Confirming the Covenant

Thanks brother. I’m including in my reply both your question on the covenant ((01396. gabar,
a primitive root; to be strong; by implication, to prevail, act insolently:–exceed, confirm, be great, be mighty, prevail, put to more (strength), strengthen, be stronger, be valiant.

This is the word used in Da 9:27 for confirming the covenant with many. I realize this shakes up the nice comfortable nest, but what if the ‘confirming’ is of a covenant that has already been made. It’s making strong some other covenant that has already (prior to the confirming) been made; making it stronger so that it will prevail is the sense of the word. As in the waters that prevailed in the flood. The waters were already there but increased.

That’s the pure scriptural sense of the word. It may not have to be a separate covenant to be negotiated. Many things are done in private. Jesus Himself only showed His deepest secrets to those He chose. It could easily be that way with this covenant. It really doesn’t even make sense that the dirty laundry would be hung out on the line from the beginning of the covenant. I know some may not like this idea. That’s exactly why I’m asking the question. I want us to be shaken from our overly comfortable friendship with the notion that we’ve got it all figured out. And the more we rehearse the same ideas, the deeper the rut gets and the more dangerous the possibility of missing something that is there because it doesn’t fit our presumptions.

Thoughts?)) and your recent statement about the 1290 to 1335 of Daniel ((I’ve got a different scenario for the events from 1290 to 1335 that is in accord with the Hebrew calendar. It is much more orderly in my opinion.

Elul 1 til Tishri 10 40 days Moses on Sinai to get the second set of tablets.

If we look at the historical pattern and the Hebrew calendar. we will find that the month of Elul (precedes Tishrei) is traditionally a month of repentance prior to the beginning of Tishrei which inaugurates the High Holy days. Yom Teruah, the Feast of Trumpets is the scriptural head of the year and occurs on Tishrei 1. It is accompanied by the blowing of the trumpets announcing the new year and precedes Yom Kippur by 10 days. The Feast of Ingathering (Tabernacles) takes place 5 days after Yom Kippur. The 40 days between Elul 1 and Tishrei 10 is thought to be the time that Moses went to Sinai to get the second set of tablets.

That 40 days plus 5 until the Messiah tabernacles here again makes 45 days. The difference between the 1290 and 1260 is one month in a year that has an Adar II (spring month added) as a clue about which years He was prophesying about so there could not be any mistake. A simple search will show which years have an Adar II.
Please consider these things carefully. Please.)). That way, a few of the friends who have expressed interest can follow along with what you and Phil have been discussing on these issues.

I’ve always thought that perhaps the additional 45 days might be the time that Israel goes apart to mourn until coming back together for either one of the great feasts (most likely tabernacles) or the formal cleansing of the sanctuary and re-dedication of the new temple. A friend from Israel who is now in Taiwan showed me the years that have the extra spring month (Adar II), and reckoning from that, a few select years appear as candidates for the start of a seven year period that will end in a year that has this double month at its end.

Here’s what I think about the times and the seasons. I don’t think that any amount of calculation is going to nail down any more precisely the exact time of the Lord’s return. He Himself said, of that day and hour no one knows. We know that He comes sometime shortly after the ascension of the two witnesses at the seventh angel. His coming is somewhere between the 1260 and the 1290, but probably closer to the 1260 than to the 1290, because 1290 is more nearly 43 months, since we know that the beast is cut off by His return at the end of 42 months (Rev 13:5).

Now that’s getting pretty close, but by no means a precise day or hour. Whereas much of the speculation, even though much may be accurate and glorify the Lord in His precision concerning time, still, it gets a little close, in my view, to trying to nail down the exact day, which is not the point. If not before, certainly after His return, it will be possible to look back and see how amazingly precise and how perfectly aligned the events surrounding His return were with certain of the feasts and set times. I have no doubt.

But until then, it is enough for us to know the basics for the sake of God’s purpose in our knowing, which is another discussion (see my article, “Where is God Taking the Church).

For example. Even if I was convinced that the covenant that will be confirmed is an earlier, already existing covenant (which I do by the way), and even if I thought it had been or will be confirmed in secret (which I do not), still, there will be nothing too secret about the restoration of a sacrifice that will be at the center of a new project to build the temple.

Even if the identity of the Antichrist is not at first identifiable, since he may be only one of “MANY” other heads of state that confirm this covenant (which is exactly what I expect), still, he will be soon enough manifest by what he proceeds to do “after the league made with him” (Dan 11:23) in fulfillment of Dan 11:23-31. And should even this escape our notice, still, it cannot be missed by those who believe the scriptures when this lately resurrected man goes to the temple, stops the restored sacrifice, and places the abomination of desolation to begin the tribulation. If it wasn’t clear before (and it certainly should have been), it will be clear from that point on that we are living in the last 3 1/2 years.

