Category Archives: Featured Articles & Blogs

Is America the “Camp of the Saints” of Revelation 20:8-9 ?

This is real prophecy for our day, that for whatever reason, is not being taught. Be sure to scroll way down to see the pictures and tell us what you think!

For those of us who don’t see the magnitude of this disaster creeping up on us, maybe because you don’t live in one of our southern states in the U.S. or in Europe, watch these …


The Illegal Invasion of America



by Steven Hawk


For years I remember pondering what the phrase “Mountains of Israel” meant, while reading the book of Ezekiel. Thinking, “What did God mean when inspiring Ezekiel to use this uncommon phrase that most assume or overlook… If only one could figure out what it meant, more than half the battle of understanding this prophecy could be solved!”


Thē key component to understanding the prophecies of Gog and Magog are dependent upon knowing whose land (and not just assume it is talking about the old land of Israel) and what peoples these hordes invade and encompass. The revelation of that mystic prophetic phrase opens the door to much prophecy for our day. Please stick with the beginning as a basis is built for the interpretation being espoused. Most Christians today automatically look to the Middle East for prophecy since that’s where OT Israel resided and prophecy was fulfilled. However, what if God said that we, in NT times, should be looking elsewhere? After giving the matter much thought, I am convinced that He did just that.


Just past the halfway mark of this subtitle, you will get the climatic meaning of this long-concealed phrase and the rest of this article will continue to support that meaning, with a final summary of what was discussed to remind you the reader, of important key points. As a free gift for giving us your thoughts on this article, we will send you a magnificent “Ezekiel and Revelation parallel chart”! Email us with your thoughts and/or comment below!


Here are 3 instances in which Ezekiel uses the mysterious phrase Mountains of Israel:


Ezekiel 36:1 “And thou, son of man, prophesy unto the ‘mountains of Israel,’ and say, Ye ‘mountains of Israel’, hear the word of Jehovah.”


Ezekiel 38:8, “After many days thou shalt be visited: in the latter years thou shalt come into the land that is brought back from the sword, that is gathered out of many peoples, upon the ‘mountains of Israel,’ which have been a continual waste; but it is brought forth out of the peoples, and they shall dwell securely, all of them.”


Ezekiel 39:4, “Thou shalt fall upon the ‘mountains of Israel’, thou, and all thy hordes, and the peoples that are with thee: I will give thee unto the ravenous birds of every sort, and to the beasts of the field to be devoured.”


Again, it is interesting that we still use this metaphor, e.g. “the mountains of evidence persuaded him.”  Biblically, the lexeme “mountains” may refer to kingdoms, governments of men and nations. There are places in scripture where “mountain” does in fact reference the Kingdom of Jesus Christ, e.g. Micah 4:1 et al. Below, are two verses in Revelation in which John shows the target of these Gog and Magog armies as the “Camp of the Saints and the Beloved City”, the same group of peoples and place of residence Ezekiel calls the “Mountains of Israel.” Note he directly ties them to the Gog and Magog scenario and the invasion (encompassing) that ensues in these verses:


Rev 20:8-9 “and shall come forth to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to the war: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up over the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down out of heaven, and devoured them.”


Did you notice there’s no other way to correctly interpret this passage than this incursion occurs after the thousand years; also when Gog and Magog begin to transpire, Christ’s millennial reign has ended?


The Sometimes Unrealized Relation of Ezekiel 38-39 To Revelation 20


Some are promoting that Ezekiel 38, 39 & Revelation 20 are not synonymous events because one is an invasion within, and the other without the camp of the saints. I don’t think there is any biblical basis for that assertion and I would like to point out scripture that counters that. You will see the invasion works hand-in-hand with the coming military attack by weakening the camp of the saints in preparation, i.e. setting them up. These prophecies are confused as separate events because of a commonly misunderstood perception of the millennial reign, but there is only one Gog and Magog invasion prophesied in the Bible (not a Gog and Magog2). After sharing and scrutinizing this interpretation for years without any good counter argument, I see chronologically that the commonly referred to NT “last days” was a 1st century fulfillment (Mat 16:28, 24:34; Heb 10:37 et al), which happened before the millennium (pre-millennial); and is what is often confused with Ezekiel’s “latter or after years” which is after the millennium (post-millennial). The following are reasons why Ezekiel 38, 39 & Revelation 20:7ff correlate to warrant as the same post-millennium event:


  • Both books point to a future time in which a great many nations attack the people of God. For Ezekiel, these people are the restored house of Israel. For John, they are the camp of the saints and beloved city (v.9); the followers of Christ. Ezekiel states it’s for “the last days of the latter years” (not to be confused with “the last days of the Mosaic Marriage covenant age” and not in Ezekiel’s time, but a future prophecy, likewise Revelation 20 “when the thousand(s) years is expired,” i.e. latter years of the thousand years.


  • We now know most Christians have yet to grasp this point, Armageddon should not be viewed as something that is to occur in the future, but as God’s first-century vengeance upon the Old Covenant Jews for their failure to acknowledge Christ as their promised Messiah. This vengeance culminated in the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in AD70. Ezekiel’s latter years are NOT the commonly understood “last days (punishment of Judah) event described in Luke 19:42-44,” but are two very different events. Ezekiel’s “latter years” event is the vengeance of Yahweh God (instead of Christ) and He does just the opposite of the last days event, because in this event new covenant Jerusalem, the camp of the saints in Rev. 20:9, on the mountains of Israel are not destroyed like the 1st century Armageddon event. In complete contrast, Yahweh God destroys their attackers and saves this new Jerusalem! Again, for emphasis: this Gog/Magog battle is when God punishes and destroys the invaders, not the people of the land (like it happened in the past).


  • While Ezekiel does not directly mention the millennial reign of Christ like Revelation 20 does, he does in Ezekiel 37:26-28 mention events which lead up to 38 & 39 and places great emphasis on the peaceful situation the mountains of Israel are found in for a long period of time. God in the above Ezekiel 37 passage shows the nations, in a peaceful setting He will place and multiply His people. All this must be attributed to Christ’s heavenly reign over these Christian lands (Revelation 5:10, 20:6) during this “thousand(s) [chilioi] years” (in this case about 2,000 yrs.) having an effect upon the earth up until about the 20th century. Also, in Micah 4:6-8  In that day, saith Jehovah, will I assemble that which is lame, and I will gather that which is driven away, and that which I have afflicted; and I will make that which was lame a remnant, and that which was cast far off a strong nation: and Jehovah will reign over them in mount Zion from henceforth even for ever. And thou, O tower of the flock, the hill of the daughter of Zion, unto thee shall it come, yea, the former dominion shall come, the kingdom of the daughter of Jerusalem. The following verse indicates this long period of time will elapse in Ezekiel 38:8, then, “After many days thou shalt be visited: in the latter years thou shalt come into the land that is brought back from the sword, that is gathered out of many peoples, upon the mountains of Israel, which have been a continual waste; but it is brought forth out of the peoples, and they shall dwell securely, all of them.”


  • Incidentally, Zechariah 14:6-11 parallels a portion of time in the millennial kingdom (v.11) and brings up the same situation in which the mountains of Israel find themselves in Ezekiel 28:26, 38:8 “dwelling safely and confidently” using the same Hebrew language and words:


Zechariah 14:11 And men shall dwell therein, and there shall be no more curse; but Jerusalem shall “dwell safely“. Zechariah (a full exposition of chapters 12 – 14) for the first time known is explained from a future and Preterist perspective in the book! Sound like a contradiction in terms? See how it is not.

  • Revelation 20 speaks of the nations encompassed, comprising Gog and Magog as coming from the “four corners of the earth” (v.8) while Ezekiel 38, 39 emphasizes that the enemies of “my people Israel” come from “the uttermost parts of the north” (38:6, 15; 39:2). It is a mistake to assume that the difference in the description of the geographical origin of those who attack God’s people means that different sets of events are in view. The four corners of the earth (ehrets Hebrew word means land) in Revelation 20:8 as an ancient metaphor has strong indication as a reference to the cardinal points of the compass: N, S, E, W. Chuck Missler, renowned prophecy teacher, has argued these are different locations spoken of in these passages and therefore are different events. However Ezekiel 38:5-6 speaks of the bands, hordes and other peoples with them, that originally migrated (and are actually still coming) from this biblical “four corners of the land” that correlates well with Revelation 20:8. Ezekiel’s description in 39:2b “And I will bring you up from the recesses of the north, and will bring you on the mountains of Israel.” speaks of the direction they are lured into this land they are invading as opposed to where these hordes originated, so there is no problem with either correlation as Zionist Missler wrongly asserts.


  • There’s a progression of events in both books that coincide and have a biblical basis too involved and consistent in history to be coincidence. In our book you will learn how this Satan (better translated as “adversary”) has been let out of his prison for a little season (Rev 20:7-8) and how the events of Gog and Magog biblically had to immediately succeed those biblical prophecies, and according to the succession of recent events are on the world scene today!


  • Ezekiel spoke of a time (before this invasion occurs) in which he was to prophesy to this malevolent Gog in Ezekiel 38:14b “Shall you not know in that day when My people Israel dwells securely?” indicating that millennial time (thousand(s) is used as a great expanse and often not literal) of peace for Israel in comparison to times of old. God’s people were in that peaceful state of confidence right before the events of Rev 20:7 broke out!


  • John in Revelation 20 did not bring up Gog and Magog by coincidence, nor was he just drawing a comparison using ancient names as some assert, but was talking about that time Ezekiel spoke of when it would be fulfilled and identifies the perpetrators.


  • Ezekiel’s “latter years” (one passage in Ezekiel specified as “latter days” 38:16 can be described as “the latter days of the latter years”) which the YLT emphasizes well in Ezekiel 38:8 “After many days thou art appointed, In the latter end of the years..


  • If one compares the following 3 verses with what the Bible elsewhere states concerning events during the “Day of the Lord,” (in that day) it becomes clear that this passage describes events during the new covenant, pertaining to a redeemed Israel.


Eze_38:10 Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: It shall come to pass in that day, that things shall come into thy mind, and thou shalt devise an evil device:

Eze_38:14 Therefore, son of man, prophesy, and say unto Gog, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: In that day when my people Israel dwelleth securely, shalt thou not know it?

Ezekiel 39:22 So the house of Israel shall know that I am the Lord their God from that day and forward. (KJV)


A Faulty Premise in Mainstream Biblical Interpretation


There is a widespread tendency among readers of the Bible—including many who are considered to be authorities—to presume when Ezekiel refers to “the mountains of Israel” he’s referring to modern day Israel/Palestine today. This presumption may seem feasible to some, but it is mistaken. Given that the events foretold in Ezekiel 38-39 correspond to those of Revelation 20:7-10, the traditional interpretation of these passages of Scripture are incorrect in at least these areas:


  1. Christians that go along with these traditional assumptions are ignoring that this event is supposed to be after “the millennial reign of Jesus Christ”.
  2. They misidentify Gog (it is not Russia). It appears here, that we have been fed another Jewish fable to divert our attention.
  3. They misidentify Israel. So it’s not just the “land” and “people groups” many have wrong, but their chronological order as well.


If God was referring to “old covenant Israel” when He mentions “Mountains of Israel” in this Ezekiel prophecy, then why does He not just refer to them as just plain “Israel”, “my people Israel”, “children of Israel”, etc. as He did elsewhere in the OT?


  1. In similar fashion, if the Apostle Paul was referring to old covenant Israel when naming new believers in the NT “Israel of God” why didn’t he refer to them as just “Israel”?
  2. Only modern day Zionist Jews have returned, not the combined 12 tribes as required: chapters 36 & 37 to fulfill this prophecy, they are only the House of Judah 2 southern tribes i.e. Jews.
  3. Ezekiel 36:33-36 states that “in the day” (not at a later time after they possess the cities) these cities become inhabited their iniquities are cleansed. This cannot mean antichrist Jews, this is talking about a broad place and people with a new heart and God gives them His Spirit Ezk 36:25-28. That He would be their God and them His people, this is NT Christian language.


God would have used the usual names and phrases for His people like “my people Israel” for this prophecy to be consistent with the past unless He was speaking of His people during a different time in a different place. God does not just use nebulous phrases to confuse us; He is not the author of confusion. In Gal 6:16 Paul is referring to the “Israel of God” who are of the new covenant, a “new creation (Christians)” who walk by the rule of the Christ and did not follow after the rudiments (elements of the temple, the law, etc. of the old heaven and earth) that were passing away in his (Paul’s) day that consisted only of “vain genealogies (verse below), physical descendants”. He was not speaking of “old covenant Israel” but he was talking about Christianity.


Tit 3:9, “But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.”


In the same manner as the Bible admonishes “vain and unprofitable genealogies”, Jesus told the Pharisees their lineage would not help them gain salvation. Not because they were Esau’s lineage (still a son of Abraham) instead of Jacob’s either, to those Israel identity groups out there. He meant ANY physical, fleshly lineage did NOT give them special status with God anymore (Luk 3:8), that old covenant God had endured with them for the sake of His son fulfilling His promises, was passing in their day. It is clear that the phrase “Israel of God” Paul used would then be synonymous with the often used NT phrase “Church or assembly of God” which no one would likely argue is not referring to Christians (1Co. 1:2, 10:32, 11:22, 15:9, 2 Cor. 1:1, Gal. 1:13, 1 Ti 3:5, Acts 20:28). Israel was “called out and sanctified” as the ecclesia.


Besides in Ezekiel, the Phrase “Mountains of Israel” is absent
in the Bible except in one questionable passage


Intriguingly, with few exceptions among translations of the Bible, the phrase “mountains of Israel” is found only in Ezekiel. After a lexicon search for the terms “Mountains of Israel” as a phrase, one will discover that the KJV, LITV and Webster’s are the few out of many translations that do use this particular phrase elsewhere, but in these two verses only:


(KJV)Jos 11:16a Thus Joshua took all this land: the mountain country, all the South, all the land of Goshen, the lowland, and the Jordan plain—the mountains of Israel and its lowlands …

Jos 11:21a And at that time came Joshua, and cut off the Anakims from the mountains, from Hebron, from Debir, from Anab, and from all the mountains of Judah, and from all the mountains of Israel:.. (Notice mountains of Israel and Judah are distinct here?)

If the above translations are correct because the Hebrew words seem to be the same (seem to be, because there are instances where the original language has used the wrong Greek or Hebrew word and the YLT – for example – has caught it) could it be because this was one of the few times in history in which God was conquering His enemies for Israel (all 12 tribes) in which He was giving them the promise land and they would finally be living in it in peace (as America)? Keep in mind also, it is Mountains (plural). These things could be, but the contention here is that the YLT has caught another error (in the Hebrew) and corrected it. Where are the original languages wrongly copied you say? Here’s one example:


Most will clamor; I thought the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts were inerrant?! Actually only the original manuscripts which we don’t have (except for a few such as the dead sea scrolls) are wholly Holy-inspired. The assertion is the original Greek and Hebrew are more correct than English translations, but apparently man has had some biased corruption that entered even into the original languages.  Notice here the KJV uses all CAPS for the first LORD indicating the Father, but does not correct as the YLT does in the Hebrew translation to English below it:


(KJV) Luk 20:42 And David himself saith in the book of Psalms, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,


In these passages Jesus Himself states that the Father is greater than He (John  [more properly the 4th Gospel but for another article] 10:29, 14:28).  Other passages He claims He only does those things instructed by the Father.  In Revelation Jesus calls the Father His God 4 times in 1 verse (Rev 3:12)!  Apparently the Hebrew uses different words (that the Greek does NOT) to make an important distinction.


Both words “Lord” here in Luke 20:42 (and in other translations other than the KJV wrongly translates) use the Greek word “Kurios”:


G2962kurios: From κῦρος kuros (supremacy); supreme in authority, that is, (as

noun) controller; by implication Mr. (as a respectful title): – God, Lord, master, Sir.

Now the parallel passage quoted from the OT Hebrew.  Note here the YLT gets it right and the KJV does not:

(KJV)Psa 110:1  A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at

my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.

(YLT)Psa 110:1  A Psalm of David. The affirmation of Jehovah to my Lord:

`Sit at My right hand, Till I make thine enemies thy footstool.’

(YLT) distinguishes the difference between the English word “Lord” and

uses “Jehovah” instead, the self existent one:


H3068 yehôvâh

From H1961; (the) self Existent or eternal; Jehovah, Jewish national name of God: – Jehovah, the Lord. Compare H3050, H3069.


H113 ‘âdôn

From an unused root (meaning to rule); sovereign, that is, controller (human or divine): – lord, master, owner. Compare also names beginning with “Adoni-”.

The KJV in this OT passage uses “Lord” both times, a confusing and wrong  translation because the Hebrew manuscripts reflect the true distinction of those two entirely different words as “Yehovah” H3068 and “Lord” (Adon) H113.

Again if the translations in Joshua 11 are correct, could it be because this was one of the few times in history in which God was conquering His enemies for Israel (all 12 tribes) in which He was giving them the promise land and they would finally be living in it in peace (as America)?  It could be, but the contention here is that the YLT has caught another error (in the Hebrew) and corrected it.

When these two verses in the book of Joshua are examined from many other translations they do not use the phrase “Mountains of Israel”.  These other translations such as YLT, and ASV (some of this writers favorites because of some accurate corrections it makes) state these two verses in the following manner:


(ASV) Jos 11:16, 21 So Joshua took all that land, the hill-country….

(YLT) Jos 11:16, 21 And Joshua taketh all this land: the hill-country, and all the south….


Notice it’s not there in the ASV or the YLT? Keep in mind that these translations (the ASV and YLT) that do NOT” use the phrase “Mountains of Israel” in the above two verses, “do” use the phrase in the book of Ezekiel. Why is this phrase so absent except for in the book of Ezekiel? Also, after doing an extensive Google search for the “Mountains  of Israel” one will find, after about eight pages and over 100 individual sites, not one article, book or site to match the interpretation that will soon be given here.  Every one of them seemed to parrot mainstream teachings on the “Mountains of Israel” as being a non-metaphoric phrase, contrary to what is being espoused here.

