The Jerusalem Covenant — Part Two

In part one of this article, we looked at the Jerusalem Covenant and considered some of the things it actually says and why those things are significant. We saw that the Jerusalem Covenant is a document created in 1992 to honor the 25th anniversary of Israel's victory in the Six Day War, when they took control of Jerusalem for the first time in two thousand years. This document officially declares Jerusalem to be the capital of the Jewish nation of Israel, and the holy city of the Jewish people. It confirms the Jews' eternal ties to the city, but at the same time it also welcomes other people groups with their various religions to come to Jerusalem to worship their gods at their holy sites right alongside the Jews, who worship the one true God. It also emphatically reiterates that the Israeli government has legally guaranteed the safety and sanctity of the holy sites of those other religions.

Since 2013, a group called Israel365 has been presenting a hard copy of the Jerusalem Covenant bearing the signatures of people from all over the world to the Mayor of Jerusalem on Jerusalem Day. The most recent copy bore 216,168 signatures from people in over 100 countries, and a few people in the watch community have begun to take notice. Some are speculating that the Jerusalem Covenant might be the "covenant with many" spoken of by the prophet Daniel in Daniel 9:27, the treaty that will be confirmed by the Antichrist and will ultimately launch the Tribulation.

And it was at that point that I decided to toss in my two shekels—this being shekel number two.

The first thing I want to do is take a close look at the treaty of Daniel 9:27 itself to establish what Scripture tells us about it. One reason I feel compelled to do so is because many people (this writer included) have at times made assumptions about this treaty that are not explicitly stated in Scripture. Thus, I want to take a hard look at what we can state about this treaty based strictly on the text of Danial 9, as well as what we may reasonably assume about it based on other passages of Scripture.

I also want to address this idea that the Jerusalem Covenant is in fact the treaty of Daniel 9:27, and I want to lay out a couple of possible ways the road to Daniel 9:27 could play out in regard to various elements of the end-time scenario, including pertinent Jewish eschatological expectations.

The covenant with many

As I'm sure you know, arguably one of the single most important prophetic passages of Scripture in the entire Bible is Daniel 9:24–27, sometimes referred to as the Prophecy of Daniel's 70 Weeks—or as I like to call it, the Rosetta Stone of Bible prophecy. This passage gives us the overall framework of God's prophetic program for Israel; and although it does not specifically address the Church, the Church Age can be neatly and logically inserted into this framework if we properly understand and interpret what Daniel wrote.

Although we will be focused primarily on only one line of it, here is the entire prophecy just for reference:

Speaking of properly understanding and interpreting things...few passages of Scripture have been subject to more exegetical scrutiny than this one, and few have given rise to a greater abundance of interpretive speculation (with the possible exception of the Gettysburg of the Gospels—the Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24–25).

For example, verse 26 clearly tells us that after the completion of the 69th week, Christ would be crucified. Since that time, Israel's prophetic clock has been stopped as God has focused on building the body of Christ, and it has remained stopped for nearly two thousand years as we anxiously await the end of the Church Age and the beginning of the 70th week during which God will once again focus His attention on His people Israel.

But there are respected Bible scholars who confidently assure us that there is no gap at all between the 69th and 70th weeks, in spite of the fact that Daniel clearly says Christ would be killed after the preceding 69 weeks—not during the 69th week, or during the 70th week. That is, a gap is clearly suggested in the text. The 69th week ended the day Jesus rode into Jerusalem on the back of a donkey on the first Palm Sunday and was hailed by throngs of people as the Messiah, several days later He was "cut off," and the 70th week hasn't started yet because the event that initiates it hasn't occurred. There's your gap, OK? And there are other such prophetic gaps in Scripture, so Daniel's prophecy is certainly not unique in this regard.

There are also respected Bible scholars who confidently assure us that the "he" mentioned in verse 27 ("And he shall confirm the covenant...") is none other than Jesus Himself, not some nefarious future "Antichrist" of some kind. Of course, to do this they must concoct exotic grammatical arguments about pronominal referents and antecedents that fly in the face of both common sense and established practice.

And there are also respected Bible scholars who confidently assure us that the covenant spoken of in verse 27 is none other than the New Covenant that the Son of God cut with Israel through His death on the cross, certainly not some future "treaty" that this alleged "Antichrist" will confirm with "the many," which clearly must refer to all of us Christians, or people who have been grafted into that covenant.

As soon as you bring up the fact that we are staring down the barrels of the fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy, such people will pat you on the back and shake their heads with a condescending grin and say:

No no no, that's all over, don't you see. It was all finished and done with two thousand years ago, so enough with all this tinfoil hattery about some scary "Tribulation" that's looming on the horizon and this lunacy about the "Rapture" and so forth. Why not get with the program and help us build Christ's kingdom now, so some fine day in the sweet by and by He might deign to come back to rule it. That's a good lad.

