Hi Reggie. If you get the time would you watch this video and let me know your opinion? It gets good about 17 minutes in. I don’t agree with the stance on Torah, but the prophetic timeline is very interesting!
I believe this is one that I’ve seen with some friends at their house. If I recall correctly, it held forth the somewhat ‘tentative’ but serious proposal that the evidence points to the revelation of the Antichrist on March 22, 2013. I say, ‘no way, Jose!’
When time permits, I want to compare notes with you a bit about your difference with my view on the full futurity of Daniel’s last week, something I can show not only exegetically, but from the church fathers (Hippolytus in particular), as no mid 19th century invention of dispensationalism. In the meantime, it is sufficient, I would expect, to appeal to something you and I happily agree on, namely our mutual view that Dan 11:23 to verse 31 describes the events leading up to the abomination.
Now, of course, if one sees no need for a peace arrangement that fulfills Dan 9:27; 11:23 and the covenant with death and hell (Isa 28:15, 18) that provides for Israel’s declaration of “peace and safety” (1Thes 5:3), and IF the revelation of the Antichrist is NOT (as I’m persuaded) at the threshold of the abomination in connection with Satan’s dejection by Michael in the middle of the week (Dan 12:1 with Rev 12:7-14). In other words, if the AC can appear completely independently of these preliminary events, then, of course, he’s subject to just appear at anytime. But then what events would distinguish his parousia? Surely, at very minimum, you’d agree it would be his violation of the holy place at Jerusalem.
Apart from such preliminary signal events, the revelation of the Antichrist can be just whenever anyone’s dates suggest that he’s on the scene. Apart from something tangible, as Paul’s identification of his appearing with standing in the temple, then its up for grabs and what is there to distinguish his presence? If the temple of God is NOT the holy place in Judea, then we may suppose the AC appears when he stands up in the church, or in the Holy See at Rome, and forces worship on Sunday, demanding worship on pain of death, as in the view of the replacement oriented 7th day adventists.
You’re agreed, are you not, that Paul is speaking of the abomination? If so, then you’d be agreed that Dan 11:23-30 must happen first. On my part, I believe the revelation of the man of sin is something more than merely identifying who the Antichrist is.That will become clear enough by the events of Dan 11:23-30 BEFORE the abomination. I see the ‘revelation’ of the man of sin to subsist in a transitional moment of demonic incarnation that emboldens his violation of the holy place at Jerusalem. I see this as the finishing of the mystery of iniquity in the incarnation of the seed of the Serpent in the coming prince. I understand, of course, that that postulate didn’t sit well with you, and when time permits I hope to take further pains to make the case and to distance my position from some unfortunate ‘guilt by association’ with dispensational presuppositions. I believe you’re confounding something of the ‘baby’ with the proverbial, ‘bath water,’ but that’s another discussion. In the meantime, if you believe that the manifestation of the man of sin is where Paul puts it in relation to Antichrist’s invasion of the temple at Jerusalem, it would seem to me that you’d want to ask, “where’s the preliminary and preparatory events of Dan 11:23-30? Can that much be squeezed in before March 23, 2013? I don’t think so, and I shouldn’t expect that you would either in view of our mutual position on Dan 11:21-31.
I’m also glad that you’re not impressed with their position on the Torah, as I believe it is a forerunner of a very great deception that will test the body of Messiah to the core. Furthermore, if their views are as close as they appear to 7th day adventism, then I wouldn’t be surprised if they do not also spiritualize all things regarding temple and Jerusalem, which would make it all the easier to expect Antichrist to just show up independently of such events according to some astronomical calculations based on a combination of the feasts and the constellations.
In appreciative friendship, Reggie
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Followup Question:
Let me ask you this…do you believe as I think Art (Katz) did that the second coming is very soon?
It is always time to be urgent and watchful, as the time of His coming is, in one sense, always ‘at hand.’ In one sense the church at all times live at an equidistance to His return, as none of the wicked will escape the terror, and none of the righteous will miss the glory of that day. It has also always been time to know the truth; and the truth has always been that before Jesus can come, the Antichrist must first be revealed. Even this does not happen in a vacuum, but in connection with a series of clearly foretold signal events that can only take place around a last days crisis over Jerusalem, a “Jewish” Jerusalem.
I’ve known Art since his arrival at the Ben Israel property in ’74. Years before I joined the community, a close brother from our community in Texas joined Art’s community in northern MN. I would come up and they would come down and we would go on ministerial forays with Art. At that time Art’s emphasis was not on Israel and the last days. That would come later, but even then we would often talk about the stance of the messianics in the Land, and really everywhere, who’s watchword in those days was, “comfort ye my people.”