We are getting closer to the meaning of this important prophetic phrase!

If “the Mountains of Israel” are not present day
Palestine/Israel then What and Where are they?


In the Bible and in our political and religious world today, the name Israelis often taken for granted by Christians because in the Bible it is used in various manners:

  • “Israel” is usually a people; seldom a ‘land’
  • Jacob was called Israel by God in the OT
  • Israel as 10 northern tribes after Solomon’s death and the 2 southern tribes then identified as the “House of Judah”
  • The 12 tribes scattered abroad (mentioned in James 1:1)
  • Israel of God in the NT has a different meaning than most consider in their paradigm. Israel has an ultimate meaning once we get to the revelation of this peculiar phrase.
  • “Mountains of Israel” may refer to the “nations” where the people of Israel live – wherever that may be (it does not have to be designated to Palestine where OT Israel lived, like most assume).
  • Israel was not rightly called “Israel as a nation” since the days of King David and shortly thereafter when all 12 tribes (before their tribal splits) were together living in peace. Yet the Jews today (only 2-3 tribes) have the audacity to call their alleged nation Israel. This would not be swallowed by so many if Christians had at least a decent working knowledge of OT Bible events.


 Has the United States of America Become

“Thē Mountain of Israel”? 


Thē with a long sounding “e” for definitive article, because the Christian west, historically where these European Christians came to “camp”, is thē most influential and therefore thē primary Christian nation, but not the only one.  Also, “Mountain” singular in the subtitle instead of the commonly used plural form of the word. America, from this perspective then, is the primary mountain. There are other mountainS (in this dimension of the New Jerusalem), plural, which may also refer to the British Isles or European countries where Christianity is most dominant.

Isaiah 49:6 He (Father) says: (to the Son) “It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of Jacob and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth… Isaiah 53:5 But he (the Son) was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed… Psalm 2:12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that take refuge in him.”

There are other Christian mountains besides America, but they are not the focus of this particular heading, though they are mentioned because they are included in the overall picture.  We’ve pounded the NT Israel of OT prophets cannot be equated to the modern state of Israel, though there seems to be no shortage of people who want to make such a claim—this ideology promotes a counterfeit Zionism that has become prevalent and powerful in the U.S.

The popular understanding of America’s role in the world is quoted from the works of the great American novelist Herman Melville in his 1850 novel, White Jacket, and the World in a Man-of-War: “And we Americans are the peculiar, chosen people–the Israel of our time; we bear the ark of the liberties of the world…. We are the pioneers of the world; the advance-guard, sent on through the wilderness of untried things, to break a new path in the New World that is ours.” (pp. xi-xii).

Is it just coincidence that North America and the western European nations are prosperous nations with often enough leftover, and we do send surplus to aid other nations and that the USA not only possesses these abundant resources and infrastructures, but has the means to maintain and improve them?  God has blessed America is the explanation.  Is it just coincidence that this prosperous land Ezekiel describes, we call the USA is in the “middle (midst, high part) of the land (earth)” as Ezekiel 38:12b purports it would be? That Ezekiel refers to as a “united” people, as in the United States: Ezk 37:22 I’m going to make them a united people in the land, on the mountains of Israel, and I’ll set a single king to rule over them. They’ll never again be two separate people. They’ll never again be divided into two kingdoms. Surrounded by oceans for protection, as Zechariah seems to imply?

These enemies of Christianity [thoroughly explained in Pt.2 of Vol. 2 titled Master of Deception] helped enact the open immigration law of 1965 to make the USA a multicultural nation, warring within its borders and destroying what was the greatest nation of Christianity at that time, and they [the enemies of Christianity] have not let up America beginningssince by their promoting of border insecurity through the Dept. of Justice (Under heading: ARIZONA PUSHING THE FIRST IN OUR TIME ANTI-IMMIGRATION LAW SB1070; Source ~ Brother Nathaniel Kapner).  Why was not their focus south Africa or Western Europe?  There are plenty of Christians that God loves in those nations, as well.  No, they knew America was the threat, since it exemplifies Christianity in the greatest measure, not only through peaceful dwelling, but prosperity and power; and therefore was the target. These Zionists had to try and stop America from surpassing their nation and status as a people and superpower from interfering with their Oligarchy.

The Death of America was enacted in 1965 with the signing of the Open Immigration Law and the results have been clear.  Since the massive third world immigration our country has been deceived into accepting, our culture has become divisive and can no longer practice the freedom it once could.  Mass immigration into a homogeneous country will inevitably produce hatred and strife.  It is a major cause of poverty, disunity, criminality, psychological strife and war. Vladimir Lenin, a Russian Jew and Bolshevik Communist leader, once said the best way to control the opposition is to lead it, and that’s what these Zionist are doing.  To oppose immigration is a right of freedom and existence for all peoples and nations and can prevent these destructive things from happening to a nation and a people.

On about the second page of this last part of the book we are in, we examined the word “surround” as it is used in Rev 20:9. What is really interesting is the “enclaves” America is now being split into; and the similar attributes the word enclave has to the word the Apostle John used in Rev 20:9 regarding these hordes – “surround”…


Noun: A portion of territory within or surrounded by a larger territory whose inhabitants are culturally or ethnically distinct. Verb: Surround and isolate; make an enclave of.  Source ~

The recent attack of our government with its lawsuits against AZ shows not only that the Obama administration is pandering for votes, but also demonstrates the true powers that be are promoting invasion. The settlers’ culture our founding fathers instituted is now just another interest group that must lobby in Washington for its share of the spoils.  We have no precedence over non-Americans, like other nations have for “their own people”, we are called racist for that.

America is called the melting pot for having so many diverse cultures and peoples. E pluribus unum, Latin for “Out of many One” was founded in 1776 as the Seal of the United States. This phrase was never meant to imply that the United States was a melting pot when that phrase was instated. The truth is, the greatest immigration (the fruits of the European immigration cannot be compared to the fruits of illegal immigration which is really an invasion, or any immigration for that matter today) of Caucasian (not all, but mostly) settlers from many areas became one people, inspiredstop invasion secure borders by their Christian faith (and the fruits of their labor proved this); made the world‘s greatest infrastructure in the greatest Christian nation the world would ever see. The late Dr. D. James Kennedy would often remind us that God made America the greatest Christian Nation or she never could have been as such. Before the current immigration invasion, our primarily Caucasian nation (race does not matter, it’s only identification) had dwelt safely or confidently because of the providential victories fought on our homeland in the mid-eighteen hundreds that brought a state of peace as the verses in Ezekiel purport. The reference (Ezekiel 38:8) “the land that is brought back from the sword” may refer to the last civil wars fought on our homeland in the mid-eighteen hundreds.


Nonetheless, that’s the way it was in America, before it was invaded by foreigners that do not have America’s best interest at heart. The modern day nation of Israel does not fit this prophetic invasion; America does for many reasons (not just a few) throughout this prophecy.  Many already believe Christian America is being overrun by such an invasion in our day.  Pat Buchanan (as others, but I just happen to have a quote from him) is noted as stating in interviews that America is being invaded by the whole world: “America’s being invaded by millions of illegal immigrants every year, and it threatens Gog Magog photothe future of the country.” He addresses this issue of immigration in his brand new… it’s called “State of Emergency: The Third Word Invasion, The Conquest of America.” Amazingly, many still do not see this invasion and naively believe there is no way our land could ever be invaded.


Just a word of caution here, this does not insinuate that law-abiding non-Caucasians contributing to society in a positive manner are any less American. This prophecy is not targeted against individuals; but towards groups or hordes perpetrating unlawful (criminal) acts upon God‘s people in the latter years.


Another reason the U.S.A. is poised for this future military (in addition to the current gog 2civilian invasion, in some places already military) attack by all these Magog nations described, is the relationship existing between the USA and modern Israel. U.S. Zionist have always and will continue to support the nation of modern day Israel, despite its many atrocities and deceit, because many wrongly believe these Zionist Jews are God’s chosen people or a good democratic nation. Those with dispensational theology believe God could bless and support deceit and injustice in what they call modern day Israel, just because of dispensationalists’ wrong eschatological beliefs. Christians cannot turn a blind eye to injustices of such proportions. The rest of the world obviously does not see things their way, so these deceptions make the U.S. a sitting duck for such a military attack by these Magog countries.


Here is more evidence that these prophecies in Ezekiel and Revelation speak of America as the Mountains of Israel: The identity of the invading hordes upon America, we see, are much of the same people groups of invaders. Ezekiel as Gog and Magog coming from ancient names and lands traced to what is described in this book as being in and closely around “the resistance belt”, which would include Kazakhstan, Mongolia, and southern parts of Russia. The mid and northern parts of Russia do not fit the ancient geographical regions of the tribal areas. If these popular interpretations with Russia escalate, and it appears they will, with the unnecessary commotion being caused by the Zionists, this error about Russia has the potential to create an international misunderstanding that could provoke unwarranted political action. The 10/40 window or resistance belt, covers the region that has the least amount of Christians located between 10° & 40° N of the equator. Most Muslim, Hindu, Communists, Buddhist people reside in this region. Revelation 20 identifies these same foreign Invaders from the same areas described as “the four corners of the land”. Discover in the book how the biblical wording of this invasion fits perfectly with the invasion into America.


The Revelation of this Phrase “Mountains of Israel” Exposes Errors in Different Eschatological Paradigms


The meaning of this obscure phrase “Mountains of Israel” has some profound implications we need to think about, for some prominent groups in Christianity today. For both dispensational futurists and for those with a Preterist perspective on eschatology like myself (there is a proper form of Preterism that does work and will be demonstrated, the following do not).


  • For the pre-millennial Dispensationalist who believes Jesus has some future “second advent or coming” this phrase indicates this Gog and Magog invasion can not be upon the Jews or the House of Judah (in the land of modern day Palestine/Israel today) as they so adamantly insist, because of the description of the route, notwithstanding the fact that today’s Jews are not the House of Israel that the promise went to. A Jew “inwardlyis a Christian (Eph 3:16-17 et al) and not an outward (physical)Jew (Rev 3:9). The “House of Israel” in OT times (the 10 northern tribes after the split, they are confusing with the Jews—the 2 southern tribes) lost the Kingdom permanently since they were kicked out of the covenant with Yahweh God circa 726BC, and would only be promised a Christian kingdom for the future, not a restored old covenant type kingdom. The House of Judah ultimately lost their kingdom when they rejected Christ, culminating with the war that destroyed their city and temple circa AD70 and they would never get it back. Even though the “House of Judah’s (Jews, NOT Israel)” back in the land today it’s not what Christians think. Pre-millennial dispensationalists need to seriously rethink their eschatology. Let that sink in.


  • For the “Full Preterist” who holds to “all things were fulfilled in 70AD” this Gog and Magog prophecy either could not have happened yet, or IS happening now. It can’t be a first century fulfillment as they assert because these Magog nations never came against the House of Judah while they still had the kingdom which Preterists well know they did ultimately lose when they rejected Jesus Christ circa AD70. Besides that, they were not the whole 12 tribe House “in the land” as required. Their house of cards falls when they try to place this event between 30-70AD or even before. We will soon see that this has to be of the Christian age phrase and event, when Christians would be “in their own land” as a people and a nation (Ezekiel 36:24, 28, 34-36, 37:21-22, 38:8, 16, 18, 39:26, 28 et al). These passages reveal a certain dwelling place in a land, where those peoples are forgiven, gathered (all twelve tribes – not just the two tribed House of Judah) and have one Prince. That’s “Christians in their own land” (specificity), not old covenant Judah in their own land. This was for a time when the shadow of Christianity would become the reality after the Kingdom of Christ had been established and Satan – better translated adversary – (the unbelieving Jews, adversary of Christianity) had been crushed and bound [not completely destroyed] (Rom. 16:20), post 70AD. Also, to the Preterist who tries to squeeze the millennium between 30-70AD, the term thousand(s) is always used in the Bible as a huge (not a small generational 40 year term) stretch of quantity or time; it is not used otherwise when it is not used as a literal thousand; and in this case it’s a “plural of uncertain affinity, or thousands”. So, full Preterists have to satisfactorily answer these issues or show their paradigm as fatally flawed.


  • For the Partial Preterist” who holds to “Jesus has some second advent or coming”, when Ezekiel penned that phrase “Mountains of Israel” he said it would be in the “latter years” not for his time and not within the time frame of the old covenant, as we shall soon see. In Ezekiel’s day, Israel, to whom the promise was given, had already lost their kingdom and status with Yahweh God over a century before, and would not get it back until Messiah, so this has to be a post old covenant fulfillment (Gen 49:10, Hos 1:11, Ezekiel 37:14ff)since it’s for a Christian people in their own land. The “Reign of Christ” had to be established in order for this phrase “Mountains of Israel” to have any significance, since there could not be anyone living that would be antichrist after their (the partial Preterists) idea of a millennium. Their idea of a millennium (much like the Dispensationalist) is basically “paradise restored,” since Christ is reigning on earth according to them. If they say otherwise, that there can be sinful human beings during the millennium as asserted here, then this position works also; Christ does not have to be here physically to reign over the Earth.


All of these prominent Christian groups, in light of this prophetic phrase alone, have had their “people groups,” their “chronological sequence of events,” and their “location of events” mixed up and now need to have answers to these dilemmas in their eschatology!


“The Mountains of Israel” as a Metaphoric Phrase


It sounds ambiguous, but the fact is the Bible does use metaphors; therefore in a sense the naming is sometimes non-literal but the thought conveyed is literal. The Apostle John uses the apt metaphor “Sodom & Egypt” in a similar fashion in the sense that he calls different places by different names to describe the spiritual condition of latter-day Jerusalem (Rev. 11:8, cp. Gal. 4:25). Likewise Ezekiel uses this cryptic phrase “Mountains of Israelto describe a different people and places than most Christians are accustomed to thinking of when they hear the word, Israel.

The Apostle John’s metaphor is to be understood quite literally. If the reader has a decent working knowledge of the OT, the reader understands the similarity of sin between Sodom & Egypt and Jerusalem in the 1st century. That is the context; the context is not identifying names of ancient countries and cities with their historical names. If someone says it is raining cats and dogs, even though the words are allegorical, the concept is to be taken “literally” that there is a torrential downpour outside; this would not mean they are a non-literalist.

In 1 Peter 2:9 these scattered Gentiles of Israelite believers are described as a holy nation.

We are at the door, to the climatic meaning of this important prophetic phrase!

The Ultimate Meaning of Israel

In the following four verses we see the correlation of Gods’ righteousness, the terms Kingdom, Nations and His Holy City (God, His people in their place of dwelling) to the metaphor “Mountains.”

Psa 36:6a “Thy righteousness is like the great mountains;”.. is a great attestation to NT Christians, Christ being our righteousness. In the next 3 verses we see more of the correlation between God’s Holy City, and His righteousness with “Mountains.

Jer 31:23b, “Jehovah bless thee, O habitation of righteousness, O mountain of holiness.”

Dan 9:16a, “O Lord, I pray to You, according to all Your righteousness, let Your anger and Your fury be turned away from Your city Jerusalem, Your holy mountain.” (Jerusalem not a literal mountain) (cf. Psa 48:1-2)

Jesus Christ is not only our righteousness (righteousness a metaphor for “mountains“), but our spiritual life support (the vine, we are the branches). He’s the head and calls the followers/Christians His body. Jesus is “The King Shepherd of Israel.” He said He came not but for the “lost sheep of the house of Israel“. Without Him there is no Israel today because He is the Kinsman Redeemer of Israel. Those lost sheep became gentiles or “people of the nations” from which many again would become God’s people through the Christ – Hosea and other passages.

Now, in Galatians, Paul spoke of the “seed” in a singular fashion not plural as the Pharisees thought when they shouted “we are of Abraham’s seed,” but singular meaning “The Shepherd“:

Gal 3:16, “But the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his Seed (it does not say, And to seeds, as of many, but as of one, ‘And to your Seed,’ which is Christ” [Genesis 3:15; 21:12; 22:18, Rom. 9:6; Heb. 11:18]).

The same emphasis when speaking of Israel is put on the Christ, which also puts the emphasis on Christians, hence using biblical vernacular the “Mountains of Israelbecomes “Kingdom of Christincludes all Christianity! There you have it. I think there can be no reasonable doubt; the same principle is used in that David means Christ—if so then Israel must mean the Christian Church. If not, then David must mean David—which is ludicrous. Christ is the messenger (angel) of the new covenant. Here’s more biblical emphasis on Jesus Christ as the epitome of the fulfillment of Israel, which further clarifies revelation of this phrase:

Isa 49:3, “and said to Me, You are My servant, Israel, You in whom I shall be glorified.”

John 5:39, “Ye search the scriptures, because ye think that in them ye have eternal life; and these are they which bear witness of me;” (ASV)

Jesus Christ is indeed the Israel of scripture. Mountains representing Kingdoms brings us to the conclusion that the term “Mountains of Israel”, denotes the “Kingdom of Christ” and/or “Nation of Christendom” in light of 1 Pet 2:9 and other passages. It is a nation converted (not yet perfect) to God—one nation under God upon the Mountains of Israel. As Christians, we cannot honestly ignore the obvious metaphoric manner in which this phrase was deliberately devised by God for us to decipher.

Now that we have unveiled the meaning of this important phrase, let’s again compare Ezekiel to Revelation 20 which speaks of the nations encompassed by the wording Gog and Magog coming from the “four corners of the earth (land of EurAsia)” (v.8) Ezekiel 38,39 emphasize that the enemies of my people Israel (38:14,16) come from the uttermost parts of the north  In other words, peoples that came from the lands of Europe-Asia and surrounding regions as coming from “the four quarters of the earth (land)” which is a way of expressing four extremities of the land. Then migrated to South America, later through Mexico, then upward into America.   This description, by no coincidence in Revelation 20 & Ezekiel 38, 39 all coincide perfectly to the invasion of our homeland USA!