That at least much of this will public seems undeniably clear. Paul did not have to elaborate to his Thessalonians when he told them of the man of sin in the temple of God. It was standing at that time in Jerusalem and needed no introductions. No, this will not be done in a corner. Dan 12:10 says that none of the wicked will understand, but the wise will understand. They will be seeing the same events that we see, but without understanding. It is not the events that is being hidden from the wicked, but their meaning.

Even if the seven years should happen to slip up on us (which I think unlikely), we will have opportunity to know soon enough that we are in the period by the initiatives to restore the sacrifice and build the temple. If by nothing else, that will be enough to let us know that the seven years have begun (particularly in view of what I think a correct interpretation the 2300 day prophecy of Dan 8:13, which shows the sacrifice as starting 2300 days before the end).

Finally, one more point: Scholars are divided over the proper translation of Dan 9:27 because there is a translation decision that must be made, because technically, the Hebrew can go just as legitimately either way. If one believes the Antichrist (“coming prince”) of Dan 9:26 is the proper antecedent, the verse is typically translated, “and he shall make a firm covenant.” If the interpreter is more inclined to see the sacrifice as rendered obsolete by Christ, then the antecedent for the one confirming the covenant is seen as Messiah, the prince” of Dan 9:25. In that case, the preferred translation tends to be, “and he shall make firm, or cause to prevail THE covenant with many.”

Since Dan 11:23 speaks of a league or covenant made with him (the vile person of Dan 11:21), there is support for the first translation (make a firm covenant). On the other hand, there is also support for the view that this evil prince / king (Dan 8:23; 11:36) confirms a covenant that is “holy”.

Notice that the one who makes or confirms this covenant is the same one who hates it, and has secret intelligence with others who share his hatred of “the holy covenant” (Dan 11:28, 30, 32). So I ask the question: What if this evil man is confirming with others the holy covenant? How can this be? How can this act of confirming (the / a) covenant be at once a “covenant with death and hell” (Isa 28:15, 18), since it is a “league made with him.” and at the same time it is a recognition, acknowledgement, or enforcement of a holy covenant that has been in existence since God’s election of Israel.

The larger context of Daniel is both a heavenly and earthly war against the covenant. The book is covenantal through and through. It is about exile and return. It is about delay and determinism. What is the great question of our times? It is, does Israel have divine right to the Land? I do not say that the leaders that will unite to confirm this covenant which God sees as holy will see it as divine, but I do very well conceive of them “confirming” (in the way of acknowledgement and / or enforcement) Israel’s long sought and long denied “right to exist” as an independent state.

In that sense, the covenant that is confirmed is an already existing covenant, “the holy covenant” that once and forever promised the Land to the Jews, but it becomes a covenant with death when it is made to depend on Israel’s trust in the nations, particularly the Antichrist, for its security and protection (see my article on the ships of Chittim). God has said that such covenants would be made a snare, particularly when it would have to do with dividing up a land that is not Israel’s to negotiate (Lev 25:35; Ex 34:12; Dan 11:39; Joel 3:2).

When this covenant will be confirmed, Israel will begin to enjoy an unprecedented, albeit short lived time of tranquility (Eze 38:8, 11, 14; 39:26; Dan 11:23; 1Thes 5:3), and this will be the peace lie by which the Antichrist will “destroy many” (Dan 8:25). Not long after the covenant is confirmed, the world will see, but not understand, Jewish initiatives towards restoring the sacrifice and temple worship.

As things now stand, we’re a long way from the kind of radical changes in the politics of the region that would give the orthodox Jews such access to the temple mount, and authority to sacrifice and to build their temple. That is why so many find it hard to abide a literal interpretation. But this is also one of the major reasons we who look for such radical changes in the region are inclined to look for a war of world changing proportions.

So yes, there is obviously a divinely intended puzzle here. It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, but the honor of kings is to search it out. But there is sufficient evidence for the least of God’s sheep to get what is of crucial importance. While some of this seems abstract and difficult, there is plenty here that is plain and knowable, and will become increasingly so as the time draws nearer. At the moment, it is enough that we put these things on the table, and ask the mercy of the Spirit to clarify or reveal what He will.

Your brother, Reggie

This entry was posted in Anti-Christ, Bible Study, Daniel. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Confirming the Covenant

Comments are closed.