Who is the antichrist?  What will he be like?  Well, that all depends on how you read the Book.  It could be that it turns out to be one of the larger non-events of history.  Kind of like Santa, the tooth fairy, and the Asthoreth bunny.  When it really comes down to it, if most of the prophecies of Revelation and Daniel have been fulfilled, then there really isn’t much left said.  And, that leaves the rest of the debate outside of the realm of scripture, and merely in speculation, which isn’t for theologians, but for arguments only.  Of course, this doesn’t meant there wont be evil men who submit themselves to the adversary, just has there have been throughout history, but are we expecting, Biblically, a great one-world ruler who will be a super-evil?  Not that I can find.

Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”

As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the close of the age?”

Matthew 24:1-3 (emphasis mine)

When we consider Bible prophecy of the end, we must look at Jesus’ words in the Olivet Discourse.  In this discussion with His disciples, Jesus answer the disciples questions about the coming destruction of the temple and it’s buildings.  The late teacher Derek Prince likened the interpreting Bible prophecy in terms of reassembling a skeleton.  He said that the thing you have to start with is the spine.  For Bible prophecy of the end, he claimed that Matthew 24 and the parallel passages (Luke 21 and Mark 13) were the spine of Biblical Eschatology.

Read more…

The Kingdom of God.  Is it now, or is it yet to come?  Jesus said that the Kingdom of Heaven suffers violence and the violent take it by force.  This wasn’t a future statement, but rather it was fulfilled then.  Compare this to a popular scripture from the book of Daniel.

 But the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever.

Daniel 7:18, emphasis added

Clearly, the Law and the Prophets were until John (the baptist), and since that time the Kingdom of God is being preached (Luke 16:16).

Read more…

A look at the End Times from a largely fulfilled perspective begins, primarily, with the book of Daniel.  Daniel sets the scene from the foundation of the enemies empire, Babylon, with Daniel’s interpretation of the king’s dream.  Daniel 2 sets the case for Rome being Babylon, and is the best case for a mostly-fulfilled End Time paradigm.  Plainly put, we see a kingdom/statue beginning with King Nebuchadnezzar, with that king as the head.  It ruled over the entire Earth and, although it changed identities (metal) three times, four in all, it was a continuous one-world government from the time of that king until the Kingdom of God broke it, probably circa 313AD, when it’s emperor was converted.  As we saw war and conflict from each subsequent kingdom, but the entire statue remained, so we see that it’s actual destruction was not a war in on the Earth, but a spiritual overthrow of the power of that kingdom in the spiritual realm, in which it was spiritually defeated, crushed, and overthrown.  When the spiritual power (beast) of Rome was destroyed, its physical and nationalist elements could then no longer be maintained, and, quite literally, the wind scattered the pieces, being the “Decline of Rome”.

Read more…

This brief look at Matthew 24 describes the 2-part layout of the Olivet Discourse.  Focusing on the explanation of two separate events, the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD, occurring in fulfillment of the words “this generation” (Matthew 24:34), and the second coming at the end of “this age”, as described by Jesus (Mark 10:30).  Focusing especially on the translation of the first word in Matthew 24:29, “immediately”, which in the Greek does not always imply imminence of time, but rather sequence in narration, the case is laid out that the text clearly delineates between the two events, which, in Luke are described as being separated by the “times of the Gentiles”.  Because the second coming, “that day” is clearly explained as being of a time unknown to Jesus Himself, known only to the Father, we see, textually and logically, that Matthew 24:34 cannot apply to the second coming events, but only Matthew 24:9-28.  Matthew 24:29-31, then, are not under the restriction of “this generation”, being “that day” and not “these things”, as Jesus explains through Matthew 24:36, “that day”.

Read more…