The post The Signs Before THE Sign appeared first on Mystery of Israel.

The post The Sign of the Sacrifice [VIDEO] appeared first on Mystery of Israel.

Yes, the ESV has some poorly translated spots here and there, but no more than most others. Except in the case of Dan 9:25 ESV, Dan 9:26 ESV. (Compare with Dan 9:25, 26 KJV) That isn’t just a poor translation; it’s bad! Yet, even there, there are arguments, coming mostly from liberal Christian and Jewish Hebrew scholars that make a case for it to be translated precisely as it is in the ESV. This translation has “given great occasion to the enemies” of the messianic interpretation.

That translation made the anti-missionaries happy, giving legitimization by Christian translators to what Jewish Hebrew scholars have been protesting all along. Of course, speaking from a strictly “technical” linguistic standpoint, it can also be JUST as legitimately translated the way KJV, NKJV, NASB, and nearly every other Christian translation in history has translated it UNTIL the ESV came along and makes this massive concession and capitulation to what Jewish scholars have been insisting all along to be the result of Christian bias, tampering with the text, giving it a forced, “unnatural” meaning. But unnatural to who?

They argue that it is the Christian who has the vested interest to “force” the text to yield a meaning that would be unnatural unless one was already predisposed to see in it one Messiah rather than two. For Jews who have no such vested interest (?), it is argued that one should see two messiahs, not Israel’s long awaited anointed Davidic ruler of ancient promise, but two priestly figures or anointed leaders, one after the first seven weeks (49 years) and another after the 62 weeks (434 years), with the latter anointed leader killed, usually by some usurper.

So what’s the tiebreaker between (some would argue) equally technical options? Well, it’s context! context! context!

But how one is inclined to see the context becomes the decisive question. Who then is willing to ask what would seem the “natural” and I think decisive question concerning the context? What is the burden of the context? Ask yourself; would Daniel be expecting an “end” (consummation) to the times of the Gentiles and Israel’s everlasting deliverance from exilic suffering, not to mention his own personal resurrection at the “END” of the final week? Would he be expecting all of this to take place WITHOUT a single reference to the appearance and death of the “curse reversing seed of the woman”, AKA the Messiah, son of David Son of God? This is what we’re asked to believe. Even the Son of Man in Dan 7 is to be interpreted simply as a metaphor for a corporate human figure symbolizing the kingdom of the saints in contrast to the beast-like kingdoms of carnal man.

Is the cutting off of the anointed prince there in Dan 9:26 just some priest that got killed by some usurper. This is the typical understanding of interpreters less “interested” to see Jesus or the Davidic Prince of Israel in this passage.

Or is this Isaiah’s suffering Servant, “cut off” (Isa 53:8) in substitutionary atonement for His people’s transgressions? Scholars just can’t figure out why this death of this particular anointed leader should just happen to fall exactly one week (7 years) before the end. But what end? The answer of liberal scholars has always been to see this as the death of Onias III and the seven years the “approximate” time of the 2300 days of Antiochus’ persecution of the Jews.

Or, is the “end” in view the “grand” end and climax of the covenant in Israel’s deliverance and the resurrection of the righteous? How about the same “end” that is mentioned all throughout the rest of the book? How about THAT end?! That’s an effective point in dialogue with Jews, Christians, and Joe unbeliever, but not pragmatic liberals. Here too, they will say, yes, this is exactly the “end” that a pseudonymous Daniel had in mind. He simply ventured a prediction that didn’t come to pass as expected.

Pseudo-Daniel’s predictive blunder permits liberal biblical criticism firm certainty that the book is to be dated circa 168 B.C. Why? Because this is where the pseudonymous author, presenting history as prophecy up to this point, now ventures to make an actual prediction concerning Antiochus’ end and the resurrection of the maskilim that simply failed to happen.

Still, somehow, such an obviously discredited “pious fraud” survived and made its way, not only into the Hebrew canon in the first century A.D., but into the library of the Essenes of the Qumran community in the second century B.C.

These were the contemporaries and successors to the history of the Maccabean struggle that saw Antiochus’ persecution as fulfillment, but also knew his end came about in a way that was completely contradictory to the end described of the the little horn / vile person of Daniel’s prophecy. And this is not even to mention that no resurrection happened, and Israel soon fell back under the power of Rome. How then does such obviously failed prophecy make it into canonical acceptance, as revered by even near contemporaries of when the liberals date the book?

You can see the assault of the powers of the air in their dread of this book’s contents and what this portends for their end. As Travis so often says, “and therein lies the problem!”

