By Dr. David R. Reagan

Is there any proof that Matthew 24 is both prefilled in prophetic type and yet to be fulfilled in history?

Let's begin with verse 14. It states that all the events described in Matthew 24 will take place at a time when the Gospel has been preached to all the world.

This certainly had not taken place by the year 70 A.D. In fact, it still has not taken place to this date. Using modern technology like radio, television, movies, satellites, and the Internet, we have been able to proclaim the Gospel to more people than ever before in history, but we still have not reached all the people in the world.

The book of Revelation reveals that this will not be accomplished until late in the Tribulation when God will send forth an angel who will preach the "eternal gospel" to "every nation and tribe and tongue and people" (Revelation 14:6).

Daniel's Prophecy

Next, let's consider verse 15. It says the period of intense persecution of Jews will begin when "the abomination of desolation," spoken of by Daniel, is seen "standing in the holy place." We have no historical record of such an event taking place in 70 A.D. Unlike the Greek tyrant, Antiochus Epiphanes, who desecrated the Temple's holy place in 168 B.C. by erecting within it an altar to Zeus, the Roman general Titus took no such action in 70 A.D. before he destroyed the city and the Temple.

The Intensity of the Tribulation

The third point to note is found in verse 21. It says that the period of Jewish persecution that will follow the desecration of the Temple will be the most intense in all of history, "since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever shall [be]."

These words were not fulfilled in 70 A.D. The persecution which the Jews experienced under Titus was severe, but it pales in comparison to what the Jews suffered during the Nazi Holocaust of World War II.

Josephus says the Romans killed a million Jews in the 70 A.D. siege of Jerusalem. Historians are convinced that this number is greatly exaggerated. But even if it is true, it is nothing compared to the six million Jews who perished at the hands of the Nazis.

Furthermore, the prophet Zechariah tells us that during the end times a total of two-thirds of the Jewish people will die during a period of unparalleled calamity (Zechariah 13:8-9). In other words, there is a period of Jewish persecution yet to occur that will even exceed the horrors of the Nazi Holocaust. According to the book of Revelation, this will occur during the second half of the Tribulation. It is the reason that Jesus referred to that part of the Tribulation as the "great tribulation" (Matthew 24:21).

Consider verse 21 again: "for then there will be a great tribulation such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever shall." Did Jesus mean what He said or not? Surely this is not an example of hyperbole — of exaggeration to make a point. Everything in the passage screams that we are to take Jesus' words literally.

The conclusion is inescapable. The tribulation experienced by the Jews in 70 A.D. was not the greatest "since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever shall be."

The Severity of the Tribulation

The fourth piece of evidence is found in verse 22. Jesus says that the period of "great tribulation" (verse 21) that He is talking about will be so severe that all life will cease unless the period is cut short.

You and I live in the only generation in history when these words could be literally fulfilled. There was no possibility in 70 A.D. that the siege of Jerusalem would lead to the extinction of all life. But that is a very real threat today due to the development and deployment of nuclear weapons.

The best selling book of 1982, The Fate of the Earth, proved that if there is ever an all out nuclear exchange between the United States and Russia, all life on earth will cease to exist.

The Proximity of the Tribulation

The fifth clue that Matthew 24 is yet to be fulfilled is found in verse 29. It says the Lord will return "immediately after the tribulation of those days." How can we escape the impact of the word "immediately"? I don't think we can. It clearly ties the preceding events to the immediate time of Jesus' return.

As I have already pointed out, some Amillennialists who are also Preterists have tried to deal with this problem in a fanciful way by claiming that the Second Coming of Jesus actually occurred in 70 A.D.! But to argue, as they do, that Jesus returned spiritually, and therefore invisibly, is to deny the promise made in Acts 1:11 that Jesus will return in the same manner in which He ascended to Heaven — bodily and visibly.

The claim that the Second Coming occurred in 70 A.D. is, of course, ludicrous, but it shows the extent to which some people will go to try to make Scripture conform to a particular pre-conceived doctrine.

The Context of the Tribulation

The final evidence that Matthew 24 was not fulfilled in 70 A.D. is to be found in verses 32-35, where Jesus says that all the things He has spoken of concerning the Tribulation will be fulfilled during the generation that sees the "fig tree" reblossom. Here is the key to the timing of the prophecy's fulfillment.

What is the "fig tree"? The fig tree is often used in Scripture as a symbol of the nation of Israel (Jeremiah 24:1-10; Hosea 9:10; Joel 1:7; and Luke 13:6-9). So, I think what Jesus is saying here is that all the events prophesied in Matthew 24 will be fulfilled at the time when the nation of Israel is re-established.

But we really don't have to guess at the symbolic meaning of the fig tree. Think back for a moment to what had happened the day before. Jesus had put a curse on a barren fig tree (Matthew 21:18-19), causing it to wither. It was a prophetic sign that God would set the Jewish nation aside because of their spiritual barrenness — that is, their refusal to accept Jesus as their Messiah.

