Who is Gog of the land of Magog?

[Numenorian]

+
Numenorian, you referred to Revelation 16:17-18. But before that in Revelation 16:16 the gathering of the armies at Armageddon. That takes place in the sixth bowl of wrath. So Israel is definitely not living in a state of peace at that time, at the height of the great tribulation, which in turn does not meet the criteria of Israel living in peace when Gog/Magog takes place.

 

[Numenorian]

Dougg, the problem here is that you are assuming what you need to prove. I agree that Israel is not living in peace at the time of Armageddon. Today, until this time of false peace in Ezekiel 38:11, there is no true, lasting peace. But prior to Gog and Magog's invasion they were living in peace in unwalled villages - "all of them", not the "relative" peace of today. So, the question is, how did this peace in Ezekiel come about? If it wasn't effected by the Antichrist, then you have to assume two peaces - one preceding Gog's invasion, and one that the Antichrist sets up (Dan. 9:27, 1 Thess. 5:3, Isa. 28:14-19). This interpretation is fraught with problems as I've already shown in previous posts.

You have to allow the wider context of Scripture to be brought to bear on your interpretation of Ezek. 38-39. Otherwise, you run into problems.

Of course Israel is going to be living in peace at the time before the Gog Magog invasion. This is the time of the 3 1/2 year false peace. But when the abomination of desolation is set up at the end of that period, as Jesus said, directing the reader back to Daniel, then the lawless one, Gog/Antichrist invades.

So peace for 3 1/2 years, then Jacob's trouble, then Antichrist goes to war against other nations in the valley of Megiddo (Dan. 11:44, Joel 2:2, Zech. 14:1-3) where they all become crushed grapes of wrath at the trampling out of His vintage (Rev. 16:13-16).

It is the issue of where the peaces occur that helps weed out false views, but it is also what kind of peace that needs to be considered. The Gog/Antichrist brokered peace will have all the appearances of a permanent peace, so much so that Israel relaxes her guard, which itself is a statement of where she has put her security: in MAN (Jer. 17:5). In this respect, Israel is merely representative of all mankind (Rom. 3:9-20).

But Israel is the covenant nation that is still at this time operating on the presumption that she can live securely in the land while she is still a people under the curse of the broken law (Lev. 26:14-33). In fact, this has been the modus operandi of Israel - the transgenerational phenomenon of "the crooked and perverse generation" - that both Moses, Jesus and Paul (Rom. 10:1-3) referenced

She MUST go into exile until she possesses an everlasting (permanent) righteousness. This is God's criterion: only the righteous inherit the land PERMANENTLY. And this the Lord will ultimately provide (Dan. 9:24, Isa. 32:15-18) when they look upon Him whom they have pierced (Zech. 12:10) at the end of their power (Deut. 32:36, Ezek. 37:11-14). Then Jerusalem's name will be "the Lord is our righteousness" (Jer. 33:14-16).

So it is critical to understand the WHY of Gog/Antichrist battle. The Bible is an Israel-centric book that must be understood in its covenantal context. God is bringing Gog down for covenant discipline on His people one final time, and for judgment on the nations, and ultimately on Satan and the powers of the air. Then finally, the world will understand what God has been up to in history through His people Israel (Ezek. 39:21-29).

 

[Douggg]

Dougg, the problem here is that you are assuming what you need to prove. I agree that Israel is not living in peace at the time of Armageddon. But prior to Gog and Magog's invasion they were living in peace in unwalled villages - "all of them", not the "relative" peace of today. Today, until this time of false peace in Ezekiel 38:11, there is no true, lasting peace. So, the question is, how did this peace in Ezekiel come about? If it wasn't effected by the Antichrist, then you have to assume two peace - one preceding Gog's invasion, and one that the Antichrist sets up (Dan. 9:27, 1 Thess. 5:3, Isa. 28:14-19 - the first purpose of Jacob's trouble/the great tribulation is covenant discipline on Israel). This interpretation is fraught with problems as I've already shown in previous posts.

Everything is a temporal and/or false peace until Jesus returns - the Prince of Peace. So you don't have an argument really, because Israel is not shooting bullets at anyone right now, and kids are going to attend their kindergarten classes this morning. And Christian tour groups are visiting the temple mount.

A person can drive right through the towns in a rental vehicle, should their Toyota be in the shop.

There is no problem that Gog/Magog takes place right before the 7 years.