And on it goes. But there are others (glory to God) who insist on treating the Bible as if God says what He means and means what He says, and understand that the Bible should be interpreted as literally as context and common sense allow—which is precisely how the Holy Spirit intended for Scripture to be read. They are unafraid to take the Word of God at face value as long as it makes good sense to do so. The following comment from Precept Austin sums it up:

With that thought fresh in mind, let's take a look at what we came to see, which is the first part of verse 27:

Let's take it one key word at a time, and I'm going to save the word "covenant" for last.

As I indicated a moment ago, the normal rules of grammar require that the pronoun "he" refer back to the the nearest individual mentioned, which is the "prince that shall come," whom we understand to be the man known as the Antichrist (and not the Messiah mentioned prior to that). So that's not an issue...at least not for people willing to play by the rules of grammar.

The word translated "confirm" is a form of the verb gabar (to be great, mighty, strong, and by implication to prevail or to act arrogantly; to confirm; to be stronger or strengthen), and the first thing to note is that this is not the word normally used when two people, countries, etc. make a covenant in the normal sense. If that were the case, a form of the verb karath would have been used, which literally means "to cut off." In other words, in Hebrew you "cut" a covenant. But that isn't what's happening here.

From a straightforward reading of the text, it would seem that the Antichrist acts to "confirm" or "strengthen" or, if you will, "forcefully implement" an already existing treaty, rather than "make" a covenant in the usual way.

"The many" in this particular context refers to the Jews or Israel—not "the many" countries that may be involved in the treaty (and certainly not "the many" people who signed the Jerusalem Covenant). Daniel uses the exact same word three other times (Dan. 11:33, 39; 12:3) and it always refers to Jews, and there is no compelling reason to believe it has a completely different meaning here in chapter 9.

The word translated "week" throughout this entire passage (a form of shabua) is a word that can refer to either a period of seven days or seven years, with the context making it fairly obvious which meaning is intended (in this case, years). So that doesn't pose any difficulty.

Finally, the word translated "covenant" is a form of berith (covenant, treaty, agreement, alliance), and is the normal word used for pretty much any type of covenant, appearing a total of 284 times throughout the Old Testament. No big surprises to uncover there.

Note, however, that little is specified concerning the precise nature of the covenant. Many students of the Bible tend to refer to it as a "peace treaty," but understand that this idea comes from context beyond this passage (as we will see). There is something worth noting, however.

Notice what Daniel says in the very next part of the verse:

"...and in the middle of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease..."

Wait a second...what sacrifice and oblation? There are no sacrifices and oblations being offered in Jerusalem today. Why? Because there is no temple. That's why. You need a temple to reinstitute the Levitical sacrificial system. No temple, no sacifices. So, don't you think it's a little strange that Daniel would suddenly drop a reference to a reinstituted sacrificial system immediately after mentioning the treaty the Antichrist will confirm with Israel? Totally unrelated—out of the clear blue sky, as it were? Hmm...

On the other hand, if in fact that treaty was responsible for the reinstitution of that sacrificial system (which requires a rebuilt temple), the whole verse reads in a perfectly logical and straightforward manner:

The Antichrist confirms a treaty with Israel that includes a provision that allows the building of the Third Temple, as well as the reinstitution of the attendant sacrificial system. But then he causes the sacrifices and oblations to stop in the middle of the seven years for some reason.

The rest of the verse refers to the Antichrist desecrating the temple in an event known as the abomination of desolation, which marks the beginning of the Great Tribulation at the midpoint of Daniel's 70th Week. The False Prophet will require men to worship the image of the Antichrist, the Jews will reject him and realize they've been deceived, and Satan's man will launch a murderous rampage against them that will dwarf the Holocaust in Satan's final effort to wipe out the Jews once and for all (see also Rev. 13:11–15).

I don't want to go too far afield here, since a lot of this is familiar ground to many of you reading this. But the takeaway is that I believe we can state with a high degree of confidence that verse 27 is telling us that the treaty will contain a provision that will allow Israel to build their long-awaited Third Temple, as well as reinstitute the sacrificial system. The temple was the beating heart of Israel, and for two thousand years the Jews have longed for it in a way few groups of people have ever longed for anything.

OK, so here's what we know so far about this treaty just from Daniel 9:27:

Now, is there anything else we can we ascertain about this treaty from other passages of Scripture?

I believe there is.

I've written about this before, but note that in Isaiah 28, the prophet is pronouncing judgment on Ephraim, who represents the Northern Kingdom in this context, and says:

The 10 tribes of the Northern Kingdom had grown fat and sassy, and had foolishly made a treaty with Egypt that they believed would protect them from the Assyrians who loomed to the north. God is telling Israel that dog won't hunt, and that they would be attacked.

And attacked they were.

Like many Old Testament prophecies, however, especially those concerning Israel, there was a near-term fulfillment to confirm the truth of the prophet's words, but there is also a future eschatological fulfillment—and I am convinced that's the case here.

Just as the Northern Kingdom placed their trust in the lies of evil men for peace and safety rather than placing their trust in the mighty arm of their God, we see Israel doing the same thing in the end-times with the Antichrist, relying on a treaty he confirms with them for their peace and security, rather than trusting God so He can bless and protect them.

