My (Updated) Thoughts On Where We Are in Relation to the 70th Week of Daniel

I was asked to share my thoughts on where we are now in relation to the end times. I suppose that there are a lot of people wondering about how close we are to seeing the start of the seventieth week of Daniel, the end time seven year period that is commonly referred to as “tribulation”, with conflict escalating in the Mideast. Therefore, it may be best to answer the request I received in an article in case there are other people who are wondering about the same thing.

  • Today I’ll try to provide people a sense of where I think we are now in relation to the start of the seventieth week of Daniel.

Two disclaimers before I begin:
  1. I am not a prophet nor do I claim to be one. Therefore, I can easily be wrong about how close we truly are to the start of the seventieth week of Daniel.
  2. I will not attempt to address how close I think we are to the Rapture in this article. The reason I will not attempt to address how close I think we are to the Rapture is that the timing of the Rapture is something that there is not agreement on (Pre-Trib vs. Mid-Trib vs. Pre-Wrath vs. Post-Trib).
Despite the current tension in the Middle East, I do not think the start of the seventieth week of Daniel is imminent yet. I think the major political change and instability in the Middle East seen over the past two years is just the beginning of a prolong period of great turmoil in the region. I expect there’ll be even more regime change and even more conflict in the Mideast, particularly between Israel and its neighbors, in the future.
  • I still would not be surprised if there is a major Mideast war in the future that provides the individual who will become the Antichrist an opportunity to gain acclaim by formulating a major Mideast peace deal.
    • Whether or not the current tension between Israel and Hamas escalates into a regional war is something that is worth watching for.
I still expect there to be increasing levels of economic, political, geopolitical, and social instability in the world in the coming years. Many things have happened in the past couple of years, but I think current global conditions are relatively calm compared to what I think the world is going to be like in the future.

  • I think global conditions will deteriorate so much in the coming years that a large majority of people who look back at this current time period will think that things were relatively good now.

Although I don’t think the start of the seventieth week of Daniel is imminent, I expect the seventieth week of Daniel to begin well within the lifetime of many people. I honestly think that the start of the seventieth week of Daniel is only less than ten years away…

  • If the start of the seventieth week of Daniel is indeed only ten years or less away, then the next several years will be very chaotic. These past couple of years may have been just a small preview of the chaos that will transpire in the world over the next several years.

Again, I’m not a prophet nor do I claim to be one. Thus, there is always the possibility that I can be wrong. I am just providing my opinion, and I hope people have a better idea of how I see things after I’ve expressed my thoughts in this article.

The next article I post should be about Micah chapter 5…

43 comments: (+add yours?)

SIASL said...

Have you ever considered that there is only one half week left of Daniels seventy weeks? Or should I say that part of the 69th week and the 70th week ran concurrent? Could Daniel's "sealing up" the book be seen in how these weeks are measured such as a "slide rule"? And that "sealing up" be his writing about 4 events all at one time leaving up to us guided by the Holy Spirit to discern.(Proverbs 25:2 or James 1:5)And where does scripture say there is 7 years of tribulation? I understand there is great tribulation to come upon us but shouldn't we be looking at it from God's point of view and that is "redemption"?

Prophecy Proof Insights said...

Never considered the idea that the 69th and the 70th week ran concurrent.


I rather use the term "70th week of Daniel" than to say a seven year tribulation since the 70th week of Daniel isn't exactly seven typical years in length. I only mention "seven years of tribulation" because that's what most people hear from Bible prophecy commentators. I don't see people using the term "70th week of Daniel" a lot.

SIASL said...

I am sorry I didn't say that there was a complete overlapping or concurrent running of the 69th and 70th week. What I see is the "Messiah being cut off"(Calvary) ended the 69th week and the 70th began when Christ read Isaiah 61 in the temple which started his "covenant" of redemption.(Isaiah 42:6) That would leave 3 1/2 years left. With both halves of this covenant of Redemption separated by HIS crucifixion and resurrection purchasing 2000 years for the "fulness of the Gentiles" which is about to end soon. All of this "time" and the 2300 days at the end of Daniel Chapter 8 along with Daniel Chapters 9 and 12 can then be reconciled by the Hebrew calendar and the fall festivals.

Connie said...

If half of the weeks ran concurrently, does that not make God a liar, for He promised them 490 weeks, not 489 1/2, which is what it would be if they ran concurrently. Also, the way the verses are laid out, it indicates that the temple is destroyed before the covenant is confirmed. I personally don't see how one can read that they run concurrently from a grammatical reading of the verses.