More proof from the book of Daniel


Dan 2:35 “Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver, and the gold were together broken to pieces, and they became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors. And the wind carried them away so that no place was found for them. And the stone that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth.

The stone that struck this image described in the verse we just read was written to symbolically be the representative of what would become the 5th kingdom. This 5th kingdom was none other than the Kingdom of Christ which began, circa 70AD, when the Kingdom was taken away from the House of Judah. Mat 21:43 Jesus refers to the Jews (NOT the House of Israel dispersed among the nations then) and their city and temple was destroyed signifying that end of the old Jewish covenant with God.

Hence, we have the Kingdom which the God of Heaven set up representing “the Mountains of Israel (Christianity)”. Remember, in Ezekiel’s day Israel had already lost their kingdom and status with Yahweh God for over a century! And it cannot be referring to the “House of Judah (Jews)” since these Magog nations never came against them before God took away their kingdom circa AD70. The only one left after that is “the Kingdom of Christ & Christianity”!

Dan 2:44 “And in the days of these kings, the God of Heaven shall set up a kingdom (not a man-made kingdom)which shall never be destroyed. And the kingdom shall not be left to other people. It shall break in pieces and destroy all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.” 




In light of what was just discussed, this mysterious phrase God inspired Ezekiel to write we now know was to be what He had planned or foresaw for a far future prophecy when the shadow of His plan would become the reality (in the latter years Ezekiel 38:8) which was the reality of Christianity. You’ve seen the documented motives of America’s enemies by the open immigration laws imposed upon Americans to destroy what had become the world’s greatest Christian Nation. And we now see why “Mountains of Israel” is a metaphoric phrase, not literal mountains and not the old covenant people or system. We’ve built an argument for America as the proper interpretation as a “Nation of Christendom,” also fitting biblical metaphoric vernacular. We’ve established with this once concealed phrase why Dispensational Futurists and Preterists need to change their views. The phrase “Mountains of Israel” made sense to God then (maybe not to His people, if any of them understood it at the time Ezekiel penned it), and should mean the same thing to us today that God understood it to mean way back then, in the following manner.

Mountains of Israel = Kingdom of Christ = Righteousness of Christianity (mountain is a metaphor for righteousness and Christ is our righteousness) = Reign (Kingdom) of Anointed One(s) (Christ and Christians) = Camp of the Saints and the Beloved City (Rev. 20:9) = Kingdom of Christianity = Nation of Christendom

Any way you slice it, the results of this phrase (from scripture) are clear!


Video: Train en route to Texas with Mexican Govt. complicit.

What could be more interesting and exciting than knowing real prophecy that others are in the dark about that is tied in to current events, and now you hold the secret knowledge! Please support us and educate yourself with this uncommon knowledge by purchasing our books.

(available in 3 formats)

The Man of Sin & 666 IDENTIFIED!

by Steven Hawk


(A Sample taken from Book 1 of


J.B. (NOTE: J.B. = JOSHUA BRADSHAW, 1 OF 2 CHARACTERS IN THE SERIES) “Rev 14:9-11 implies that if you get this mark, you lose your salvation. The people that say this are often the same people that say “once saved, always saved” which does not add up! The
Name of the Beast is contrasted with the ‘name’ of Christ, which is the word of God. The name of the beast, on the other hand, is the lust of the eyes, lust of the flesh, the pride of life…all things contrary to the ‘NAME OF GOD.’ Ergo, ‘thee time of the gentiles’ in the land, corrupting the people and the land, with the name of the beast which is not the name of God. The beast power ‘Mystery Babylon’ did it for 666 years, corrupting the Israelites with the name of the beast
(their ways) as opposed to the name of God.”

“What you’re saying does not biblically refute the idea of the name having
to be linked to a person, like the language seems to indicate in Rev 13:7.”

J.B.  “The significance of a name is NOT in the numerical value of the letters. Where is
that idea found in scripture? That is Jewish Gematria, some call Occult
Numerology, which is a system of assigning numerical value to a word or phrase, in the belief that words or phrases with identical numerical values bear some relation to each other—look it up. However, the numerical values of Greek and Hebrew letters could play a part, but also realize you can add up many words and phrases to get 666 out of almost anything. But when you take the numerical values in concert with the fact of 666 years and the context of the emperors, as well as the fact of Soloman’s 666 lbs. of gold every year et al, it is the preponderance of data points in context that validate  the meaning. So, what I am saying is I don’t think it is just a coincidence that 666 relates to Nero Ceaser,  but do not think that alpha numerical values are the primary or central  proof of anything, but it is probably just one more non-coincidence that God intended for people to look at in the context and in concert with all the other data. It is kind of like setting up not one sign post, but signs all over the place pointing the way. Some of those signs can point to other things as well, but only one thing will be shown to be consistent  with all the sign post that were put up. Merriam-Webster defines NAME’ as ‘1 a: a word or phrase that constitutes the distinctive designation of a person or thing, and b: a word or symbol used in logic to designate an entity'”…

…It simply does not say give each letter a numerical value and add the letters up to get a number. The numerical value is based on the meaning not on the letters…in the same way and for the same reasons that Christ is not some numerical value of the letters in JESUS. ….the number associated with the beast is 666 years and you can count that (scriptures states to count it – does not state add up the letters!)..the/any number associated with Christ is ‘alpha and omega’…..scriptures say the number of his name, it does not say add the letters up to figure out the number. The number is something counted – his name can be counted because it refers to his meaning. It does not say count up the letters by giving the letters a numerical value. The whole letter value thing comes from the Jews, if you care to trace the source… from the very same people who Christ said:  Mat 16:6. Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees….

The significance of the name is in what it means…. note: Ex 23:20 Behold, I send a messenger before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. 21Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for My name is in him….see also the number of times Revelation refers to “my name” … 13And he was clothed with a vesture dipped
in blood: and his name is called The Word of God…. Rev 2:3 And hast borne, and hast patience, and for my name’s sake hast laboured, and hast not fainted…13..and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth. You don’t add up the numerical value for Jesus, so as to claim you have it – do you? Likewise the name of the beast has nothing to do with numerical value of letters, but rather what the name refers to or has meaning with…. you can either have the name  “the word of God” …or you can
have the name of the beast which is everything in the world ‘1John 2:16 For all
that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world’ except the word of God. The issue is those who have the Name of the Beast and NOT the name of God.”

 We have determined there is no single anti-Christ, but there is a “man of sin” (aka the son of perdition, which is actually an entity not an individual). We have been told by Hank Hanegraaff and others that the beast is Nero Caesar. Only, this cannot be because the beast associated with the number six-hundred and sixty-six has a conglomeration of kings, one of which is Nero (the 6th head/Ceaser Rev 17:10f) so he cannot be this beast, he
is one of the heads/kings. This beast also has the same deceiving trait as the adversary and the great whore: Rev 13:14a “And it deceives those dwelling on the earth…” Considering what we’ve learned, there are several indicators that lead us to what this man of sin is. In Dan 2, there is a statue of a man depicted as kingdoms of and by men, and in Dan 7, this same entity (not a single man) is described as beasts.

This time period is covered by exactly 666 years and this is a proven fact!  We are also
told this “man of sin” is destroyed at our Lord’s coming in judgment, which we have already determined was ca. 70AD. So what can we decipher from these clues?

The key metrics for man of sin “who” and “when”….

1. Destroyed with the coming of Christ, i.e. the War of AD70
(2Thes 2:8ff)

2. Associated with “Mystery of Iniquity”….What
was that mystery? It was when “sin would come to an end” in Israel.
When did these happen?

Ezk 21:25-27 And thou, profane wicked prince of Israel, whose day is come, when iniquity shall have an end, thus saith the Lord GOD;
Remove the diadem, and take off the crown [lost their kingdom]: this shall not be the same: exalt him that is low, and abase him that is high. I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him.

Rom 11:27 and this to them is the covenant from me, when I may take away their sins.

3. It’s associated with “The falling away.” What fell away?  Israel “fell away”…it was the end of physical Israel (the last remaining tribes of Judah) when sin would come to an end in the kingdom because the physical kingdom would be destroyed and thus left only a spiritual kingdom wherein flesh and blood cannot enter…. 666 years was the number of the last period of destruction and time that God gave Israel to repent ….that period was
outlined once as a man in Dan Ch 2 and once as a beast in Dan 7—which
correlates with Rev 13.

Also note, “the land” physical Israel is literally dirt, for man is made of the dust of the earth, and the people of Israel are the dirt of Palestine, but the mystery was that the land, aka Israel the people, not the shrubs and sand, would be destroyed (Ezk 21:2 et al). 

Isa 3:8-9 For Jerusalem is ruined, and Judah is fallen; because their tongue and their doings are against Jehovah, to provoke the eyes of his glory. The show of their countenance doth witness against them; and they declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not. Woe unto their soul! for they have done evil unto themselves.



Dan Ch 2 outlines a time period as “a man”…Dan Ch 7 outlines this same time period as a beast and the fourth beast is a compilation of the previous three.

Jeremiah 31:27  Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will sow the house of Israel and the House of Judah with the seed of man, and with the seed of beast.

A beast in Dan Ch 7 describes the same beast in Revelation 13:1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy. 2.  And the beast
which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion
(Dan 7:3-7) and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, (Rev 2:13) and great authority. 3And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast. 4And they worshipped the dragon, which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? 5And there was given
unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies
; (Dan 7:25) and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. 6And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. 7And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them:

“COMPLETE THE CIRCLE” BACK TO: Dan 7:21..made warwith the saints, and prevailed against them; 22Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom. 23Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall
devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces. 24And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings….. 25…: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time…. (condensed
for this article)

…We’ve learned this 4th beast (Rome), and this Mystery Babylon (the whore riding) was none other than Apostate Judah (what was left of Israel of the flesh—human nature operating at its worst—with a system in complete defiance to God) that was
about to be destroyed… (condensed for this article)

They go into Babylonian captivity, from there (Nebuchadnezzar’s reign) the countdown to the end begins, but the end does not start until the birth of Christ. Nebuchadnezzar’s reign is the countdown towards the final end (ca. 70AD) of the Mosaic covenant that the Jews were abominating.


…(Dan 9:24 to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins)  30Shall I cause it to return into his sheath? I will judge thee in the place where thou was created, in the land of thy nativity. (Ezk 23:15…after the manner of the Babylonians of Chaldea, the land of their
nativity: 48.  Thus will I cause lewdness to cease out of the land, ergo “Mystery Babylon”)
  31And I WILL POUR (Dan 9:26…the end thereof shall be with a flood,; Mat 24:36 et al) out mine indignation upon thee,




Israel like mankind, was both flesh (carnal and at enmity with God Rom 8:7) and spirit—two parts to a single whole or two sides of the coin looking back. The physical seed of Israel that was walking by the flesh because they had a spirit of whoredom and would
be destroyed (Hos 4:12, 5:4 this whoredom personified by the man [statue of Dan
2—the feet where the name of the head] and beast
that God outlined by Daniel for the period of their destruction, 666 years), and the spiritual seed of Israel alone would be redeemed and continue. The physical kingdom/nation would get the everlasting curse and the spiritual seed would get the everlasting blessing via Christ who is the promised seed by whom the Gentiles were grafted in. That process began with Babylon and ended with the feet of the Babylonian image Rome mixed with the House of Judah “Mystery Babylon,” the feet and toes.

This is the Man that was outlined by God in a dream. Once as a man to Nebuchadnezzar and once as a beast to Daniel and it is a fact that period of time covered exactly 666 years. After which, it was destroyed with the Brightness of Christ’s coming in the war of AD70. This was the 1st century time of the Gentiles fulfilled with the destruction of those Gentile
nations out of the land, kingdom and people of God. The Physical house was corrupted by the Jews and Gentiles and thus destroyed, over and at, the end of that 666 year period. The spiritual was redeemed with its accomplishment. This is “the Mystery of Iniquity” mentioned in 2Thess 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now lets will let, until he be taken out of the way. 8And then shall that Wicked [one] be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:



Consummation at end of war Not AD70! Dan 9: 26….the prince that shall come shall (A) destroy the city and the sanctuary and the end thereof shall be with A FLOOD (Mat 24:39; Rev 12:15,16 et al)… ( unto the end of the war DESOLATIONS are determined. 27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and (A) in the midst of the week (AD70) he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease……he shall ( make it DESOLATE, even until the CONSUMMATION, (ca. AD 73)

(available in 3 formats)


The Destruction of The Harlot

The Destruction of the Harlot
By Lloyd Dale

We would like to take this opportunity to share some very interesting “about to” (Gk. mello) passages with you:

And you are about to hear of wars and rumors of wars: see that you are not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. (Matthew 24:6)

Audience relevance: Jesus clearly instructed his disciples that they (not somebody in the 21 century, 2000 years in the future) were about to hear of wars and rumors of wars.  This would have been a very unusual occurrence in their day because of the great Pax Romana that had existed throughout their life time!

God…now commands all men every where to repent:  Because he has appointed a day, in which he is about to judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he has ordained; whereof he has given assurance unto all men, in that he has raised him from the dead. (Acts 17:30-31)

Many partial preterists insist the Matthew 25 has not been fulfilled because the judgment of the nations did not take place in the first century.  If it did not Paul was radically confused, not inspired.

And after certain days, when Felix came with his wife Drusilla, which was a Jewess, he sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the faith in Christ.  And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment about to come, Felix trembled, and answered, Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee. (Acts 24:24-25)

Why did Felix “tremble”?  Certainly not because of righteousness or temperance, but because he clearly understood with Paul that the judgment of Yahweh was about to come in his life time in that generation!

Paul told Timothy essentially the same thing:

I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who is about to judge the living and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; (2 Timothy 4:1)

The above passages and many other similar passages make it very clear that the judgment of the “wrath of” God was about to descend on the people of the first century.  This judgment was to bring about the destruction of the temple and the city of Jerusalem (among other things, Matt. 24:2 et al.). Thus we ask ourselves the question – how was this judgment to occur?  Who or what was going to carry out this judgment and destruction of the temple and the city of Jerusalem?  For our answer to this we now turn to the book of Revelation:

The beast that you saw was, and is not; and is about to ascend out of the abyss, and go unto destruction: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is. (Revelation 17:8)

When John wrote this passage, he declared that “the beast” was about to come up out of the abyss and go unto the destruction.  The full context of this passage is one of the very best internal evidences for a late 60’s AD dating for the writing of the Revelation!  In order to recognize this, of course, it is very important to understand what John is really writing about in this and related verses.  We submit for your consideration that very, very few have ever understood this verse and its related context.

In verse one of this 17th chapter, John is told that he is to be shown the “judgment (destruction) of the whore.”  Old[1] and New Testaments[2] speak in unison and conclusively that the “whore” is Jerusalem – the capitol city of the southern kingdom, Judah.  Thus the full context of this passage is “the destruction of Jerusalem.”

John is then taken into the wilderness and shown a vision of the whore and the beast upon which she was riding.  Here the whore is identified as “drunken with the blood of the saints and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus.”  This description can identify none other than the apostate Judaism in Jerusalem.

In addition to the “whore” John is shown a great “scarlet colored beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.”  All Bible students “in the know” agree that this beast is the Roman Empire.  Verse 10 tells John’s first century audience that there are “eight kings” of this Empire of which they should be cognizant.  According to verse 11, the “beast” that John described in verse 8 is to be that “an eighth” King (Caesar) of the Roman Empire.

In verse 8 John describes the beast (“an eighth” king of Roman Empire) as “the beast that… was, and is not, and is about to come up out of…”  What is this riddle that John puts forth?  Very few modern Bible students have understood this riddle because they fail to put it in the proper context.  Remember the context of this whole passage is the “judgment of the whore” – thus the destruction of Jerusalem!  John’s riddle thus means that this man (beast) who “is about to come up out of the abyss…” and become the “an eighth” king of the Roman Empire “was” (previous to his coming up out of and becoming king) involved in the judgment-destruction of the whore-Jerusalem, but at the time in which John was putting forth the 17 chapter of the Revelation he “is not” involved in the judgment-destruction of the whore-Jerusalem, but he “is about to come up” into his kingship and in that capacity he will return to the work of the judgment-“destruction” of Jerusalem.

Where is this man who is going to be the eighth king of the Roman Empire?  John informs us that he is about to go up out of the abyss.”  What and where is this abyss?

Traditional Christian “wisdom” has associated the abyss with the concept of hell.  Thus it is generally taught that this beast (“an eighth” king) is some strange creature that comes from hell.  We don’t think so, and we think we have clear and strong biblical evidence for our thoughts!  First, in context all the kings (Caesars) of the Rome Empire were flesh and blood human men, thus this eighth king must be a flesh and blood human also.  If hell is what the Christian church has taught that it is, no man ever did or ever will come out of hell to rule the Roman Empire!  Thus, if this “an eighth” king did not come up out of hell, where was he and from whence did he come?  In other words – what and where is John’s abyss?

Remember the context here is “the judgment of the whore!”  Verses 16-17 inform us that the whore was hated, made desolate and naked, her flesh eaten and she was burned with fire.  In other words she was “judged and destroyed!”

A Hebrew prophet, psalmist informs us:

The transgression of the wicked says…that there is no fear of God before his eyes.  For he flatters himself in his own eyes, until his iniquity be found to be hateful.  The words of his mouth are iniquity and deceit: he hath left off to be wise, and to do good.  He devises        mischief…O Yahweh…thy judgments are an abyss: (Psalms 36:1-6, emphasis added)

In Revelation 17 Yahweh God is prophesying the judgment-destruction he is about to bring down upon the whore.  It is established that the whore is Jerusalem in Judaea.  Thus putting the information from the Hebrew Psalmist-prophet with the information from the Hebrew apostle-prophet we can now see that John’s “abyss” is the first century place of Yahweh’s judgment for sin which is Jerusalem in Judaea!  Thus the land of Judaea of the first century Jews is John’s abyss!  This is the place where Yahweh’s judgment was to take place.

