June 6, 2010

Gog’s Assault in the Purposes of God

[…] But this great love and covenant privilege is also Israel’s greatest culpability. The same is true of the Christian. Because He has known them in a way He has chosen to know no other nation, He will not spare. “You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities (Amos 3:2). It is the same for the Christian (Heb 12:6-7). It is a rule belonging to the very nature of covenant that the greater the opportunity for blessing, the greater the severity when that privilege is slighted. God will employ the bitter hatred of the enemy to minister corrective discipline or final judgment where the divine pleading is fatally resisted.

It is the paradox of God’s sovereign over-ruling of evil to accomplish His own purpose in grace (“you thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good;” Gen 50:20). Here, Gog thinks an evil thought (Ezek 38:10), but God has planned from all eternity to use that evil thought to bring an end of Israel’s long night of exile by His sovereign employment of Satan’s hatred to bring Jacob to the end of his power (Deut 32:36; Dan 12:7). […]

Jump to full post

reggiekelly

June 4, 2010

Gog (Ez 38) and the King Who Exalts Himself (Dan 11)

[…] Remember that Israel is dwelling securely when Gog comes down. At no time beyond the abomination could Israel be said to be dwelling safely (Rev 11:2). Note that this could NOT be the security of post-millennial Israel. It is the deceptive security that follows the presumptuous ‘league’, or ‘covenant with death and hell” (Isa 28:15; Dan 8:25; 9:27 11:23). This is further proven by the reference made to this particular kind of security described in Ezek 39:26. It is a security in which Israel’s sins only increase. This is not true of Israel’s millennial security. I believe this is the “time of tranquility” described in Dan 11:24, which follows upon the league made with ‘vile person’ in Dan 11:23. In other words, here is the false security of the first 3 /2 years of Daniel’s seventieth week.

The contrast between this security and millennial security is enormous. At the end of the millennium at the time of Satan’s momentary release, Israel has been abiding in the everlasting righteousness of covenant promise (Jer 32:40; Dan 9:24). The security that Israel enjoys in the Land throughout the millennium is based on the transformation that began at the day of the Lord (Isa 66:8; Ezek 39:22-29) and is guaranteed of unfailing continuance unto children’s children ((Isa 54:13; 59:21). They shall “all” be holy “from that day and forward” (Isa 4:3; 60:21; Jer 31:34; 32:40; Ezek 39:22). […]

Jump to full post

reggiekelly

May 30, 2010

“Let The Reader Understand”

[…] My view is that IF we set our hearts, like Daniel, to “understand” what is written in the Scripture of truth (Dan 10:12, 21) in order to see how the prophetic scriptures line up (not only through close exegesis, but a deep dependency on the mercy that alone grants the Spirit’s illumination), then we will be able to recognize all that is necessary to not miss any of the critical turns that lie ahead. I believe a careful obedience to follow the Lord’s express instructions to ‘pay attention to Daniel’ (Mt 24:15 – “Let the reader understand,” i.e., understand what Daniel wrote) is critical in three vital areas:

1) Our protection from unequaled deception (Mt 24:4, 11, 24; Mk 13:23; 2Thes 2:3).

2) Our readiness to follow where God is taking the church corporately through the constraining influence of these specifically timed events.

3) Our ability to understand the true essence of what is at stake in terms of what these events reveal, but most importantly to apprehend with all saints the full weight of glory that God has invested in this eschatological vision (Isa 28:12; Dan 9:24; 12:9-10; Hab 2:2-3; Ro 11:25-36; Rev 10:7). […]

Jump to full post

reggiekelly

May 29, 2010

On the origin of the Antichrist

[…] The only thing clearly stated about the geographical origins of the Antichrist is found in Dan 8:9 and 11:21. There he is depicted as coming out of one of the four ‘notable horns’ (i.e., one of the four divisions of Alexander’s kingdom). I believe his origins in both geography (Dan 8:9; 11:21) and descent (spiritual if not entirely genetic), will be from among the descendants of Ishmael and Esau (Ps 83; Isa 34:5-6, 8; Ezek 35-36, Obadiah 1:6-17) together with those nations (Ezek 38:5-6) that will support them in their final prosecution of “the everlasting hatred” (Ezek 35:5). Hence, I believe that the ten kings allied with the Antichrist will be Islamic, if not entirely Arab. For reasons I hope to explain in future correspondence, I’ve had this view since 1973 when the Lord revealed it during the Yom Kippur War.