Now, the next day, Jesus calls the fig tree to mind and says, "Watch it. When it reblossoms, all these things will happen."

The setting aside of Israel occurred in 70 A.D. The reblossoming took place on May 14, 1948 when the nation of Israel was re-established.

A Fact to Ponder

Matthew 24 is not history. The terrible events of 70 A.D. were a classic prefillment in type of the ultimate fulfillment that will occur immediately before the Lord returns.

Matthew 24 is prophecy yet to be fulfilled. It is going to be fulfilled soon, for Israel has been regathered, the nation has been re-established, and the nations of the world are coming together against the Jewish state. The wrath of God is about to fall. We are on the threshold of the Great Tribulation.

As you ponder this reality, are you ready for it? Have you received Jesus as your Lord and Savior? The Bible says that if you put your faith in Jesus, you need not fear the wrath of God, for "having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him" (Romans 5:9).

Does the Olivet Discourse have any application to the Church? Find out as we continue with the next segment in this "Olivet Discourse" series!

By Dr. David R. Reagan

During the last presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton decided to make the point that Barack Obama was all smooth talk with no substance. In her attack on him she said that "talk is cheap" and that words were nothing without action.

Her attack really riled Obama, and he fired back with these memorable words (which he plagiarized word for word from a speech by Governor Deval Patrick of Massachusetts):¹

Don't tell me words don't matter. "I have a dream" — just words? "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal" — just words? Just words? "We have nothing to fear but fear itself" — just words? Just speeches?

Obama was right, words do matter. They matter a lot. The old saying, "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me," is a lie. Words can hurt, and hurt deeply. They can even destroy. Just tell a child repeatedly that he or she is "dumb" and watch how it impacts their life.

Euphemisms

Euphemisms have always been a part of language, as people have used substitute words or phrases to soften the impact of something they want to say. So, instead of calling a person a liar, one might say, "I think you may have your facts wrong." Or, instead of describing a person as being fat, you might say the person is "plump" or "heavy set."

Euphemisms are motivated by politeness. Instead of referring to a friend's occupation as a "garbage man," you might call him a "sanitation worker." Instead of describing a family member as "retarded," you might call him "mentally challenged." Rather than ask how to find a "toilet," you will probably ask directions to a restroom.

An interesting example of a euphemism can be found in the Bible. Since the name of God — Yahweh — was considered sacred by the Jews, they refused to pronounce it out loud. So, when reading the Scriptures orally, they developed a tradition of substituting the word, Adonai (Lord), for Yahweh. When the translators were preparing the King James Version, they decided to follow this tradition by injecting a translation code. When Yahweh appeared in a verse, they indicated its presence with the word, LORD (all in caps). When the word Adonai appeared, it was rendered as Lord.

Euphemisms constantly change. What was accepted as proper yesterday might be considered highly improper today. "Negro" became "Colored" and then was followed by "Black" and "Afro-American." Today, the only acceptable term is "African-American," a term I personally don't like and refuse to use because I consider it divisive for us to think of each other in hyphenated terms. I am reminded of a t-shirt I saw on a teenage Black boy at a mall. On the back of the shirt, it read:

I'm not Black.
I'm not Colored.
I'm not African-American.
I'm a born-again Child of God!

Political Correctness

In modern times the use of euphemisms has been elevated to a fine art through the development of political correctness, often referred to as "PC." Despite its many negatives, there are some positive aspects to this movement. For example, it has been effective in subduing the use of ethnic slurs like Nigger, Gringo, Kike, Dago, Kraut, Mick, and Camel Jockey.

Even so, it can result in some crazy situations. Consider what happened at a City Council meeting in Washington, D.C. in 1999. While discussing the city's budget for the next year, an aide to the mayor said he thought the budget was "niggardly." That is a word that means "stingy" or "miserly." Despite the fact that it was a legitimate word, all hell broke loose, and the aide was fired for speaking a "racial slur." (He was later rehired.)²

Another positive aspect of PC is that it has motivated the change in a lot of job titles that were once male-dominated and reflected that fact in the name. Mailman has become "Mail Carrier." Fireman is now "Fire Fighter." A policeman has become a "Public Safety Officer." Chairmen are now referred to as "Chair Persons." But some of these make-overs have gotten out of hand, as when a gas station attendant is referred to as "a petroleum transfer technician" and a car wash worker is called "a vehicle-appearance specialist."

This kind of nonsense prompted the comedian, Henny Youngman, to claim that his brother-in-law was a "diamond cutter." His actual job was mowing the field at Yankee Stadium!

Negative Aspects of PC

Unfortunately, most political correctness is not positive in nature. That's because it is used by Liberals to promote their political agendas. They also use it as a powerful form of censorship. On most university campuses today, students have to be very careful what they say or else they can get in trouble with the thought police and even be required to attend sensitivity-training.