Connie said...

Sorry that should have read 490 years not weeks, and 486 1/2 years not 489 1/2. (or 69 1/2 weeks, not 70). Was writing in a hurry.

SIASL said...

No. God is not a liar. But we have to look "deeper" at what these "weeks"(of years) are "determining". A good place to start is to look "Grammatically" at the "covenant to be confirmed" the first question to ask is what covenant and confirmed by whom? Religious doctrine tells us that this a peace covenant and I believe this is in error. The "grammar" says "he" shall confirm and the closest antecedent would go back to verse 26 and that would be the Messiah. Modern doctrine believes "he" is the anti-Christ or it's spirit but if you look at the grammar it says "the people of the prince" which is "they". Also, if one looks at Daniel 10:13 we are revealed what a "prince" is. Here Michael is referred to as "one of the chief princes". He is chief prince over the Hebrew people. So the people of the prince, fallen angel, are the Romans. When YESHUA spoke in the temple reading Isaiah 61 the covenant of Redemption was "confirmed" and again later in the Garden of Gethsemane. In fact 40yrs later when the "people of the prince" destroyed the temple "the oblation did cease" etc. and is not performed today. Not temple no oblation. In the "midst" of the week is an interesting transliteration of the Torah. It can also mean the "middle" of the week and I believe Calvary was that beginning of the "midst". And there the Messiah purchase 2000 years for the fulness of the gentiles and that 2000 year "half time" is almost over and the last "3 1/2 years of redemption" is about to start. Another thing I suggest we all look closer at what is really written in the Torah. If you compare what is written in Daniel by the King James scribes vs. the Torah you will see there are many "transliteration" errors especially in Daniel 11 where the scribes had a hard time determining between "it" and "he". For that is how Daniel "sealed up" what is written. When YESHUA spoke of "not one jot or tittle" would be changed HE was speaking of the Torah or at best the Tenach. Why should we look closer at the Torah? In the story of Ruth where did she and Boaz place their new born child to get nourishment? Torah is often confused with "law" but it's true meaning is "instruction". And I pray that the Holy Spirit discerns to all the truth in that Mighty Book.

Prophecy Proof Insights said...

This might interest you Connie... I'm gathering a lot of passages into tables that indicate that Yom Kippur at the end of the 70th week is going to be a really really eventful one. I've read some of your thoughts on that Yom Kippur... I agree with you a lot about it.

Connie said...

Can't wait to see what you've got.

Prophecy Proof Insights said...

I'm trying to figure out what information to share next. I'm currently working on an article about the everlasting gospel of Revelation 14:7 but I'm almost done with an article about the timing when the fullness of the Gentiles ends. hmmmm

Connie said...

I'm curious to see what you have to say about the first, and have written on the second myself within various articles. I'll be interested to see if we agree.

SIASL said...

As I have read thru your doctrinal beliefs above I am reminded of the Apostle Paul telling us to work out our salvation as though running a race and I remember that I have run the path of "your" doctrine many years back and now have no desire to return to that part of the race but to continue on to the finish line. I have no desire to banter over interpretations or selective verses that are much like putting square pegs in round holes. For around those square pegs there is always a "gap" and that is what I encourage you to seek. One such example is the word "fulfillment" and I encourage you to look closer to the Greek Strong definitions. Another, to look closer on who God's people are and that you might visit what Paul says in Galations. Even there he tells us also that the "school master" is not longer needed when there is faith and that faith is an individual experience so those who have it and then there are those who don't. In Galatians we are also told we are all "one" not Jew nor Greek, nor Male nor Female etc. but one. Doesn't fit to well with a "gentile" vs "Jewish" church but that is what the adversary would like you to believe. Yes, there is much leaven in the dough as it was at the time of the Pharisees. But, to the 490 years, God is not a liar but HE has changed his mind from time to time and lucky for us. For if it weren't for Moses interceding on behalf of all those who were in disobedience we would all be in more serious trouble. 490 years, you might look at Mark 13:20 or Matthew 24:22 but pause and see if you can look at it from a more "spiritual" view for that "pouring in" by Yeshua our Savior is where he has taken the understanding of the Word. And as the host of this web site is ready to write about "Yom Kippur" where else is there to go for understanding but the "Torah" which means "teaching". There you will see the "meat"(grain) offerings and I encourage you to look at the parables of Yeshua to figure them out. But then let's agree to disagree and pray that YHVH thru HIS might SPIRT reveals the truth to both of us. I will pray for that to happen.