The current peace in Israel is not the peace of the false messianic age. The false messianic age peace takes place after Gog/Magog.

The whole issue is what is the confirming of the covenant for 7 years in Daniel 9:27? Your position interpretes that passage to mean a peace treaty of some sort - based on Daniel 8, he destroys many by peace.. But in the bible - the confirming of the covenant for 7 years is already established in Deuteronomy 31:9-13.

Of course Israel is going to be living in peace at the time before the Gog Magog invasion. This is the time of the 3 1/2 year false peace. But when the abomination of desolation is set up at the end of that period, as Jesus said, directing the reader back to Daniel, then the lawless one, Gog/Antichrist invades.

Your understanding of the Antichrist is flawed. That's why you equate Gog as the Antichrist. Which if you understand the concept of the Antichrist, you would realize the 7 years following Gog/Magog being the false messianic age and Daniel 9:27 the confirming of the covenant for 7 years are the same period.

The Antichrist is not in Daniel 11 or Daniel 12. The person is, but he is not the Antichrist any longer, in Daniel 11. The person is in Daniel 11:36, but as he has stopped being the Antichrist, and has become the beast. You need to know the difference between the Antichrist and the beast - same person, but not same role.

 

[Straightshot]

Straightshot, before the Day of the Lord, you must acknowledge that this is Satan manifest in human form


I would say that Abaddon is the one who will be manifest in the human little horn, and not Satan Himself [Revelation 13:1-4]

Satan aspires to be "God" and will use his beast from the abyss who will inhabit and control the human little horn .... this one will project the religious cult of Islam [Revelation 13:11] .... the two prominent divides of Islam will merge when their "Mahdi" appears

By the way, your several posts above tell me that you are very astute with regard for the correct rendering of the visions of the Lord's prophets

 

[Numenorian]

Everything is a temporal and/or false peace until Jesus returns - the Prince of Peace. So you don't have an argument really, because Israel is not shooting bullets at anyone right now, and kids are going to attend their kindergarten classes this morning. And Christian tour groups are visiting the temple mount.

A person can drive right through the towns in a rental vehicle, should their Toyota be in the shop.

There is no problem that Gog/Magog takes place right before the 7 years.

The current peace in Israel is not the peace of the false messianic age. The false messianic age peace takes place after Gog/Magog.

The whole issue is what is the confirming of the covenant for 7 years in Daniel 9:27? Your position interpretes that passage to mean a peace treaty of some sort - based on Daniel 8, he destroys many by peace.. But in the bible - the confirming of the covenant for 7 years is already established in Deuteronomy 31:9-13.



Your understanding of the Antichrist is flawed. That's why you equate Gog as the Antichrist. Which if you understand the concept of the Antichrist, you would realize the 7 years following Gog/Magog being the false messianic age and Daniel 9:27 the confirming of the covenant for 7 years are the same period.

The Antichrist is not in Daniel 11 or Daniel 12. The person is, but he is not the Antichrist any longer, in Daniel 11. The person is in Daniel 11:36, but as he has stopped being the Antichrist, and has become the beast. You need to know the difference between the Antichrist and the beast - same person, but not same role.

All begging the question - assuming what you need to prove. So many assumptions!

"No mas!" said Roberto Duran. This Roberto agrees....

 

[Douggg]

All begging the question - assuming what you need to prove. So many assumptions!

"No mas!" said Roberto Duran. This Roberto agrees....

Numenorian what is this in blue...?

Daniel 8:13 Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?

Daniel 9:11 Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him.


The person has to be a Jew to transgress the law, and commit the transgression of desolation (of worship and praise of God in the temple). To be the Antichrist, the person has to become the King of Israel, for a short time. Then he commits the transgression of desolation - sitting in the temple, claiming to be God.

According to Deuteronomy 31:9-13, the leader of Israel is supposed to ensure the confirming of the Mt Sinai covenant for the 7 years, which cannot be done from the temple mount as long as there is the Muslim presence. Which that presence will no longer be a factor following Gog/Magog. Following Gog/Magog, is when the person becomes the Antichrist.

 

[Straightshot]

My comment

Satan's beast in the human little horn will not be a "Jew"

Islam will be the cult religion of this entity

And the idea that 400 million Middle Eastern Muslims will be destroyed by a Euro-centric Pope led "antichrist" has no biblical moorings

This is the rant of the rapture ready crowd [Hal Lindsey, Bill Salus, David Reagan, and Terry James]

It is the Muslim intransigence that will subdue Israel and end up being destroyed by the Lord at the battle of Armageddon

 

[iamlamad]

Numenorian what is this in blue...?

