One evening, while I was studying the Word, the Lord gave me the knowledge to understand some of the revelations in Daniel chapter 11. Excited, yet amazed, I ran to my husband, who was sitting in the front room, and said, “I know who the Antichrist is! God has revealed him to me!” Bewildered, my husband just watched and listened as I began to explain some of the following verses taken from this chapter.
Daniel 11:19, Then he shall turn his face toward the fort of his own land: but he shall stumble and fall, and not be found [exist, present (1)].
The word “he” in this verse is Yitzhak Rabin, the former Israeli Prime Minister who took office on July 13, 1992. Instead of turning his face toward the enemy, Rabin turned it toward the fort (meaning the defense (2)) of his own land. In his article, “A Biblical Bird Disappears from the Israeli Landscape,” Gary Stearman writes that “Prior to his assassination, Rabin had been branded a moser - a Hebrew term for one who collaborates with the enemy” (3). And he did just that. When he gave Israel’s land to the enemy, he gave away their defense, for the land acts as a natural fort. This God-given land separates them from their enemy. The further they are away from the opponent, the more military warning time they have in case of an attack. Notwithstanding, Yitzhak Rabin, instead of facing the adversary, “turned his face” in uniting with them, leaving him only to look back upon his people and their land.
Rabin had forgotten this sacred land did not belong to him. Setting God aside, he used his power of authority and signed an agreement with PLO leader Yasser Arafat. This agreement totally defied the Word of God. Outraged by his action, Yigal Amir, a religious nationalist and law student, murdered Rabin with two bullet wounds to the back. However terrible this may seem, “[s]ome evangelical Christians saw the event as part of God’s unfolding plan for Israel’s destiny” (4). God raises up leaders and brings them down. In the fulfillment of prophecy, King David killed King Saul’s assassin even though, paradoxically, Saul’s death paved the way for David to usurp authority over Israel. Similarly, Yitzhak Rabin, who started to build his own kingdom, pushed the Lord to the side and touched what wasn’t his, the land. Now he is no longer in existence. In fulfillment of prophecy, Rabin’s death, on November 4, 1995, paved the way for the ascension of the next Israeli leader, Shimon Peres.
Daniel 11:20, Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes . . . .
1) Taxes - to drive, tax, tyrannize (5).
A) Drive - coerce, compel, instigate, push (6).
B) Tax - a heavy demand (7).
C) Tyrannize - to exercise arbitrary (willful,
unwise, or irrational choices (8)) power over (9).
After Rabin’s assassination, Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres took his office. As a “raiser of taxes,” Peres was the driving force behind the peace treaty signing. He was the one who coerced Yitzhak Rabin into taking a step toward peace. Shimon Peres didn’t just broker the agreement, but he birthed it. That is why he was commonly called the “architect of the covenant.”
Ido Dissentshik, an Israeli political commentator, sums it up in his article titled, “Why Yitzhak Rabin Changed His Mind:”
Rabin is a conservative person. He hates to change policies and attitudes. He is a systematic thinker but within carefully set frames. He is not a visionary like his foreign minister, Shimon Peres. Even his pragmatism is limited by a profound sense of suspicion. In particular he is suspicious of Peres, whom he once termed “a tireless saboteur.” So the miracle in the breakthrough [why he changed his mind in meeting with Arafat] is even greater, because it was untrustworthy Peres the fantasizer who not only led it but also “sold” it to Rabin as the only possible solution . . . . Rabin had reluctantly made Peres foreign minister, but with reduced status and authority to the point that he was not invited to sit in on meetings with visitors such as Secretary of State Warren Christopher. In March Peres had appeared ready to resign and fight. But his people reported to him that their secret negotiations (unknown to Rabin at the time) with the PLO were serious enough to warrant his patience. He was skeptical, but he allowed his deputy, Yossi Beilin, to go on. Only late in May or early June did he go to Rabin with a first draft of a Declaration of Principles. To his surprise, he was not fired but got a green light. (10)
Peres, a “raiser of taxes,” the driving force behind giving away Israeli land for peace, also fits the definition of a tyrant. Displaying an unwise, irrational choice, Shimon Peres, “[a]gainst associates’ advice, . . . insisted on putting forth his vision of a new Middle East of peace and cooperation between Israel and its Arab neighbors. ‘He put a high priority on integration with the Arab world, and it appeared to be a higher priority than security. He kept talking about the new Middle East . . . . Most Israelis don’t buy this’ [Alpher stated]” (11). Peres’ actions were seen as a threat to Israeli security, especially after a series of suicide bombings from militant Islamic groups. The Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, commonly known as Bibi, then amplified the anxiety of the public by basing his campaign for the prime ministership on fear tactics, saying that Peres was unjust and reckless in his decision making policies. Netanyahu claimed he would bring Israel real peace and real security. Meir Shitrit, a relative dove commented, “‘We must project ourselves as able to make a better peace than them - one that doesn’t just surrender everything’” (12).