Why all the fuss and confusion? You’ll guess my usual answer, but “It’s the mystery, Watson!” Always the mystery! Closed up and sealed till the time of the end!

Not too often, but very occasionally, how we see the big picture will determine translational decisions for weal or for woe. Can we even conceive that God deliberately left us just enough rope to hang ourselves with if we are not very careful, believing that not one jot or tittle can pass without perfect, detailed fulfilment of every line of the sacred trust. This is no less true, even in the pious, most often completely sincere science / art of translation.

I believe that here too God has “hid these things from the wise and prudent”. To arrive at the truth that God Himself has hidden within the text takes a miracle of mercy. It doesn’t come naturally, and great learning is no advantage where the secrets of God are concerned.

By sovereign design, He has put these difficulties right in the text for His purposes in mercy and judgement and so none can glory. He has done just that in a few places throughout scripture, particularly where the sealed vision of eschatology is concerned.

Many fail to see beyond the partial, albeit sometimes quite remarkably parallels in history to insist on a much more precise and exhaustive fulfillment in the future at the end. Yet there are many instances of this telescoped perspective of blending the near and the far in Hebrew prophecy. We see this particularly in Dan 8 & 11 for just one example, but even somewhat in the Olivet prophecy.

This phenomenon of a double horizon in prophecy works as a kind of decoy, hiding and obscuring from the hasty scholarly mind the necessity of a more thoroughly detailed and exhaustive fulfilment at the end, repeating what took place in real pattern and principle on the near horizon, but now in much more exhaustive, fuller precision of detail at the end. Here we stand!

The post ESV on Dan 9:25-26? appeared first on Mystery of Israel.

Someone’s been listening in class!

In the interest of brevity and people’s natural lack of stamina for involved discussions, I would only tweak a couple of points. Read his summary first below my remarks, and then return to my comments here for a few, hopefully helpful caveats and additions.

Others may very reasonably differ, but it is not my view that when Michael casts Satan down to take up full and unimpeded residence in the body of the mortally wounded and risen beast that he is now “confined” or restricted to the body of the Antichrist. As in the Lord’s incarnation, the Father remained omnipresent and ubiquitous, but the fullness of His divine nature was concentrated in all its moral perfection in the body / humanity of Jesus. This mystery of incarnation (1Tim 3:16) was, of course, made possible by the virgin birth, because only in this way was it possible for Jesus to be born perfectly free of the fallen, Adamic nature that all others are born into by natural procreation.

In similar parallel, the fullness of Satan’s moral image will be fully embodied / incarnated in the Antichrist, but as Isaiah said, the Antichrist (typified by the Assyrian) does not know God’s intended use of him (Isa 10:7). In the same way, Satan, symbolized as the dragon, knows his time is short, but the risen beast will doubtless think his time has just begun, that nothing will be withheld from this consummate expression of self exaltation.

Furthermore, just as the incarnation of the son was made possible by his freedom from any taint of the fallen nature by means of the virgin birth, just so, it appears that what Paul sees as necessary for the mystery of lawlessness to be revealed requires the removal, not only of Satan from his hindering position in heaven, but something has been removed from the humanity of the Antichrist at the same time. This is why there must be this marvelous intersection and convergence between the time of Satan’s expulsion that starts the tribulation (Dan 12:1 with Rev 12:7-14) and the death and resurrection of the Antichrist in the healing of the mortal wound, which occasions his ascent up out of the abyss into which he descended at death (Rev 11:7; 13:8), all taking place at the middle of the week.

Whatever it is that preserves even the least residue of what it is that makes us human, apparently, this is what has been removed through the Antichrist’s descent and ascent out of the abyss at the very same time that Satan is being removed by Michael from his hindering place in heaven. This great transition is necessary to reveal what Paul calls, “the mystery of lawlessness” (2Thes 2:7).

As Jesus, the Anointed prince of the host in Dan 8:11; 9:25-26, fulfilled the “mystery of godliness” through circumventing passing the fallen seed of man by the virgin birth, just so, the mystery of lawlessness is revealed in the resurrection and full embodiment of Satan in the Antichrist. This is made possible by the miraculous coincidence of the death and resurrection of the Antichrist with the casting down of Satan. Observe what this implies.