Daniel 8:13 Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?

Daniel 9:11 Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him.


The person has to be a Jew to transgress the law, and commit the transgression of desolation (of worship and praise of God in the temple). To be the Antichrist, the person has to become the King of Israel, for a short time. Then he commits the transgression of desolation - sitting in the temple, claiming to be God.

According to Deuteronomy 31:9-13, the leader of Israel is supposed to ensure the confirming of the Mt Sinai covenant for the 7 years, which cannot be done from the temple mount as long as there is the Muslim presence. Which that presence will no longer be a factor following Gog/Magog. Following Gog/Magog, is when the person becomes the Antichrist.

Antiochus Epiphanes was NOT a Jew, yet he certainly committed an abomination of desolation.

 

[iamlamad]

My comment

Satan's beast in the human little horn will not be a "Jew"

Islam will be the cult religion of this entity

And the idea that 400 million Middle Eastern Muslims will be destroyed by a Euro-centric Pope led "antichrist" has no biblical moorings

This is the rant of the rapture ready crowd [Hal Lindsey, Bill Salus, David Reagan, and Terry James]

It is the Muslim intransigence that will subdue Israel and end up being destroyed by the Lord at the battle of Armageddon

Straightshot, I agree with you here, that the religion of the Beast will be Islam...It seems from scripture that all the Muslims will accept that the man of sin turned Beast is their God.
I disagree with your "rant" of the rapture ready crowd. Are you not "rapture ready?"
I agree that the Beast will not be the "Pope," and the great city will not be the Vatican.

 

[Douggg]

Antiochus Epiphanes was NOT a Jew, yet he certainly committed an abomination of desolation.

Antiochus was not a Jew, but the passage in Daniel 8 is not about him. The vision, as it states in the text, is for the end times - which was not Antiochus. And btw it doesn't say abomination of desolation in Daniel 8. What does it say?

Antiochus is in Daniel 11, but not in Daniel 8.

All those people who think that the Antichrist will confirm the covenant for 7 years in Daniel 9:27 is some sort of peace treaty - do you know where the idea comes from? From Daniel 8, because it says the person will destroy many by peace. It is not the correct interpretation of confirms the covenant for 7 years. But nonetheless the most common popular view is that the covenant for 7 years is a peace treaty.

Daniel 8:25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.

 

[Straightshot]

"I disagree with your "rant" of the rapture ready crowd. Are you not "rapture ready?"


You better believe that I am, every day of my life

The problem with Lindsey and the gang is that they still cling to reformation theology regarding the Euro-centric pope led kingdom of the "antichrist"

They do this because they do not want to appear to be in error with their past practice on the matter

So what they have done is to construct a further error by telling that the Middle Eastern Muslims will be wiped out by the RCC Euro-pope who will then lead the charge and fulfill the balance of the prophetic scriptures

This ruse was concocted by Bill Salus and David Reagean in order to stick with their old bankrupt reformation theology

The Middle Eastern kingdom of Satan's beast in the little horn is described as "Middle Eastern" in the prophetic scriptures .... hands down

The ancient Roman empire and a revival of the same is not a part of the scope of the prophetic visions

Even when the stage is being set up today exactly where the prophets describe it will be at the time of the end

 

[iamlamad]

Antiochus was not a Jew, but the passage in Daniel 8 is not about him. The vision, as it states in the text, is for the end times - which was not Antiochus. And btw it doesn't say abomination of desolation in Daniel 8. What does it say?

Antiochus is in Daniel 11, but not in Daniel 8.

All those people who think that the Antichrist will confirm the covenant for 7 years in Daniel 9:27 is some sort of peace treaty - do you know where the idea comes from? From Daniel 8, because it says the person will destroy many by peace. It is not the correct interpretation of confirms the covenant for 7 years. But nonetheless the most common popular view is that the covenant for 7 years is a peace treaty.

Daniel 8:25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.

Sorry, but you did not read close enough. Surely you know that Antiochus was part of the Seleucus dynasty which was part of Alexander's kingdom. Did you miss this?

23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.

Notice, the latter time of THEIR kingdom. OF COURSE this is talking about Antiochus. Look at the context of this verse:

21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.