Liberals use political correctness to disguise sin and thus make it more palatable. A sexual pervert becomes a "sexually dysfunctional person." A prostitute is referred to as a "sex worker." Homosexuals are "gay people." Gambling is "gaming."

As you can see from these examples, Liberals use PC to soften the image of behavior they are sympathetic to but which the general public finds unacceptable, usually because the behavior violates Judeo-Christian principles which the Liberals hold in contempt.

Abuses of PC

PC becomes a form of censorship when it is used to force people into conformity. For example, a person could get into trouble today on the job or in school for making reference to an "American Indian." The politically correct terminology is "Native American." I personally refuse to use that term because I consider it to be nonsensical. I was born and raised in the United States. If I am not a Native American, then what am I? Some sort of alien?

Another example of PC being used as a form of censorship can be found in the fact that more and more academic journals will not publish papers that use the terms B.C. or A.D. because these terms reference time to the birth of Jesus. Authors must instead use the terms B.C.E. and C.E. which stand for "Before the Common Era" and the "Common Era."³

PC can also become very tedious, to the point of being downright silly. "Lame" became "crippled," which was then renamed "handicapped," which was subsequently replaced with "disabled." But that was not good enough. Next came "physically challenged." And now, believe it or not, the politically correct term is "differently abled." Or consider the fact that the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People now considers the term "colored people" to be a racial slur!

PC can really become dangerous when it is used to advance a political agenda. And this is where the Obama Administration excels. Illegal aliens have suddenly become "undocumented immigrants." Terms like "Islamic terrorism," "Islamic radicalism," and "Muslim extremism" have been banned. The Global War on Terrorism has become "The Overseas Contingency Operation." (The what?) The words, "crusade" and "jihad" have also become taboo.⁴

Think of it — our government officials can no longer even identify our enemy by name! It would be like FDR issuing an order during World War II that no one in the government could identify our enemies as Japanese Imperialists or German Nazis.

An Ominous Shift in Vocabulary

Realizing how important words are to Liberals in general and to the Obama Administration in particular, you can understand the widespread concern among Christian leaders that has sprung up recently concerning a very subtle but monumental shift in vocabulary within the Obama Administration regarding religious freedom in our nation. It all began in November of 2009 when President Obama spoke in Texas at the memorial service for the victims of the Fort Hood massacre. A few days later he did it again in speeches both in Japan and China. What he did was to substitute the expression "freedom of worship" for "freedom of religion."⁵

This is an exceedingly important change in terminology. So important, in fact, that in May of this year, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom issued a report expressing grave concern about it.⁶

Here's the point: freedom of religion includes freedom of worship, but freedom of worship does not include freedom of religion. Freedom of worship gives me the right to pray or read the Bible in the privacy of my home or church, but nothing beyond that. It does not include the freedom to share my faith with others. No freedom to hand out materials on the street or preach in a park. No freedom even to wear a cross around my neck or on my lapel.

Some commentators believe that one of Obama's motives is to throw a sop to China and the Muslim world where freedom of religion is denied but private worship is allowed in some areas. They believe Obama is giving a signal to these nations that we are not going to do anything about their denial of freedom of religion. Others fear he is signaling to the secular leaders in this country that he plans to aide and abet them in their demands for a crackdown on public expressions of religion in our nation.⁷

Whatever the motives may be, the shift in vocabulary is monumental and must be monitored carefully. Already, it has spread to other Obama Administration officials. In December of 2009, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton used the same terminology three times in a speech at Georgetown University. Here is an example:⁸

To fulfill their potential, people must be free to choose laws and leaders; to share and access information, to speak, criticize, and debate. They must be free to worship, associate, and to love in the way that they choose.

Notice how she referred to "freedom of worship," not freedom of religion. And in passing, I might ask, "Since when has the right 'to love in the way you choose' become one of our basic human or constitutional rights?" Does this guarantee the rights of pedophiles and prostitutes and those engaged in polygamy and bestiality?

Where is the Obama Administration headed with this change in words? Remember, it was Obama himself who said, "Words matter!"

Notes

1) Rachel Sklar, "Yes, You Can Borrow My Speech: Why Obama's Lifted Words Matter," Huffington Post, February 19, 2008, http://www.huffingtonpost.com
2) Wikipedia, "Controversies about the word 'niggardly,'" en.wikipedia.org/wiki.
3) Wikipedia, "Common Era," en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_ Era.
4) Fox News.com, "Obama Bans Islam, Jihad From National Security Strategy Document," www.fox.news.com.
5) Paul Cooper, "Why is Obama changing 'freedom of religion' to 'freedom of worship'?" www.rightsidenews.com.
6) USCIRF Annual Report, www.uscirf.gov.
7) Sarah Eekhoff Zylstra, "'Freedom of Worship' Worries," Christianity Today, June 22, 2010, www.christianitytoday.com.
8) Hillary Rodham Clinton, "Remarks on the Human Rights Agenda for the 21st Century," www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2009a/12/133544.htm.