Doubtless, through their understanding and certain knowledge of the time, those of understanding (Dan 11:32-33; 12:3-4, 10) will imitate Daniel. Through deep self abasement and prevailing prayer, they too will receive the help of Michael. That is why all heaven rings out with shouts of Jubilee when Satan is cast down. It is also why, just now, as perhaps never before on such a wide scale, the saints received great power and strength (Dan 11:32; Rev 11:2; 12:10). It just so happens that both Daniel and John put this great anointing precisely at the middle of the week (Dan 11:31-33; Rev 11:2; 12:7-10). This is no accident! With Satan’s expulsion, not only is there woe for the ‘earth-dwellers’ (sensual, destitute of the Spirit), but with an open heaven, free of the Accuser’s influence, great power has come upon the saints for the final test and greatest witness unto death.

No wonder all of heaven rejoices when this great blockage has been once and for all removed from his illicit access to the consciences of believers, as through deep travail the veil gives way to the clearest grasp of the liberty of the gospel and fullest enforcement in heaven of the victory that Jesus won at the cross. With Michael’s greatest victory in the removal of Satan from his position of hindrance, the now awakened sleeping giant that is the true body of Christ will arise, and shake itself like Samson, to accomplish more in its last, remaining hours (in this mortal frame) than anytime since Pentecost. I see a type in Samson that gives me hope for the sleeping wise, some of whom have been sinfully distracted and compromised by the vanities of the world system, but God can use again the son He chastens.

So put the two things together. Christ cannot return and the kingdom cannot come in all its fullness UNTIL this man has first been revealed. This event is the ”WHAT” (Greek neuter) that withholds. What is being withheld? The WHAT, I would submit, is the return of Christ to gather us together (2Thes 2:1). Paul says this cannot happen until the man of lawlessness is revealed FIRST (2Thes 2:3). But for this to take place, there is a mystery that he embodies that also must be revealed. This is the mystery of lawlessness, but for this to be revealed, there is a person who must first be removed.

For the reasons shown, we believe that person to be Satan who must be removed from heaven by Michael in the middle of the week. It is Satan’s removal from his position as the one who hinders (1Thes 2:18) that permits the revelation of the mystery of lawlessness to be revealed in the man of lawlessness. This is fatal to his interest.

It is because the whole age waits for this great event that the saints in heaven and earth rejoice, not simply because the time of greatest tribulation has now started, but because “NOW is come salvation, strength, the kingdom of our God and the power of His Messiah” Now, with Michael’s victory over Satan in heaven, that which stood in the way (hindered) the full coming of the kingdom has been taken out of the way. The kingdom can now come unhindered. The opposer can no longer oppose the necessary revelation of the mystery of lawlessness that releases the Lord to release the remaining seals and finish the mystery of God (Rev 10:7; 11:15). Satan is out of the way! The long foretold tribulation can begin that brings in the kingdom and the sure fulfillment of all that is written.

Of greatest puzzlement to commentators is to decide between the what and the who in 2Thes 2:6-7. There is a what (neuter in the Greek text) that is restraining (or some preferred translations say ‘withholding’) and there is also a person who is restraining or withholding. How do we sort this out? I would suggest that the puzzle is best solved by understanding that the necessary prior revelation of the man of lawlessness is holding back the return of the Lord. This corrects the perilous error circulating at Thessalonica.

When Paul says, “and now you know WHAT withholds” (2Thes 2:6), he is saying that after reviewing with them the order of events he had laid down at his earlier visit, they are now reminded and thus fully apprised of why Jesus cannot be expected to return until this necessary preliminary event has first taken place. This calls to mind the person who is pledged to restrain the revelation of the mystery of lawlessness that will mean his time is short.

Who is the person and what is he restraining? Satan is restraining the revelation of the mystery of lawlessness. Why would he do this? It is because he knows that when this mystery is revealed in the person of the man of lawlessness, his time will be short.

Do not confuse the identification of the Antichrist with his revelation. He will be identifiable well before this, but he cannot be ‘revealed’ until Satan has been removed (cast down) in order to become incarnate in the man of lawlessness. For this mystery to be revealed, Satan must be “taken out of the way”.

We say this happens when he is cast down by Michael. Only then will Satan be forced to take up a full and unhindered habitation in the moral nature of the man of lawlessness, thus empowering him with “ALL power, signs, and deceiving wonders”, (reminiscent of the strong delusion evoked by his resurrection). The world has never seen anything, even remotely like this!

So Jesus cannot return until this happens first. The prior revelation of the man of sin is the event (the what) that is now withholding / i.e., hindering the return of Jesus to gather His own. This corrects the dangerous presumption that Christ’s return is immediately imminent, thus diverting from all that Jesus so carefully commended as a bulwark against deception and to be fully armed for the time when it comes (Mk 13:5, 14, 21-23).