Whether or not I am correct in my view of the ten kings, it should be evident to anyone that the Antichrist, regardless of his origin, will be able to command the forces of the Islamic world through a common hatred of what Daniel calls “the holy covenant” (Dan 11:28, 30). Not only in Daniel, but in the larger context of Old Testament prophecy, this final war against the covenant is depicted as a presumptuous defiance of God’s claim to the Land, the city of Jerusalem, and the sacred institutions of a restored Jewish worship. (Side note: The sacrifices that will be restored by unbelieving Jews are entirely without efficacy. This will become clear when they find themselves again cast out of the Land in flight from the Antichrist. Still, the “holy pace” in Jerusalem has real significance. As a divinely commanded token of the covenant, it remains holy and set apart, not simply because it is sacred to Jews, but by reason of the Word of God. Its sanctity does not inhere in the faith of the worshippers, but in the authority of the God who elects. This is why Satan desires to defile the place that bears God’s name, and to possess the city from which the Son is destined to rule all nations […]

Jump to full post

reggiekelly

April 29, 2010

Dan 2:44 – The Kingdom Shall Not Be Left To “Another” People

[…] You mention Daniel and the issue of the millennium. I can’t say much at the moment, but I know you’ll agree that there much more at issue here than mere questions of how different texts should be interpreted. I believe the battle is more spiritual than that. I believe how we see Israel is a gauge of how we see God. The tragic story of the church’s historic rejection of God’s declared intentions towards Israel is beyond mere flesh and blood.

Since time will not permit more, I want to call your attention to just one verse that is telling of so many others. It is Daniel 2:44. Notice that the scripture says “in the days of these kings.” What days? What kings? Dan 7:24 makes clear that the kings in view here are the ten kings that are contemporary with the final Antichrist. In John’s apocalypse, he is the beast that tramples down Jerusalem for the last 42 months (Rev 11:2; 13:5) before Christ’s return. Thus, it could hardly be clearer that these then kings are immediate contemporaries of the Antichrist. They are united with him through their mutual hostility against “the holy covenant” (Dan 11:29, 30). In this context, the term “holy covenant” is clearly identified with the ‘literal’ holy places and institutions, which are situated in a very literal Jerusalem (Dan 9:27; 11:31; 12:11; Mt 24:15-16). Hence, the Antichrist’s assault on Jerusalem is a further chapter in Satan’s long war against the covenant, which in this context is shown to be inseparably related to the literal Land and people of Israel […]

Jump to full post

reggiekelly

March 6, 2010

Israel’s ‘Divine Right’ to the Land

[…] The issue of Jewish right to the Land and the city of Jerusalem will be the great stumbling block of the last days leading to the time of the unequaled tribulation (Jer 30:7; (Dan 12:1; Mt 24:21). The offense that the Land belongs to the Jews by divine right will be magnified as the world finds greater and greater fault with a people who dig themselves an ever deepening hole by their desperate struggle to secure peace by the arm of the flesh. They will incur the wrath and disdain of many nations, particularly those Islamic nations that particularly despise the covenant that grants the Land to a people of no special regard (Ps 83: Ezek 35:5; 36:5; 38:2-3, 5-6).

In my view, Piper’s view undermines this basic conviction of scripture concerning the relationship of the Jew to the Land. Furthermore, it opens the way for the church to turn its head away from the growing chorus of anti Zionism. The outcry against the “Zionist state” is not merely a protest against Israeli politics, it is a disdain for the covenant of election. The new anti Zionism masks the old anti-Semitism. But it ends in the same blood. It is really the secret envy that exists in every natural heart against the sovereignty of a divine election that has nothing to do with human merit.

Jews in unbelief do what unbelievers do. Get used to it! […]

Jump to full post

reggiekelly

December 16, 2009

The Tents of Judah

[…] I’ve often marked the Lord’s specificity in His mention of Judea. Why not all of Israel? One would think that a modern invasion force would threaten all of the Land with equal devastation. Well, apparently not at first. And isn’t it particularly interesting that Jerusalem and the nearby West Bank are the two areas in hottest international contention. Jerusalem being the coveted capital of the new Palestinian state. The impression I get is that the Antichrist who has become a figurehead of Islam (as I believe) or who is a political champion of the Muslim world’s claims on the Land (as believed by others), will lead a multinational force in a sudden invasion that will catch Israel off guard and will overwhelm the nation militarily. This happens in the middle of the week (3.5 years after a delusive peace “league”). That is when we will see the abomination of desolation that begins the 42 months of siege (great tribulation). From this point, the Antichrist is physically present in Jerusalem (Dan 11:45). What will this mean for the Jewish inhabitants of the Land? It is clear what it will mean for those living in Jerusalem and the neighboring region of Judea (modern West Bank). That is where many of the settlers reside who take a covenant view of the Land. […]

Jump to full post

tomquinlan

September 9, 2009

An Alternate View on the Nature and Origin of Anti-Christ

The question is who are “the people of the prince that shall come?” Are we to understand this of the Romans that destroyed Jerusalem in 70AD? Does this mean then that we are to trace the coming prince to Roman descent and ancestry? Or, could this refer more particularly to the ‘immediate’ people of a yet future Antichrist that will once more destroy the city and a yet future sanctuary? I take the latter view. Of course, the strength of the former view is that in Dan 2 & 7 the fourth kingdom is clearly Rome. For this cause, many expositors believe they must locate the rise of the Antichrist out of a ‘revived Roman empire’, and therefore expect the Antichrist and his ten nation confederacy to originate in Western Europe among the common market countries. I do not believe this view is necessary for the following reasons: …

Jump to full post