It is clear to me that the treaty of Daniel 9:27 is the end-time fulfillment of this prophecy of Isaiah, and it will be every bit as much a "covenant with death" and an "agreement with hell" and for essentially the same reasons as the Northern Kingdom's treaty was 2,700 years ago. The treaty of Daniel 9:27 will deceive Israel into believing they have achieved a lasting peace with countries that seek their annihilation and that will ultimately attack them.

And attacked they will be.

(As we shall see, however, I am inclined to believe this attack is not necessarily the attack described in Ezekiel 38–39.)

So, what can we say about the treaty of Daniel 9:27 at this point?

OK, anything else? Mmm...maybe.

Note how the phrasing of verses 1–2 clearly speak to the end-times. Although Israel has been divided up a number of times over the last two millennia, the Jews are back in their land to stay (Amos 9:15) and I believe there is a final eschatological fulfillment of this prophecy that will find its fulfillment in the confirmation of the treaty of Daniel 9:27.

In other words, I for one don't believe the current, maniacally single-minded drive for a two-state solution is an accident.

Or a red herring, for that matter. The Palestinians and other key regional Arab players are making it increasingly clear that they will accept nothing less than an independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital, all the glossy economic benefits and incentives promised by Jared Kushner in Bahrain recently notwithstanding. And if Trump doesn't deliver the goods in his so-called Deal of the Century (and at this point I am 99 percent certain he won't), the Palestinians have indicated they are fully prepared to take their two-state dog-and-pony show to the United Nations, where they will find no shortage of sympathetic ears.

My point is that I firmly believe that Israel will in fact be divided one last time, and I believe Israel will acquiesce in a desperate bid for their temple and the elusive peace they are after (and will be deceived into believing they are getting in the treaty of Daniel 9:27). But that begs the question:

Q. Will it be the treaty of Daniel 9:27 that creates the two-state solution?

I don't have a definitive answer, but I do have a definitive opinion.

I admit that it's not terribly difficult for me to imagine the creation of a two-state solution being done through a separate agreement, one distinct from the treaty of Daniel 9:27. I can visualize it working out that way. But it doesn't really make good sense to me.

For one thing, Daniel says the Antichrist will confirm one treaty, not two treaties. Not a series of treaties that accomplish different things: one treaty. That's not exactly a smoking gun, but the idea of multiple treaties forces us to read things into Scripture that aren't there.

One thing that troubled me about this, however, is that at first blush the dividing of the land of Israel doesn't seem "messianic." I mean, the Jews are expecting the Messiah to restore Israel to prominence, and a two-state solution would seem counter to that. But that's still where things are heading at full speed, so all I can say is that the Mashich must be one seriously persuasive individual—and indeed he is.

They don't call his boss the father of lies for nothing.

But I believe there's more to it than that. Consider: As Gentile Christians, it's almost impossible for us to conceive how deeply the desire to rebuild the temple runs through the veins of the Jews. Like I said, the temple was the beating heart of Israel, and they have been deprived of it for nearly two thousand years.

But now...it's been 70-plus years since the prophesied reestablishment of Israel as a nation, 50-plus years since the prophesied retaking of their beloved capital Jerusalem, and the Jews are getting hungry.

And that hunger is for a temple, and it's reaching fever pitch.

Make no mistake, however: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu does not want a two-state solution. Most Israeli citizens do not want a two-state solution. And for crying out loud, why on earth should they? They would have to be clinically insane to want a two-state solution (either that, or avid viewers of CNN). The Palestinians prove themselves to be drooling homicidal maniacs bent on the destruction of Israel and the killing of as many innocent Jewish citizens as humanly possible every single chance they get, and you expect Jews to believe a fancy piece of paper would change that? Really?

But if you offered them a chance to build the Third Temple...my oh my, that would change things. Satan knows that if he dangles the temple under their noses, the Jews will agree to almost anything—including carving up their land with their enemies who seek only their destruction. And I believe they will do just that for the flimsy promises of peace on a worthless scrap of paper called the treaty of Daniel 9:27—but flimsy promises of peace on a worthless scrap of paper that will let them

BUILD. THE. TEMPLE!

In the hearts and minds of the Jews, Israel will truly be Israel again after two thousand years of suffering and persecution. After being kicked in the teeth for two millennia, the Jews will finally possess the last piece of the puzzle, and the first tangible step to their long-awaited kingdom and God-ordained world dominion—the Third Temple! Courtesy of...you guessed it: the Messiah!

It's perfectly logical that the Jews will have to make some sacrifices to get their temple. They will have to agree to some things they are not completely comfortable with—and to say that the two-state solution falls into that category is an understatement. But Israel's enemies know full well (as does Satan) that the two-state solution is just an intermediate step toward the destruction of Israel, since the pre-1967 borders leave Israel highly vulnerable, any high-sounding promises of peace and security notwithstanding. But for the Third Temple? Oh, talk to me, baby.

Where do we sign?! (pant...pant...)

I believe that forcing Israel to accept a painful dividing of their land for the benefit of a gaggle of perennial Arab refugees who hate Israel and the Jewish people and are sworn to their destruction is what the temple-related provision of the treaty of Daniel 9:27 is all about. It makes perfect sense. Otherwise, Israel is basically getting a free lunch—their temple, peace and security...for what? Because the Arabs are a bunch of nice guys? Hardly.

