The individual goals they want to achieve in the BoP—a two-state solution and the division of Jerusalem—are exactly what the individual I consider to be the beast wants in order to sign the Abraham Accords (the Board of peace is beast peace decoy at this point.) - My thoughts on the current situation are somewhat similar to what this brother points out in his two-and-a-half-minute video:
Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.
www.youtube.com
And I simply pose this as a question: Could the attack on Iran be the trigger for the Rapture and the war that follows shortly thereafter from Ezekiel 38/39 (Persia would be part of the armies, and the war would likely be quite short, as God Himself intervenes), and then the beast enters the stage to make the covenant from Daniel 9 with the many from Israel? I consider this a possible scenario at the moment.
Thanks for the video Jedi. I believe that guy's views make a lot of sense. No one knows when the rapture will occur. Put the case he makes is certainly reasonable. And I love his hoody too. Great to see such love in his heart and expression toward the Lord. Amen.
One of the "many" wonderful qualities of our forum is the allowance of differing views within reason. So please do feel totally free to post views (of course within the range of orthodoxy) that are on your heart. As for me, I have views that are somewhat outside the scope of this forum as well as are outside the scope generically of evangelicalism, when it comes to eschatology. I have never met anyone with my views. I won't be getting into those because I can appreciate how they may seem outside of orthodoxy. But i bring it up out of encouragement to you in posting your convictions. There is no other soul on earth I know that shares mine....lol. And that is ok. But my eschatological views pretty much differ from all of evangelicalism. I'm ok with that. I don't share my views out of respect to our forum differences, but I will share perspectives of my views that do or can land in orthodoxy for sure. I say this to just hopefully be clear the differences i have are commonly somewhat known here. But thank you for posting your convictions. I believe it is important for the heart. Amen.
. . . . .
As far as Iran and the rapture timing, I believe Ez 38 is simultaneous with the rapture. This is just my take. But what makes the most sense to me is that the reason God permits Ez 38 on Israel is, at least on one level, they no longer have the protection of church being on earth. So to me, JD Farag used to say, "When the bombs come down, we go up." I like that. I would just reverse that order. But i think it is that close together.
As for Iran, personally (and this would be a taste of perhaps on some levels how rather different generically my views can be) I would not say that something cannot happen to Iran because the bible tells us they will be involved in launching Ez 38. The reason i would have for saying that is that Iran attacking Israel in Ez 38 could be old school elements of this regime no longer in power at the time of the attack. This was something that dawned on me a bit from a post
@Spartan Sprinter posted a few days ago marveling at Ez 38 players possibly running home to mother Russia. If the leaders of Iran run off for protection in Russia, technically, they can join Russia from within and be reps of Iran (the one we have known now for decades).
Personally, what seems to tend to be a trend in our era is that our convictions of what we see the word saying can tend to become larger than how God may actually fulfill them. I have seen a lot of that sort of thing. I used to do a lot of that sort of thing. And probably still do in places i am not aware. It comes from genuine care. It comes from zeal toward God, amen. But I believe Iran might go through changes we have to scratch our heads about. Granted the narrative is tightening to provide perhaps less room for other narrates to take place instead (like things taking a direction none of us would expect). So in that sense, in contrast to my favored view on the rapture though, I would say, "Yes it is possible that rapture could be near because of what is occurring." Amen.
My overall sense is this peace deal does go through. And Iran gets changed. Because what i would see (what i can share of my views) is that Israel has to come to real peace and safety. At least in sociological and economical terms. Something i believe the world has to see. And for other reasons, Israel has to taste. I believe that Israel will be under real peace and safety. The counter question in this i might ask is: "How can Ez 38 occur if Israel is not dwelling in peace and safety?
Ez 38
11 and you will say, ‘I will go up against the land of [h]unwalled villages. I will go against those who are at rest, who live securely, all of them living without walls and having no bars or gates, 12 to capture spoils and to seize plunder, to turn your hand against the ruins that are now inhabited, and against the people who are gathered from the nations, who have acquired livestock and goods, who live at the
center of the world.’
Is there dwelling in safety just what Gog is thinking? Perhaps that is one way to say there does not have to be peace in Israel at the time of attack. It is true that there are no real strong indicators that it might be more than just what Gog is thinking. But reasonable reading ethics would generally, i believe, have us understand that in part it would likely be that Israel would be in some form of peace regardless the perspective of Gog. And so far, we really have not seen an Israel at peace and safety before us. I believe the "When they say peace and safety" language is language for being over the target. But i believe Israel living in peace, will be the target. Respectfully of the two, I would believe that Israel living in peace is the loudest because it is a part of the literal prophesy we are speaking of. Whereas 1 Thes 5 speaks of the language of that time, likely. The majority of evangelicalism believes that 1 Thes 5 is for the world not Israel. For that to be true, I believe we would not have to have a peaceful Israel. I am not sure of the general views on that of this forum. But i know in evangelicalism, typically, "sudden destruction" in 1 Thes 5 = destruction on the gentile world. Not Israel.
But for me, I agree with your linking 1 Thes 5 with Israel because of the pregnancy language (linked to Israel in Isiah and Rev 12). I don't believe we have sound exegesis to make 1 Thes 5 the gentile world. Perhaps there is good exegesis on it. I just never heard it though. So on that point brother I am 100% onboard. Hope in what i have taken time to express might be helpful in some ways. Blessings.
www.prophecynewswatch.com