Now we must ask – was there a man in the land of Judaea (the abyss) who had been involved in the judgment of Judaea, but at the time John established for the fulfillment of the 17th chapter of Revelation was not active, and who soon left Judaea to become a Roman Emperor and who as the king of the Roman Empire ordered the judgment-destruction of Judaea?  There certainly was and his name was Vespasian, the Roman General who had been sent to Judaea by Nero to take over the Roman army which was already in that land and to prosecute the judgment-war against the Jews in that land.

There is a very interesting comment in Josephus about a “sacred oracle” that ostensibly applies to this Revelation passage.  Josephus states:

But now, what did most elevate them in undertaking this war was an ambiguous oracle (Rev.17:10-11) that was also found in their sacred writings, how, “about that time, one from their own country (this shows that the Jews understood John’s bottomless pit to be “their own land”) should become governor (Caesar) of the habitable earth (Roman Empire).”   The (apostate) Jews took this prediction to belong to themselves in particular; and many wise men were thereby deceived in their determination.  Now this oracle certainly denoted the government of Vespasian, who was appointed emperor in Judea. (WOTJ Book VI, ch.V, Sec.4, emphasis and comment added)

According to Josephus, The Roman army wanted Vespasian to become emperor because of his age, excellent character, experience and military record.  They also considered Vespasian and his son Titus as the “dynamic duo” that would be able to salvage the Roman Empire with Vespasian as king and his son Titus leading the army.  When Vespasian went to Rome to officially begin his reign, Titus returned to Judaea

to continue the prosecution of the war against the Jews and was “sent (by Vespasian) to destroy Jerusalem”  which he eventually did. In his writings, Josephus often refers to Titus as “Caesar” even while Vespasian was the ruling monarch. (Wars of the Jews, Book III, ch. 1, sec.3 p.502 – ch. 10, P.546)

According to the historical accounts, especially Josephus, Vespasian became the general of Nero’s army in Judaea and proceeded to prosecute the war against the Jews (“was”), however, while doing that Vespasian and the army heard about the death of Nero.  At that time Vespasian placed the war in abeyance pending the placement of the new king.  During this time of inaction (“is not”) in Judaea and chaos in the Empire, the Roman soldiers began to persuade Vespasian to become the new Caesar.  After considerable hesitation Vespasian finally succumbed to the urging of the troops and with the approval of Alexander of Egypt, he agreed to permit them to anoint him as the “an eighth” Caesar of Rome (“about to come up out of the abyss”).  Vespasian then “ascended up out of the abyss,” proceeded to Rome, dispatching Vitellius’ army on the way, and became the “an eighth” king (Caesar) which John described in Revelation 17.

In a very interesting passage, Josephus, the Jewish historian employed by the Romans to document the “Wars of the Jews” etc. confirms the above:

But now, what did most elevate them in undertaking this war was an ambiguous oracle (Rev.17:10-11) that was also found in their sacred writings, how, “about that time, one from their own country (this shows that the Jews understood John’s bottomless pit to be “their own country [Judaea]”) should become governor (Caesar) of the habitable earth (Roman Empire).”   The (apostate) Jews took this prediction to belong to themselves in particular; and many wise men were thereby deceived in their determination.  Now this oracle certainly denoted the government of Vespasian, who was appointed emperor in Judea. (WOTJ Book VI, ch.V, sec.4, emphasis and comment added)

According to Josephus, The Roman army wanted Vespasian to become emperor because of his age, excellent character, experience and military record.  They also considered Vespasian and his son Titus as the “dynamic duo” that would be able to salvage the Roman Empire with Vespasian as king and his son Titus leading the army.  When Vespasian went to Rome to officially begin his reign, Titus returned to Judaea to continue the prosecution of the war against the Jews and was “sent (by Vespasian) to destroy Jerusalem”  which he eventually did. In his writings, Josephus often refers to Titus as “Caesar” even while Vespasian was the ruling monarch. (Wars Of  The Jews, Book III, ch. 1, sec.3 p.502 – ch. 10, P.546)

As should now clearly be seen, this internal evidence and historical information conclusively dates this fulfillment of the Revelation into the late 60’s AD!

In the clear light of this information let us now take another look at verse 8 and its pertinent context and true meaning as shown below:

The beast (“an eighth” king of the Roman Empire) that you saw was (involved in the war against the Jews), and is not (currently prosecuting the war); and is about to come up out (ascend) out of the abyss (Judaea), and rule over [the] destruction [of Jerusalem-Judaea (Jews)]: and they that dwell on the land (the apostate Jews)  shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast (the “an eighth” Roman Caesar) that was (involved in the war), and is not (currently prosecuting that war), and yet is (in the land). And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains/kingdoms (the reigns of the seven kings), on which the woman (Jerusalem) sits.  And there are seven kings: five (Julius, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, & Claudius) are fallen, and one (Nero) is, and the other (Galba) is not yet come; and when he (Galba) comes, he must continue a short space (seven months).  And the beast (Caesar-king) that was (in the abyss prosecuting the war against the Jews), and is not (currently prosecuting the war), even he is the “an eighth” (Roman Caesar-king), and is of the seven (Chief General of the Empire under Nero), and leads unto the destruction (of Jerusalem). (Revelation 17:8-11)

The “ten kings” of verse 12 (not a reference to ten kings of the Roman Empire) receive their power when Vespasian becomes Caesar, and being of “one mind… (they) give their power and strength unto “the beast” (Vespasian).  Verse 14 explains that these ten kings shall make war with (Greek: “meta,” this does not mean against as erroneously given in many “modern” translations) the Lamb.

If this passage means that the “ten kings” fight against the Lamb and the Lamb “overcomes them” as many modern translations render this passage, then it is totally out of context.  Remember the context is “the judgment of the whore” and her destruction as given in verses 16-17.

The first portion of verse 14 is clear, the beast and the ten kings make war with the Lamb, not against him.   In other words the beast and the ten kings unite, and are brought under the power of the Lamb to do his will to make war against the whore.  This is verified in verses 16-17:

And the ten horns which you saw upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.  For God (the Lamb) hath put in their hearts to fulfill his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled. (Revelation 17:16-17)

In his letter to the Romans, the apostle Paul urges the Roman Christians to not attempt to “avenge” themselves against their persecutors (primarily the Jews) but rather to allow the wrath (judgment) of God to do its work (Romans 12:19ff).  Then Paul continues:

…the [Roman] powers that be (the beast and the ten kings) are ordained of God.  Whosoever therefore resists the power, resists the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves judgment (Gk. “krima” cf. Rev. 17:1).  For rulers are…a terror to…the evil…if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he bears not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him (persecutors) that doeth evil. (Romans 13:2-4)
In Chapter 19 John describes the Lamb coming forth as a conquering king:

And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.  His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.  And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.  And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.  And out of his mouth goes a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treads the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.  And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.  And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;  That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.  And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war with (Not against as in AV. Gk. meta, cf. Rev. 17:14) him that sat on the horse, and with (Not against as in AV. Gk. meta, cf. Rev. 17:14) his army.

The above is John’s description of the climax of the destruction of Jerusalem as a result of the Lamb’s judgment.  The great armies of the beast (Vespasian and the ten kings), in submission to do the will of the Lamb, bring destruction to the whore.  However, at this point John makes an interesting adjustment in his language.  In verse 20 John describes the whore using the words by which he had described her in the 13th chapter of Revelation[3]:

And I beheld another beast (The Herod dynasty-[the beast] and apostate Judaism-[the false prophet]) coming up out of the land; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spoke as a dragon.  And he (The beast with two horns, i.e. the Herod dynasty with his false prophet, apostate Judaism) exercised all the power of the first beast (the Roman Empire) before him, and caused the land and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast (“we have no God but Caesar”), whose deadly wound was healed (by the reign of Vespasian).  And he does great wonders, so that he makes fire come down from heaven (War from Rome) on the earth in the sight of men (apostate Jews),  And deceived them that dwell on the land (of Judea) by the means of those wonders which he had power to do in the sight of the first beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the first beast, which had the wound by a sword (the sword that killed Nero and caused the near collapse of the Empire), and did live (the Empire survived the death of Nero).  And he had power to give life unto the image of the first beast, that the image of the first beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the first beast should be killed.  And he caused all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:  And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the first beast, or the number of his name.  Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the first beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six. (Revelation 13:11-18 AV)

Thus John describes the fate of the second beast of Revelation 13:11ff at “the hands” of the armies of the beast (Vespasian) and the ten kings.  Thus “the powers that be” (i.e. the Roman Empire) have borne the sword, become the avenger, and delivered the wrath of God upon Jerusalem and the apostate first century Jews:

And the beast (The Herodian dynasty) was taken, and with him the false prophet (apostate Judaism) that wrought wonders before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the first beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both [the second beast, the Herodian dynasty & his false prophet] were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone (Jerusalem in the process of destruction).  And the remnant (of apostate Jews) were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword [of prophecy fulfilled] proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh. (Revelation 19:11-21 AV)

Thus just as John and Paul had declared, in 70 AD the armies of the beast and the ten kings delivered the “wrath of God” by sacking and burning the Jerusalem of the Herodian dynasty and his false prophet [apostate Judaism], the second beast of Rev.13:11-18) to carry out the will of the Lamb.

We would really appreciate your consideration and evaluation of the above material.  Comments and questions are most welcome.


That TRUTH may prevail!


In the service of the reigning King,


Lloyd Dale, Founder and CEO

Olive Tree Ministries

19463 US Hwy 12

Lemmon, SD 57638

Phone: 605-374-3291



[1] For complete OT documentation of this see Dale, Lloyd, The Olive Tree Mystery, self published.

[2] For complete NT documentation see Preston, Don, Who is this Babylon, self published.

[3] In Revelation 13 John states that the beast that “comes out of the land” has “two horns.”  This beast has “two horns” because of its status under Rome.  Rome gave the authority to rule (one horn) over the Judean province to Herod and continued it in his sons.  However, the Jews also had their rule (the other horn, the false prophet) in the form of the Jewish Sanhedrin or priests and elders of Judea.  Collectively this beast “spoke as a dragon” against the Christ and His followers and demanded Caesar worship in Judaea.  This “beast and false prophet” was destroyed in the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman Armies led by Titus.

1Corinthians 15:19-28


My name is Dan and I found your email address on I began studying preterism in the late 1990’s when I was in my early twenties, but didn’t quite understand it at the time. As it happens I unfortunately became a backslidden Christian for the better part of ten years and nearly put it out of my mind completely. About two years ago I renewed my relationship with Christ and for the first time in my life experienced true repentance for my sins.  In the last two years I have spent a great deal of my time studying scripture and bringing myself closer to God. I am a full preterist, but there are still things that I don’t fully understand, so I was happy to come across your website.

What I am trying to understand mainly is what happens to this physical world? Is this world to continue on as is forever as many full-preterists seem to believe with sin still existing in some form? Or is Christ going to eventually put all things in subjection in the literal sense as in putting an end to the evil and sin (and death)?  It seems to me that there is a lot of spiritualizing being done by many preterists particularly in relation to 1 Corinthians 15 24-28. My understanding is that this has not happened yet because sin is utterly rampant everywhere.  Could you tell me your thoughts on this?  Perhaps I have misunderstood.

Thank you kindly for taking the time to read through this email and answer my questions. I saw that you have a 262 area code in your phone number. I’m not sure where you live, but my family and I live in Muskego. I hope you are doing well.

Warm Regards,


Thank you for your interest and enthusiasm.  We hope the following article will assist in answering your questions.  Please let us know your thoughts and where you disagree.


1Corinthians 15:19-28

By Lloyd Dale


In order to properly understand 1Cor 15:19-28 many things must be taken into account.  In 1Cor 15, Paul is refuting the erroneous notion that there is no resurrection.  He Claims that “now Christ is risen from the dead and become the firstfruits of those that have died (slept).”  Thus in order to properly understand this portion of this chapter, we must first properly understand what the Bible and Paul meant by “dead.”  For the present suffice it to say that Christ became “dead” when He voluntary surrendered to death on the cross.


Next Paul states that “as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.  Contrary to popular opinion Paul is not writing about salvation here, he is writing about death in Adam and he is simply stating that Adam’s death is imputed to all men that are born of Adam’s seed.  Then he states that in the same manner that Adam’s death was imputed to all men Christ’s resurrection life is imputed to all men that are born of Adam’s seed.


Again, contrary to popular opinion, Paul is not writing about salvation in this passage.  He is simply contrasting death and resurrection life.  Other passages clearly tell us that there will “a resurrection of the dead, both the just and the unjust” (Acts 24:15, cf. Dan 12:2).   In that context, Paul states that this resurrection of the dead to life will occur for all men, “but each man in his own order.  The first man, in this order of resurrection life, is Christ; He was the resurrection firstfruits of all men.


Next Paul states, “afterward (we now know from the balance of the NT that Paul’s “afterward” meant approximately 40 years after Christ’s resurrection) they that are Christ’s at His Parousia.”  Paul’s those “that are Christ’s” is of course a reference to those that were given to Jesus by God the Father (John 17:9-24).  In this verse, Paul clearly states the only “those that are Christ’s” (the justified) will receive resurrection life at His Parousia.  Nothing what-so-ever is stated about the resurrection of anyone that was not Christ’s (the unjustified).  By any reasonable standard this is the “first resurrection” of which John wrote in Rev 20:4d.  We are told that those that “have a part in this first resurrection” will have no part in “the second death.”



At this point let me ask you a question: How can anyone have a part in the “second death” unless he was born of Adam, and first died of Adam’s death then experienced the resurrection life of Christ and then became subject to the “second death” because his name “was not found  written in the book of life.?”  Don’t criticize my view until you have a reasonable and complete answer to this question.



At this point we are left with a serious question: “When will those that had not been given to Christ be resurrected?”  By any reasonable standard those that had not been given to Christ by God the Father, i.e. “those that are Christ’s at His Parousia” would be the “rest of the dead” of which John wrote in Rev 20:5.




John writes that “those that had a part in the first resurrection are blessed and holy and they shall be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him a thousand years.”



Now without writing any more about this right now let’s return to 1Cor 15:24 were Paul wrote, “then the end.”  What is this “end” to which Paul refers?  One thing is certain, whatever it is; it clearly occurs after the “resurrection…of those that are Christ’s at his Parousia” of verse 23 in Paul’s sequence of events as presented here.  That leaves two questions that we must answer correctly in order to properly understand what Paul is stating here:  (1)  “How long after the event of verse 23 (the Parousia resurrection of the justified) will it be until the “end?”  (2) “What is this “end” to which Paul refers?”



From Scripture it can be deduced that Paul, John and the other apostles discussed the Revelation at the Jerusalem council in ca. 46 AD, therefore, I think that Paul and John were in agreement about these things.  While Paul does not give us the details about the resurrection of the unjustified dead (the rest of the dead), in 1Cor 15:19-28; John does in Rev 20:5-6 and 11-15 and according to John this resurrection of the rest of the dead (the unjustified) takes place after a thousand year “heavenly kingdom” (2Tim 4:18) “reign”  of the  saints (“beheaded” and otherwise dead) resurrected at the Parousia (the justified of 1Cor 15:23b, cf. 1Tim 2:10-12, Matt 16:27-28,19:28, 25:31)



That this reign of the saints with Christ begins at the Parousia is verified by the sequence of verses 23 and 25 in 1Cor 15.  First, the resurrection of “those that are Christ’s at His Parousia,” in verse 23 then “for He must reign…” in verse 25.  In 1Cor 15 there is NO mention, not even a suggestion of a “reign” until after the Parousia of verse 23.  However, in verse 26 after the Parousia of verse 23 Paul states, “for He must reign…”  This follows or correlates perfectly with the events in Rev 20:4-6 & 11-15.  Thus 1Cor 15:19-28 and Rev 20:4-6 & 11-15 are parallels that clearly establish that the “end” Paul has in mind in 1Cor 15:24 is the end of “the thousand years reign of the resurrected saints with Christ” which John describes in Rev 20.


It should be noted here that there is no coming of Christ or Parousia of Christ identified with the end of the thousand years reign of the saints with Christ in Rev 20:11-15.  This all takes place in the realm of the “resurrected” both of the just and the unjust (“…whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire” of the “second death, verses 14-15).


In keeping with both Paul’s and John’s sequence of events, the events of 1Cor 15:26-28 occur after “the thousand years reign of the saints with Christ.”


Hi Steve,


Thank you for forwarding Lloyd’s article. It was excellent and not to mention undeniable in its entirety. I have to say that it is almost shocking to read something like that. It makes me wonder why I hadn’t come to the same conclusion years ago because it seems so obvious that it is the truth of the matter. One can only guess how it has been possible that dispensationalists have been so sucessful in promoting a doctrine that obviously smacks of complete non-sense. It is almost as if they call God a liar and then create an esoteric means by which one should understand scripture. I recently heard a preacher on WVCY talking about how the Jews were going to build another temple in Jerusalem and that would be the temple that would eventually be destroyed per Matthew 24. What a pitiful state we are in when people can accept these lies without so much as a fight.



I had always wondered why we had strong Christian civilizations like Byzantium that would eventually crumble, only to give birth to Christian cultures that seemed to only get more and more degenerate. So when I see these degenerate currents finding their place in our world, it makes perfect sense why Rev 20: 7-10 makes complete sense in our present times. How wonderful to have learned this!



I learned about preterism back in 1998 from a man named V.S. Herrell. I had been involved in his ” Christian Separatist Church ” for a time and eventually had a falling out with them and left that church, which is something similar to what is today called “Christian Identity.” I believe some of his writings can still be found online.  This occured in my early to mid twenties. I’m 32 now. Since then, I haven’t been involved in any other churches or similar organizations. I am married with three children living in Muskego .


Thank you again to you and Lloyd for sending this excellent article. Very well written. I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind Regards,




Sin Ain’t What You Think!