By Nathan Jones

Americans are abuzz over noted author and broadcast personality Glenn Beck. Beck is nationally known by his supporters as a defender of American liberties and by his enemies as an outspoken critic of the current political establishment. Both sides, though, are confused over just what Glenn Beck believes concerning his claim to Christianity and Jesus Christ.

On Saturday, August 28, Beck held a Restoring Honor Rally on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington D.C., presenting such famous speakers as Sarah Palin, Dr. Alveda King and Marcus Luttrell. The purpose of the event, as Beck's website describes, is to "celebrate America by honoring our heroes, our heritage and our future" and remind Americans that "our freedom is possible only if we remain virtuous," calling all patriots to help him "restore the values that founded this great nation."

Just what "values" does Beck see America returning to, though, and where does he derive those values from? Are they from the Bible, or from something else?

These questions were taken to one of today's foremost defenders of the faith, Eric Barger, the founder and director of Take a Stand! Ministries headquartered in the Dallas area. Eric is an authority on the cults, the New Age, and rock music today. He's generated a letter called "An Open Letter Concerning Glenn Beck" that gives great insight into Glenn Beck's belief system.

An Open Letter Concerning Glenn Beck

Over the last few months there have been many questions and much conversation about the popular broadcaster Glenn Beck and his professed Mormon faith. This letter seeks to identify and clear up the confusion concerning both Beck's stand and about the marked differences between Mormonism and historic, biblical Christianity. Please understand that we do not write these words in an effort to simply be "right" or to win an argument. The purpose of the letter is to determine the truth — something that Glenn Beck himself constantly lauds.

Let us begin by saying that we appreciate the stand Glenn Beck has made concerning our country, its foundation, and the great need for America to come back to God. Many of us have no doubt learned and gleaned information from Beck's thorough research and many fine, conservative guests. In fact, as he has stated many times on his national television program on the Fox News Channel and on his much-listened to radio program, the only hope America, indeed any person or nation, has is to return to and surrender to God. However, therein lies the problem. When Beck speaks of God, informed Christians must immediately question "which God?"

The unsuspecting or those less informed are given the perception that, when Beck mentions God, it must be the same deity that is spoken of as the Creator in the Holy Bible. To what extent Glenn Beck is grounded in Mormon doctrine or understanding may be debatable. However, he indeed presents himself in much the same manner as that of an "evangelical" Christian and also consistently states that he is indeed a Mormon. Let us be clear. Each person reading this must be warned that Glenn Beck's spirituality — which he claims to be the only solution — is not orthodox, historical Christianity in doctrine, beliefs, or practice.

Put bluntly, the basis of Mormonism exists in the idea of godhood for mankind in a doctrine called "The Law of Eternal Progression." This cultic belief states that God was a man as we are now and (through Mormonism and its erroneous teachings) we humans can become "gods" as well. Mormonism's founder, Joseph Smith, wrote, "... You have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you..." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 348). Though the modern Mormon Church has tried to appear to be "Christian," this belief is the very core teaching of Mormonism.

On the "Mormon Jesus," Mormon apostle Bruce R. Hunter, a member of Mormonism's "First Council of the Seventy," emphatically wrote, "The appointment of Jesus to be the Savior of the world was contested by one of the other sons of God. He was called Lucifer, son of the morning. Haughty, ambitious, and covetous of power and glory, this spirit-brother of Jesus desperately tried to become the Savior of mankind" (The Gospel Through the Ages, Milton R. Hunter, p. 15). Though the evidence that separates Mormonism from authentic Christianity is overwhelming, just these two examples should give one pause to question whether the Mormon god and Mormonism's unbiblical Jesus could in any way be construed to be the same as that portrayed in God's holy word, the Bible.

In conclusion...
No matter how good the fruit may appear, no matter how much we may agree with his stand on America or politics, no matter how sincere or passionate he may be, we feel it is incumbent on those in apologetics ministry to point out that, if indeed Glenn Beck is a Mormon, he is advocating a religion that is not Christianity in any fashion but instead a false religion responsible for damning the souls of all who follow it. Being close or just using similar terms or phrases do not constitute sound doctrine. These things matter and each of us — Glenn Beck included — need to examine whether we have placed our faith, hope, and trust in the real Jesus who is able to redeem and save a sinner or in one of the many worthless counterfeits such as the "Jesus" of the Mormon Church.

By Nathan Jones

Q) Is a massive invasion of Israel coming?