The point is that I am strongly inclined to believe that the treaty of Daniel 9:27 will include the parameters for a two-state solution, which will be the eschatological fulfillment of Joel 3:2.

So, where does that leave us with the treaty of Daniel 9:27?

And that leads us to the $64,000 question:

Q. Is the Jerusalem Covenant the treaty of Daniel 9:27?

(Hey, no fair peeking!)

Is the Jerusalem Covenant the treaty of Daniel 9:27?

Uh, no.

I think it is overwhelmingly clear at this point that a careful examination of what the Jerusalem Covenant says (see part one) and what the treaty of Daniel 9:27 is all about and what it will almost certainly entail (see the above) pretty much blows this idea out of the water. I don't even see where there's really all that much to discuss.

The Jerusalem Covenant doesn't do one single thing the treaty of Daniel 9:27 will do. Now, I guess if you really wanted to you could say the Jerusalem Covenant is a "covenant with death" and an "agreement with hell" since it openly accommodates the worshiping of false gods on the Temple Mount—I'll give you that one. But even if the Jerusalem Covenant were confirmed for seven years, it still wouldn't be the treaty of Daniel 9:27, and even that makes little sense. Like they're gonna make an agreement to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, with the stipulation that it no longer be so recognized at the end of the seven years? C'mon.

There's no temple, no sacrifices, no oblations, no peace, no security, no dividing of the land...nothing.

Sorry Deborah, sorry Kimberly, but the Jerusalem Covenant ain't it.

I suspect many of you knew that all along, but I wanted to work out this article anyway because I think it is worthwhile to take a hard look at Daniel 9:27 and get a firmer grip on what's coming down the pipe in coming days as the prophetic scenario congeals into its God-ordained shape.

Now, please don't get me wrong. I don't mean to sound as if I'm being dismissive toward the Jerusalem Covenant, or toward people who might have the idea it could be the treaty of Daniel 9:27. That's not my intention.

Let me be clear:

The Jerusalem Covenant is not an insignificant document.

As I said in part one, the Jerusalem Covenant officially and biblically declares that Jerusalem is the eternal capital of Israel—it is the holy city of the Jewish people, and puts an exclamation point on the Jews claim over it. Israel is God's land and Jerusalem is God's city, and so such a claim is no trivial matter.

But it's just not the treaty of Daniel 9:27, that's all. Sorry, guys.

And who knows? The Antichrist might recognize the Jerusalem Covenant along the way. Why not? But even if he doesn't, I think it is very possible that one or more of the core ideas of the Jerusalem Covenant will find their way into the Treaty of Daniel 9:27. At this point we can only speculate about how the status of Jerusalem will be handled, but it will almost certainly be internationalized in some manner. Who knows...perhaps Israel will be granted some special type of recognition or "quasi-sovereignty" over Jerusalem to recognize its historical and inherent Jewishness in some way that will placate the Jews, but with other peoples being able to claim it in some political and/or religious sense, such as the Palestinians with East Jerusalem as their capital and Muslims worshiping on the Temple Mount. No one can say with confidence what shape the details will take, but the diplomatic possibilities are many.

And if push comes to shove, it's also possible the Jews may bite the bullet on the diplomatic status of Jerusalem in return for their temple and for peace and security, Jerusalem Covenant or no.

On the other hand, I am 100 percent certain that the part of the Jerusalem Covenant about officially and legally allowing other religions to worship at their holy sites on the Temple Mount will be included in the Treaty of Daniel 9:27 (if not recognized as is in the Jerusalem Covenant itself). In fact, this will probably be underlined and highlighted. I believe that's part of the price the Jews will end up paying to get their temple, which I personally believe will ultimately be built right next to the Dome of the Rock. And when the temple is complete, the Temple Mount will become one of the greatest memes of the twenty-first century. It will be more than just their return to a relationship with God—it will be the quintessential picture of tolerance, inclusion, and diversity.

And the world will eat it up.

One Mashiach or two?

Before we talk about a couple of possible ways the events surrounding the treaty of Daniel 9:27 could play out, it is important to gain some understanding of what the Jews are anticipating in terms of eschatology. (I wrote something pertaining to this topic about four years ago, but it is certainly worth revisiting.)

Them, not us: It is critical to understand that Jewish end-time expectations matter a great deal—regardless of how biblically misinformed and misguided they may be in reality—simply because it is they who will be here to give shape and form to how the end-time scenario plays out, not the Church.

I wish I had a shekel for every time I listened to some sincere student of the Bible lay out their ideas about how they imagined the end-time scenario unfolding, and know in my heart it was an absolute train wreck because they had no clue what the Jews were anticipating, and so things would never work out that way in a million years. Please remember:

• It is the eschatological expectations of the Jews that God will allow Satan to play like a Stradivarius to lure them into the adversary's end-time plan to destroy them (and straight into God's end-time plan to save them).