Prophecy Proof Insights said...

okay, I'll aim for the everlasting gospel article. That one is going to take some time, but I may publish an article defining "the end of the world" as it will be connected to the everlasting gospel article.

Connie said...

I don't know how Wayne feels, but my response would be to ask first, does he take Scripture literally, or spiritualize things? Second does he take things grammatically and chronologically, or does he have to manipulate verses and twist them around to come to his conclusions? I know that I am open to reading other people's ideas, and have changed my mind on a number of things when I see that the Scriptures bear out what is being said. I also know that Wayne is very open minded, but the minute I see that someone is ignoring, manipulating, or spiritualizing Scriptures out of context, I immediately get highly suspicious of what they say.

Added to that is the fact that these days I have seen so many people saying that they have received a "new" revelation directly from God that nobody else has ever managed to deduce. Usually these theories are completely diverse from each other (which makes you wonder if "God" doesn't know what is going on since "He's" telling everyone a different story) and tend to not work out for the people (remember Harold Camping?) as they usually are date predictors and end up with egg on their faces. As I, myself, do not believe that God is delivering the truth to only one individual, I am skeptical to begin with when this "new" revelation is so completely different from anything anyone has ever taught before. God's Word is only spiritually discerned, granted, but I don't believe He is that obscure that only one individual has been given the ability to know the truth.

While I don't necessarily agree with the theory held by the greatest number of people, when I studied the Scriptures on my own and started looking around, I found that the conclusions I had come to had also been discovered by others that had used the same method of exegesis - literal, grammatical, and chronological. We all tended to come to the same conclusions, which is what I think God intended. He did say that prophecy is not for private interpretation, and the only way to avoid that is to use that form of exegesis.

Connie said...

Thank you for the info. It gives me a place to start some investigation, however without the whole theory I can't really examine it to see if I think it has any validity. What I don't quite understand is, what event is being looked for to happen in this year? The signing of a covenant? The rapture? The abomination of desolation? the building of a temple? It would help if I understood from what theological viewpoint the author was coming. I have heard so many versions of how the seventy sevens are to be interpreted that I wouldn't know which one the author is expecting to happen. And it goes without saying that there are multiple versions of when the rapture will occur. And some believe the temple is our body rather than a building. You see how hard it would be for me to determine whether or not this person's theory is correct without further information?

Connie said...

Just an added comment, to the other I just wrote. I just did the math and 490 added to 1535 comes to 2025. So why the importance of 2013? That's a twelve year period not seven.

Prophecy Proof Insights said...

I wonder why the author is so hesitant to release something that they believe to be true. They should not be afraid of the repercussions of releasing this information if they are 100% confident that the information is correct.


I don't believe the end times is ready to begin in the year 2013, so I wonder how strong this proposed solution is when it can be disproven if nothing happens in 2013.

Connie said...

I wondered about that too. Why the secrecy? The only thing I can think of is that he isn't 100% sure and is afraid of appearing to look foolish like so many others when it is proven wrong. I can see wisdom in holding back in that case. But then why not just present it as a possible idea or theory, rather than a "new revelation" that is true? We all come up with ideas and possibilities as to what Scripture could mean in obscure passages, so I don't see why keep it a secret, as long as he presents it as a possible theory with the caveat that it is just a theory. That would give the rest of us a chance to look it over and find any flaws, so that the theory could be refined. That is one of the benefits of finding people who do research and check things and showing them your theory, so that if they find a flaw in it you can go back and reassess it. Of course that is supposing that you are open to your theory having flaws. I know I've had to refine my beliefs a number of times over the years (from pre-trib to pre-wrath to last trump) to reconcile discrepancies and inconsistencies within what I was believing at various times.

At this point the EARLIEST I could see anything happening is next fall, and all things would have to come together to make it happen. I don't believe anything can happen this spring or summer, as I believe it must begin sometime from the early fall to early winter, because that is when it ends. I'm not going to hold God down to an absolute number of days, because He only specified that the second half was a particular number of days. He never said anything about the first half, so I don't want to add to God's Word what is not there. I keep watch every autumn to see what happens and when it passes figure that this isn't the year. Unless of course the covenant is something that is not made public for a while. If that were the case, I will assume if I see the temple go up that it is the first sign and we are into it.