But the withholding event calls to mind the withholding revelation and the unnamed person who is committed to withhold it. That is the revelation of the mystery of lawlessness in the man of lawlessness, and this can only be revealed when Satan is removed. It is Satan (not the Holy Spirit, or Michael) that must be forcibly removed in order to be fully embodied in the now resurrected Antichrist.

This is the strong delusion that causes the whole world to marvel when they see the mortally wounded beast that was, and is not, and yet is (Rev 13:8). The removal of Satan from heaven permits the predestined revelation of the mystery of lawlessness, and this in turn opens the way for the return of the King. It is the great ‘without which not’ of Jesus’ return and the end of the age.

When Satan can no longer retain his place in heaven as the one one who hinders / resists / withholds or holds back, the revelation of the mystery of lawlessness, his time is short. It is now, with his removal, that the kingdom can come in all its full strength and power. Therefore, we say Rev 12:7-12 becomes the key to understand the mystery of the restrainer in 2Thes 2:7.

As the brother so well points out (see below), this is all in perfect parallel to the way that through Daniel’s self emptying intercession, Michael was sent to remove the prince of Persia who was “withstanding” (the Hebrew equivalent of hinder / resist / oppose) the arrival of the holy messenger who carried the critical revelation of how the age will end (Dan 10:13-14). Doubtless, this is the background behind Paul’s understanding of the role of the dark powers to oppose and hinder the advance of the kingdom’s conquest of evil.

Somehow, Satan’s dejection must coincide perfectly with the death and resurrection of the Antichrsit (Rev 11:7; 13:3; 17:8). This is what reveals the mystery of lawlessness, which is nothing short of the revelation of Satan in the “coming prince” of Dan 9:26. It is the fulfillment of THIS mystery (i.e., “mystery of lawlessness”) on which all else depends and awaits, because Jesus CANNOT return to gather together His elect UNTIL this final, outstanding mystery has FIRST been revealed (Mt 24:29-31 with 2Thes 2:1-8).

Since the removal of Satan from heaven to earth must coincide perfectly with the time of the Antichrist’s death and resurrection (obviously, very closely aligned in time), we may ask why is the death and resurrection of the Antichrist necessary in order for Satan to fully inhabit this man? I would suggest that just as Jesus circumvented (by-passed) any hindrance to the full expression of the image of His Father through the virgin birth, something here too of a hindering nature must be removed from the Antichrist in order for him to most fully express the fully exposed image of his father, the Devi (“son of perdition”). What might that be? It would seem to have to be something that was never fully eradicated, even in the most wicked antichrists (plural) of history.

Other than the predestined timing, what is it that stopped these demonically empowered antichrists ‘ beasts (plural) from becoming THE Antichrist / beast? Whatever that is, it has apparently been removed by the mortally wounded Antichrist’s descent into the abyss. Whatever this is (the remnant of the moral image that makes us human?), apparently it is the impediment that is fully removed only by the death of the Antichrist (mortally wounded beast).

By death he descends into the abyss. In resurrection he ascends up from the abyss to become now the full incarnation of Satan in the flesh. This has apparently been made possible by the divinely ordained convergence of the death of this particular man and the expulsion of Satan from heaven at the very time the tribulation is about to begin with his entrance into the temple to present himself to the world as above all other forms of deity (Dan 11:36-37 with 2Thes 2:4).

Finally, one may very reasonably ask why was this left to be such a mystery? Why, if at all important for us to know, did Paul not simply identify the restrainers, both the impersonal what or thing that is being restrained, and the person who is restraining? Firstly, it was not his pastoral purpose to expound on all the details, but simply review and recount what he had told them on his earlier visit in order to correct a serious error. But also, it is in the nature of scripture that many things are revealed in such a way as to require grace and mercy for the Spirit’s help in making the correct connections, and this is especially true of anything that the Lord wanted to be kept till the time of the end.

That said, I believe Paul did indeed most definitely identify what was being withheld. It was the return of the Lord. Let me show why this seems so plain to me.

Translators will translate enesteken in 2Thes 2:2 as “already here”, or “near at hand”, depending on whether they think the Thessalonians would have conceived of the DOL as distinct from the actual return of Jesus, since Jesus had obviously not arrived personally. The error of the Thessalonians that the day of the Lord had either arrived or was very imminently to be expected would be corrected by Paul’s demonstration that the DOL is being held back by the necessity of a specific event, namely, the preliminary revelation of the man of sin.

