How is it possible that all Israel will be saved and yet people will be going into the millennial reign of Christ without being transformed and having new bodies? Will all Israel that’s a part of the church be transformed into heavenly bodies? How will there be people going into […]
Where in the OT is Paul getting his “last trump” and “twinkling of an eye”?
Paul knew the trumpet of Isa 27:12-13 (also Ps 47:5; Joel 2:1; Zeph 1:16-18) sounds at the same time the nation is being born “at once” / in “one day” in Isa 66:8 (with Ps 102:13; Eze 39:22; Zech 3:9; 12:10; 14:7). That is the same moment the AC is being destroyed in “one day” (Is 9:14; 10:17; 47:9) by the breath of the Messiah’s mouth / voice (Isa 11:4; 30:27-33; 31:8-9; 42:11-14; 66:6-8; Joel 3:16; Zeph 1:7, 14-18; Zech 9:14).
As Paul’s manifest use of the Septuagint’s translation of Isa 11:4 in 2Thes 2:8 makes clear, the AC is destroyed at the instant of the Lord’s return to judge the wicked, raise the dead, and assert His rod iron rule over the nations the “last trump” (1Cor 15:52; Rev 10:7; 11:15). It all lines up with the moment (“twinkling of an eye”) of His return like the lightning flashing across the sky (Mt 24:27, 29-31; Rev 1:7).
Obviously, the NT writers believe their OT, literally! They put the pieces together by the help and leading of the Holy Spirit. They are not advancing ‘new truth’ but unraveling the mystery of what stood written in the OT prophetic scriptures (Acts 26:22-23; Ro 11:25-29; 16:25-26; 1Pet 1:11). That’s the glory and compelling proof of the gospel, that it was all foretold!
Who is the wicked prince of Israel in Eze 21:25?
How about “the prince of the covenant” of Dan 11:22?
Commentaries will say the wicked prince of Eze 21:25 is Zedekiah, as you can check on Bible Hub in their collection of commentaries. Just type in the verse.
But then, as you know, there is almost always a near and far fulfillment, the past being very often the pattern of last things. So my best guess would be that the “wicked prince” is also the “foolish / idol shepherd” of Zech 11:15, 17.
Does our view see the Day of the Lord as one specific, single day occurring at the end of the tribulation when Christ returns to destroy the AC and raise the righteous dead? I’ve heard we need to include the broad concept of the day of the Lord, meaning, that the Day of the LORD (DOL) begins with the abomination and continues for three and one half years.
Is this legitimate and correct?, or should the DOL be confined to one single extraordinary day occurring at the end of the tribulation thereby ushering in the first day of the millennial age? For example, is Ezekiel 39:8 a single day or a period of time in duration?
I believe it is the latter choice. It is a very specific day (“one day”; Isa 66:9; Zech 3:9; 14:7), around which is clustered an intensive convergence of many events, leading to, and issuing from, that are certainly not confined to one day. It is the day and hour, even instant (1Cor 15:52) that constitutes the great transition between this age and the age to come.
To answer your last question first, most definitely and assuredly Eze 39:8 is the “great day of God Almighty“ referred to in Rev 16:12-17. This is seen very clearly by observing that the same, very precise language of Eze 39:8 is applied to the “great day of God Almighty” in Rev 16:17.
Significantly, this day is shown to come in conjunction with the 7th bowl, which significantly follows Jesus’ announcement that His now truly imminent coming will be “like a thief” (Rev 16:15). This announcement is significantly interjected between the 6th and 7th bowls. So the time in view here is very precisely the very end of the tribulation.
Note too that in all of scripture, the only two places that the precise term, “day of God” is found is in 2Pet 3:12 and Rev 16:14. In second Peter, the “day of God” is a synonym for the thief-like day of the Lord (2Pet 3:10, 12). These are important markers, since in both 2Pet 3:10-12 and Rev 16:12-17, the “day of God” comes as a thief on the unsuspecting world of unbelievers at the very end of the tribulation.
From this you can see that the DOL and the great day of God Almighty are the same day, and the latter is clearly at the 7th bowl. The DOL doesn’t get any narrower than that, and this is the usual meaning throughout the prophets.
One thing I would say without looking at the whole superstructure, which time simply does not permit, is the really foreign thought that God is fishing for DNA in order to mediate His salvation. That someone named Kelly, for example, is saved, not strictly because of the drawing power of the Holy Spirit, and response of faith to God’s great, “whosoever will” extended to all nations without discrimination, but because my physical lineage has some surviving genetic element that can be traced back (or that can only be assumed on the basis of what I believe) to one of the supposedly lost ten tribes of Israel (see David Baron’s excellent little pamphlet by that title). That just doesn’t square with the mystery that Christ is revealed ‘in’ gentiles, without discrimination, and that gentiles of “every” tribe, tongue, and nation are equally made Abraham’s seed through faith alone. Such a thesis is suspicious from the start!
Yes, I believe and affirm that God preserves an ethnic distinction from among the natural branches precisely in order to demonstrate and set on public display His covenant word to Israel for the vindication of His sovereignty in divine election, and for the instruction of the nations and the fallen order of principalities and powers through what He has purposed to show through them. A preserved remnant from among the natural branches will indeed be born in a day (Isa 66:8; Zech 3:9) and gathered from all nations, never to be invaded again. That is sure and certain! Until then, they are made sufficiently distinguishable as a distinct ethnic race precisely in order to show in them the discipline of the covenant and to test the hearts of all nations concerning this blinded people who, though momentarily enemies of the gospel, are NONETHELESS BELOVED, and are to be so regarded, to the chagrin of those nations who have laid malicious, unfeeling hands on God’s afflicted in their pitiable ghetto condition, a presumption that will be much required in that day.