I too would like to see what he has to see if there is anything to be gleaned from it. From what Luke said, I already see that there might be a problem. It seems, from what little Luke said, that the work is based upon the idea that the word weeks is plural in the first few verses but singular in verse 27. To me there is no hidden secret in that. In the first verses he is talking about multiple weeks(sevens) of years, hence the plural weeks, but in verse 27 he is talking about the one week (seven) of years, hence the singular. I don't see how he creates a whole new theory around this use of the word. It just seems the grammatically correct usage to me. But then I don't know all the details, so can't see where he is going with this. What makes me think it doesn't work as he said, is that it clearly states that at the end of the 69 weeks the Messiah is killed or cut off. How does he incorporate that little problem into his 490 years starting at 1535? Christ doesn't come and get killed again. And why would 2013 be of importance if he sees the end at 2025? I need to see his entire theory to really understand.

Connie said...

Well, that does clear up some of my questions as to how the date was arrived at. As for the Gog/Magog war, I see that happening at Armageddon I, and Armageddon II (after the millennium) as the description matches that of Armageddon. I see the chapters in reverse order with chapter 38 being after the millennium and chapter 39 at the end of Daniel's 70th week. They burn the wood for seven years into the millennium, and bury the bodies from Armageddon for 7 months after that event. I see no problem with this, as the world will have been decimated of its forests and grass, etc. from the judgments. They will need the wood to burn. I have found no problems or conflicts with putting those chapters at those points in time in that way. In fact they seem to fit very well there.

As for the pre-trib rapture, I don't hold to that, but even if I did, my question would still be, as God has been known to only deliver His people from His wrath just as His wrath is beginning, (e.g. Noah, Lot) why would you believe that God removes Christians literally years before that event? By what defense of Scripture could you come to that conclusion? There would be no purpose. We have not been promised freedom from war, pestilence, horrors, martyrdom, or terrible fiery trials. In fact Peter tells us "Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you: But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings; that, when His glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding
joy." These are a part of life that many Christians have endured. Should the Laodicean church of today be exempt? Do they not need refining more than any other church? Why remove them just because times get tough?

As for God dealing with the church and Israel at the same time, I guess you don't think of the elect or the saints as being part of the Church, for Daniel, Matthew, and Revelation teach that the elect or saints will have to endure the same time of Jacob's trouble as Israel does. In fact, the woman (Israel) is protected while Christians are handed over to Satan, so they ARE being dealt with at the same time. I know the typical answer to that it to say that they are tribulation saints, but I find no place in Scripture where God separates out His people into two different Brides of Christ in that manner. He says that He will send a delusion so that those who have not believed the truth before it all begins won't believe after, so I don't see millions of people coming to Christ during this time.

I also have trouble with Christians being appointed to God's wrath when He says that they aren't, but it is inescapable that they must be, if the definition of God's wrath is Daniel's 70th week.(which I don't believe it is, but that is another discussion entirely)

I already see a number of problems with this scenario, (some mentioned above) so I think you are wise to keep an open mind that the rapture may not happen this year, because I have a feeling that is how it will turn out. If it did happen, then happy days.

Connie said...

Just answering the first two questions that I mentioned at the start of my posts below (or above depending on where this pops up after I post it) took most of my evening until late at night, so I will have to address the rest of your problems as time permits.

Prophecy Proof Insights said...

I appreciate you taking all that time to share your thoughts. I often learn new things when reading your thoughts. Our viewpoints on the timing of Ezekiel 38 and Ezekiel 39 are almost the same. The many verses I've gathered support your belief that Ezekiel 38 is millennial.

Connie said...

Below is my very lengthy posts (5, I think) answering your questions and problems. After going over them, maybe you could answer a few questions for me.


Why does John represent an unbelieving Jew in Matt. 24, but the church in Rev. 4? How can he represent both. Is it just because that is what he needs to be for the theory to work? I can't find any Scriptural reason for this assumption. Why when pre-trib insists on taking things literally do they spiritualize this out of the ballpark to get where they want?