To answer this tough Bible question, Dr. David Reagan and I on a Christ in Prophecy television episode interviewed Dr. Ron Rhodes. Dr. Rhodes is the founder and director of Reasoning From the Scriptures Ministries. With nearly 50 books penned and decades of public teaching, he is an expert on the Bible. As a former "Bible Answer Man," he specializes in easy to understand answers to the really tough questions about the Bible and the defense of the Scriptures.

If you look off into the distance and you see a bunch of dark clouds coming on the scene, and you see some lightening and the winds are blowing toward you, then you can kind of know when the rains will be coming down. By being an accurate observer of the times, you can tell that a storm's coming at you. Well, according to the Scripture, there is a northern storm emerging on the scene. Jesus told us to be accurate observers of the times, so look off towards what's happening in Russia and Iran and Turkey and the Sudan and all of those nations over there.

The Bible says that there's going to be a massive invasion of Israel. We don't like to talk about those kinds of things. I mean, we're sick of war. But, the Bible is very clear that there's going to be a massive invasion of Israel.

There's going to be a coalition of nations involved coming from north of Israel. One of the nations involved Ezekiel calls Rosh, and that lies to the uttermost north of Israel. If you were to take a ruler and draw a line straight north from Jerusalem, you're going to reach Russia. Joining Russia will be a variety of Islamic nations including Iran and the Sudan and Libya and Turkey and others.

When Ezekiel wrote back in the 6th Century BC, Islam did not exist. He probably had no idea what would make all these nations unify together. In fact, for many years there have been some more liberal-type Christians who have said these nations are not contiguous or next to each other, therefore it doesn't make sense to say that they are going to join together in a battle. But see, recent history reveals Islam is what joins those nations together. Islam came into being in the 6th and 7th century and that's what unifies them, with the exception of Russia.

Did you know, though, that Russia is 20% Islamic and they've got thousands of Muslim temples over there? Russia also has a long history of aggression against Israel. We saw that in 1967, 1973 and 1982. In each case American Presidents have stared down the Russian bear. When you look at some of the alliances that Putin's building, for example with Iran, how could anyone deny it? He signed not only an agreement in which Iran is provided nuclear weaponry, but he has also signed a 25-year agreement in which Iran gives 500 million dollars a year to Russia in order to build up Iran's military.

Iran while under President Ahmadinejad has said that he would like to see Israel wiped off the map. He has said we're going to see very soon what it's like to live in a US-free and Israel-free world.

I think that the stage is being set. I'm not one of those people who likes to set dates. That's not a healthy thing. In fact, Christ told us not to, so I don't want to imply any date or anything like that. But, I will tell you that Jesus told us to be accurate observers of the times. As I observe what's taking place with Russia and Iran and Turkey and the Sudan and Libya, not only are these nations aligning with each other, but every one of them has a motive to hate Israel. These nations stand against Israel. They believe that Israel belongs to them. They believe that Allah promised that Holy Land to them and that in our Bible the Old Testament has been changed by Jews and Christians, but originally they say the land was promised to the Muslims. They accuse Israel of basically stealing something that wasn't theirs back in 1948 when they became a nation.

Now, of course, there's been recent overtures in trying to build the Palestinian state and divide Jerusalem. The Muslims don't want a part of Jerusalem — they want all of it! They're going to go to war one day over it. I see what is taking place right now is setting the stage for this eventual storm that will just come in like gangbusters.

Despite the ominous storm, God is going to stand for Israel. He who stands for Israel does not sleep or slumber, as Psalm 121 tells us.

You know what's interesting, though? Israel is going to be so overwhelmed when this invasion takes place that there's not going to be a chance of Israel's survival. When God actually turns back the invading force, it's like everybody's going to recognize God's hand. I want you to notice that when God speaks, He says that they may know that "I am the Lord thy God." Now, this is the same language we see in the Exodus account when God delivered Israel from the Egyptians, "That they may know that I am the Lord thy God." In fact, Ezekiel says point blank it'll be done in such a way that even the Jews will realize it came from God, so I think there's going to be massive conversions as a result of this.

I've heard some people say that when this coalition army gets destroyed that the Antichrist might stand up and try to take credit for it. I suppose that's possible. I've heard some people like Dr. Dwight Pentecost say that. But, the text indicates that God is going to get the glory for this. God says that "they may know that I am the Lord thy God." A lot of people are going to become acquainted with Yahweh for the first time.

The 144,000 Jews that become witnesses during the Tribulation might convert because of God's victory in the Ezekiel 38-39 Gog-Magog Battle. I think those 144,000 witnesses will be kind of like 144,000 Jewish Billy Grahams going all over the world witnessing. I also think there's going to be conversions based upon the two witnesses of Revelation 11.

I also think that when Christians vanish off the planet, all our books are going to be left behind. I think that many people are going to turn to the Lord as the result of that. That was really my goal in writing my book titled Northern Storm Rising. I believe that one of the ministries God has called me to is to communicate effectively with people. The truth is that the Bible is one of the most exciting books in existence and if I can help communicate that excitement in what I write then I've succeeded. If people get anything from this book, it's that God is in control of human history and that the Bible can be absolutely trusted in its prophecies.