The "king" of Greece was Alexander. When he died, four took his place. Seleucus was one of the four, and Antiochus was one of the kings of his dynasty. This can be NONE OTHER than Antiochus.

We know he sacrificed a pig on the altar and set up an image of a false god there. We know the temple had to be cleansed. The 2300 days was for THAT TIME, not future.

It may not say abomination of desolation, but we know from history that what Antiochus did WAS an abomination and that Israel was made desolate until THE HAMMER overcame Antiochus. You and many others have missed it on this chapter, pulling verses out of context. The CONTEXT of this chapter is Alexander the Great versus Medo-persia: the ram being Persia and the goat being Alexander.

 

[iamlamad]

"I disagree with your "rant" of the rapture ready crowd. Are you not "rapture ready?"


You better believe that I am, every day of my life

The problem with Lindsey and the gang is that they still cling to reformation theology regarding the Euro-centric pope led kingdom of the "antichrist"

They do this because they do not want to appear to be in error with their past practice on the matter

So what they have done is to construct a further error by telling that the Middle Eastern Muslims will be wiped out by the RCC Euro-pope who will then lead the charge and fulfill the balance of the prophetic scriptures

This ruse was concocted by Bill Salus and David Reagean in order to stick with their old bankrupt reformation theology

The Middle Eastern kingdom of Satan's beast in the little horn is described as "Middle Eastern" in the prophetic scriptures .... hands down

The ancient Roman empire and a revival of the same is not a part of the scope of the prophetic visions

Even when the stage is being set up today exactly where the prophets describe it will be at the time of the end

I agree here. When we look at the "five have fallen" nations; Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Greece, or perhaps better, Assyria, Babylon, Media, Persia and Greece, leaving Egypt out, each of these in this last group had control of the nation of Israel and all the lands surrounding Israel. The people living in all those areas today that surround Israel are Muslim nations. Assria today is Syria. Babylon today is Iraq. Media and Persia today is Iran. Only Greece of these five is not a Muslim nation.

 

[Straightshot]

Greece is not in the listing

Here is why

Alexander never ruled the Middle East after he conquered the region [he died at 33], the populations remained indigenous, and Athens was on the wane and never ruled the Middle East

The first of the 5 fallen was the post flood land of Magog and his brothers Mesheck and Tubal .... then the Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, and northern Seleucid

Ezekiel 38 lists the confederation that will attack Israel at the middle of the 70th week and gives the ancient names of the region of the northern Middle East [northwestern Mesopotamia]

These populations are still there today with the modern names of essentially of Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Turkey

Egypt [the kingdom of the south] is not mentioned because the little horn will pluck this king

and add the land of Egypt to his northern kingdom [Daniel 11:40; 11:42]

Egypt will oppose the little horn as he begins to expand his Middle Eastern holdings and Saudi Arabia will question His ambitions [Sheba and Dedan] .... he will also pluck this king and add this kingdom to his holdings

His third plucking will be the Syrian kingdom that is in upheaval today and add it .... his core kingdom will be in Iraq where the Assyrians ruled at Nineveh on the Tigris River .... this is why he is called the Assyrian in Micah 5:5-6

His conquering of the Middle East will occur during the first half of the 70th week and then he will attack and subdue Israel .... then he will rule for the next 42 months [Daniel 11:36-45; 12:7]

Rome is not a part of the vision as many teach because Rome's rule of the Middle East occurred and terminated during the breach between the ending of the 69th week and the beginning of the 70th still pending

 

[Numenorian]

Numenorian what is this in blue...?

Daniel 8:13 Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?

Daniel 9:11 Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him.


The person has to be a Jew to transgress the law, and commit the transgression of desolation (of worship and praise of God in the temple). To be the Antichrist, the person has to become the King of Israel, for a short time. Then he commits the transgression of desolation - sitting in the temple, claiming to be God.

According to Deuteronomy 31:9-13, the leader of Israel is supposed to ensure the confirming of the Mt Sinai covenant for the 7 years, which cannot be done from the temple mount as long as there is the Muslim presence. Which that presence will no longer be a factor following Gog/Magog. Following Gog/Magog, is when the person becomes the Antichrist.