SPIRITUAL 1 CORINTHIANS 2:9-15                                                                                                                                 
MAINTENANCE  TITUS 3:8                                                                               

                                               MARCH 2008
                           WEB ADDRESS:
                       E-MAIL ADDRESS:
The Spiritual Maintenance Newsletter is a monthly study of scripture and matters that deal with our spiritual life and our growing in grace and knowledge of the nature and character of God. It is not a lecture or a sermon but practical help and insight for our faith walk in this tired busy world. You are invited to e-mail responses, AGREEMENT IS NOT REQUIRED.  Some print out the newsletter and share it with others, and some study it over a month in small segments from their computer.  It is not necessary to read in one sitting, but in parts over the month, for thought and meditation, at ones own pace. We are not so concerned with who is right but what is right, not what we believe as much as whom we believe.
                                                                    Acts 17:11 / 2 Timothy 1:12  

                  ROMANS 5:12-13 / 3:1-20 / 3:23 / 6:23 / JEREMIAH 17:9

Throughout human history man has spoken the word “sin” in ridicule and frustration.  Most people accept the word “sin” but deny it’s reality or personal application, or at least what it really is. The natural man “who does not understand the things of God”, mocks it, denies it, and refuses the Biblical declaration of “lostness”.  We as believers are forever plagued with its reality and as we grow in grace we develop an even greater awareness of our “absolute spiritual inability”. Our victory is always “His Victory” in us and through us.  We must never forget that “WE SIN BECA– USE WE ARE SINNERS AND NOT SINNERS BECA– USE WE SIN”!  Sin is not murder, rape, adultery, greed, etc., in other words not what we do or don’t do but rather a condition or disease of the human heart or experience. All the behavior that misses God’s purpose, misses the mark of His plan for our lives, whether it is to be found in what we do or what we fail to do.  Thus murder, rape, adultery, greed, drunkenness and so on or the by-product of the “sin nature” and the human condition. It simply put, declares that we have “missed the mark” or “come short” of the glory of God. I grew up as a kid hearing the following cuteness in response to the idea of sin and how we saw it, “I don’t dip, dance or chew and I don’t run with folks that do, or date girls who do.”  This I might add does not describe SIN in the Biblical sense but rather human behavior as it relates to a given human value, or personal opinion.  Sin is indeed a malicious cancer in the heart of all mankind.
Jesus Christ is our righteousness and our only hope, a gift of grace.
                          SIN DEFINED!
All have SINNED and COME SHORT of the glory of GOD.        ROMANS 3:23

        RIGHTEOUSNESS – WE WEAR MASK / WE PLAY GAMES / WE HIDE     WE RUN  / Isaiah 64:6 / Matthew 6:33 / Romans 5:17 / Titus 3:3-7  / James 1:13-15
      GOD FINDS US NOT US FINDING HIM.  Genesis 3:8-10
I “I” is me at the center of the universe / ME – MYSELF & I                 
      Romans 3:10-18 / Jeremiah 17:9 / Job 14:1-6 / Proverbs 3:5-6 / Luke 19:10
LOST WE ARE:  L lonely  O opposing S salvations T treasure / 2 Corinthians 4:7
N NAKED and afraid / fears and anxieties / we hurt
  Mark 7:14-23 / 2 Timothy 1:7 / Philippians 4:4-7 /   2 Corinthians 5:21                             
                                                  Genesis 3:8-10

Life is short / death is sure / SIN the cause / Christ the cure!     
               SIN IS!?.
                                             Romans 3:9-12 / 23

SIN is an actual legal standing before GOD whereby we are declared guilty and condemned of not accepting His gracious payment of the death, the burial and resurrection of HIS SON, the LORD JESUS CHRIST in our behalf. John 3:18  1 Corinthians 15:1-4    Ours is inherited human sinfulness and
inability because of Adam’s transgression.  Romans 5  Thus all men are dead in sin and totally corrupt in all parts and faculties of both soul and body.  Therefore we all inherited a polluted, corrupt nature.  We are conceived in sin and by nature children subject to God’s anger against sin, the servants of sin and subjects of death.  We as all men are now given up to unspeakable miseries, spiritual temporal and eternal unless the Lord Jesus Christ alone sets us free. Psalm 51

           SINS ARE!?.
                           Romans 5:18-19 / 3:26

We SIN because we are SINNERS!  Once we have received God’s pardon in Jesus Christ “BY GRACE THROUGH FAITH”, we are no longer looked upon by God as SINNERS
But rather Children of God, and “joint heirs with Jesus Christ”. We then have a whole different relationship to sin. Sin is no more out master, but we are under command to “refuse sins reign in our “corrupt mortal bodies”.  As a believer God never views us as “SINNERS”, rather as His children who struggle with  “our earthly bodies”, that is our “old natures”, with their desires, resulting in sin. James 1:13-16  We will often move in our growth from victim to victory and stand continually in conflict with our old nature of the flesh. 
Romans 7:14-25 / Galatians 5:17   Our position in Christ never changes as we confront and conflict with our old nature, but our condition changes and our joy is disapated. John wrote “DON’T SIN, but if you do, you have an ADVOCATE with the Father, JESUS CHRIST the righteous”.    1 John 2:1-3  As in the human relationship between a parent and a child we must moment by moment repeat the process of renewal of intimacy and fellowship between us and our HEAVENLY FATHER. 1 John 1:9-2:2 Our relationship is not broken by our sin but our fellowship is. At our physical death “this mortal puts on immortality and this corruption puts on incorruption.
1 Corinthians 15:50-58 / Luke 15: 11-32 /  Romans 8 The renewal process is:
                      CONFESS – 1 John 1:9
                      REBOUND – 1 John 2:1-3 / Philippians 2:12-13  
   2 Timothy 2:14-15 / Hebrews 4:12-13, 5:13-14, 12:1-3  / Psalm 51, 119:9,11, 89 
         James 1:13-16 / Romans 6:12-14 / 2 Peter 1:2-8, 3:17-18 / 1 John 2:27  

 We live in mortal, corrupt bodies that are not redeemable, thus Paul declared that, “flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God, and this mortal must put on immortality, and this corruption must put on incorruption.”
1 Corinthians 15:50-53    This happens at our physical death when
redemption is complete for which we were sealed at the moment of our salvation.  Ephesians 1:13-14  Thank God that our condition of sin, in our natural lostness, is remedied only by
receiving at a moment in time, His “LEGAL RIGHTEOUSNESS
AS A GIFT”, by which we are covered, redeemed and sealed until the day of redemption.  Never forget, “CHRIST IN YOU THE HOPE OF GLORY.” Colossians 1:27 /  Galatians 2:20 / Romans 5:17

                 Amazing GRACE how sweet the sound
                 That saved a WRETCH like me
                 I once was lost but now I’m found
                 Was blind but now I see.
                                                            JOHN NEWTON
Heart to heart   
Life has been very busy these days and God is faithful.  Every generation has it’s own pain and struggles.  Our world is so given to technology that often separates us rather than drawing us together.  We are often removed from closeness and intimacy but we must determine to make ourselves available to one another in order to stimulate one another to love and good deeds.  I ask you to pray for me and my family as we pray for you.  Pray for Grace Fellowship that meets on Sunday and Wednesday, for our Sunday evening Bible Study in Mooresville every other week, for the Voice of Reason worldwide radio ministry that I share with John Anderson twice a month. Finally pray for the monthly ministry of Spiritual Maintenance, the newsletter and the one to one discipleship ministries.  I am
home schooling Elizabeth our 9 year old,  4th grader and she is precious and we both are growing and learning.  Pray for Diane my faithful wife, her work and her mom and dad who are having physical problems.  Their names are Ralph and Doris.  Thank you for your many letters, emails and phone calls.  Feel free to call for prayer or to discuss some need or Biblical truth.  I love you each one and am grateful for you being in my life.  Pray especially for our country, our world and our leadership, and the many faithful who walk daily with the Lord.    
                                      I LOVE YOU IN HIS GRACE      danny griffin

                  Feel free to call me 704-497-7126!

Wood found on Mount Ararat


Whether one agrees that this is the remains of Noah’s < ?xml:namespace prefix = st1 />Ark is not really the issue of why this article is being posted.  Personally I believe it is, the evidence is too compelling; but the way Mr. Bowen describes the effect of “tradition” on people is equally compelling and very much the same message Proper Preterism is trying to convey..

From Anchor Stone International

by Jerry Bowen

I recently had a couple of folks send me a link to a news interview concerning wood found on Mount Ararat.  After viewing the information I feel the need to respond, so folks are not continually deceived.  For the last four centuries an almost overwhelming tradition has developed, that the Ark of Noah landed ON Mount Ararat. Obviously tradition is a powerful thing, because people believe tradition without ever investigating for themselves.

Most folks, especially Christians, point to the Scriptures as proof to confirm the Ark landed on Ararat.  However, like other Christian traditions, a misunderstanding of the Word has lead many to believe something that is not accurate.  Try this little test yourself: ask any Christian how the animals went into the Ark?  Almost invariably, the answer will be 2×2, yet Genesis 7:2  clearly indicates there were two of the unclean animals and 7 of the clean. This is just an illustration of the power of traditions becoming the mindset of individuals.  We sing song and hear the story, (or tradition), from childhood over and over again, until, in our minds it becomes fact.   (like the THEORY of evolution)

The Bible does provide a general location for the landing site, but not a specific mountain peak.  It simply says, “The Ark came to rest upon the MOUNTAINS of Ararat”.  The original indicates it came to rest in the REGION of Urartu.   (the area we call Ararat today)

I believe one very positive result from the traditions that developed was the preservation of the remains, tradition actually led explorers away from the authentic site.  Also, God worked in a miraculous way to preserve the remains for this generation.  He simply hid it from human sight, until 1948.

One of the most fundamental reasons why the Ark could not have landed on Ararat is that the mountain had not developed to it’s present height.  Most Geologists will tell you the evidence indicates that the peak we call Ararat, is only 2,000 or less years in development.  This means that it was not the dominant feature in the area 4,400 years ago, that it most obviously is today.   And we know the flood waters were not over 17,000 ft in height as they would have needed to be, in order for the Ark to land on that mountain.

The mountain’s development is due to volcanism, large lava domes are still present even today indicating major activity in the last 500 years.  In 1848 the north west face blew out creating the Ahora Gorge, which interestingly is where most explorers search, and many claims have been made concerning evidence.  The mountain is also very active, especially at about 14,000 ft as it is Turkey’s second largest glacier.  With all this development and movement over the centuries IF the Ark had landed there it would have been ground to pieces and totally destroyed. But God had other ideas in its preservation, and so he secured the Ark at a location that would allow its partial survival for this last generation.  Also, Scripture indicates God used a strong wind to dry the waters from the Earth, the Ark would have needed to be in a harbor environment to survive that process, it would have been too exposed on the top or side of a large mountain.

With the tradition of the Ark being somewhere on the mountain, over the centuries individuals and locals have constructed various shrines or buildings there.  So, it is not unusual to find wood fragments on the mountain, also, to keep the tradition alive, (for economic purposes), some have taken wood up the mountain, buried it in the snow, and retrieved it at a later date, claiming to have found wood at a certain elevation.  This keeps the illusion alive and many come to continue the search.  The fact is there has never been any petrified carboniferous wood found on the mountain.

The environment before the flood was much different than today.  The archaeological record clearly reveals one universal temperature, greater oxygen levels, stronger electro-magnetic field, plus other advantages.  The planet was like a large hyperbaric chamber, prolific for growth, thus the size of the people, animals, and vegetation were astounding.   One consideration for us is the growing season for the trees.  Before the great flood, Scripture indicates the lack of rain as we experience today.  So, the wet/dry seasons that we experience today almost world-wide did not occur.  This means that the wood used in the construction of the Ark would have a grain consistent to that of stone, we would not observe the typical rings that we see today in most trees.

Though we find a lack of evidence from the mountain and the theory that the mountain was not even there 4,400 years ago, still the search goes on.  This illustrates the power of tradition.

For just 15 miles south-east in the region of Urartu, we find the remains of the hull of a man-made ship, the dimensions which correlate to those given in the Bible, made of Gopher wood, (Laminated petrified carboniferous wood), with evidence that it was a floating zoo.

If you’re interested in the whole story of the Ararat region and the research over the last 30 years on Noah’s Ark, check out Henri Nissen’s book “Noah’s Ark Uncovered.” We have a current special on these books – buy one at regular price get the 2nd for half.

God bless

Jerry Bowen, Director

Anchor Stone International, Inc.

The Stones are Crying Out!

James Jordan and the Book of Daniel


James Jordan and the Book of Daniel

James B. Jordan’s long-awaited full commentary on Daniel is now in print and on sale by American Vision as The Handwriting on the Wall. Now that I have read it in its entirety, I herein offer some comments on this important work. Jordan is an outstanding biblical authority with a great capacity for original thinking that allows him to break free from prevailing views. Sometimes, in my opinion, he fails to make a persuasive case for his unconventional ideas, but he often offers real nuggets of exegetical insight that leave me asking “why didn’t I think of that?” In any event, his knowledge of the Bible is so profound and intimidating that even when I think he is wrong, I take it for granted that his arguments should be examined seriously instead of being airily dismissed.

With a text that, counting the appendices, runs about 700 pages in length, The Handwriting on the Wall provides detailed commentary on all twelve chapters of Daniel. The book is written in an easy to follow style offering judiciously placed repetitions of earlier statements that will help the reader remember important points without seeming to be monotonous. I have read that Jordan is a very good Bible teacher, and his writing style bears this out. The chapters are well organized so as to make it easy to find particular points in them.

On the other hand, the book lacks endnotes, a bibliography, and indexes, and this is a very serious flaw. Thus, if you want to see where Jordan cites Matthew 24, you have to leaf through it. I recommend to readers that they use highlighting and marginal notes to help them find points that they may want to recheck. This advice presupposes that the book is a “keeper.” It does contain a considerable number of footnotes, some of which are quite informative. Relatively few of them are to the works of other writers, however. Jordan evidently does not believe that most other Danielic scholars are worth citing; and while I am somewhat sympathetic toward that point of view, I am sure that biblical authorities in the academic mainstream will tear him apart for his disregard of proper scholarly form. I hardly think, however, that Jordan is seeking approval from that quarter! As an aside, I am happy to say that although my book on the four kingdoms of Daniel is cited only once, I am quoted with approval (p. 177). Given the number of points on which I disagree with Jordan, I was fortunate.

I estimate that Jordan devotes a total of no more than about seven pages to mainstream opinion on Daniel. “It is not my purpose to bog down the reader with a discussion of various ‘liberal’ or skeptical approaches to Daniel,” he writes on page 6, and he delivers on his promise! Much later (p. 155), in a brief reference to John J. Collins’s massive critical commentary on Daniel, he blasts Collins—correctly, in my view—for operating under the assumption that “the author of Daniel was really stupid” with respect to his dating of the story of Daniel 2. To this I add that critical; i.e. “liberal,” scholars generally assume that the author of Daniel was either unconcerned about historical accuracy or lacked accurate information in some instances. They also tend to assume that numerous alterations were made in Daniel’s original text between the time when some of its stories first circulated—perhaps as early as the fifth century BC—and the date when they believe it attained its final form; i.e. around 164 BC. Such claims are laughable to Jordan, who is convinced that Daniel’s text is so elegantly constructed in terms of chiastic passages, its integration with other books of the Old Testament (OT), and the application of numerical symbolism to particular words that the idea that the book is full of historical inaccuracies and editorial glosses can be dismissed out of hand.

What cannot be dismissed so readily is the possibility that an unknown master of redaction put the Book of Daniel into its final form not long before Jewish rebels led by Judas Maccabeus succeeded, in December 164 BC, in taking Jerusalem from the forces of Antiochus IV, the ruler of the Hellenistic Seleucid kingdom. In my four kingdoms book, I endeavored to deal with this possibility using a twofold approach that combined detailed criticism of mainstream scholarship and its insistence on a second-century BC “end time” in Daniel with a positive assessment of the evidence supporting the belief that the climactic events of Daniel’s prophecies occurred in the first century AD and that Rome, not “Greece,” is the fourth kingdom in Daniel 2 and 7. Jordan skimps on criticism of the evidence that supposedly supports a “Maccabean date” for these events and focuses almost entirely on presenting a very detailed case for tying them to his version of the “Roman sequence” of four kingdoms. He makes numerous observations that I did not make, some of which I wish I had made. In particular, he integrates his analysis of Daniel with the OT to an extent that I can never hope to match. I find much of his analysis to be convincing. His version of the Roman sequence is quite different from what I favor, however, and nothing in his book persuades me that I could be wrong.

In the version of the Roman sequence that I endorse, the third kingdom is the “Greece” that supplanted the kingdoms of Babylonia and Medo-Persia as the dominant political power in the Holy Land with the conquest of the Persian Empire by Alexander the Great in 334-331. This “Greece” included the various Hellenistic kingdoms into which Alexander’s empire dissolved following his death in 323. It was ultimately replaced as the dominant power in the area by Rome. Just when Rome began its “career” as the fourth kingdom is not completely clear. One could go with a date as early as 190 BC, which is when the army of Scipio Asiaticus inflicted a devastating defeat on the force commanded by Antiochus III “the Great” at Magnesia in western Asia Minor. In my judgment, a better date for the beginning of the dominion of the fourth kingdom is either 168 BC, when Roman envoys to Egypt compelled the Seleucid king Antiochus IV to desist from his attack on Alexandria and to leave that country forthwith, or 164 BC, the year when Judea gained effective independence from Seleucid Syria. Rome’s period as the fourth kingdom thus runs, in my view, from about 164 BC until AD 30, the year I favor for the Crucifixion and Ascension of Jesus Christ.