Yitzhak Rabin gave away the Israeli land, a biblical land, and then he paid for it with his life. Shimon Peres, as a “raiser of taxes,” was the driver and tyrant behind it all. As the new Prime Minister, Shimon Peres picked up where Rabin left off. However, this time it would be in the glory of the kingdom.
Daniel 11:20 continues, Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes in the glory of the kingdom . . . .
Peres took office “in the glory of the kingdom” because at the time when he came in, Israel was in a state of national repentance. When Rabin was in office, the kingdom was divided on whether to give away land for peace. There was much turmoil in the region as the Islamic terrorists were willing to become martyrs to stop the peace process. As the death toll rose, the Jewish people feared for their lives and the lives of others.
Because of the numerous terrorist attacks, Israeli President Ezer Weizman called on Rabin to rethink the way they were headed. He then added they should stop the peace process. In January of 1995, Wilbur G. Landrey, foreign correspondent for the St. Petersburg Times, noted, “The newspaper Maariv reported that 50 percent of Israelis agree, and only 37 percent favored continuing - along with Rabin, whose own Cabinet is divided both on the process and the settlements” (13). Rabin’s opponent, Netanyahu, added fuel to the fire with his constant outbursts against Rabin’s decision to trade land for peace. In a rage, he shouted to a crowd, “‘This government is opening the way to an Islamic Palestinian state in the suburbs of Jerusalem and Tel Aviv! . . . Never before in the history of Israel has any government conceded so much, so quickly - for nothing! Rabin has no right to endanger the state, to bury the Jewish dream of generations!’” (14). While Rabin was resuming peace talks in Washington, the Israelis became more and more divided. Thousands of people attended a protest, which was lead by Benjamin Netanyahu: “They wave[d] giant Israeli flags and desperate signs: ‘Today the Golan, Tomorrow Jerusalem . . . Rabin Is Leading Us To Civil War . . . STOP THE SURRENDER’” (15).
Israel was in a time of turmoil as the country was undoubtedly divided over Rabin’s decision to give away the land. Then suddenly, “Israeli opinion was turned upside down by the murder of Yitzhak Rabin” (16). A wave of anger and fear swept over the Jewish people. The nation was stunned as thoughts of “a Jew killing a Jew,” haunted the minds and souls of many. “Thousands of Jews are asking: Who are we? Do we love each other or hate each other?” reported Peter Wallsten in the November 20, 1995, St. Petersburg Times (17). Remorse filled the land bringing many to a state of repentance. “‘I’m sorry, I ask for forgiveness. If I spoke ill. If I uttered bad words. They were just words spoken in anger, in concern for the people of Israel,’” commented Eliezer Botavia, a resident of Kiryat Arba, a suburb of Hebron (18). Thousands filled the streets as mourning went on throughout the land. When all the graffiti came down overnight in Israel, it was proclaimed a “miracle.”
The message now would be unity. The Times Wires suggested, “In the wake of the slaying by an opponent of Rabin’s peace plan, Israeli political leaders across the board spoke only of how to mend the torn country” (19). Undoubtedly, Peres came in “in the glory of the kingdom.” *He entered the kingdom at a time of a revolutionary mind set. Law makers spanning the political spectrum were now coming together to demonstrate that ballots and not bullets would establish the Israeli government. Parties representing 111 out of 120 Knesset members recommended Peres as Rabin’s successor.
Daniel 11:20 continued, Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes in the glory of the kingdom: but within few days he shall be destroyed, neither in anger, nor in battle.
