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

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.

Apparently, just about the time of the renewed sacrifice, some venerated figure within Judaism will have emerged to become, if not Messiah (less likely), perhaps a potential candidate for Messiah (more likely), or perhaps the officiating high priest over the restored sanctuary and sacrifice.

This highly honored presumer will evidently be “overflown and broken” at the same time the power of the IDF falls to the now irresistible force of the combined armies of the AC (Rev 13:4).

Daniel 11:22 (KJV)
“And with the arms of a flood (see Isa 28:2; 59:19; Dan 9:26) shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covenant.”

This I read as taking place in the middle of the week. There are a couple of good reasons for this that I’ll not take time to go into, but I think it’s important that we NOT permit the placement of Dan 11:22 before the abomination of Dan 11:31 to imply an earlier invasion of the Land and the killing of this leader. Here’s why:

Just as Dan 12:1 functions as a ‘recap’ of the event that was introduced in Dan 11:31 (as clearly confirmed by Dan 12:11); in the same way, Dan 11:22 is inserted as a ‘precap’ of the same time that begins when the Antichrist floods the Land in the middle of the week (Dan 9:27; 12:11).

We know this because until that point, Israel is enjoying an illusory, short lived peace that finds them wholly unprepared for the suddenness of the AC’s surprise invasion to start the 42 months of downtreading of Jerusalem (compare Isa 28:18; Lk 21:24; Rev 11:2, Mt 24:16, 2Thes 2:4; with Eze 38:8, 11, 14; 39:26; Isa 28:15, 18; Dan 8:25; 9:27; 11:23-24; 1Thes 5:3).

Then, beginning with the following verse (i.e., Dan 11:23), there is the resumption of an actual unbroken chronological order of events that make up the first half of the week, beginning with Israel’s disarming peace “league / alliance / covenant” made with the man who will become Satan incarnate at the middle of the week (Dan 8:23-25; 2Thes 2:4, 8-9; Rev 13:5, 8; 12:7-12; Rev 17:8, 10).

This is the one who fulfills the final installment of the ongoing “mystery of lawlessness” (2Thes 2:6-8), the ordained counter-antithesis to the “mystery of godliness” (1Tim 3:16). This final mystery of incarnation of the two seeds of the Garden brings the incarnation of the ancient serpent who stands behind all the anti-God, covenant despising aggressors of history (Eze 38:17). This is the “coming PRINCE” of Dan 9:26 (compare Eze 38:2-3; 39:1; Dan 10:13).

As the collective “seed of the serpent” (Gen 3:15), i.e., “the spirit that now works in the children of disobedience (Eph 2:2-3; 5:6; Col 3:6; 2Thes 2:6, 8-9) the man of lawlessness will be the final and complete embodiment of this mystery in a man (Dan Dan 7:8 with Rev 13:18).

So, from Dan 11:23-30, we have a ‘play by play’ order of events from the “confirming” / “strengthening” / “endorsing” of the covenant to begin the week (Dan 9:27, which, most evidently, should be understood as taking place at the same time as “the league made with him”, Dan 11:23) – to the breaking of the alliance (and assault on the “holy covenant”, Dan 11:28, 30) in the middle of the week.

Then, beginning with verse 31, we have a clear order of the events of the second half of the week, which is, of course, what Daniel and Jesus will call the “great”, unparalleled “trouble / tribulation” (Dan 12:1; Mt 24:21).

This “understanding” among the ‘maskilim’ (Heb. the wise having insight) of the basic order and meaning of the final seven years, particularly the first half as critical preparation for the second half, will prove of massive strategic value for the fulfillment of God’s purpose for the close of this age. It will be a bulwark against the unparalled deception (Dan 7:11, 25; 8:23-25; Mt 24:4-5, 11, 24; 2Thes 2:3, 9-10; Rev 13:8). It will be critical to the explaining the divinely intended meaning of the unfolding these final events. It will bring final, gloriously manifest harmony between the Old and New Testaments, what I’m so fond of calling, “the glory of the Story”.

Such manifest fulfillment of prophecy supporting the truth of the gospel, preached under great anointing, will turn to the greatest harvest of souls ever witnessed in history amid “THE tribulation, the great one”. (Dan 11:32-33; 12:3; Mt 24:14; Rev 7:9, 13-14; 14:6).

“When this agreement shall have been confirmed, the wise will know that the final Seven of years has commenced, that the end days are present, that the consummation of the age has arrived. They will expect the violation of the covenant after three years and a half, and will not be overwhelmed with surprise, having been told beforehand by this prophecy. Then will it be seen in fulness that the knowledge of prophetic Scripture is simply priceless.” (G. H. Lang, “The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel”; pg. 140).

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.