Although Jordan also takes Daniel’s third kingdom to be “Greece” and its fourth kingdom to be “Rome,” his conception of these two kingdoms differs sharply from what I suggest and is one that I had not previously encountered. According to Jordan, Daniel’s “Greece” actually includes republican Rome; i.e. the Roman state as it existed before Augustus Caesar, or perhaps before his great-uncle Julius Caesar acquired full control of the Roman state. His fourth kingdom is thus imperial Rome. This means that he has the period of “Greek” dominance run all the way from Alexander’s conquest of the Persian Empire until whenever it was in the first century BC—and Jordan is not precise about this—that the Roman Republic became the Roman Empire. Because he assigns republican Rome to “Greece,” the time he effectively allots to the fourth kingdom of Daniel is comparatively short.

My study of Daniel has convinced me that the great statue of Daniel 2 must be understood as a kind of timeline in which the proportions of the five different segments of the image correspond to five successive periods in the history of the Holy Land and the nations adjacent to it. These periods are symbolized by the statue’s head of gold, its chest and arms of silver, its belly and thighs of bronze, the solid iron portion running from the knees to (presumably) the ankles, and the iron mixed with clay portion composed of the feet and toes. The corresponding historical periods are: (1) the Babylonian period, running from about 605 BC, when Nebuchadnezzar became king, to the fall of Babylon in 539; (2) the Medo-Persian period, running from 539 until 332; (3) the “Greek” period, running from 332 until about 164; (4) the first part of the time of Roman dominance, running from about 164 until the occupation of Judea by Pompey in 63 BC; and (5) the second part of the time of Roman period, running from 63 BC until AD 30. According to Jordan—and on this point I come close to agreeing with him—“the terra cotta [clay] refers to those Jews who sought to join Rome, who in memorable words, when they were forced to choose, declared ‘We have no king but Caesar’” (p. 182).

As I argued in the last article that I posted at (“Some Funny Things Happened to the Statue of Daniel 2”), a division of the five segments of the statue along the lines suggested above is the only way to provide a reasonably close match between the statue’s dimensions and historical record. I am confident that this hard fact largely explains why it is that those who insist that Daniel’s end time is to be found in the second century BC simply dismiss the notion that the imagery of the statue is supposed to correspond closely to the historical record. Futurists have, on the whole, been more interested in exploring the notion of the statue serving as a timeline, but they cannot satisfactorily handle the awkward problem of explaining how “Rome” will still be around when the end time finally arrives. Jordan avoids the challenge of extending the life of the statue into the future, but his solution results in a gross time imbalance between the dominion times of the third and fourth kingdoms by implausibly allocating the Roman state partly to the third kingdom and partly to the fourth. Further compounding his problem here is the fact that the time periods he seems to assign to the solid iron and the clay mixed with iron segments of the statue do not conform well to the historical record.

According to Jordan, Daniel 7 allows us to identify the terra cotta or clay in the feet of the statue “as the Herods and Jewish leaders who sustained a love-hate relationship with Rome” (p. 183). Only two pages later, he indicates that the fourth kingdom’s period of dominance came to an end with the Ascension of Christ AD 30, or very shortly thereafter (p. 185). These statements appear somewhat contradictory because descendants of Herod the Great as well as Jewish leaders who allied themselves with Rome exercised authority until the outbreak of the Jewish War in AD 66. Herod the Great did not effectively begin his long reign as Rome’s vassal king of Judea until 37 BC. Therefore, if you assign that year to the beginning of the clay in the feet as you move down the statue, very little time remains for the solid iron segment of the statue even if you push the date for the beginning of the fourth kingdom to as early as 48 BC, the year when Julius Caesar defeated Pompey at Pharsalus. Having only eleven years for the historical equivalent of the solid iron running from the knees to the ankles compared with least sixty-six years (37 BC to AD 30 with no year zero) to the clay of the feet and toes obviously does not work well from the timeline perspective. Making this problem even worse is the fact that Jordan suggests at one point that the fourth kingdom; i.e. imperial Rome, did not displace the third kingdom until Octavian Caesar (Augustus) defeated Mark Antony (p. 605). Since Octavian’s victory over Antony occurred at Actium in 31 BC; i.e. six years after Herod the Great was installed as vassal king, this means that Jordan has the historical equivalent of the clay in the feet materialize before the fourth kingdom comes into existence! I must conclude that his handling of the third and fourth kingdoms simply does not work.

Understandably, Jordan never claims that the statue should be understood as a timeline, and at one point he states that, “taken as whole the statue does not indicate any passage of time” but is to be understood symbolically (p. 179). Above all, he insists, biblical prophecy must be understood theologically, and it is not always to be taken literally. He recognizes, however, that there are instances in the OT, such as the seventy years prophecy of Jeremiah 25 and 29, where the times specified in prophecies are quite literal, but he also points out that in other instances, prophecies are to be understood symbolically rather than literally. In the case of Daniel 2, he tends to favor the symbolic approach. Nevertheless, his statement that “the statue does not indicate any passage of time” is contradicted by the fact that he does indeed recognize that the statue records the progression of history (pp. 184-86). And since the head of the statue refers to the time of Nebuchadnezzar and the historical equivalent of the striking of its feet by the stone occurred around AD 30, we have good reason to assume that the five segments of the statue should be taken quite literally as corresponding to actual periods of historical time. As far as I am concerned, the prophecies of Daniel 2 are both theology and history, and the dimensions of the statue must be understood as a literal forecast of history.

In my own work, I regard the prophecy of the supernatural rock (or stone) that strikes the feet of the statue of Daniel 2, destroys the entire statue, and grows into a great mountain that covers the entire earth as one of the most important prophecies in the Bible. What this prophecy says to me is that Christianity came into being as the realized New Covenant in the first century AD and has since undergone a long process of growth and development that will ultimately give it spiritual dominion over all of Earth. This implies, I am confident, that the process of the rock’s growth corresponds to the “thousand years” of Revelation 20:2-7. This puts me at odds with those preterists who insist that Revelation’s “thousand years” are to be found in the period AD 30-70. So be it.

Jordan does not devote much attention to the prophecy of the rock, and he does not relate it to Revelation 20. Neither does he relate it to the swords into ploughshares prophecy of Isaiah 2 and Micah 4, which is a striking omission in view of the many other instances where he connects passages in Daniel with earlier books of the OT. He assumes that the prophecies of Daniel are almost entirely concerned with what was to happen to God’s people from the time of Nebuchadnezzar to the destruction of the Temple in AD 70, and while this assumption is correct, I believe that these prophecies are somewhat more concerned with the future of mankind after that date than he recognizes. I must note, however, that he does recognize that although the prophecy of the rock foretells the spiritual shattering of Rome in the first century, “it took a while (a few centuries) for the wind of the Spirit operating through the Church to blow away all the chaff pieces” (p. 185). For Jordan—and I agree completely—the arrival of the rock must be understood as a spiritual event, as opposed to a change of political dominion, and there is no reason whatsoever to insist that the prophecies of either Daniel 2 or Daniel 7 require the political removal of all four kingdoms before the rock arrives.

I am happy to report that Jordan holds that Daniel’s Darius the Mede is none other than Cyrus the Persian and that he supports this position with sound reasoning. Moreover, he points out that when Daniel states in 5:31 that Darius was about sixty-two years old when he took over Babylonia, “This is the only place in the Bible where the age of a Gentile king is provided.” This suggests to him that there is a link between the sixty-two years of Darius/Cyrus and the sixty-two weeks of 9:25. Because these passages are not parallel, he surmises, the link must be “a typological connection between the 70 years of Babylonian dominance [cf. Jeremiah 25] and the 70 weeks of world-imperial dominance: Seven years before Darius/Cyrus was born, then 62 years, and then a seventieth year during which the events of Daniel 6 took place—Daniel’s tribulation and elevation typologically prophesying those of Jesus during the 70th week” (p. 304). This discernment of a possible typological connection between 5:31 and 9:25 provides a good illustration of Jordan’s ability to discern linkages between biblical passages. I have long wondered why the specific reference to the age of Darius was inserted, and I find his explanation to be plausible.

In Daniel 9:1-2 we are told, in effect, that in the first year of Darius the Mede; i.e. shortly after the fall of Babylon to the Medes and Persians, the prophet Daniel assumed that Jeremiah’s prophecy of seventy years of servitude to the king of Babylon (c.f. Jeremiah 25:11) had been fulfilled. Accordingly, in 9:3-19, Daniel turns to the Lord and utters a long prayer asking forgiveness for the people of all Israel. He is immediately rewarded by the arrival of the angel Gabriel, who then proceeds to utter the astounding prophecy of the seventy weeks or “sevens” of verses 25-29, whose time span appears to be seventy years times seven or 490 years. Operating under the assumption that this “prophecy” was actually written in the second century BC, critical scholars generally hold that its unknown inventor assumed that Jeremiah’s prophecy had never been fulfilled and recast it through the fictitious agency of Gabriel so as to produce an end time that would coincide with the hoped-for demise of Antiochus IV in the near future.

The notion that the author of Daniel did not believe that Jeremiah’s prophecy had been fulfilled with the fall of Babylon in 539 has never made sense to me. I have argued on this site (“The Seventy Years of Daniel 9:2”) that it should be perfectly clear that the author of Daniel knew that Jeremiah’s prophecy had been fulfilled and that the prophecy may well have been fulfilled quite literally. I am happy to write that Jordan adheres to this line of interpretation and presents a strong case for holding that the beginning date for Jeremiah’s prophecy was in the first half of 608 and its terminal point occurred toward the latter part of 539 (pp. 53, 632); i.e. in the prophecy’s seventieth year. Given the strength of the evidence supporting the literal fulfillment of the prophecy and given, as Jordan puts it, “the immense skill and care revealed in this prayer” (p. 450), I am totally in his corner when he writes: “according to the critics, Daniel is a fake book” and that, therefore, the “entire statement [of the critics] about reading Jeremiah is a flat lie, according to the brayings of these ‘scholars’” (p. 451).

Although I came to the reading of Jordan’s book thinking that he rejects the idea that Daniel 9’s prophecy of the seventy weeks was literally fulfilled, after I read his treatment of Jeremiah’s prophecy, I got my hopes up that he would espouse the literal fulfillment of the companion prophecy in Daniel. I was badly disappointed. Jordan is firmly convinced that the “decree” or “word” to which 9:25 refers as authorizing the restoration and rebuilding of Jerusalem can only be the decree issued by Cyrus the Great (2 Chron. 36:22-23; Ezra 1:1-2, 6:3-5) that authorizes the return of exiled Jews to their homeland and the rebuilding of the Temple, and he dates the issuance of this decree to both 538 (p. 472) and 537 (pp. 470, 642), though I suspect from the context that his time for the starting point of the seventy weeks is the beginning of 537.

By picking such an early date for the beginning of the seventy weeks prophecy, Jordan sets up a scenario that rules out the possibility that it was literally fulfilled in its entirety. His preferred terminal date is AD 33, which coincides with the stoning of Stephen (p. 474) and strikes me as being quite plausible. This means that the total period he selects for the 490 years of the seventy “weeks” runs too long by about 80 years. After acknowledging that John Calvin’s proposed solution to this discrepancy was to argue that historians had miscalculated the relevant dates, Jordan concedes that the information that we now possess rules out this option. Accordingly, he produces a solution based on Gabriel’s division of the seventy weeks into three distinct periods of seven weeks, sixty-two weeks, and one week (9:25-27). The seven weeks run from 538/537 to 489 and are to be taken literally; the sixty-two weeks run from 489 until AD 26 and are to be understood symbolically; and the seventieth week should probably be understood as literal, running from AD 26 to 33 (pp. 460, 472, 474, 648).

In my view, if you accept that Jeremiah’s prophecy of the seventy years of servitude to Babylon was literally fulfilled, then logically you should approach Daniel’s prophecy of the seventy weeks for the people of Daniel and their holy city (9:24) with the presumption that it, too, must have been literally fulfilled. I am firmly of the belief that Daniel’s prophecy was literally fulfilled and that, therefore, it is a mistake to identify the decree of Cyrus as the “word” or “decree” to which 9:25 refers. It is my position that the decree of Cyrus did not necessarily authorize the rebuilding of the defensive fortifications that would have been essential to a full rebuilding of Jerusalem and that the “word” that allowed the walls and the defensive “moat”; i.e. ditch, to be built was not delivered to the returnees until 458/457 by Artaxerxes I (Ezra 7:12-26). If you take the date 458 BC and then deduct 49 years for the seven weeks of the prophecy during which the city and its fortifications were to be rebuilt during a time of trouble (9:25), you arrive at 409 BC for the end of the seven weeks and—assuming the weeks are continuous—the beginning of the sixty-two weeks. Then, by deducting 434 years (sixty-two times seven) from 409 BC and factoring in that there was no year zero, you arrive at AD 26 for the end of the sixty-two weeks and the beginning of the seventieth week. AD 26 just “happens” to coincide with the commonly accepted date for the beginning of Christ’s ministry.

Regrettably, although Jordan is undoubtedly quite familiar with the calculation in the last paragraph, he does not deal with it head-on in his book. He does, however, indicate that the Artaxerxes of Ezra and Nehemiah is actually Darius I and that the Book of Nehemiah should be dated considerably earlier than is commonly done (pp. 469, 647-48). It is obvious that he takes it for granted that Cyrus authorized the full rebuilding of Jerusalem—which he evidently did not do—and that the letter from Artaxerxes I to which Ezra refers cannot be granted the status of a “decree.” He infers that Cyrus must have authorized the full rebuilding of Jerusalem from Isaiah 44:28 and 45:13, which prophesy that Cyrus will indeed order the rebuilding of the city of Jerusalem and not just the Temple. My response is that, yes, his decree did specifically authorize the rebuilding of the Temple, and that action would necessarily have required some construction activity around this facility. On the other hand, in the world of the Holy Land of ancient times, the full rebuilding of a destroyed city would have required the construction of a wall and other defensive facilities before people would have become willing to undertake the private and public infrastructure investments required for a full restoration. A reasonable inference is that since Daniel 9:25 states that Jerusalem is to be rebuilt in troubled times with streets and a “moat,” the rebuilding process necessarily involved the construction of such defensive facilities. Incidentally, Jordan disposes of the “moat” reference by writing that since “Jerusalem did not have a literal moat,” this reference must refer “to the restoration of the baptismal cleansing rites of purification, as required in Leviticus, which people needed to undergo before entering the holy city if they were unclean” (p. 460). On this point, color me skeptical. I think it is more plausible to view the reference to the “moat” as referring to the construction of a defensive ditch outside the walls.

Against preterist interpretations of the prophecy of the seventy weeks that have it being fulfilled in the first century AD, it is commonly argued that the proponents of this theory insert a gap of forty years (actually thirty-six and one-half years) between the end of the first half of the seventieth week and the end of the second half. This gap results, it is said, because the middle of the week to which 9:27 refers coincides with the Crucifixion and Ascension in AD 30 while the destruction of the Temple that occurs in the second half of the week took place in AD 70. According to Jordan—and here I am completely on his side—“the coming of Christ’s vengeance army, the Romans, is not said to happen in the 70th week, but only in a time after the block of 62 weeks,” and the destruction of the city was determined during the seventieth week though it was not actually carried out until some years afterwards (p. 461-63).

Because of space constraints and the complexity of the issues involved, I cannot do justice here to Jordan’s treatment of Daniel’s references to the passages in 8:13, 9:27, 11:31, and 12:11 that allude to what is commonly called “the abomination that causes desolation” and to the related passages in these chapters that have to do with the daily sacrifice at the Temple. It should be noted, however, that Jordan relates the passages in chapters 8, 9, and 12 to events occurring during the time symbolized by the clay in the feet of the statue of Daniel 2; i.e. the era of Herod the Great and his descendants, and that he assigns only 11:31 to the time of Antiochus IV. Moreover, he strongly emphasizes his belief that in all four of these cases, the desecrations and abominations that they mention had to do with the actions of the Temple priesthood. For Jordan, “sacrilege [at the Temple] is never committed by Gentiles” because they had no relevance to the worship system there. “What counts as desecration,” he insists, “is idolatry and sacrilege on the part of the priests” (pp. 466-67).

Soon after he usurped the Seleucid throne in 175 BC, Antiochus IV allowed Onias III, the high priest of the Temple in Jerusalem, to be replaced first by Jason, the brother of Onias, and then by a man named Menelaus. A reasonable surmise is that Antiochus followed a policy of selling the high priesthood to the highest bidder, but it also seems likely that both Jason and Menelaus were more favorably disposed toward Hellenization than Onias III. Onias III was murdered in 171, evidently through the handiwork of Menelaus. When Antiochus was involved in his ill-fated expedition to Egypt in 168, a struggle broke out in Jerusalem between the supporters of Jason and those of Menelaus. Upon his return from Egypt, Antiochus intervened to restore Menelaus, and his forces killed many Jews in the process of establishing control. He also looted the Temple and launched a vicious campaign against the practice of Judaism. He was rewarded for his efforts by the Maccabean Revolt, which succeeded in capturing Jerusalem in December 164. While his forces were losing the struggle for Judea, Antiochus became personally involved in coping with problems along his distant eastern frontier, and he died there around the time that the Maccabees took Jerusalem, or shortly thereafter.

According to Jordan, “Not being part of the priestly people, Antiochus could not defile the Tempe; all he could do was rob it” (p. 575). Therefore, he reasons, the pollution of the Temple to which 11:31 refers could only have been done under the authority of its high priests, namely Jason and Menelaus (p. 581). After Menelaus seized the high priesthood, he notes, that office was never again held by a Zadokite, which means that all who held the position from that time on lacked legitimacy (p. 577).