Prime Minister Shimon Peres was only in office a few days, approximately 6 months. He succeeded Rabin in November 1995, and remained there until the new elections were held in May 1996. Peres was destroyed, and it wasn’t from anger nor battle. He simply was voted out! His destruction was foretold in Daniel 5:25-28, “(v. 25) . . . MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN . . . (v. 26) MENE; God hath numbered thy kingdom, and finished it. (v. 27) TEKEL; Thou art weighed in the balances, and art found wanting. (v. 28) PERES; Thy kingdom is divided, and given to the Medes and Persians [the enemy].” Peres’ appointed days are over. God has finished his kingdom. He is found only wanting, desiring a new Middle East, which by his hand shall never prosper. Peres divided the kingdom and gave it to the enemy. All in all, God allowed him to do so as part of His unfolding plan.
*It is common knowledge, among prophecy teachers, that this next verse is referring to the Antichrist. The Revell Bible Dictionary further credits this idea commenting, “The later chapters of Daniel are prophetic . . . . [C]hs. 11, 12 contain obscure prophecies of events associated with history’s end” (20).
Daniel 11:21, And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom . . . .
To the surprise of everyone, Benjamin Netanyahu was elected to office on May 29, 1996. Charles W. Holmes, of Cox News Service noted, “Some critics view[ed] Netanyahu’s election as a step back that could reignite the Palestinian ‘intifada,’ the violent uprising that faded after Israel and the PLO signed their landmark accord in 1993” (21). Netanyahu has been scrutinized as a hard-liner and a threat to the Middle East peace process. His victory is certainly not what the Clinton administration wanted since they had been nurturing the peace process from 1993. In fact, Lee Michael Katz wrote in USA Today, “Clinton all but endorsed Peres, and privately, Netanyahu aides say they were rebuffed in attempts to visit Clinton during one of Netanyahu’s regular U.S. trips” (22). Along with Clinton, “Arab leaders [also] voted for Labor Prime Minister Shimon Peres. While realizing the possibility that their Israeli negotiating partner might lose, they apparently almost discounted it” (23). Feeling threatened by the Israeli election of conservative Benjamin Netanyahu, 21 Arab leaders gathered together for their first summit in six years. They did this in an attempt to urge Israel to prove its commitment to the peace process.
No one wanted to give Benjamin Netanyahu “the honour of the kingdom.” Across the board, his election was a major upset to political world leaders. Benjamin Netanyahu defied everything the U.N. Resolution 242 called for. The Oslo Peace Accords of 1993 were drafted according to the U.N. Resolution 242 that requires Israel to return to her pre-1967 boundaries. This is where they developed the land for peace idea. Netanyahu claimed he would not trade land for peace. He said no to the releasing of the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem, and no to the control of the West Bank. The policy positions held by Benjamin Netanyahu were in direct opposition to the demands of other political world leaders. His recent decision to build 6,500 new homes in East Jerusalem has proven to be a prime example. Worldwide denunciation has come against Israel in making such a move: “Japanese Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto called it a ‘negative element’ to the Middle East peace process . . . . Russia said it was ‘ill-considered and untimely’ . . . . The European Union, Britain and France condemned the decision when it was announced . . . . Iran’s state radio called for international action, blasting the decision as an effort to ‘Zionize’ Jerusalem” (24).
Daniel 11:21 continued, And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honor of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries.
Benjamin Netanyahu is that vile person. His main concern is rising to the top, and he doesn’t care how he gets there. An article titled, “Brash ‘Bibi’ Honed Political Skills Along American Lines,” pointed out that “Netanyahu’s rapid ascent from foreign diplomat to party chief has drawn sneers from critics who view him as more dedicated to his own success than to a Likud platform or right-wing ideology” (25). For example, when running against Shimon Peres, “ . . . Mr. Netanyahu has tried to improve his position by an electoral alliance with Tsomet, a small hardline party controlled by a former army chief of staff, Rafael Eitan. Mr. Eitan withdrew from the race for the prime ministership . . . in return for a wedge of safe seats on the joint ticket” (26). Bibi’s decision, to work with Mr. Eitan, a vowed secularist, sparked tension within his own party. Many times in Israel it is the religious vote which will win the election. Neither party, Likud nor Labor, could understand Netanyahu’s reason for such a decision. The Economist reported “A joke heard in Knesset corridors suggests that if Mr. Netanyahu were to show as much flexibility in talks with the Palestinians as he did in haggling with Tsomet, Likud goals would be better served by leaving the talks in the hands of Mr. Peres” (27).