If the church domes up with John, and he is now in heaven, then where is the church. The teaching that the church is no longer mentioned is not a case for your view, but against it. They are conspicuous by their absence. The martyrs under the altar are visible, as are all the tribulation martyrs on the sea of glass. And don't say that the 24 elders represent them, because they don't. That's just reaching because there is no answer. Everyone else is visible as themselves. Why spiritualize the 24 elders when nobody else is "spiritualized" in presence. There is no reason to do this. Again it is done because they can't explain their absence otherwise.


Revelation says there are two resurrections. The righteous and the wicked. Pre-trib has many. Where is the scriptural justification for that? Daniel is told he will be resurrected after the time of trouble. So Does Christ only return with those who died after His death and leaves all the O.T. saints in heaven twiddling their thumbs while He resurrects everyone else? How do you defend that?


Why does pre-trib use the verse that Christians are not appointed to wrath to get themselves out of the 70th week, then turn around and condemn millions of Christians to that very wrath that they say Christians aren't appointed to? It is completely illogical. And don't say that tribulation Christians don't fall under the promise. A Christian is a Christian, right? Are these tribulation Christians any less Christian than the Laodicean Christians of today's church? Does the Laodicean Church deserve to not be chastised and refined? Doesn't having all these Christians in wrath just totally invalidate the verse?


Why does pre-trib say of the rapture that nobody knows the day or hour when that verse clearly is speaking about the Second Coming in Matt. 24. From a pre-trib view, that verse is irrelevant. We are told that we are NOT in darkness that the Day of the Lord should overtake us as a thief. For some reason that verse is always skipped over when that passage is read.


If Daniel's 70th week is the Day of the Lord/God's wrath, and we are told that Elijah will come before the Day of the Lord, and if the rapture is the event which starts the Day of the Lord (this is Scriptural) then how can it be imminent? We must see Elijah first, right? That means it can't be imminent, because Elijah hasn't come yet.


These are some of my problems, just to name a few. I have many more. Maybe you can answer them.

Connie said...

Are you going to be posting an article on these chapters? I'd be interested to see where we differ. You are very good at analyzing and finding all the data. What I threw together last night was only about five hours worth of work, so not very thorough, but I tried to cover the points needed for the debate. Same with the rest of the info from today. I wanted to get back to the subject and answer all the questions before it digressed too far away from the first post.

Prophecy Proof Insights said...

Yes, I will be posting at least one article on these chapters in the future. I have an article about the timing of Ezekiel 38 that is mostly complete. Where we may differ is the timing of Ezekiel 39, but it's not a big difference.

Connie said...

You don't see it at the end of the millennium?

Prophecy Proof Insights said...

I don't see Ezekiel 39 at the end of the millennium. I see it occurring at the end of the seventieth week of Daniel, but if I'm not mistaken you see the end of the seventieth week of Daniel at the end of the 1290 days instead of the 1260 days as I currently do. If I'm not mistaken, there'd only be a 30 day difference I see much of Ezekiel 38 as millennial.

Connie said...

Okay, I was really tired last night when I was writing. Did I say that I saw 39 at the end of the millennium and 38 as Armageddon? Ugh. I meant that 38 is the end of the millennium and 39 is Armageddon. Because I see them backwards I may have gotten confused, and even now my brain is so scrambled I'm not sure I said that right. I hope I didn't confuse the issue with Luke. That's why I tried to quote verses, so that I wouldn't make that mistake. I see the first chapter as being at the end of the millennium, the real Gog/Magog war. The next chapter seems to have more in common with Armageddon, although I know that it may also apply in some respects to the later Gog/Magog war. Only time will tell on how much it does. Since it is also called the Gog/Magog war, I can't dismiss it completely as not having anything to do with the millennial Gog/Magog war.

I see the trumpets ending at the 1260 days, because that is what Scripture says. The sixth trumpet (2nd woe) is over when the 2 witnesses are resurrected (day 1263/4). It is at this time that the last trumpet will sound and then I see the rapture occurring and the wrath of God beginning as the vials are poured out during remaining days until 1290. As Daniel is told that from the time of the abomination (and what seems to be implied is until the end of God's dealing with man) there will be 1290 days. I see Armageddon at the end of those 30 days from day 1260. God usually does not prolong His wrath and these vials are poured out quickly. I see the further 45 day period as the time of the sheep and goat judgment and the 1335th day as the first day of the millennium and rededication of the temple. If the rapture was on Yom Kippur, 75 days later is Hanukkah in most years. God does like to reuse event dates, so the rededication of the temple on the same day it was rededicated before makes a lot of sense. Both temples were destroyed on the same day, (Av 9) so it makes sense that they would be rededicated on the same day too (Kislev 25).