• It is the Jews who will make the treaty of Daniel 9:27 with their sworn enemies, and it will give the Jews a false peace, let the Jews build their temple, and divide the Jews' land.

• It is the Jews who will ultimately be deluded into believing the man who confirms this treaty with them is their Mashiach, and they will believe it for reasons that only apply to the Jews.

• And it is the Jews who will spurn their fledgling Mashiach when he finally demands they worship him as God because it violates a fundamental tenet held by the Jews.

The Church won't even be here, capiche?

The spotlight is focused on the Jews, who will be deceived by lies and their own misguided expectations. The Church will have already exited stage up.

One fascinating thing I discovered while doing some reading for this article is the fact that in some ways the belief systems of Jewish people as a whole bear some structural similarities to those of today's Church. I know that sounds a bit weird, so allow me to explain.

There is tremendous variation in Jewish beliefs today, due in large part to the destruction of the temple in AD 70, which signaled the death knell for Judaism as it existed in Old Testament days. Over the next several centuries, Judaism was essentially reinvented by the incorporation of truckloads of the opinions and teachings of legions of rabbis and various Jewish scholars into the Talmud, and since that time numerous groups have formed within Judaism that have widely varying views of both the Tanach and the Talmud.

And this applies to things eschatological as much as anything else.

First of all, in regard to overall prophetic interpretation, Jewish people generally fall along a spectrum that is surprisingly similar to that of Christianity at large. One could divide this spectrum into three broad bands, which we might call (a) fundamentalist, (b) moderate, and (c) secular.

(a) In the fundamentalist band, you have Jews who believe the Bible is divinely inspired, and so carries the weight of divine authority. They believe the Bible in its original form is inerrant, and that its prophecies should be interpreted as literally as common sense and context allow. They believe that apocalyptic prophecies apply specifically to the end-times, and so they tend to actively focus on Bible prophecy and eagerly anticipate the fulfillment thereof.

(b) In the moderate band, you have Jews who believe the Bible was written by men, perhaps with some parts inspired or "influenced" by God. Thus, they don't insist that the Bible is inerrant or "divinely inspired," and tend to view its prophecies as something not meant to be taken too literally and not necessarily referring to future events. Some Jews in this band view the Bible's prophecies as having already been fulfilled in history (preterists, I'm looking at you), and as a result prophecy tends to take a back seat in their religious life, while the moral teachings of the Bible are emphasized.

(c) The secular band comprises Jews who might consider the Bible as an important, beloved, even majestic book that should be read, but certainly not one that is inerrant or divinely inspired. They tend to view prophecy as something to be interpreted allegorically, if not dismissed altogether as a collection of myths—myths that at best have some literary or possibly allegorical significance.

I'm sorry, but does any of this sound familiar? It should, because it absolutely nails (a) the hardcore Church of born-again believers who are eagerly looking forward to the pre-trib Rapture, (b) the socially relevant Church of Your Best Life Now, and (c) the apostate corporate Church, which would include the Roman Catholics (and it took me awhile to talk myself out of spelling the word "Church" with a lowercase "c" here).

As far as what these various strata of Jewish people believe, understand that Jewish eschatological beliefs center around one prime subject:

The Messiah

It all revolves around the Mashiach—the man many Jews are expecting to show up and restore Israel to world prominence, among various other feats of messianic legerdemain. It's all about the Messiah.

Messianic buzz: When will he come? Under what conditions will he come? Who will it be? What will he be like? What will he do? How will he do it? Can ordinary Jews somehow hasten his arrival, and if so, how? Will there be one Messiah or two? Will he be a military leader, a political leader, or both? Should we expect the Son of Joseph to come first followed by the Son of David? Or will there there only be one Messiah, who is both rolled into one?

And on and on it goes, and the debate has raged for over two millennia. Note, however, that for many Jews it's not about a personal Messiah, it's about the messianic age that will be inaugurated, with or without such an august individual. Some Jewish people believe that messianic prophecies in the Old Testament speak of a messianic era or "Golden Age" rather than an individual who will usher in such an age—an age biblically knowledgeable believers would immediately recognize as the Millennial Kingdom under the reign of the real Messiah Jesus Christ.

Just as most Jewish people can be divided into three broad bands in terms of their general attitudes toward the interpretation of prophecy, they can be divided into four broad bands in terms of their views toward the Messiah and the messianic age, and they are (a) Orthodox, (b) Conservative, (c) Reform, and (d) Reconstructionist.

(a) Orthodox Jews include the ultra-Orthodox "black-hatters" who wear the long, black coats and black hats and sport long, curly sideburns and who do essentially nothing but study the Tanach and the Talmud, in addition to those who are equally devoted to the study of the Tanach and the Talmud, but whose lifestyles are more integrated into secular society.

Orthodox Jews are the most fundamental of all Jews, and they believe the Tanach and the Talmud (the written law and the oral law) are both divinely inspired, and must be strictly adhered to. They tend to interpret prophecy in a literal manner, and believe that at some future time the Messiah will appear and begin to restore Israel to its biblically prophesied place as the preeminent nation on earth, and he will make himself known by the things he does—namely, rebuild the temple, bring peace to Israel, gather the Jews back into their land, make Israel a respected nation in the world, spread the knowledge of the Torah throughout the world, etc.