Even so, for a man who has never held a cabinet post, it was Bibi’s use of illusionary words, containing peace and flatteries, which propelled him into office. Standing by more experienced contenders, Bibi appeared on a televised debate and proudly asked whom better than he could lead the Likud Party back into parliament. With flattering words Netanyahu claims,
“I am here . . . . I am the only one who can replace it . . . I am the only one who can return Likud to government.” Such arrogance drew snorts of contempt from his competitors, including a sniff from one that he was a “Napoleon” . . . “Bibi is unlike past Israeli politicians who stood for something,” said a disapproving Labor government official. “But I have always said that we should not underestimate him” (28).
Known as a slick master of sound bites who doesn’t always believe what he speaks, Netanyahu has told the Israeli people what they have wanted to hear. He has promised the Israelis peace with security without offering any further concessions to the Arabs. His campaign slogan read, “Netanyahu - we will bring peace and security.”
Even The New Republic commented on his tactics:
His followers readily concede he is aloof, ruthless . . . been caught cheating on his third wife. Still, they revere him: he is their hope for rallying the demoralized right for its final struggle over the territories . . . . Netanyahu tells Israelis they can have it all: security within and without. He promises to restore the élan of the Zionist past, when doing the impossible was considered routine . . . . For Israelis, the name “Netanyahu” symbolizes Zionism’s defiance of the odds. (29)
In the delivery of his first post victory speech on Prime Time TV, Netanyahu stated, “Tonight I extend the hand of peace to all Arab leaders and to our Palestinian neighbors . . . . We plan to advance the process of dialogue with all our neighbors in order to achieve stable peace, real peace, peace with security’ . . . . A jubilant crowd chanted ‘BIBI, KING OF ISRAEL’” (30).
Daniel 11:22, And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken . . . .
“And with the arms of a flood,” what does a flood do? It comes in quickly and powerfully, pushing everything that’s in its way out of its way. This is exactly what happened to the Israeli government. It was as if a flood came in and over night turned the Israeli government upside down. The election, to the world, was supposed to be a no-brainer. Everyone expected Shimon Peres to resume his position and for things to carry on as planned. He and his Labor Party were ahead of the Likud Party by 12-20 points. Knowing this, Shimon Peres decided to push up the elections from late October to May 28th. What a fatal mistake, for in February and March, a series of suicide bombings from militant Islamic groups helped alter the Jewish vote. Overnight, Israel’s parliament was “overflown, [wash away (31)] from before him.” Shockingly to everyone, Benjamin Netanyahu and his new government would now take office. The Liberal Labor would no longer be in control; under this pretense, both the Clinton Administration and the Arabs felt a little uneasy. “‘We call on the new government to implement the principle of the exchange of land for peace,’ said a statement of the PLO Executive Committee” (32).
The new election law made this election quite different from the previous ones. When it went into effect, the people were enabled to have a split ballot. In the past, voters could only vote for Parliament, but now they would be entitled to vote for both Prime Minister and Parliament. “One of the surprising consequences of the new election law was the strong showing of small parties at the expense of the two major parties,” reported the Tampa Tribune (33). Wilbur Landrey also reported that
Labor and Likud together . . . lost 20 seats between them, 11 for Labor, now with only 33, and nine for Likud. Its 31 Knesset members will also henceforth include the freeloaders from special-interest groups Netanyahu wooed into Likud with promises of seats. The demanding religious bloc of parties have won big in winning 25 seats. So, in winning seven, has Natan Sharansky’s Yisrael B’Aliya of immigrants from the former Soviet Union. A Third Way Party whose main plank is refusal to give up the Golan won four. (34)
Daniel 11:22 continued, And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covenant.
Along with the defeat of the government, the prince of the covenant was also broken. Israel’s Prime Minister Shimon Peres, known as the architect of the peace process was also destroyed! The Jewish community wanted a change, and their voices were heard. The liberal Labor, having the majority in parliament, was pushed out from their position. Their leader Shimon Peres, the prince of the covenant, was pushed out along with them. A Times Wires article noted, “It is unclear whether Netanyahu’s apparent victory means that most Israelis reject the policy of conceding land, or if they believe Peres moved too quickly, without sufficient guarantees for security” (35). In addition, on May 31, 1996, The Tampa Tribune reported, The “[p]reliminary breakdowns of the vote indicated Netanyahu led by 10 percentage points among Jewish voters and took 95 percent of the ultra-Orthodox religious vote. For his part, Peres received 95 percent of the votes of Israeli Arabs” (36).