OK, lets take up the Scriptures you gave here. Always game for that. But let's let Scripture interpret Scripture:

Dan. 8:13 mentions the transgression of desolation (or horror). Yes, Jesus spoke about it, that it would be standing in the holy place (Matt. 24:16, Dan. 9:27, 11:31)

Dan. 9:11

Daniel's statement concerning Israel transgressing the law of God is universal in application; it is true of any and every generation of Jews because Israel is always "a crooked and perverse generation" (Deut. 32:5, 36, Matt. 17:17, Luke 9:41) until the nation is reborn at the day of the Lord (Isa. 66:8).

The curse of the broken law, the Law of Moses, is constantly upon them until Israel is schooled in where righteousness lies - not in themselves (Rom. 10:1-3), but in the Lord (Isa. 45:24). But note that the verse in Isaiah speaks to what all the nations will testify: "In the Lord alone are righteousness and strength." And in those days, Jerusalem is called "the Lord is our righteousness" (Jer. 33:16). This is a revelation that all need, because "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."

“At night my soul longs for You,
Indeed, my spirit within me seeks You diligently;
For when the earth experiences Your judgments
The inhabitants of the world learn righteousness.
Though the wicked is shown favor,
He does not learn righteousness;
He deals unjustly in the land of uprightness,
And does not perceive the majesty of the LORD.” Isaiah‬ ‭26:9-10‬ ‭

You mistake the unique thing that is the abomination of desolation, picking the one usage that uses the word "transgression" and lump it in with general and historic Jewish sinfulness. This event that Jesus and Daniel spoke of was not just another transgression; it is the ultimate hubris of Man on display, usurping the place of God.

But to argue that a transgression of the law or the insertion of the desolation that causes horror in the holy place necessitates that the Antichrist be Jewish does not follow logically or biblically.

Do only Jews transgress the law?

“Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭3:19-20‬ ‭

“for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus;”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭3:23-24‬ ‭

“What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin; as it is written, "THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE; THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS, THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD; ALL HAVE TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME USELESS; THERE IS NONE WHO DOES GOOD, THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE."”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭3:9-12‬ ‭

It is not logically or biblically necessary for a Jew to be the Antichrist. Do you not see the backhanded antisemitism in your assertion that it must be so? ALL ARE TRANSGRESSORS OF THE LAW, not just Jews.

And you misunderstand the enemy's designs for Zion, which make him an implacable enemy of the Jews. He does not want to rule over them. Like Hitler, he wants to destroy every last one of them. Because God has chosen Zion, it is a special target of the enemy's animosity:

“His foundation is in the holy mountains. The Lord loveth the gates of Zion more than all the dwellings of Jacob.”‭‭ Psalms‬ ‭87:1-2‬ ‭

“Great is the Lord, and greatly to be praised in the city of our God, in the mountain of his holiness. Beautiful for situation, the joy of the whole earth, is mount Zion, on the sides of the north, the city of the great King.” ‭Psalms‬ ‭48:1-2‬ ‭

“For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.”
Isaiah‬ ‭14:13-14‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Rest assured, the Antichrist is not interested in being king of Israel. As for Temple Mount, it has to be in the hands of the Jews prior to the Antichrist's invasion at the 3 1/2 (middle of the week) invasion. Jesus said, "when you see the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place..". Obviously, Israel had to be in possession, or at very least be granted unprecedented access, to the Temple Mount for there to be a holy place built PRIOR TO the outbreak of any war. Things are not dependent on some Gog and Magog war to set the board for Antichrist. He already has set the board with his false treaty which has allowed Israel to build.

As for Deut. 31:9-13, it is not talking exclusively about the responsibility of the leader alone, but also priests. And it was not about confirming the Mosaic covenant every 7 years, but about reading the law to the people at the Feast of Booths.

You're shoehorning Scripture into the shoe of your assumptions. The word "confirm" isn't even in that passage, but if that word is accepted in terms of your interpretation, it permits the misusage of Dan. 9:27. The only thing that confirms covenantal promises is the blood of Jesus (Rom. 15:8, 1 Cor. 12:25, Luke 1:68-75, Jer. 31:31-35)

Even the Mosaic covenant was not inaugurated without blood (Heb. 9:16-18). It was not reinaugurated every year or every seven years, but once, although yearly sacrifices, which would never take away sins, were made continually.

 

[Douggg]

We know he sacrificed a pig on the altar and set up an image of a false god there. We know the temple had to be cleansed. The 2300 days was for THAT TIME, not future.

No, not back in the days of Antiochus. It is not Antiochus.

Daniel sees the vision of the stopping of the daily sacrifice and the transgression of desolation.

13 Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?