By the way, of all the things the Jews are expecting the Messiah to do, the one that stands out front and center is the building of the temple. This is the one that's tangible. This one is black and white—bricks and mortar. Either there is a temple or there isn't. You can't pencil that one in. Revered twelfth-century Jewish scholar Maimonides (Rambam) famously wrote that if and when someone comes along who successfully rebuilds the temple, then he is the Messiah with absolute certainty. In other words:

It's the temple, stupid.

The attitudes of Orthodox Jews toward the Messiah and the messianic age are generally in line with the teachings of Maimonides, who also wrote:

All the prophecies regarding the Messiah are allegorical? Well, of course they are, you silly goose! Allegory, every last one of them. In other words, they can be interpreted to mean anything under the sun except what they plainly say. Otherwise it would have been impossible for Jewish rabbis to weasel their way around passages like Isaiah 53, Psalm 22, and about 40 others.

For example:

Straight up—the Jews basically have two choices with such a passage:

1. Allegorize it until it could refer to a purple dinosaur named Barney.
2. Rip it out.

Hey, don't laugh...there have been rabbis in history who have actually wanted to do that second thing.

Orthodox Jews believe the Messiah will be a real man who will come at some future time to restore Israel to prominence among the nations of the world, influence Jews in the Diaspora to return to Israel, spread the Torah from Jerusalem, build the Third Temple, and usher in an era of peace, prosperity and righteousness (and they readily admit that this will take some time). Of course, many Jews add and subtract to this list according to taste, but this is a fairly middle-of-the-road job description for the Mashiach.

(b) Conservative Jews are in general agreement with much of the above, but many Conservative Jews see the messianic prophecies as referring to the messianic age itself, and not necessarily an actual person. Conservative Jews typically believe that people are free to fashion their own personal speculation regarding the Messiah and the messianic age.

(c) Reform Jews are much more inclined to believe in the messianic age without a personal Messiah.

(d) Reconstructionist Jews flat out reject the idea that God can or will send either a personal Messiah or a messianic age, but teach that man can bring about such an era of peace and prosperity through his own efforts.

For the rest of this article, we will only deal with the views of the first group, the Orthodox Jews. These views tend to be more prevalent than those of other groups (and they're obviously pertinent to this article).

Some Orthodox Jews also believe in the future arrival of two Messiahs: a Messiah Son of Joseph, and a Messiah Son of David. Most believe that Mashiach ben Yosef will be a military leader who will probably be killed in the battle of Gog-Magog, and that his efforts to save/protect Israel militarily will inspire the nations of the world to respect and live with Israel in peace and will give rise to the main guy, Mashiach ben David.

On a historical note: Some in Israel had Lt. Gen. Yitzhak Rabin pegged as Mashiach ben Yosef back in June 1967, because he was the IDF officer largely responsible for the Israelis retaking Jerusalem.

At any rate, Mashiach ben David is the guy who does the following:

• He is responsible for the Jews being allowed to build their temple.

• He establishes peace between Israel and other nations, specifically regional Muslim nations who have traditionally been Israel's sworn enemies.

• He will spread the knowledge of the Torah around the world.

• He will cause Jews from the Diaspora to return to Israel. (Trust me—once the word is out that this guy might really be the Mashiach, Jews will flood back to Israel in droves. Mashiach ben David isn't going to have to lift a finger to check this one off the list.)

Of course, many other Orthodox Jews believe there will only be one Mashiach. They believe the two Mashiachs have been combined into one man, which is what the late Rabbi Yitzhak Kaduri said he heard straight from the Mashiach himself in a vision in 2005.

I am inclined to think the Jews will in fact see the Mashiach as both of these rolled into one, rather than as Mashiach ben Yosef followed by Mashiach ben David, since this jives with the idea that the Antichrist, in addition to other things, will also be seen as a strong military leader:

So whether it's in the form of one Mashiach or two, the defense and protection of Israel is a definite messianic box to be checked off:

• He will defend and protect Israel militarily.

And as I have mentioned, Jews believe the Mashiach will be a man, not divine—so that's an easy one to check off. Not God in the flesh or any such absurdly blasphemous thing.

It is critical to keep this in mind:

The supposed divinity of the Mashiach
is an absolute non-starter for all Jews.

I can state without fear of contradiction that this is the one thing upon which there is virtual universal agreement among Jews (and that's saying something). Even Jews who aren't even sure there will be a personal Messiah would chime in on this point:

The Messiah will be a man—he cannot be divine, or God in the flesh.

Precious few things are more deeply ingrained into the Jewish psyche than the oneness of God, which is interpreted by the Jews in a way that excludes the divinity of the second Person of the Trinity—or anything even remotely resembling the Trinity. The notion of the Messiah being God or having a divine nature and so being worthy of the worship due God is not only impossibly absurd to the Jews, it is the most grievous species of blasphemy to them. The consummate oneness of God is proclaimed by religious Jews around the world on a daily basis, typically before they retire in the evening, in a prayer taken from Deuteronomy 6:4 and known as the Shema:

Shema Yisrael: Adonai Eloheinu, Adonai Ehad.
("Hear, O Israel: the LORD is our God, the LORD is One.")