As much as we were grateful and desirous of any comfort, however momentary, from Israel’s tragic course through history, and as much as we were tendered and grateful for the small measure of asylum that Aliyah might offer in terms of momentary respite from their long sufferings, still, I would often point out that this slogan was premature in terms of the big picture. Israel would NOT have this promised comfort until their “warfare is accomplished,” and that would only come AFTER Jacob’s trouble, which necessarily awaits the event of the abomination in Jerusalem. The messianics in the Land were simply NOT reckoning on this, at least not then, as confirmed by many statements from them.
This began a line of thought in Art that was more cross centered in his understanding of prophecy, which until this time, existed as almost a ‘studied avoidance’ of idle prophecy excitement that distracted from discipleship and the cross in the believer’s sanctification. We would often pray with great travail of spirit that Art would catch the importance of the prophetic scriptures, particularly the details of Daniel, as the Lord’s appointed mouthpiece. This came when he saw the outbreak of the intifada. The manifestation of such implacable hatred, such that would never be assuaged by any kind of political accomodation, was, to him, a clear portent of Israel’s necessary death before resurrection, a key motif that would characterize his word to the nations in the days to follow.
At first, his view was much like your own. He saw nothing in scripture that had to be fulfilled before the sudden rise of Antichrist and the advent of Israel’s last and greatest tribulation. This made him ‘persona non grata’ to many, really most, of the messianic leadership in Israel and elsewhere. This was about the time I joined the community and was usually the one that would travel with Art. Through our studies and conversations, he gave up the view that Jacob’s trouble was imminent. He took the view that you, at least for now, associate with dispensationlism.
My hope, in brotherly love, is that you will reconsider as I trust I can present some things to your attention on this question that you’ve not considered, but, of course, that remains to be seen. All is to say, I believe some things must happen before even the Antichrist can come. Those things, in my view are critical to the preparation of the body, both practically and spiritually. There MUST be something answering to the ‘temple of God’ on the forbidden temple mount that can count as the ‘holy place’ situated in Judea (2Thes 2:4 with Mt 24:15; Dan 11:31), as this will be the scene of the Antichrist’s initial desecration that signals the great tribulation.
There MUST be a restored sacrifice in that ‘holy place’ that he (the prince who exalts himself), NOT Jesus, ‘takes away’ (Dan 8:11; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11). There MUST be a false league with this dangerous enemy who, from the beginning, studies to destroy the covenant he confirms with the many (Dan 9:27; 11:23; Isa 28:15, 18; 1Thes 5:3, which I believe has the false security of Eze 38:8, 11, 14 in mind). This deadly league (Dan 11:23) among nations with the Antichrist being one participant among “many” will “confirm” (give formal recognition) the “holy covenant” (Dan 11:28, 30) that will be violated in the middle of the week (Dan 9:27) to being the last 3 1/2 years (half week) of unequaled tribulation (Jer 30:7; Dan 12:1, 7, 11; Mt 24:21).
If this be so, it means that some very seismic changes will have to come about in the region, because, as it stands now, the Islamic world threatens to “open hell” if Israel so much as assays to approach the sacred ground of the ‘noble sanctuary,’ this would “open hell.” So I believe a war is imminent that will completely re-configure the politics of the region and that Israel will have an advantage in the negotiations that they do not presently have. This may, of course, happen very soon. In my reading of Mic 5:1-4 and Hos 5:15; Hos 6:1-2, there is approximately 2000 years (the 2 days of Hos 6:2) before the Lord’s rejection and return to heaven and His return at the end of the tribulation. At that time, the rejected Messiah ben Joseph is revealed to His estranged brethren who will then answer, “blessed is He who comes in the Name of the Lord …” (Mt 23:39). I see the third day as the time when Israel lives in His sight throughout the balance of the the thousand years.
Until then, their house is left desolate. It is the designated ‘holy place’ that He appointed. It is the ‘temple of God’ that was consecrated by His Word and commandment, but the sacrifice is NOT, of course, one that He accepts. It is rather a statement of their abiding rejection of Jesus’ sacrifice. This is clear since those that offer it are appointed for the “days of vengeance and wrath upon this people that “all” things written in the prophets might be fulfilled.”
In all the great ‘until’s’ of prophecy it is clear that the Jew outside of Christ is under the discipline / wrath of the covenant. However, they are no less elect and beloved and appointed to be “born in one day” (Isa 66:7-8) after Zion’s travail at the post-tribulational day of the Lord. So while I don’t see the Lord’s return as imminent; I do see it as very soon. In fact, I believe it MUST be very soon, because I am firm in my conviction that we are at the very far end of the two days of Hos 6:2, which I believe speaks of the hidden interim between His advents that has come to light in the mystery of the gospel.
I am praying that you and your wife are led faithfully and graciously, with much mercy and kindness, to your appointed place of service, and that the Holy Spirit will lead you into all truth.
Your friend in the fray, Reggie
Dave
Reggie Kelly
Toddwott