This, I would argue, is the ‘what’, or the impersonal ‘thing’ that is holding back the return of the Lord. It is an event, one that very necessarily MUST preceded the Lord’s return. What is being withheld (some translate restrained) is the Lord’s return, and the thing or event (impersonal neuter in the Greek text) is the prior revelation of the man of lawlessness exalting himself in the temple of God (2Thes 2:3-4). Simple as that!.

Commentators puzzle and say, “if we only knew what Paul had told them on his first visit, then we would know what they knew”, but we must modestly decline anything more than a rather tentative guess. To me, it seems fantastic that there would be any question of what Paul would have told them on his first visit. He told them exactly what Jesus told His disciples in the Olivet prophecy!

With all urgency, Jesus commands His disciples to read and understand Daniel if they will know the signs and escape the great deception. No wonder Paul opens his correction with words very similar to those by which Jesus begins His discourse, “Take heed that no man deceive you” (Mt 24:4). Paul, moved by the same urgency of warning, will say, “Let no man deceive you by any means …” So a lot at stake here.

The only blank that Paul did not fill in is the identity of the person who restrains. I believe this is because the Holy Spirit did not permit him to make this obvious. I believe it is one of those things reserved till the time of the end that when opened would open so much else. By the Spirit’s kind grace we can put the pieces together and see things reserved for the end, so not to be taken by surprise, or at least have a frame of reference by which to understand the unexpected when it comes. Appropriately, God left it to the Revelation of John to give us the clue that would make perfect sense of the restrainer of 2Thes 2:7, as both build upon the angelology (principalities and powers) of Daniel and Ezekiel that build on Moses and the prophets.

Reggie is of the conviction that Satan is the Restrainer of 2 Thes 2. That might sound counterintuitive to many. This is just my attempt to clarify that position. (I’m not saying this is exactly how Reggie sees it). Some thoughts on the Restrainer of 2 Thes 2. Everything you’ve ever been taught will likely contradict what I’m about to say, it took me 28 years to finally come to see this, now I just can’t unsee it….

2 Thes 2v7… “….Now he who restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way” Some translations say “restrain >him<” or “restrains >it<” or “restrains >evil<” etc. That is only because translators have struggled with this verse. The “it”, “him”, “evil” etc. should not be there. Because of bad translations and what we’ve been taught by sincere teachers who have read bad translations, an assumption is made that it is >evil< that is being restrained. New King James Version… And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. (Good Translation – No ‘it’ or ‘him’ etc) New American Standard Bible… And you know what restrains >>him<< now, so that he will be revealed in his time. (Bad Translation – here we see the Paradigm shifting “him”) So that added “him” or that added “it” etc, is like points on a railway track really, something tiny but entirely capable of shunting the whole train (of thought) on to a different track. And that’s clearly what it does.

So to summarize, the original text does not state that it’s evil or ant-christ that is being restrained. Thats a false assumption based on bad translations. Moving on… Scripture doesn’t explicitly state either that this mystery “restrainer” is the Holy Spirit, Church or Michael or Rome etc. All these views are of course quite widely held by believers and indicate the manifold confusion that exists surrounding this passage because its >>assumed<< because of bad translations, that it’s evil that’s being restrained. So all we can really take from the text is that there is a mysterious “Restrainer” mentioned. We don’t know what he’s restraining and that he will be removed at some point, and when he is, the Antichrist can come into view. So here goes… In Daniel 10, Daniel prays and he is heard immediately and the Angel is sent forth at once but the fallen demonic powers in the heavenlies resist and restrain the Angel for 21 days until Michael intervenes. In Revelation 12v7-9 we see Michael again, this time casting down Satan and the demonic powers to earth. We are told exactly when this happens i.e. at the 1260 days (final 3 1/2 year) point.

Directly following this expulsion, we see this in the very next verse… 10 THEN I heard a loud voice in heaven say >>NOW<< have come the >>SALVATION<< and the >>POWER<< and the >>KINGDOM OF OUR GOD<< and the >>AUTHORITY OF HIS MESSIAH<< for the accuser of our brothers and sisters, who accuses them before our God day and night, has been hurled down (taken out of the way). So as Satan is removed we see a colossal dam burst in the Heavens. Satan and his angels were holding something back, as they are taken out of the way, the dam bursts! So Satan, the restrainer of God’s Salvation, Power, Kingdom, and Authority in the heavenlies, is now cast out and down from his >restraining place< and hurled down to earth.