That Jordan assigns 8:13, with its reference to “the apostasy that causes desolation” (p. 410), to the time period symbolized by the clay in the feet of the statue rather than the time of the third kingdom draws attention to the fact that he also assigns the “small horn” introduced in 8:9 to the later period. This means that, contrary to the generally accepted opinion of both liberals and conservatives, he denies that the small horn symbolizes Antiochus IV. It also means that he holds in common with liberals the belief that the “small horn” of 8:9 is also the “little horn” of 7:8, though he differs from them with regard to where the two horns fit into history. The view that the two are identical contrasts sharply with the prevailing conservative position, which holds that while the small horn of Daniel 8 is Antiochus IV, the little horn of Daniel 7 is a later figure. Unfortunately, more conservatives probably assign to the little horn of Daniel 7 to the future than to the first century AD. In any event, I find Jordan’s position on this matter to be even less persuasive than the liberal position.

In Daniel 8’s account of the kingdoms symbolized by the ram and the goat, we are explicitly told in verses 20 and 21 that the two horns of the ram symbolize the kings of Media and Persia and that the great horn between the eyes of the goat symbolizes a king of Greece. This king is obviously Alexander the Great. Verse 22 indicates that the four horns that replace the broken horn are four kingdoms that will arise in place of the kingdom it represents; verse 9 indicates that another horn, “a small one,” arises from one of the four horns; and verses 23 and 24 state that in the latter part of the time of the four horns, a fierce king will arrive who will cause great destruction among the holy people. From the context it is clear that this evil king is the “small horn” of verse 9.

For Jordan, the four horns that replace the horn that symbolizes Alexander correspond to a succession of four domains that followed him: (1) the entire Alexandrian empire during the few years when Alexander’s son (who was born after his death) was its titular head; (2) the Egyptian kingdom of the Ptolemies during the time when it controlled Palestine; (3) the Seleucid realm after it wrested control of Palestine from the Ptolemies; and (4) Hellenistic Rome, which replaced Seleucid Syria as the dominant power in the area until the time of imperial Rome under the Caesars (pp. 423-24). As I indicated earlier, I deny the validity of allocating the historical Roman state partly to the kingdom of bronze and partly to the kingdom of iron in the imagery of the statue of Daniel 2. Beyond this objection, I add that I believe that it is the clear intention of Daniel 8 to portray the four horns as contemporary successors to the broken horn, and I call attention to the facts that 8:9 explicitly states that the small horn arises from one of the four successor horns. This indicates to me that the other horns are still in existence when it emerges. In addition, I note that 8:23 indicates that the small horn will arise in the latter part of “their” reign, meaning the time of the four kingdoms. This, too, implies that the four kingdoms are contemporaneous.

Jordan fails to address such counterarguments head-on. Instead, after noting that “It is often said that Alexander’s empire broke into four kingdoms, and that this is what is meant here,” he states that the empire was actually broken up into more than four parts, and he dismisses without serious discussion the possibility that four is a symbolic number in this instance (p. 423). What the historical record shows, however, is that in the struggle among Alexander’s generals (the diadochi) for supremacy, there initially was a breakup of the empire into the areas controlled by four generals: Cassander (Greece and Macedonia), Lysimachus (Thrace and most of Asia Minor), Seleucus (Syria, Mesopotamia, and Persia), and Ptolemy (Egypt). Following the death of Lysimachus in 281, most of his territory dissolved into minor kingdoms that lasted into the first century BC, but the fact remains that there was an initial division of Alexander’s empire into four parts. Moreover, I maintain that even if you hold that the number four is used here only symbolically, you can make a stronger case for this position than for holding that the four horns represent the four successive kingdoms identified by Jordan.

But just who—or what—is Jordan’s choice for the little/small horn of Daniel 7 and 8? For Jordan, this figure must be understood as a composite entity, namely “that complex of enemies that includes the Herods with the Jews and Judaizers” (p. 424). Because liberals generally hold that both horns symbolize Antiochus IV while most conservatives have identified Antiochus as the small horn of Daniel 8 and have sought to identify the little horn of Daniel 7 as an individual other than Antiochus IV—who either lived during the first century or (more commonly) will show up in the future—the notion that these two horns symbolize a group of individuals will, I suspect, be a startling one for some readers, and I must confess that it continues to be one that is difficult for me to take seriously. Contributing to my difficulty is Jordan’s identification of the ten horns of the fourth beast who precede the arrival of the little horn as successive Roman emperors, beginning with Julius Caesar and ending with Vespasian, the army commander who was commissioned by Nero (the sixth emperor) in February AD 67 to reconquer Judea (p. 382). If the ten horns are individuals, how can the eleventh horn, who comes up among them in 7:8 and reduces three of the horns to stumps, be a group?

An obvious challenge in identifying the little horn of Daniel 7 is to identify the three kings who, in Jordan’s translation, are “reduced to stumps” in verse 8, fall before the little horn in verse 20, and are subdued by it in verse 24. For some years now, I have tended to favor the view that these three horns symbolize the emperors who followed each other in quick succession after the death of Nero in June 68: Galba, Otho, and Vitellius, the last of whom was succeeded by Vespasian in December 69. I believe we should logically begin the enumeration of the ten horns that I take to literally symbolize a succession of Roman “kings” with Pompey, who brought Judea under Roman domain and laid claim to being the sole head of the Roman state before his defeat by Julius Caesar, and I tend to identify the eleventh horn; i.e. the little horn, as Vespasian. I readily concede that most analysts hold different views about the little horn’s identity. I shall not attempt to meet objections to my interpretation in the present article, though I do insist that it is more plausible than what Jordan offers.

According to Jordan, the little horn does not destroy or eliminate the three horns, “but takes over their manifestation in the holy land” (p. 355). He identifies them as the emperors Augustus, Tiberius, and Claudius, who ceded power, respectively, to three Herods: Herod the Great, Herod Antipas (a son of Herod the Great), and Herod Agrippa I (a grandson of Herod the Great). Each of these Herods, he notes, is portrayed in the NT as an enemy of Jesus and His followers (p. 388). The composition of the little horn is not confined to these three Herods, he insists, because we must understand that they cooperated with wicked Jews to effectively take over and control the behavior of the fourth beast of Daniel 7 “in its relationship with God’s people” (p. 390).

Of course, there were more than three Roman emperors who allowed “wicked Jews” to exercise influence and power in the relationship between the empire and “God’s people.” Specifically, there was the murderous Caligula, who came between Tiberius and Claudius; and there was Nero, who persecuted Christians after the great fire of Rome in 64 and whose wife, Poppea, was favorably disposed toward Judaism. Moreover, I must note that the references to the little horn, particularly in verses 24 and 25, refer to him as “he,” not “it” or “they.” This suggests that the little horn is to be understood as a single individual, but I concede that with my background as a professional economist, I lack Jordan’s capacity for imaginative thinking in the realm of scriptural analysis. In writing this, I am not intending to be sarcastic. I am open to persuasion in this matter. As of now, however, I remain thoroughly unconvinced.

Jordan also draws upon the composite figure concept in his treatment of the “one like a son of man” of 7:13, who, he maintains, “is clearly identified as the saints who possess the Kingdom of God” in verses 18 and 27 and is thus, like the little horn, “a corporate symbol” (pp. 328, 343). This being the case, the “Ancient of Days” of verses 9, 13, and 22 is Yahweh, as personified by Jesus Christ (p. 334). In support of this position, he insists that Christian readers of the NT are mistaken when they assume that when Jesus refers to Himself as “the Son of Man,” He has Daniel 7:13 in view. To the contrary, Jordan assures us, “He is much more likely to be referring to Ezekiel than to Daniel 7:13” (pp. 330-31). Again I must register my dissent. That Christ is deity I do not doubt, but I do not regard Him as being the Ancient of Days in Daniel 7:9.

A collective understanding of the son of man figure of Daniel 7:13 has long been common in mainstream academia, but it has not been Jordan’s version that has garnered support there! Instead, what many liberal academics have held is that Daniel’s one like a son of man symbolizes the Jewish faithful who are to someday dominate the earth. That He could be a messianic individual in the Christian sense, at least in the primary application of Daniel’s symbolism, is an idea that has generally been rejected by the academic cognoscenti. Because so much of Daniel 7 seems supportive of the notion that the son of man is an individual rather than a group of people, however, the collective view has tended to cede some ground to the idea that he could be an angel, specifically Michael, who is mentioned three times in the Book of Daniel (10:13, 10:21, and 12:1) and is presented there as the “prince” who supports Daniel’s people. The belief that Michael is the guardian angel of the Jews appears to be derived in large part from the mention of him in Daniel.

In Jordan’s view—and here I agree with him—Michael is to be understood as the preincarnate figure of Jesus (pp. 428). Moreover—and again I agree—Jordan identifies Michael as the mysterious man in linen who hovers over the Tigris in Daniel 10:4-5 (p. 520); and he takes a similar view of the “man” in 8:15-16 who is above the Ulai River. “Christ [i.e. Michael] is over the waters to direct history” in the visions of both Daniel 8 and Daniel 10-12, writes Jordan, and he then adds this observation: “The water is a Gentile stream . . . and represents the Gentile world. God directs the course of Gentile history from above the waters, and now shows that course of history to Daniel” (p. 416). This, to me, illustrates Jordan at his best. While I agree with all of this, however, I also believe that the one like a son of man of Daniel 7 is the resurrected Christ and that His appearance there sets the stage for His presence in each of the three remaining visions. In Daniel 8 and 10-12, He appears in preincarnate form and is called Michael. In Daniel 9, He is the “anointed one”; i.e. Jesus Christ, who is “cut off” in verses 26-27 in the middle of the seventieth week.

Another area where I find much to agree with in Jordan’s analysis is his treatment of Daniel 11:36-45, which he assigns to the period running from the time of Herod the Great to coming of the kingdom of the Messiah (p. 584). It is in these verses of Daniel 11 that I find that critical scholars simply “run off the rails” in their treatment of Daniel by trying to force a fit between them and the career of Antiochus IV that simply does not exist. A favorite idea among the critics is that the unknown author of Daniel probably wrote the material in Daniel 11 just before the climactic events of 164 BC that brought victory to the Maccabees and that verses 36-45 were a failed attempt at genuine prophecy. Unfortunately for them, it can be shown that these verses can be matched very well with recorded history by looking at the Judea of Herod the Great, who became the vassal king of Judea more than a century after the unlamented demise of Antiochus.

The idea of assigning the fulfillment of the prophetic material in Daniel 11:36-45 to the time of Herod the Great seems to have originated with a Scot named James Farquharson, who published a book on this matter in 1838. Philip Mauro came across Farquharson’s book in 1922 and included positive references to it in a book with the short title of The Seventy Weeks that has become a must read for anyone interested in looking at the first century AD for the fulfillment of the end-time prophecies of Daniel 2, 7, 9, and 11-12. Unfortunately, few mainstream commentators have taken Farquharson and Mauro to heart. With due acknowledgement to the work of these predecessors, Jordan offers an in-depth analysis of Daniel 11:36-45 that I consider to be fundamentally sound though hardly free of problems.

Unfortunately, in analyzing Daniel 11:36-45, Jordan continues to insist that “Hellenistic Rome” is the fourth head of the Greek beast of Daniel 8 (p. 605). My biggest criticism of his analysis of these verses, however, involves his dogmatic insistence that a hypothetical Jewish biblical scholar in the tradition of Ezra (p. 543) would certainly have interpreted the vision of Daniel 10-12 along the lines that he suggests. Thus, when he introduces his discussion of 11:36-45, Jordan states that when his hypothetical “Ezra” comes to these verses, he “will realize that a new section about another king starts in verse 36” and that Michael appears to be the promised Messiah (p. 593). His subsequent analysis makes it clear that he believes that “Ezra” would have understood that 11:36-45 look well beyond the time of the “angry king” that he identifies as Antiochus IV. The problem with his analysis is that it is not at all clear that Jewish scholars from the time of Ezra until the time of Antiochus IV did, in fact, look well beyond that time for the coming of the Messiah. I am persuaded that the available evidence suggests, to the contrary, that following the capture of Jerusalem in 164 BC and the almost simultaneous death of Antiochus, the Jewish authorities tended to look to the immediate future for the fulfillment of all of Daniel’s end-time prophecies, including Daniel 8. In due course, however, when it became clear that the time of Antiochus IV and the Maccabean Revolt could not be squared with the prophecies of Daniel 2, 7, 9, and 10-12, a revised assessment of those prophecies occurred that contributed greatly to the eruption of messianic expectations that occurred in the first century AD.

In Daniel 12:2, the prophet is told by the narrating angel that many who sleep in the dust will awaken, some to everlasting life and others to scorn and everlasting contempt. In the remainder of this article, I shall concern myself primarily with Jordan’s treatment of this verse. This entails commenting on his understanding of the nature of the resurrection described there and the related matter of what he means by “God’s people.” Jordan outlines six possible ways to understand this verse. The first is that it refers to the last judgment of all humankind at the end of history. This must be ruled out, he states, because the last judgment will apply to all people, not many. Then, after quickly alluding to four other alternatives, he comes to what he considers the only credible possibility, “a national resurrection like the one portrayed in Ezekiel 37” (pp. 616-17). This national resurrection is to occur “in the days of Jesus”; i.e. in the first century, at which time “the nation will undergo a last spiritual resurrection, but some will not persevere and their resurrection will only be unto destruction” (p. 618). Although he uses the term “spiritual resurrection,” what he appears to have in mind is a revival of the spirits of the people of God as a functioning flesh and blood community on Earth after the coming of the Messiah (p. 84). He is rather unclear, however, as to the extent to which this “national resurrection” applies to Gentiles.

Ezekiel 37 presents the account of the valley of the dry bones that are restored to life to symbolize the resurrection of all of Israel. In verse 21 the prophet is told that the Israelites will be gathered from all the nations to which they have gone and returned to their own land. In verses 24-28 he is told that “David” will be the king of this Israel and that its people will live in peace under an everlasting covenant. It is easy, of course, to see in this a messianic prophecy in which “David” symbolizes Christ and “Israel” consists of all those people, Jew or Gentile, who accept Him as the Savior of humanity. What Jordan seems to have in mind in his chapter on Daniel 12, however, is the idea that “Israel” essentially consists of a revived Jewish nation that has straightened itself out spiritually.

In historical fact, the nation of Israel passed out of existence permanently in the eighth century BC when it was destroyed by Assyria. The Assyrians evidently carried most of its more prominent residents to other parts of their domain, and I assume that many of the common people were left behind and that the Samaritans were descended, in part, from them. Just how much religious influence the scattered descendants of the ten tribes who comprised the nation of Israel exercised upon the culture of the Near East during the time of the four kingdoms of Daniel no one can know for certain, but I sense that their influence must have been considerable. I am persuaded that numerous references to “Israel” in the Bible, including those in Ezekiel 37, are to be understood as applying to the spiritual descendants of Moses, including Gentiles, who become followers of the Messiah who appears in the dry bones prophecy, which seems to me to look well beyond the first century AD.

At times in his book, Jordan seems to grasp this broader concept of “Israel,” and he writes compellingly about how, from the time of Daniel to the time of Christ, the Jewish people acted as “God’s special nation of priests” (p. 26) to bring God’s Word to an enlarged international commonwealth that he terms the Oikumene. He emphasizes that such Gentile rulers as Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus became part of a larger community of worshipers of the True God. This implies to me that many other Gentiles also must have become such worshipers to some degree. Nevertheless, rather than extend the concept of “Israel” to include such people, Jordan writes that King Josiah of Judah “re-unified the nation of Israel” by conquest and that “the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel often speak of the Kingdom of Judah as ‘Israel,’ for after Josiah, the Kingdom of Judah ruled the entire land.” (p. 44). In doing all this, Jordan leaves me confused, and I suspect that many other readers will be confused as well.

In any event, Jordan’s “national resurrection” is not a resurrection of the dead, and this assessment conflicts sharply with my own view. Jordan concedes that “It is possible that the first resurrection of Revelation 20:4-6 refers to the ascension of the Old Covenant saints to heaven” (p. 617), and he then proceeds to suggest that although Daniel 12:2 does not refer to this event, Daniel 12:13 may well do so. In the latter verse, Daniel is told to go to his rest and that he will rise to receive his inheritance at the end of the days. Jordan’s interpretation means that he views 12:13 as referring to the last judgment that still awaits us. Although Jordan believes that 12:2 cannot refer to a resurrection of the dead because it refers to many who sleep in the dust rather than to all who do so and because he is convinced that that the wicked are not to be subjected to “everlasting contempt” until the last judgment, I prefer to believe that Daniel 12:2 should be understood as allowing the possibility that some people were condemned to “everlasting contempt” in the first century and are not to be judged again.

In this article I have avoided Jordan’s treatment of the time, times and half a time of 7:25, the 2,300 evenings and mornings of 8:14, the time, times and a half of 12:7, the 1,290 days of 12:11, and the 1,335 days of 12:12. In recognition of the fact that this article has become rather lengthy, my remarks about Jordan’s treatments of these time periods will be very brief. In each of these five cases, I am confident, he will encounter searching criticism of his view. I shall refrain from such criticism, and with the exception of the 2,300 evenings and mornings of Daniel 8, I shall not offer an opinion.

Daniel 7:25 states that the “saints” are to be given over to little horn for “a time, times and half a time,” a period that commentators tend to believe means three and one-half years. Jordan objects, however, that “there is no reason to take it as a reference to years, nor is there any reason to take the plural as only two” (p. 397). In his opinion, the “time” refers to “a general time during which the True Jerusalem is being built” and applies to the period of Jesus’ ministry, which ended with His death and resurrection. The “times” began at Pentecost and continued until the outbreak of Great Tribulation of the Apostolic Church that began in 64 with the persecution of Nero. The half a time is the Great Tribulation itself, which ran from 64 until the Romans began their assault against the little horn as embodied by the Jewish religious establishment in 67. The cutting short mentioned in Matthew 24:22 makes this last period a half time (pp. 398-99).

Daniel 12:7 has a time period similar to that of 7:25, but it is in Hebrew rather than Aramaic. According to Jordan, the “time” (or better) “set-time,” of 12:7 “is mentioned in 11:27, 29, and corresponds to the tribulation under Menelaus and Antiochus Epiphanes, the time after the initial shattering of the High Priest.” The “set-times” probably refer to the periods of the Hasmonean (or Maccabean) rulers and the Herodians, which correspond, respectively, to the times of Hellenistic Rome and Imperial Rome. The half a set-time is “the Great Tribulation that follows right after the coming of Michael” (p. 625).