16 And I heard a man's voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.

17 So he came near where I stood: and when he came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man: for at the time of the end shall be the vision.

It is not Antiochus.

Let's see what else about the little horn.

23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.

Okay, let's look at Antiochus's track record. When he was on his way to Egypt to do battle with one the Ptolemy group, who had just become king there - Antiochus was intercepted by a Roman official, who told him if he proceeded he would be at war with Rome, who backed the Egypt leader. Antiochus tucked his tail between his legs and went back to where he came from. Not a king of fierce countenance,

Okay, lets look futher at the little horn person.

24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people.

Not Antiochus. Was afraid to face up to the Romans.

25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.

Antiochu stood up against Jesus? But was afraid of the Romans? No, it is not Antiochus.

 

[Douggg]

Dan. 8:13 mentions the transgression of desolation (or horror). Yes, Jesus spoke about it, that it would be standing in the holy place (Matt. 24:16, Dan. 9:27, 11:31)

No, Jesus did not say transgression of desolation.

Jesus said Abomination of Desolation.

That's what I am trying to show you. In Daniel 8:13 is the transgression of desolation - which is different from abomination of desolation.

You mistake the unique thing that is the abomination of desolation, picking the one usage that uses the word "transgression" and lump it in with general and historic Jewish sinfulness. This event that Jesus and Daniel spoke of was not just another transgression; it is the ultimate hubris of Man on display, usurping the place of God.

I don't know what you are saying. But transgression is an act. A person doing something. Differently, the abomination of desolation "setup" is a thing. Some object "setup".

“For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.”
Isaiah‬ ‭14:13-14‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Rest assured, the Antichrist is not interested in being king of Israel.

Numemerian, you are making a mistake in terminology and function calling the person the Antichrist, for that verse. When the person finds himself in hell in Isaiah 14, he is no longer the Antichrist.

At that stage, he is the slain man of sin, no longed the King of Israel, the Antichrist.

He finds himself in hell because he transgressed the covenant, by going into the temple "sitting" claiming to be God - and in Ezekiel 28:1-10, God has him killed for the act. And the Jews will have rejected him as continuing as their King.

You need to understand for the time that he is the Antichrist - It is because he has been anointed the King of Israel. He is only going to be in the position of the Antichrist for 3 years 3 months, thereabouts.

The Antichrist - combines the word Christ (anointed) with the prefix "Anti". Combined together as the Antichrist they mean the King of Israel, instead of and against.... Jesus, the rightful King of Israel. Here is bible explaining bible...

Mark 14:32 Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.

Even the unrepentent thief on the cross next to Jesus knew what "Christ" meant. Christ, an transliteration of the Greek word, refers to messiah, which in turn at it's origin means "anointed". The Kings and priests of Israel were all "anointeds". When the bible says "the" Christ or "the" messiah, it is talking about the one special King of Israel to lead Israel and the Jews into the messianic era.

As for Temple Mount, it has to be in the hands of the Jews prior to the Antichrist's invasion at the 3 1/2 (middle of the week) invasion. Jesus said, "when you see the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place..". Obviously, Israel had to be in possession, or at very least be granted unprecedented access, to the Temple Mount for there to be a holy place built PRIOR TO the outbreak of any war. Things are not dependent on some Gog and Magog war to set the board for Antichrist. He already has set the board with his false treaty which has allowed Israel to build.

No, there doesn't have to a (peace) treaty of any kind, only the removal of the obstruction of the muslim presence on the temple mount, for a temple to be built. The muslims are not going to allow the Jews to rebuild a temple on the temple mount - when the muslims won't even allow the Jews to pray there.

The Gog/Magog war will eliminate the muslim presence on the temple mount.... which will make it possible for the person who becomes the Antichrist to oversee the reading of the Mt. Sinai covenant to the nation of Israel. That's the confirmation of the covenant. And for a temporary downsized temple to be built in a short time.

Following Gog/Magog is the burning of the remains of the war implements for a 7 year periiod, instead of wood (assuming for heat and cooking)

If Gog/Magog were in the middle of the 7 year last week of Daniel 9 - then 3 1/2 of those years would be into the messianic era - which conflicts with Jesus restoring all things caused by the destruction on the earth that takes place during the great tribulation. It is not going to take Jesus 3 1/2 years to remove the war implements following Armageddon and cleanup of Israel.