As stated, this happens clearly at the 3 1/2 year point. In conjunction with this we see the beast receiving a mortal wound in Rev 13v3 but coming back to life again and the whole world marvelling at this. He then sets off on his 42 month (3 1/2 year) reign of terror. So as Satan is cast down by Michael exactly at the 3 1/2 year point this dovetails in perfect concert with the beast (human) dying from a mortal wound then coming back to life.

I think it’s plain Satan is now permitted, or perhaps even forced, to take up residence in this man’s body. So what we now see is the full incarnation of Satan in bodily form. We saw “The Mystery of Godliness” in the incarnation of God in bodily form in the person of Jesus. Now we see “The Mystery of Iniquity”, the full incarnation of Satan, in bodily form.

Astonishingly, there is divine symmetry here. Both “mysteries” commence their “ministry” in a death and resurrection (Jesus baptism by John), both have exactly 3 1/2 years. The Genesis prophetic opener of “the seed of the woman” and “the seed of the serpent” has now fully come into view. Keep in mind also Michael appears in Jude where he contends with Satan over Moses’ body. Why would Satan want access to Moses’ body? As Derek Prince states demons are personalities without a body. Speculating, but did he want to incarnate Moses body to then decieve the Israelites? God did not permit it then, but does He permit it, even orchestrate it, at the 3 1/2 year point? So “the lawless one will be revealed”. I.e. Satan is forced down and out of the heavenly sphere to take up residence in a man’s dead body. He’s now exposed and confined into a human body and is FURIOUS >>knowing<< his time is short. So for me this raises a fundamental question. The presupposition amongst much of what calls itself church in relation to 2 Thes 2 is that Satan >>wants<< to take the stage, that he >>wants<< to take over, that “good” in the form of the Holy Spirit OR the Church OR Rome OR Michael is restraining him. So Does Satan >>really<< want this to happen? Mathew 8v29… “What do you want with us, Son of God?” they shouted. “Have you come here to >>torture<< us before the >>appointed time<>knowing his time is short<<, knowing only eternal torture and torment awaits him.

I see it like the mafia in a city where the forces of law and order are finally and relentlessly closing in. They were happy to be incognito and pulling the strings in the dark but now they know their time is soon up and they are being forced out into the open and to pending and ultimate justice. Or like a desperate death row prisoner who knows his time of execution is fast approaching. In both these instances it’s the last thing they want and a truly desperate fight will ensue. And so we have the end times. A desperate and dark kingdom is coming to be exposed and ultimately judged and it well knows it. Like a cornered pack of rabid hyenas the final expulsion will be vicious and brutal.

In closing. If the mystery restrainer is not Satan then who is it? From whatever angle I now look at this from nothing fits better or makes more sense. I just can’t “unsee” it. Obviously the pre-trib camp uses this passage to bolster their early rapture view but it’s a doctrine based entirely on inference (that’s another story). In closing, Scripture makes plain this displacement, this ‘taking out of the way’ event happens at the 3 1/2 year point so a completely “Open Heaven” is there now for the Saints, the restraining demonic forces are removed and unprecedented Power, Salvation and Authority is now made available. It will truly be the Church’s finest hour. Revelation 7 tells us of a harvest of souls from every tribe and nation, a number so vast it cannot be counted will come out of the “Great Tribulation”.

God surely keeps the best wine till last and I believe this “Restrainer” being “taken out of the way” is the key to all this. So considering now the same verse… 2 Thes 2v7… ….Now he (Satan) who restrains (God’s Power, Salvation, Kingdom and Authority in the heavenlies) will do so >>until<< he is taken (literally forced) out of the way (by Michael in the midst of the final week). As clearly detailed in Revelation 12! So instead of “Good restraining the Evil”, it’s in effect “Evil restraining the Good” until Michael casts the evil restrainer down and out at the final 3 1/2 years point and we see an unprecedented release of God’s Spirit and Power and the greatest ingathering of souls imaginable. So this truly turns everything on its head. As I said at the offset, this view will likely blow all your fuses; it did mine. It’s easy to dismiss as it goes against the grain at night on all that’s been taught on it in this hour. I just humbly ask you to prayerfully consider it.

The post Who is the Restrainer in 2 Thessalonians 2? appeared first on Mystery of Israel.

The post The Downfall of the Devil is in the Details of Daniel [VIDEO] appeared first on Mystery of Israel.