If I didn't believe in a sovereign God today, I'd have a lot to worry about. Our world seems to be spinning out of control in so many different ways. But, God is directing human history toward its culmination, and one day when you and I have been with Christ for billions of years we're going to look back on all of this and just marvel at the way that God directed the circumstances on earth towards its end.

Nathan's IMHO

With Russia supplying nuclear know-how and materials to Iran to build their nuclear power plant and nuclear weapons, to Iran's boisterous threats to destroy Israel and the United States with their growing weapons stockpile, to Turkey doing a 180 in leaving behind diplomatic relations with Israel and allying itself with Iran, to the unification of Middle Eastern countries under the Koran, to the economic and political alliances made between all the players of the Gog-Magog Coalition that exist this very day — everything seems to be in place for the fulfillment of Ezekiel's prophecy in chapters 38-39. And yet, there is one piece still missing.

The nations comprising the Gog-Magog Coalition are missing the nations that immediately border the nation of Israel — Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Gaza and Egypt. These nations are either openly hostile or in a tenuous peace accord with Israel. Those who say they have peace practice war games and invasion scenarios that strategize the destruction of Israel, so the peace is only superficial at best. These nations would never sit out an all-out Islamic invasion of Israel, and have to fit into the prophetic picture somehow.

The missing piece and most likely next step in prophetic events is most likely found in Psalm 83. Psalm 83 is read as an imprecatory prayer, in that it calls down judgment and justice upon an enemy. In Psalm 83, all the nations it lists have modern equivalents as the nations that surround Israel. Israel has never fully subjugated those lands since becoming a nation again in 1948, and so Psalm 83 has never been totally fulfilled. If a Psalm 83 conquest were to happen, it would answer the question as to why the Ezekiel 38-39 Gog-Magog countries do not include the nations bordering Israel, but instead only comprise of an outer ring of Islamic nations.

Psalm 83 is only a prophetic theory, but a logical one that fills in a gap long questioned. It also provides a required peaceful precondition to the Gog-Magog Battle because the outer ring of Muslim nations would fear Israel's greater expanse of power in the region and control of more resources. The resources Israel would acquire on top of their newly found gas wealth would drive the leader of the invading coalition designated Gog to desire to plunder Israel, the impetus behind the Gog-Magog Invasion.

For more on the timing of the Gog-Magog Battle, check out the articles Timing Magog and The Wars of the End Times. For a "Christ in Prophecy" television interview with Bill Salus, author of the Psalm 83-themed book Isralestine, visit his website Prophecy Depot or Lamb & Lion Ministries' Programs page.

Q) Will the Antichrist not originate from the Roman Empire, but rather instead the Ottoman Empire, and will he be a Muslim?

To answer this tough Bible question, Dr. David Reagan and I on a Christ in Prophecy television episode interviewed Dr. Ron Rhodes. Dr. Rhodes is the founder and director of Reasoning From the Scriptures Ministries. With nearly 50 books penned and decades of public teaching, he is an expert on the Bible. As a former "Bible Answer Man," he specializes in easy to understand answers to the really tough questions about the Bible and the defense of the Scriptures.

A very faddish thing has developed recently in Bible prophecy. It is the idea that the empire that will be revived in the end times will not be the Roman Empire but the Ottoman Empire, and that the Antichrist will come out of that Ottoman Empire and he will be the one who will rule over it. In fact, not only do some say it's going to be the Ottoman Empire and the Antichrist is going to be a Muslim, but they argued that it's hyperbole when the Bible says that the Antichrist is going to rule over all the nations of the earth. Instead, the theory goes that he's really just going to rule over the Middle East.

I think, though, that the Scriptures are very clear that the Antichrist's empire is from a revived Roman Empire. When we look at Daniel in his writings, he talks very specifically about how the Antichrist would come from the people who overran Jerusalem and destroyed the Jewish Temple. That happened in 70 AD. It wasn't the Muslims that overcame Jerusalem. They didn't even exist at that time, as Islam was founded by Muhammad 600 years later. And so, to say that could possibly apply even metaphorically to Muhammad or to Islam would be just reading something into the text that's not there.

I also think about Daniel 7, where it talks about how a little horn emerges out of ten horns right there with them. That indicates to me that whole context is about the Roman Empire that will reemerge. And so, this ruler comes out of the Roman Empire. He is said to be of the same people who overcame Jerusalem and destroyed the Jewish Temple, which was Titus and his Roman warriors who destroyed Jerusalem in AD 70. If words mean anything, it is a Roman Empire.