I know that everyone uses the 360 day year multiplied by seven to determine the length of the 70th week, but I think everyone is forgetting that even God included an occasional extra month in their calendar every few years to keep things seasonally correct. Within that seven years, there would be at least one extra month to straighten out the seasons. The difference between a 360 day seven year period with an added month (the extra 30 days at the end) and a 365 day seven year period is 5 days. Hence I think the extra 30 days of God's wrath are included in His timeline, even though Israel comes to believe in Christ on day 1260 or thereabouts. Since part of what is brought in at the end of the week according to Dan.9:24 is to bring in everlasting righteousness, seal up the prophecies and visions, and anoint the most Holy, I can't see that being totally fulfilled before God has cleansed the earth of all that wickedness. I am even open to the idea that it extends to the 1335th day to really fulfill the prophecy of anointing the most Holy.

Prophecy Proof Insights said...

I think you said everything like you meant it. You implied last night that Ezekiel 39 is connected with Armageddon and Ezekiel 38 is connected with the end of the Millennium. You said: "I see the chapters in reverse order with chapter 38 being after the millennium and chapter 39 at the end of Daniel's 70th week". This I agree with.

johns718 said...

I am not sure Ezekiel 38 occurs after the millennium. Persia is mentioned as one of the kingdoms that is allied with Gog-Magog in verse 5. In Daniel 2, however, Persia is destroyed completely without a trace in the days of the ten kings of the Antichrist when Jesus returns at Armageddon (Daniel 2:35). If that verse is to be taken literally, then Persia obviously would not be around after the millennium to participate.

Prophecy Proof Insights said...

What about the possibility of Ezekiel 38 referring to the geographic area that Persia resides? The pieces of Daniel's statue were major empires. Couldn't Persia participate in form of a political entity that is far less than the Persian empire?

Connie said...

I think you point out the key to this when you said that antichrist destroys Persia. How can he destroy Persia when "Persia" no longer exists. The world calls them Iran now. It also mentions Gomer, Togarmah, Meshach and Tubal and they do not exist today under those names either, so if that is
the criteria, then this prophecy must already have been fulfilled as
these places have ceased to exist by those names too. Is it not more
probable that this refers to the geographic area and people who have
inhabited this land over the centuries and millennia regardless of what
the name is? They are still the same national origin regardless of the
name change. For instance we still know that Iranians are Persians and
often refer to them as such even though the political name of the
country is now Iran. God uses the name that every age from the time
this was written will be able to identify, as before 1935, the people
reading the Bible would have no idea to whom Iran referred, (unless they
spoke Persian) but everyone knows who Persia is. So it would make no
sense for God to call the nations by modern names that people throughout
the centuries would not understand. Who knows, they may revert back to
their Biblical names during the millennium, so this may very well be what the area is called then.

johns718 said...

You may have misunderstood my post. Let me try to clarify.

I think we both agree that Daniel chapter 2 refers to the end of the 70th week when the Lord returns to defeat all of the enemies of Israel at Har Megiddo. Since the statue is struck on its feet and toes, the ten kings indeed seem to be in focus, as the toes are given significant attention in that passage.

I was not asserting that Persia was different from Iran; I simply was calling it by the same name as the Scripture. If you read my above post and insert the name "Iran" where I said "Persia", it should make more sense.

My point is this: if Iran is destroyed as a kingdom (by Jesus and the Saints -- not the Antichrist) *prior to the millennium* at Jesus' first reappearance at the Battle of Har Megiddo, I cannot see how Ezekiel 38 could occur after the millennium, seeing how Iran is still one of Gog-Magog's allies.

Does that make more sense? Or did you already understand what I was saying and I'm missing *your* point?

johns718 said...

That is exactly what I was thinking last night after I wrote that post. Your idea is the only way I see that Ezekiel 38 could occur after the millennium. There will undoubtedly be women and children and some men left behind in Iran after Har Megiddo; I am sure they will not all be destroyed. I suppose that, as Connie stated above, the name of Iran could still be used even though the kingdom itself would cease to exist, as appears to be the case with Gomer, Togarmah, Meshech, Tubal, and Magog.


I'm afraid I have only confused the matter more by throwing this out there, ha ha. Hopefully some of you scholars can find an answer somewhere that I have overlooked.

johns718 said...