With regard to the 1,290 days and 1,335 days of 12:11 and 12, Jordan assures us that they allude to the time of the Egyptian captivity as recorded in Exodus 12:40-41, namely 430 years. After noting that 1,290 equals 430 multiplied by three, he suggests that the larger number symbolizes three periods of 430 “days” each that correspond to three new Egyptian captivities: (1) the period of Antiochus Epiphanes, (2) the Hasmonean period; and (3) the Herodian or little horn period. The 45 additional days needed to reach the total of 1,335 as given in Daniel 12:12 are the Great Tribulation.

In Daniel 8:13-4 we are told that there will be a period of 2,300 evenings and mornings during which a rebellion that causes desolation will result in the surrender of the sanctuary and a host will be trampled underfoot. At the end of this time, the sanctuary is to be restored. Both liberal and conservative biblical scholars have tended to assume that the events described take place during the time of Antiochus IV. Some have taken the 2,300 to signify that number of actual twenty-four hour days. Others, however, have pointed out that at the Temple in Jerusalem, the day was considered to begin with the evening prayer and there was also a prayer in the morning. Because there were two prayers daily, the reasoning goes, the 2,300 evenings and mornings actually point to a period of 1,150 days. I personally have favored the latter view and have argued that this period conforms to the period of time during the Maccabean Revolt during the years 167 to 164 BC when services at the Temple were actually suspended.

Because Jordan places the time of Daniel 8:13-14 in the days of the Herodian little horn, he rejects the alternatives suggested in the last paragraph and opts for a complicated explanation that, in my judgment, is ingenious but implausible. In the first place, as I have explained earlier in this article, I reject the idea that the small horn of Daniel 8 is anyone other than Antiochus IV. Therefore, I reject his finding that “the prophesied evenings-mornings begin in or around AD 64” (p. 437). I also reject his contention that the 2,300 evenings and mornings should be taken symbolically rather than literally (p. 436).

Jordan has succeeded to a greater extent than any other writer on Daniel whose work I have read in demonstrating an ability to look at this great prophetic work from the perspective of the people who lived before the time of Christ. At times, however, I think he forgets that the Bible was also written for people who would live long after Christ died on the cross. The Handwriting on the Wall is a book that I think every serious OT scholar should own and read. It is my hope that it will help materially to bring about a badly needed reorientation of scholarship away from liberal bias that has for too long influenced the world’s understanding of Daniel. It is also clear to me, however, that it is going to take more than Jordan’s book to accomplish what needs to be done.

John S. Evans

This article is also posted at

Dating The Book of Revelation


Dating The Book Of Revelation

By Steven Hawk


Some have discussed the idea of the dating/writing of Revelation being a post 70AD occurence citing historians “Polycarp”, “Eusebius” and “Irenaeus” which Lloyd addressed in his article John On Patmos.  Hank Hanegraaf makes an important point: “It’s instructive to note that the late dating by Irenaeus for Revelation is largely dependant on a single ambiguous sentence in the writings of a church father named Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons.  That sentence can be taken to mean either that John or that John’s apocalyptic vision was seen toward the end of Domitian’s reign.  The credibility of Irenaeus as a source is called into question by his contention in the same volume that Jesus was crucified when he was about fifty years of age. I don’t think there are too many evangelicals that hold to that proposition”.  While I agree with this statement, I would disagree with his other assertion on this topic, when he claims that the Apostle John makes no mention of the catastrophic event on apostate Judah.  The Apostle John indeed does cite the event, only he prophesies it as a future event as we will soon see.

The Apostle John’s prophetic statements about the impending destruction upon the great whore unequivocally are predicted as future events.  Revelation 1:1 one of several passages, makes this time statement, “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass“.  The demolition of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple at the hands of Titus as described in the Book of Revelation were prophesied to “shortly come to pass”.

Christ’s prophecy about the “temple and apostate Judah”…in Matthew 24:1-3 we read:1  And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.

2  And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

3  And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy prescence (original Greek word “parousia” important), and of the end of the world (“age”, my emphasis)?
…whether someone would argue that John was not referring directly but making indirect references to the destruction of Jerusalem in the several passages such as Revelation 12:10, 14:8, 15:5,8 (1 Peter 2:4-5, Eph 2:21 as in Rev 21:3 make reference to what would be now a living temple), Revelation 18:8-9,18,21, 19:6,21 20:2-3 all speak to to the demise of Babylon the Great which included the destruction of the old Jewish temple and system, of which the new could not be established while the old tabernacle was still standing Hebrews 9:8-9.  Even without these references there would still be sufficient evidence to the early dating of the book.

When you consider that the apostle John did not make mention of this catastrophic event as a past fulfillment makes a late date totally implausible, especially since Jesus predicted it and considering the magnitude of the event makes it all the more inconcievable.  A student of the Bible is well aware, when prophecy was fulfilled, the biblical writers mentioned it. And when the mother of all prophecies is fulfilled, it is inconceivable that John would not mention it as a past fulfillment, with that in mind it would seem the Book of Revelation had to be written before Judah’s destruction or pre AD70.  Moreover from the standpoint of things which were to “shortly come to pass”, we do not seem to have anything of historical significance shortly after AD 95 that we know of which in itself would make the late date untenable.

Finally, what we have about Polycarp is purely speculative, there is nothing that actually declares the late dating.  We don’t even know that Polycarp knew John except possibly by his own testimony and even that is suspect.  If we stick with the Bible, the internal evidence tells us it could not have been written in AD95 as some claim.  The Bible teaches in Revelation 11:1-3: Rev 11:1  And a reed like a rod was given to me, saying, “Get up and measure the temple of God and the altar and the ones prostrating themselves in worship in it.Rev 11:2  “And leave out the court, the [one] outside of the temple, and do not measure it, because it was given to the nations [or, Gentiles], and they will trample the holy city forty and two months.

Rev 11:3  “And I will give [power] to My two witnesses, and they will prophesy a thousand, two hundred [and] sixty days, having been clothed with sackcloth.”

Historically we understand, through the works of Josephus, that the Gentiles were definitely in control of the outer court.  If Revelation was written after AD70, how is it that John was to take a reed and measure the temple of God if the temple of God was not even existing?  The temple was totally destroyed in AD70  approximately 40 years (a biblical generation Matthew 24:34) after Christ had predicted it to be, as noted in Matthew in the above passage, and it hasn’t even been built since.  So, the Bible’s internal evidence of itself supports the fact that the book of Revelation was written prior to AD70, not AD95.

John On Patmos

John on Patmos
(When Revelation was Written)


By Lloyd Dale




A proper understanding of when Revelation was received and written makes a great deal of difference in how it is to be interpreted.





Many would agree that when one begins a study of Revelation, he should first deal with the questions:





  1. When did John receive the visions that are recorded as Revelation?
  2. When did John write down the document we call Revelation?

These two things did not necessarily occur at the same time.





Something to think about




Where did the Church ever get the idea that John was exiled to Patmos by a Roman ruler?  Certainly not from the following passage:


 I John, who also am your brother, and companion in persecution, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was on the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ. (Revelation 1:9)


There is absolutely nothing in this passage that says that he was an exile or that he had been sent there by anyone.  John simply states that he “was on the isle called Patmos for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.
 If we went to a specific place to preach and evangelize it would be perfectly proper for us to say that we were in that place “for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.”
How, when, and where did the notion that John was exiled to Patmos by a Roman King get started?

According to the Bible was John really exiled to Patmos or did he go their voluntarily to teach and preach about Jesus Christ?



Where did Eusebius get the notion that John was banished by Domitian?  And to which Domitian was he referring?    Eusebius states that Nerva released John from his exile on Patmos. Historically who was Nerva?  Did he have the authority to undo what Domitian did?



The works of Eusebius posits a late date for the writing of Revelation, i.e. 95 AD.  Today, we know from many passages in Revelation and the balance of the NT that Eusebius’ notion of a late date was false.  Why would we accept his tradition about the banishment of John to Patmos by Domitian?  Would it not be suspect as well?


We think that it can be proven from the context of the NT alone that John received the Revelation, at least part of it, much earlier than 68 AD. 


What was John doing between 36 and 46 AD?

Could it be that he was going out preaching the “gospel of the kingdom” in fulfillment of the great commission when he received the Revelation? 



 Based on the information we have right now it would appear that John
received the Revelation, at least the first two portions of it, about 45 AD.
 According to internal information, John received the first portion (chs 1-3)
 of the vision when Jesus Christ “sent and signified” it by his messenger
 (1:1).  The second portion (4-16) was received when he was invited to “come
 up here (to the third heaven) and I will show you things which must soon come to pass.”  The third portion (17-21:8) was received when the messenger invited him to “come here; I will show unto you the judgment of the great whore that sits upon many waters. And the fourth and final portion (21:9-22:21) of the vision was
 received when the messenger came to John and took him to “a great and high mountain”.  Nothing is said about how long there was between each of these, but it clear that John could not go three different places at once (i.e. “up here,” into the 3rd heaven; “come here to the wilderness” to see the judgment of the whore; “come here, to a great and high mountain, to see the bride, the lamb’s wife.”



The Bible does not record that Peter, James, or Paul “received Revelation” yet each one of them apparently knew about it and seemly make reference to its contents in their pre 65 AD writings.




Example:  Who was Paul writing about in 2Cor 12:1-5?



“…I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord: I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago—whether in the body I do not know, or whether out of the body I do not know, God knows—such a one was caught up to the third heaven. And I know such a man—whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows— how he was caught up into Paradise and heard inexpressible words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter (or write). Of such a one I will boast; yet of myself I will not boast, except in my infirmities. (2 Corinthians 12:1-5 NKJV, emphasis and comment added)


We submit to you that in this passage, Paul is writing about John.  This is a clear accounting of John’s situation as described in Revelation. 





 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants—things which must soon take place. And He sent and signified by His messenger to His servant John, (Revelation 1:1)


After these things I looked, and behold, a door open in heaven (the third heaven). And the first voice which I heard, like a trumpet speaking with me, saying, “Come up here (to the third heaven), and I will show you things which must take place after this.” (Revelation 4:1)


And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not [unlawful to be uttered]. (Revelation 10:4, emphasis and comments added above)


When shown in this manner the similarities are astonishing.  Who else could Paul possibly be referring to?  The context makes it clear that he was not referring to himself.  Therefore, it seems clear to us from this comparison that John had this experience (the third heaven vision)14 years before Paul wrote 2Corinthians.  Of course the liberals and the late dating futurists will deny this, but this is extremely supportive of the preterist early date position.


Some will say that the exile is implied.  Implication is not enough, nor is it clear that “exile” is actually implicated. 


While the passage clearly states that John was a “companion” with others “in persecution” nothing is said about “exile.”  If some group decided that they were going to beat up on my family, we would be “companions in tribulation,” but that would certainly not mean that we were in exile. 



The Greek word translated “tribulation” is:


2347 yliqiv thlipsis thlip’-sis from 2346; TDNT-3:139,334; n f


AV-tribulation 21, affliction 17, trouble 3, anguish 1, persecution 1, burdened 1, to be afflicted + 1519 1; 45


1) a pressing, pressing together, pressure


2) metaphor. oppression, persecution, affliction, tribulation, distress, straits


By definition “thlipsis” could be and often is translated “affliction” or “persecution.”  The apostate Jews began to persecute and afflict the Christians long before the Romans got involved in this activity.  John’s statement here is most likely a reference to the disciples of Jesus, including John, who were being afflicted and persecuted by the Jews following the Jewish killing (stoning) of Stephen in c. 36 AD.  It is probably not a statement about Roman persecution as, unfortunately, is commonly assumed because of late dater and liberal bias.


The statement:


“was in Patmos.for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ”


Could very easily be a reference to the “preaching of the good news” which Jesus commanded.  Again there is nothing in the text about “exile.”  That appears to be an assumption that may be totally unwarranted.




Some would make reference to Rev 1:9 as follows:



John indicates that it was ‘because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus’ that he was formerly on Patmos. He was not there to preach that Word but because of religious-political opposition to his faithfulness to it.



First of all, this acknowledges that the notion of John’s exile is based on “religious tradition,” not the Bible, and the history passage which is quoted above continues that religious tradition.



Look again at Revelation 1:9:


I, John, your brother and companion in the persecution and kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was on the island that is called Patmos because of the word of God and because of the testimony of Jesus Christ. (Revelation 1:9)


John simply writes that he “was on the island called Patmos because of the word of God and because of the testimony of Jesus Christ.”  He does not say anything about “because of exile.”



Some attempt to make a case for the use of Patmos for penal purposes.  That is a given, everyone familiar with Roman history is aware of that.  However, exile is not the only reason that John may have gone to Patmos.  We personally know many that go to penal institutions; not because they have been sent there, but because they are compelled to go there by the Spirit because of the word of God to give testimony of Jesus Christ.  We submit that John could have been on Patmos for that very reason not because he had been exiled there by some Roman ruler named Domitian in 95 AD.



Above we quoted Paul’s statement from 2nd Corinthians about his knowing this man “fourteen years ago.”  Many Bible scholars date the writing of 2Corinthians at about 59-60 AD.  If we count fourteen years backwards from 60 AD, what do we have?  We have 46 AD.



Many scholars date the events of Acts 15 to about 45-46 AD.  If we count forward fourteen years from 46 AD we have 60 AD.



Acts 15 records the Jerusalem counsel and it demonstrates that Paul and Barnabas went to Jerusalem to confer with the apostles and were “received by the apostles.”  Peter and James are mentioned by name and, given the language, it is a certainty that John and the other apostles were there also.



We submit for your consideration that by the time of the Jerusalem council, John had already been to Patmos; possibly several times on preaching missions, during the time (beginning in ca. 36 AD) of the apostate Jewish afflictions (persecution) upon Christians, and had received the Revelation while there on one of these trips, and that it was there, at this conference, that he conveyed, at least a portion of, the information of the Revelation to Paul and the other apostles.  Then the document we call Revelation could have been written later.



Revelation 1:1 specifically states that John was given the Revelation by Jesus Christ “to show unto His servants, things which must soon come to pass,” and John identifies himself as one of those “servants”.  Taken as a whole this identifies the apostles as His servants.  Paul, Peter, James, and John all made reference to events (last days) recorded in Revelation in documents which they wrote.



Can this all be just one colossal coincidence?  Can we really believe that Paul inserted these words for no useful purpose at all?  Where else does the New Testament make reference to anyone being caught up into the third heaven, to the throne of God and words that should not be uttered (written)?



There is more that we have uncovered, but we will let you chew on this for a while.



Lloyd Dale

70 AD — A very important date


More people from various groups of Christianity are coming to realize the Biblical significance of what happened circa 70AD. Dispensational futurist still insist the book of Revelation was written post 90AD, which to them means most of Revelation has a future fulfillment since the catostrophic events of 70AD were already in the past when John had penned it. Yet the new covenant Kingdom could not be right at the door as Jesus clearly stated while the old covenant and kingdom was still standing. Hebrews tells us the old was ready to vanish:

Heb 9:8 the Holy Spirit this signifying, that the way into the holy place hath not yet been made manifest, while the first tabernacle is yet standing;

Heb 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

Steve Simms whom we have no acquaintance posted this article in the Examiner.

70 AD — A very important date
September 8, 2009


Jewish Temple Mount What is the most important date after the birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ? My vote is for 70 AD.70 AD was an awful year–yet extremely significant in world history. That was the year Roman armies surrounded the city of Jerusalem and defeated it. Then they sacrificed a pig in the Jewish temple and totally demolished and flattened both the city and the temple. In the process they slaughtered more than a million Jews and drove most of the rest out of Israel. This was written about by Roman historian Josephus who was an eye witness to it.

So why is 70 AD the most important date in history since Christ?

1) When the Jewish temple was demolished, that was the end of Old Testament Judaism. Never again in history have the required animal sacrifices been offered in the “Holy of Holies” in the God’s Temple. The destruction of the temple totally changed the application of the Old Testament to Jewish and Gentile life. After 70 AD there was no longer an animal sacrifice for our sins.

2) The events of 70 AD also drastically effected the early Christians by greatly reducing the influence of Judaism and Jewish rituals on Christianity.

3) The events of 70 AD help us date the writings of the New Testament. Many people in an effort to discredit the New Testament writings say that they were written after 90 AD all the way up to the second or third century. But in the light of 70 AD, how is this possible? How could such a huge and radical event as both the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple and the end of animal sacrifices not be mentioned one time in the books of the New Testament if they were written after 70 AD? The book of Hebrews says animal sacrifices are still going on–therefore it had to be written before 70 AD. Paul had great verbal battles with Jewish Christians that wanted all new believer’s to be circumcised. If the Temple had been destroyed before Paul was writing, wouldn’t he have used that as a great argument for his cause? Paul had to be writing before 70 AD. In fact, all the New Testament books must have been written before 70 AD, because no New Testament writer (all were Jewish but one) could have left out such a devastating event if it had happened before his writing.

This means that the New Testament was written by people who were no more than 43 years (70 AD minus the 33 years of Jesus’ earthly life plus 6 years if Jesus was born in 6 BC as some scholars say) removed from Jesus’ earthly life. All of the New Testament writers actually knew Jesus physically or knew someone who knew Him physically.

So why did the animal sacrifices end in 70 AD? Because the final blood sacrifice had been made by Jesus Christ on the Cross and the animal sacrifices were no longer meaningful.

70 AD shouts — “The New Testament was written before the destruction of the temple in 70 AD by eyewitnesses of Jesus and His earthy ministry and by those who knew eyewitnessesses personally. Therefore it is very reliable!” So since we have such an awesome witness of God’s working in our world, shouldn’t we devote some time to reading the Bible?