Furthermore, I think that the idea that the Antichrist will be a Muslim, that really kind of runs amiss in terms of what Islam teaches when you think about it. For example, Islam believes in the Islamic creed, "there's one God named Allah and Muhammad is his prophet." They will not tolerate any other claims to deity. In 2 Thessalonians 2 it's talking about the Antichrist and it says that he is going to go into the Temple, exalt himself above every god or object of worship, take his seat in the Temple and display himself as being God. Well, for a Muslim to do that, especially in view of the Islam creed which says that "there's one god named Allah," and in view of the very clear Islamic teaching that Allah can have no partners, it becomes an impossibility.

Further, just consider how it stretches credulity to say that this individual according to Daniel 9:27 will sign a pact guaranteeing protection for Israel. Why would a Muslim sign a pact guaranteeing protection to Israel? I mean, if there's any group of people who want to see the destruction of Israel, it is Muslims. So, how would that work?

Not only that, but I believe that this invasion of Muslim countries into Israel will probably take place before the Rapture, or after the Rapture but before the Tribulation, or at least the very beginning of the Tribulation, somewhere in there. If the Muslim nations are largely destroyed by judgment, as seems to be indicated in Ezekiel 38 and 39, how will an Antichrist emerge from the ashes of what used to be a very strong group of people but now are almost gone?

Anyway you look at it, there's just all kinds of variables that do not fit this idea that the Antichrist could be a Muslim.

Daniel even says that he will have no regard for the gods of his father, but he will claim that he is above all gods. How can a Muslim say that? No, a Muslim couldn't possibly say that. In fact, one of the things that Muslims get mad about in terms of Christians today is claiming that Jesus is the Son of God. They say that's absolute blasphemy because that means that God has partners.

For those same people who would say the one-world religion will be Islam, I've done a lot of thinking about the coming one-world religion. Now, just think about it. The Rapture takes place before the Tribulation, that's what I believe. So, the Christians are removed. If in fact this invasion into Israel by Russia and the Muslim nations takes place before the Tribulation or maybe at the very beginning of the Tribulation, then Muslims are largely taken out of the picture, too. To me that opens up the door for the easy emergence of both the Antichrist and the great power as well as a one-world religion. And so to me it just fits chronologically very, very well.

Concerning the argument that this is going to be a local empire and not a world-wide empire and that that's hyperbole when Revelation says that, if a prophecy as you read it in the past came true literally and if you look at all the prophecies that deal for example with the First Coming of Christ and see how absolutely literal they were fulfilled, then the indication is that all the other prophecies that deal with the Second Coming and events associated with it will be fulfilled just as literally. So, there's no room for spiritualizing in my opinion. Very often in the Old Testament you've got things referring to both the First and Second Coming within the same basic passage. As the first part was literally fulfilled, so the second part will be literally fulfilled.

The proper policy is to read the Bible first. Let the Bible speak for itself and then as Jesus said in Matthew 16, to be accurate observers of the times.

Nathan's IMHO

Daniel 9:26 tells of the origins of the Antichrist, "The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary." In other words, the Antichrist will arise from the people group that destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple. That occurred in 70 AD when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem.

Some like Sid Roth, Joel Richardson, and Walid Shoebat teach the current fad "Beast from the East" view, that the Antichrist will be a Muslim and the Mahdi, the Islamic messiah. The whole theory of a Muslim Antichrist is based on the incorrect historical account of what groups of people made up the Roman legions who destroyed the Temple in 70 AD, a full 530 years before Islam came into existence.

As Sean Osborne of Eschatology Today reveals from history, the Roman army that destroyed the Temple is 70 AD were those of the Legio X Fretensis, Legio V Macedonica and Legio XV Apollinaris, under the command of Roman General Titus Vespasianus. The soldiers of Legio X were Italians from the region of the Straits of Messina; Legio XV from the mixed Illyrian-Celtic people of the region of Pannonia along the Danube River, and Legio V were of the Thraco-Illyrian people in the region of the lower Danube formerly known as Moesia. In sum, the "people of the prince" were Europeans and Roman citizens.

The Jews of the First Century would have recognized the destroyers of the Temple to be orchestrated from Rome and so recognize "the people" then as Romans. It's possible that the Romans could have been lumped into the larger unbelieving Gentile world, but the text is pretty specific about the people group — Romans, not Syrians.

For the Antichrist to originate from the Middle East and Islam is religiously problematic. If Russia-Iran-Turkey is wiped out in the Ezekiel 38-39 attack God miraculously delivers Israel from, and Israel's surrounding nations seem to be non-players in most of the Tribulation, how could Islam dominate the Middle East and the Antichrist be Muslim? It would seem such defeats would dishearten any Muslim. Also, if the Antichrist is supposedly not into women and could be gay (Dan. 11:37), the Muslims would want him dead, right? Also, the Antichrist glorifies himself. Even the Mahdi couldn't do that, for worship alone is for Allah.