Forget my first reply to your post. I see exactly what you are saying now. You were not thinking that I was implying that this had already taken place; you were simply stating why the name of "Persia" could still be used after it may be destroyed as a kingdom. Basically, you are in agreement with Wayne's reply to my post. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I will try to read more closely next time.



Again, you could very well be correct on this matter. I need to review both of your posts below to better understand why you both feel that Ezekiel 38 may occur after the millennium while Ezekiel 39 occurs before the millennium. The way I currently read both chapters, I feel that both chapters may describe events that pertain to two different battles, but did not necessarily feel that 39 occurs before 38. Since the language of the two chapters seems to smoothly flow from 38 into 39, if anything, I would have placed 38 before 39.

johns718 said...

I seem to agree with everything you said here. Regarding the Gog-Magog battles, I believe that the Gog-Magog war at the end of the Millennium will be the consummation of Ezekiel 38 and 39. I currently feel that what is quoted in Ezekiel 38 and 39 starts at Har Megiddo and is finished in Revelation 20, in no particular order.



The same is true of Daniel 2 concerning the statue of Nebuchadnezzar. Jesus already established his kingdom "in the days of these kings" -- ancient Rome, precisely -- that will one day overspread the earth. In doing so, he destroyed all four kingdoms spiritually. The consummation of that chapter will be the ultimate and final *physical* destruction of those kingdoms altogether.



The same is also true of all of the Old Testament prophecies concerning Babylon; its destruction began in 6th century B.C., and will be finalized during the Tribulation. The Old Testament prophecies describe events that pertain to both incidents.


I also agree with what you said about Antiochus being a sort of prototype of the Antichrist. The more I read these prophecies, the more I am beginning to seek more than one meaning for them. In some cases (if not all), their spiritual and physical meanings are interchangeable.

johns718 said...

Good. Would love to read it.

johns718 said...

Sorry to keep posting but let me clarify one more thing. I do not believe Iran could participate in the Revelation 20 battle as a political entity...PERIOD. I think it would have to be completely absorbed into the land of Magog and the remnant of its people no longer be ethnically identifiable as Iranians, just as Daniel 2:45 indicates.

Prophecy Proof Insights said...

Ezekiel 38 has details which are found in Millennium passages while Ezekiel 39 has details which seem to appear in end times passages. For instance, Ezekiel 38 talking about the general condition in the land of Israel is consistent with millennial massages about Israel. Ezekiel 39 has key details like the house of Israel knowing the Lord from that day forward which suggest end time relevancy.

johns718 said...

I am actually beginning to see some of what you're talking about. I read both chapters again last night and realized that. One of the more obvious clues appears to be Ezekiel 38:11. I won't say anymore and just let you write your piece on it.

Prophecy Proof Insights said...

Go ahead and continue if you like. Ezekiel 38:11 is definitely an interesting verse.

Dave Hume said...

When God Says Seventy weeks he really means it, The Beginning 70th week was fulfilled by John The baptist when he baptized Jesus and the descent of the holy Spirit upon Him.14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?
15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.
16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:

Dave Hume said...

http://cceministry.have2need.com/wpdebates/2009/01/23/audience-relevance/

Prophecy Proof Insights said...

I believe the everlasting righteousness aspect of the 70th week of Daniel will be fulfilled with the establishment of the kingdom of God on Earth at the sounding of the 7th trumpet (Daniel 7:27 and Revelation 11:15-18).

Dave Hume said...

We have an imputed righteousness, the right to worship the Father in Spirit and truth,. Because Christ was the ultimate once only perfect sacrifice ,reconciling us to the Father. The Lords Prayer starts with Our Father, which declares we are the sons of God. Christ reconciled us in the middle of Daniel's 70th week. The Gospel is the preaching of the glory of Christ to the Nations. The Kingdom is already manifested. Christ is our King and we make up his Kingdom. The nations were brought into the Kingdom by the Disciples and Paul, who preached the Good News. Christ our High Priest of the Melchizedek order.

Heb 6:20 Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.
Heb 7:1 For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;
Heb 7:10 For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him.
Heb 7:11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?
Heb 7:15 And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest,
Heb 7:17 For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.
Heb 7:21 (For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec:) Christ is the King of the KIngdom.

1Jo 3:1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.
Being Sons of God and the heirs of everlasting Life, the Church is the kingdom of God in manifestation.

Post a Comment