"The LORD is ONE." This is key because the Antichrist is going to check off the major messianic boxes so convincingly that the Jews will be enthralled with the fact that he is the long-awaited savior not only of the Jews, but of the whole world. In their zeal, they will demand that the entire world so acknowledge him (for the good of the entire human race, of course), and this will include obeying the universal laws that will be part of the global religion enforced by the False Prophet in support of the rule of the Antichrist—laws that will mandate the death penalty for people who dare blaspheme the oneness of God by worshiping the infamous fraud from Nazareth Christians are so taken with.

This explains why the Jews will still spurn their presumed Mashiach after the abomination of desolation, in spite of all he's done for them. At the climactic moment when Satan's man demands what Satan craves most, the Jews will turn on him—it's in their religious DNA.

As a result, the Antichrist will turn on them and will launch a purge of the Jews that will make the Holocaust look like a canceled church picnic. This is Satan's moment—his big chance to finally wipe them out, but he'll still come up short because during the Great Tribulation God will protect a remnant of His people who return to Him with all their hearts.

And return to Him they will.

Paths to the treaty

Finally, I want to consider a couple of possible ways we could get to the treaty of Daniel 9:27 and the surrounding events, and I want to stress that this is just speculation that sincerely attempts to jive with and make sense out of Scripture, which is the best any of us can hope for.

As I said earlier, it is clear to me that the Jerusalem Covenant will not play a leading role in this. The Antichrist may well recognize it at some point, but it will be a secondary issue compared to the treaty of Daniel 9:27, which may in fact incorporate one or more ideas from it.

I've also decided not to focus too much attention on the messianic era that the Jews believe their Mashiach will usher in, because that's a longer-term issue and I am instead focusing more on the time frame between the Rapture and the early part of the Tribulation.

1. The DotC.

First off, I feel obligated to mention the scenario that many people in the watch community are still taken with, and that is the one that's in the news these days—Trump's Deal of the Century (DotC).

Although some (this writer included) have all but written off Trump's deal, in all fairness we could still be in for a big surprise.

While it is true that Trump's team has been dropping some subtle and some not-so-subtle hints that a two-state solution is not in the offing, the reality is that there is likely a teetering stack of different versions of Trump's plan that have been drafted, and no one will know which one he is going to release until he releases it.

Theoretically, Trump could still come out with a plan that does divide Israel in some manner (as the treaty of Daniel 9:27 almost certainly will), and he could shock the world by tossing in a provision to allow the rebuilding of the temple—and promises of peace and security to boot.

I don't want to sound dismissive of this idea, because as I said—none of us knows what Trump's deal will contain. We can't write off what we don't know.

That said, however, it appears unlikely in the extreme that this will be the case. I am including it because I can't just ignore it and move on until Trump releases his plan. The plain truth, however, is that I see no compelling reason whatsoever to think it will work out this way. I basically see this as the "wishful thinking" scenario.

2. No DotC #1.

OK, let's assume Trump's deal is rejected by the Palestinians (which it already has been, sight unseen). Then what?

At some point after their rejection of Trump's deal, I believe the Palestinians will go hat-in-hand to the United Nations, which they have already indicated is their intention, and at least one top European leader has expressed an interest in helping them (and I will decline to name this individual because I don't want to be accused of sensationalistic name-dropping). At the UN, they will surely find sympathetic ears, and the parameters of a deal that gives them an independent state and East Jerusalem as their capital will be hammered out. But what about the implementation of this deal?

Obviously, Israel won't be thrilled at the idea. Why would they be? They would no doubt oppose dividing their land, and would continue to oppose it until something changed.

And something will change.

The Rapture will change everything.

We mustn't lose sight of the fact that the Rapture must precede the confirmation or implementation of the treaty of Daniel 9:27, and will likely precede it by some number of months, if not several years. I don't know. But I do know one thing:

Never gonna be the same: This is yet another reason why it's so hard to get a clear, accurate sense of exactly what will happen and exactly how it will happen prior to and on into the Tribulation: The Rapture is going to turn the world upside down and shake it, and it will alter the world's geopolitical calculus in ways we cannot currently envision.

It will take some time for the world to reach any semblance of normalcy in the wake of the removal of the Church, and the new normal will see the world embarking on a drive for the elusive New Age it craves and is satanically deluded into believing it can attain through man's efforts.

In this "No DotC #1" scenario, at some point following the Rapture there is a push to bring peace to the Middle East and a charismatic leader (possibly European and definitely with a Jewish background—see *note below) will arise from the new political landscape that will exist in the aftermath of the Rapture, and will confirm the treaty of Daniel 9:27 with Israel. That treaty will include the items we have already discussed—and note that it's possible one or more of those items may be added to the treaty after it's original drafting. That may be part of the "strengthening" of the covenant. But at the end of the day, Israel will have a false peace, a new temple, a divided land, and will be delirious over the idea the Messiah has arrived.