As for Deut. 31:9-13, it is not talking exclusively about the responsibility of the leader alone, but also priests. And it was not about confirming the Mosaic covenant every 7 years, but about reading the law to the people at the Feast of Booths.

Do you know what Deuteronomy is? It is for that second generation of Israel, as the first generation died off, and Moses
had to go over the terms of the Mt. Sinai covenant with them, as they were about to enter the promised land. The reading of the law every 7 years for all future generations is so that they would never forget. The law is the agreement that God made with the Children of Israel, that they would be His people and He their God, and that the land of Israel is theirs forever. The reading of that law, the covenant, to the nation of Israel is confirming that covenant - on a 7 year cycle.

That the law, the Mt Sinai covenant, has to be read on the feast of tabernacles every 7 years - should tell you something. That the 7 years starts in the fall, and the events surrounding Jesus's Second coming coincide with the fall feasts. The events of Jesus's First Coming coincided with the spring feasts. Which means Gog/Magog will likely happen in early fall, some year.

Yes, the high priest is involved - who do you think the false prophet is in Revelation 13 - who has two horns like a lamb ? Who is the lamb of God ? Jesus. Jesus is our high priest in heaven, is what the bible says. What it is telling you by saying the second beast has two little horns like a lamb is that the false prophet will also be the high priest. He will also probably claim to be Elijah. He will be the one who anoints the person as the King of Israel at the start of the seven years.

 

[iamlamad]

Greece is not in the listing

Here is why

Alexander never ruled the Middle East after he conquered the region [he died at 33], the populations remained indigenous, and Athens was on the wane and never ruled the Middle East

The first of the 5 fallen was the post flood land of Magog and his brothers Mesheck and Tubal .... then the Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, and northern Seleucid

Ezekiel 38 lists the confederation that will attack Israel at the middle of the 70th week and gives the ancient names of the region of the northern Middle East [northwestern Mesopotamia]

These populations are still there today with the modern names of essentially of Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Turkey

Egypt [the kingdom of the south] is not mentioned because the little horn will pluck this king

and add the land of Egypt to his northern kingdom [Daniel 11:40; 11:42]

Egypt will oppose the little horn as he begins to expand his Middle Eastern holdings and Saudi Arabia will question His ambitions [Sheba and Dedan] .... he will also pluck this king and add this kingdom to his holdings

His third plucking will be the Syrian kingdom that is in upheaval today and add it .... his core kingdom will be in Iraq where the Assyrians ruled at Nineveh on the Tigris River .... this is why he is called the Assyrian in Micah 5:5-6

His conquering of the Middle East will occur during the first half of the 70th week and then he will attack and subdue Israel .... then he will rule for the next 42 months [Daniel 11:36-45; 12:7]

Rome is not a part of the vision as many teach because Rome's rule of the Middle East occurred and terminated during the breach between the ending of the 69th week and the beginning of the 70th still pending

You are mistaken: The Seleucus dynasty, especially with Antiochus most certainly ruled over Israel and did great damage to them.

I have to take the image of Daniel 2 into consideration when I think of the five fallen.

 

[iamlamad]

No, not back in the days of Antiochus. It is not Antiochus.

Daniel sees the vision of the stopping of the daily sacrifice and the transgression of desolation.

13 Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?

16 And I heard a man's voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.

17 So he came near where I stood: and when he came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man: for at the time of the end shall be the vision.

It is not Antiochus.

Let's see what else about the little horn.

23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.

Okay, let's look at Antiochus's track record. When he was on his way to Egypt to do battle with one the Ptolemy group, who had just become king there - Antiochus was intercepted by a Roman official, who told him if he proceeded he would be at war with Rome, who backed the Egypt leader. Antiochus tucked his tail between his legs and went back to where he came from. Not a king of fierce countenance,

Okay, lets look futher at the little horn person.

24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people.

Not Antiochus. Was afraid to face up to the Romans.

25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.

Antiochu stood up against Jesus? But was afraid of the Romans? No, it is not Antiochus.

WHAT "END?" You ignore what comes next. He TELLS US what end: it is the end of THEIR (Seleucus dynasty) end. You are pulling your theories out of the context of this chapter: it is about GREECE and PERSIA. OF COURSE he stood up against Jesus - the preincarnate Jesus.

Verses 1-8 about the ram and the goat.

Verses 9-12 about the little horn that came out of one of the four, being out of the Seleucus dynasty. Clearly this is Antiochus.