I'd have to conclude on these and other verses that Islam is just another system that will be wiped out before the Antichrist instills his system and makes a grab for the Middle East riches that Israel will also be claiming, hence a peace treaty and the taking over of all former Roman Empire lands.

Those who fight tooth and nail over origins, though, tend to hold to a Post-Tribulation Rapture view, and are deeply concerned that they have to be able to recognize who the Antichrist will be so as not to be deceived. I, on the other hand, believe the Church will not be around to worry about the Antichrist or even past a study interest care where he originates from due to the Rapture occurring before the Antichrist ever comes on the scene.

Q) Is Jesus the only way to Heaven?

To answer this tough Bible question, Dr. David Reagan and I on a Christ in Prophecy television episode interviewed Dr. Ron Rhodes. Dr. Rhodes is the founder and director of Reasoning From the Scriptures Ministries. With nearly 50 books penned and decades of public teaching, he is an expert on the Bible. As a former "Bible Answer Man," he specializes in easy to understand answers to the really tough questions about the Bible and the defense of the Scriptures.

I've been asked that question a lot of times and a lot of times people will say I'm being narrow-minded in claiming that Jesus is the only way. I don't think that that's being narrow-minded. There are some things that are narrow that are good. Sometimes there's only one operation that will save your life. Sometimes there is only one road out of the forest. There's only one correct formula for some of the popular soft drinks. I want my wife Carrie to be faithful to her one-and-only for her entire life. That's narrow, but it's good. When I fly from California to Texas I not only want the pilot to land in Dallas, but I want him to land on the right runway. That's narrow, but it's good. And so, yes, God's way of salvation is narrow, but it's good.

God's heart is wide open. He offers this narrow gift to people who are rich or poor. It doesn't matter what your skin color is. It doesn't matter whether you're male or female. God's heart is wide open and He offers that same wonderful gift to all people.

As for Jesus being the only way, it's ridiculous to say that all religions lead to God. They all have different concepts of every doctrine. If one is true, the others are necessarily false. The truth is that all religions are essentially different and only superficially the same.

It's really important to understand that while all the other religions basically try to take bad men and make them better by ethics, Christianity seeks to take dead men and make them alive. You see, we are dead in sin, and dead people can't help themselves. They need an external savior to come in and rescue them, and that's exactly what Jesus has done.

Every other religion also emphasizes works as opposed to Christianity that says we're going to be saved by grace through faith. Christianity paints man's problem as worse than any other religion. You see, all the other religions say, "Well you've got some ethical problems so you need to do some good works." But, Christianity says, "Listen, even your good works are like filthy rags compared to God. You're unholy. You're defiled in just about every way. So, there's no way that you can work your way to salvation." But, you see, even though Christianity paints man's picture as really, really bad, we've also got a really, really good solution, because salvation becomes a gift that is received through faith and that gift is based upon Jesus Christ.

Nathan's IMHO

Jesus of Nazareth, proven by miracles and testimony to be the very Son of God, stated very clearly that belief in Him and Him alone as Savior is the only way to Heaven in this age.

"Jesus answered, 'I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.'" - John 14:6

"Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him." - John 3:36

"Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God..." - John 1:12

"Who is it that overcomes the world? Only he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God." - 1 John 5:5

"That if you confess with your mouth, 'Jesus is Lord,' and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved." - Romans 10:9-10

The story about Jesus begins when God first made mankind. We had a perfect, personal relationship with God. But, when Adam and Eve disobeyed and rebelled against God, their sin brought death and the just judgment of Hell upon us all (Romans 5:12).

We all have sinned, too (Romans 3:23). Have you ever lied or stolen something or looked at someone lustfully? If so, do you realize you're a sinner, too, living in rebellion against God and are in need of His forgiveness?

But, God is love (1 John 4:16). He doesn't want to send us to Hell, though His just nature requires Him to (John 3:36). So, He sent His perfect son Jesus to suffer and die in our place as payment for our sins. Jesus then beat death by coming back to life. Jesus' sacrifice has become God's lifeline to us. Jesus did all the saving work on the cross. There's nothing we can work to do to earn our way to forgiveness or Heaven. Jesus has done it all (Romans 10:9-10).

But, like any free gift, it must be accepted to work. God promises that everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved (Acts 2:21). To grab hold of God's promise, pray right now. "Dear Jesus, forgive me of my sins. Be my Savior." Jesus in turn will remove your guilt and make you a brand new person inside, and when you die, He promises you will live forever with Him (John 10:28-29). The relationship with God is restored. You are a new creation, and considered a child of God (John 1:12; 2 Corinthians 5:17).

By belief in God's Son Jesus you no longer stand condemned in God's eyes for your sin, as Romans 8:1-2 tells us, "Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death."

If you accepted Jesus Christ — the only way to Heaven — then you are free indeed. To fully understand your salvation, seek out other believers in Christ so you can worship and learn together. Read your Bible daily, starting with the Gospel of John.