But that false peace is broken at some point during the first half of the Tribulation when the Gog-Magog coalition attacks, and God supernaturally intervenes to save Israel. It is then that Israel and the nations of the world know that God is the LORD and He fights for His people.

One potential plus for this scenario is that the peace established by the treaty of Daniel 9:27 explains the peace that exists prior to Gog-Magog:

This scenario, however, is not without problems in my opinion. The Jews are anticipating Gog-Magog to precede the arrival of the Messiah, not follow it. And it seems odd to have the event that brings Israel's hearts back to God coming well after they have received the man they believe is the Messiah God has sent them to restore Israel to peace and prominence. It just seems a bit jumbled.

3. No DotC #2.

So...how about this: This scenario begins in a similar manner as the previous one, with Trump's deal being rejected, the Palestinians going to the UN, a deal being hammered out, and the Rapture occurring at some point during all of this and throwing the world into chaos. After some degree of post-Rapture normalcy has a chance to set in, a tenuous, temporary peace exists in the Middle East (not the peace brought about by the treaty of Daniel 9:27, but a temporary peace nonetheless).

But not for long.

The Gog-Magog coalition seizes the opportunity to attack Israel (possibly taking advantage of the chaotic conditions following the Rapture—which will include the crippling of the U.S.), and is destroyed as God supernaturally intervenes for His people. As per the prophet Ezekiel, this event turns the hearts of Israel back to their God.

However, the leader mentioned above (possibly European and definitely with a Jewish background—see *note below) will somehow be viewed as being instrumental in Israel's success against Gog-Magog. Yes, they'll know it was God who did it, but Satan will arrange for his man to somehow be in position to receive some degree of credit for it in some way. This is in line with Satan's style, which is to take everything God does and twist it into something he can use for his own purposes.

In the aftermath of Gog-Magog, that leader, who will now be seen as a defender and protector of Israel, will confirm and implement the treaty that was hammered out earlier. It will let them build their temple, give the Palestinians their state, and in return for dividing their land it will guarantee Israel peace and security (a major issue after an attack like Gog-Magog).

And BOOM...the Jews will be ready to Mashiach all over themselves.

One plus about this scenario is that it wraps up all the major messianic qualifications into one neat, dramatic package, which I believe fits Satan's MO quite nicely. Satan may be evil, but he has a brilliant sense of showmanship—and for Satan and his man, this is End-Times Theater. This is the stage production he's been planning for thousands of years. The stage is being set, the actors are taking their positions, and the curtain is about to come up.

It's show time, baby.

Many students of the Bible are convinced it's the peace that results from the treaty of Daniel 9:27 that characterizes Israel prior to Gog-Magog (as per scenario #2), and I have also held that opinion in the past. But that's an assumption, and it's not hard for me to imagine that assumption being wrong and things unfolding along the lines of this third scenario. It makes more sense in terms of Jewish end-time expectations, and doesn't blatantly violate any pertinent Scripture I can think of.

Of course, we need to remember that there are multitudes of ways this scenario could play out, most shaped by future events we can't see coming. And we must also remember that even the most insightful, most scripturally grounded speculation (let alone my ramblings) is just that: speculation.

Eyes front!

Confession time: The real point of this two-part article was not to seriously entertain the possibility that the Jerusalem Covenant is the treaty of Daniel 9:27. I realized early on that it's not, and I suspect many of you out there suspected as much. My real purpose was to focus a spotlight on the treaty of Daniel 9:27 and the eschatological expectations of the Jews.

One reason I felt led to do so is because what the Jews are anticipating in regard to end-time events actually matters (even if much of it is replete with error), but almost no one ever talks about it or takes it into consideration. As born-again believers, we tend to ignore what the Jews believe and how they interpret Scripture, because...well, let's be honest:

Reading the Old Testament and missing
the fact that it undeniably points to Jesus
as the Messiah is like readingWar and Peace
and missing the fact that it's about Russia.

Can you blame us? But even though we know full well that Jewish beliefs are steeped in the opinions of men, we must never forget that it is God who has hardened their hearts to the truth of the gospel, and He did it for His own sovereign purposes of (a) grafting the Church into their New Covenant, and (b) causing the Jews to place themselves in a position where He could ultimately bless them by fulfilling His inviolable promises to them.

And their misinterpretations of His Word are a key part of their placing themselves in position for that blessing.

As we've seen, a major part of this involves the Jews receiving the Antichrist as their Mashiach. Surprised? You shouldn't be. Jesus Himself told the Jews that one day they would receive an impostor:

And ironically it's been "Eyes front!" for the Jews for the last two thousand years as they anxiously await that impostor—and it appears they won't have to wait much longer.

So may it be "Eyes front!" for us as well, as we anxiously await the real Messiah to take us to be with Him before that impostor comes on stage and attempts to steal the spotlight.

Greg Lauer — JUL '19

Top of the page

If you like this article, share it with someone!

 JUL '19 

Site Search

Powered by:
JavaScript Kit