He polluted the temple by sacrificing pigs and placing in the most holy place an image of ZEUS.

"by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of the sanctuary was cast down."

Before the temple could be used again, it would have to be cleansed.

14 And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

The angel is telling how long it would be before the temple would be cleansed. They would need a red heifer.

Verses 15-18 about Daniel and an angel

Verse 19 And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be.

WHAT indignation? Of course the one in CONTEXT: what Antiochus did.

Versus 20-22 the ram explained as Media and Persia and the goat as Greece, and Alexander the great dying and his dynasty divided 4 ways.

Verse 23 is the key to the entire chapter:

"23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up."

Whose Kingdom? Of course Alexander the Great's kingdom that was divided four ways, and in particular the Seleucus division. In the later time of THAT division...so again speaking of Antiochus.

Verses 24-25 about Antiochus. We MUST keep this in context.

Verse 26 this story is TRUTH and it will be for many days. (Note: NOT many years. For DAYS. It is about Antiochus.

Daniel said none understood. It seems that is almost true today also.

Benson Commentary:
The reader will be pleased particularly to observe this, as being a key to the right interpretation of the subsequent prophecy. The little horn proceeded from one of the four kingdoms just mentioned, into which Alexander’s empire was divided after his death: therefore to look for it elsewhere, or to interpret it of any power, king, or kingdom, which had not its origin in one of them, must be a misinterpretation of the prophecy. From one of the four successors of Alexander, namely, from Antiochus the Great, came forth Antiochus, afterward called Epiphanes, or Illustrious, by his flatterers; but by Polybius termed more properly Epimanes, or the madman.

Barnes notes:
And in the latter time of their kingdom - When it shall be drawing to an end. All these powers were ultimately absorbed in the Roman power; and the meaning here is, that taking the time from the period of their formation - the division of the empire after the battle of Ipsus (see the notes at Daniel 8:8), until the time when all would be swallowed up in the Roman dominion, what is here stated - to wit, the rise of Antiochus - would be in the latter portion of that period.

Matthew Poole's Commentary
In the latter time of their kingdom, i.e. when they were come to the height, and beginning to decline. It notes that time when the Romans began to seize part of the Grecian kingdom, by Emilius Probus, who subdued Perseus king of Macedonia, and thereby brought all Greece under the Roman jurisdiction; which was one hundred and sixty-six years before Christ was born, that very year Antiochus set up the abomination of desolation.

 

[Douggg]

WHAT "END?" You ignore what comes next. He TELLS US what end: it is the end of THEIR (Seleucus dynasty) end. You are pulling your theories out of the context of this chapter: it is about GREECE and PERSIA. OF COURSE he stood up against Jesus - the preincarnate Jesus.

What? Antiochus stood up against "the preincarnate Jesus" ?

What you are not understanding about the vision of the trangression of desolation of the time of the end by the little horn - is that the little comes toward Israel, the middleeast from the location of one of the territories of the four break up kingdoms.

What Gabriel is saying to Daniel, future to him would be the Medes/Persians, followed by the Greek empire, that would be broken up into four lesser kingdoms. Those things happened, but the prophecy of the little horn's transgression of desolation is for the time of the end. And when the little horn person eventually becomes the beast, he will convince the nations to try and stop Jesus from returning, in Revelation 16:16.

23 And in the latter time of their [the transgressors] kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.

In Daniel 8:23, "in the latter time of their kingdom", it is not talking about the four breakup kingdoms - but the kingdom of the transgressors, which in Daniel 7 is the end times fourth kingdom, and the transgressors coming to the full is the ten kings that will arise in that kingdom - at the latter time of it. Which the EU has already gone through a series of transformations since it beginning by the treaty of Rome, and is about to enter the latter time of it, when the ten leaders come to power, which also the little horn will arise over them.

None of the old testament end times prophecies can be understood apart from Revelation. In Revelation 17, the ten kings give the power of their kingdom to the beast, and they will over-run, control Jerusalem and Israel for 42 months.

It is not Antiochus in Daniel 8. Nor is it the abomination of desolation in Daniel 8. But the end times little horn.

Antiochus is in Daniel 11. Which he had the image of Zeus setup in the temple, which typifies the abomination of desolation which will be done in the end times, but as the image of the beast.

transgression of desolation - the person sits in the temple, transgresses the covenant.
abomination of desolation - the image of the person placed in the temple.

You need to learn the difference between those two.