(… More …)
In order for our view of the two days to be vindicated, we would have to see the signs that precede the principal sign that Jesus gives, all within a very short period of time. By understanding this particular, centermost event, all other principal events of the end are aligned and set in order.
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.
(… More …)
“The people of thy holiness have possessed it but a little while: our adversaries have trodden down thy sanctuary.” (KJV)
“Your holy people possessed Your sanctuary for [only] a little while; Our adversaries have trampled it down.” (Amplified)
Just as Jeremiah’s prophecy was a catalyst for Daniel’s further quest for understanding (Dan 9:2), there can be no doubt that Ps 74 with Isa 63:18; 64:10-11 would have been an influence on his expectation concerning the fate of a future sanctuary that would be standing at the time of the end.
Whether Ps 74 was written before Isaiah or the reverse, it is Isaiah who adds something that entirely distinguishes the tribulation temple from any other.
The broad context surrounding the mention of the temple in Isa 63:18; 64:10-11 makes clear that Israel’s ultimate deliverance at the day of the Lord is envisioned as following in the wake of the devastating loss of the temple and the trampling down of the holy city. This is a theme that we see in many places throughout the prophets. But here’s what is so striking about Isaiah’s prophecy in particular. The temple that will be trampled burned and destroyed in the final tribulation has only been back in Jewish possession for “a little while” (Ps 74:7-8; Isa 63:18; 4:10-11; Dan 8:11, 13; 9:26).
No other temple in history answers to this description. It can only have reference to a third temple that has been only recently rebuilt, shortly before it is desecrated, trampled and burned by the self-exalting little horn (Dan 8:11; 9:27; 11:23, 31; 12:11).
Similarities in language suggest very strongly that either Isaiah is aware of a very early Asaph (Ps 74), or else a later Asaph is certainly aware of Isaiah‘s prophecy (Isa 63:18; 64:10-11) — and Daniel shows awareness of both. I tend to favor the view that the prophecy originated with the Asaph who served in the tabernacle of David.
Certainly, an early Asaph would have inherited all that Moses had said concerning the inevitability of exile and dispersion. Covenant chastisement would be the ever-looming threat until the expected day of national repentance that Moses foresees at the end of a final tribulation “in the latter days” (Deut 4:29-30; 29:4; 30:1-6).
It is just as likely that the original Asaph could have prophetically anticipated the destruction of the sanctuary. In any event, it seems clear that Ps 74:7-8; 78:59-60; 79:1, with Isaiah 63:18; 64:10-11 forms the prophetic background for an eschatology of tribulation that is centered around a very recently restored sanctuary.
Liberal commentators who hold that this portion of Isaiah could not have come from the pen of Isaiah of Jerusalem will, of course, assume that Ps 74 and Isa 63-64 are both written in retrospect after the exile, looking back and lamenting the bitterness and shock of the loss of the first temple.
We say, on the contrary! In both cases, the Spirit of prophecy is putting into the mouth of the suffering remnant of the final tribulation the cry for the long-awaited day of deliverance and permanent possession of the Land, according to the the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants.
(… More …)
What do you think of this article Reggie? https://www.newantisemitism.com/antisemitism/is-the-stage-being-set-for-the-prophecy-of-zechariah-123 Good thoughts, good points, raising a very timely question. However, and it’s a big however, we must never forget the larger surrounding context of Zech 12:2-3. Obviously, the final siege of Jerusalem ends when the repentant survivors of Israel “look upon […]
Reggie’s response to an excellent comment (quoted at the bottom of this article) on the video “The Downfall of the Devil is in the Details of Daniel.” Someone’s been listening in class! 🙂 In the interest of brevity and people’s natural lack of stamina for involved discussions, I would only […]
What would you say is the cost of making the first resurrection either the new birth or something else?
Contrasted with the first resurrection coming at the end of the last persecution with the destruction of the final beast, the obvious answer is the necessary details of all that. But is there something more that is lost? It sure feels like it.
Lost is all that God has invested in the demonstration that Israel was first set apart to demonstrate and vindicate “through their fall” and national resurrection by a sovereign act of discriminating grace (Eze 36:22, 32). Lost is all the meaning of God’s own affliction and sacrifice in their temporary surrendering over to blindness and dispersion “for our sake”. (Ro 11:11-12, 28). Lost too is all that God has invested in the crisis events of the end that signal and lead up to that great transition of greatest consequence to millions.
Lost is the purpose of 1000 years of open demonstration and vindication of the ‘everlasting covenant’, as every Jew who revered the scripture understood it before the cross, and as the apostles of the Lamb manifestly understood it after the cross.
In all references to the forward looking “everlasting / new covenant” the expectation is clear, that AFTER a final tribulation of unequaled severity, the penitent survivors of Israel would be born to new national life in one day (Ps 102:13; 110:3; Isa 66:8; Zech 3:9) through the spiritual regeneration of the new / everlasting covenant. That “from that day and forward”, not SOME but “ALL” would know the Lord from the least to the greatest (Isa 4:3; 45:17, 60:21; Jer 31:34; 32:40; Eze 39:22, 28-29), and this blessed preservation would extend without exception unto children’s children, “world without end” (Isa 44:3; 59:21; 61:9; 65:24; 66:22; Eze 37:25).
Click below for more…