The same Tribune article also explained that
For Peres, 72, a defeat in the election would mark a major personal blow. In 50 years at the pinnacle of Israeli politics, his innumerable achievements were marred by the fact that he led his party in three previous elections, and failed to win even once. Even before the final count was in, younger Labor ministers were maneuvering to succeed Peres. (37)
And Wilbur Landrey suggested, “Finally, barring that biblical miracle, Netanyahu is the big winner and Peres the big loser. Peres . . . seems to have stayed too long. A journalist who admires and has been close to him for years nevertheless said Thursday, expressing the brutal realism of Israeli politics: ‘If he doesn’t go voluntarily, they will throw him out’” (38).
Daniel 11:23, And after the league [to join (together) (39)] made with him he shall work deceitfully . . . .
Why does the Word say, “after” the league “made with him” he shall work deceitfully? It’s because the law gives Bibi 45 days to present his coalition to parliament. If he fails to form his cabinet within the allotted time, new elections for prime minister could be held. If he presents his coalition and it doesn’t receive a majority vote in parliament, then new elections for both parliament and prime minister would occur. Therefore, Netanyahu, is not secure in his position until after the approval of his chosen cabinet. On June 18, 1996, the new 120-member Knesset endorsed Netanyahu’s cabinet and swore him into office.
Daniel 11:23 continued, And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully . . . .
Once, the “league” was made by him, Bibi began to work deceitfully. The people who voted for him did so on the pretense that things would change. Things were now going to take a different path! After all, he did make many “heart felt” promises to the Israelis, and surely he would keep most of them. Time tells all though, and actions speak louder than words. Bibi has already started to backslide on most of his claims; for example, “Netanyahu said during his campaign that he would not consider returning any of the Golan to Syria. [Yet, once in office], . . . Israel’s new foreign minister said he would not rule out territorial compromise on the Golan Heights in exchange for peace with Syria” (40). Netanyahu was against the Israeli-Palestinian accords, but now he has changed his view to accept Palestinian autonomy in the West Bank and Gaza. He says he will continue peace talks.
Two other particular claims shine the light on his darkness. One such claim he made was on February 5, 1996: “‘I will not meet with Yasser Arafat’” (41). On September 4, 1996, less than three months into office, Benjamin Netanyahu met with the Palestinian President. This meeting “. . . was noteworthy because it was the first time the leader of Israel’s right wing sat down with the founder of the Palestine Liberation Organization, a man it has reviled for decades as a terrorist” (42). Outraged by Netanyahu’s actions,
Amid shouts of “traitor!” and “resign!” from Likud Party activists stunned by Wednesday’s meeting and handshake with the Palestinian leader, . . . [a] vocal minority of Likud stalwarts, especially Jewish settlers and religious nationalists, considered the meeting a betrayal of their dream of holding onto the West Bank and Gaza, where the Palestinians want to turn autonomy into a state . . . . “Bibi has betrayed us!” said Amram Cohavi, a veteran Likud member . . . . In an interview with Israel TV, Netanyahu said he would fire Cabinet ministers who oppose him: “Ministers who do not sit comfortably with (the Arafat meeting) will not be in the government.” (43)
Furthermore, Bibi vowed to never withdraw troops from Hebron. This particular promise was extremely important to the Jewish people. Hebron is holy unto them. It carries major biblical significance, to name just a few: (A) Abraham first pitched his tent there and built an altar unto the Lord; (B) Abraham and his family were buried there; (C) God gave this land to Caleb as an “inheritance”; (D) David was anointed king there. On January 15, 1997, Bibi defected on his commitment to stay in Hebron and also agreed within two years to withdraw from important parts of the occupied West Bank. This was quite a shock to the Israelis mainly because this land was considered “‘Eretz Israel’, the land God promised them in biblical times . . . . Even though Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will never admit it publicly, that is effectively what he is doing - trading away major parts of Eretz Israel and with them the biblical promise” (44).
The confirming of the peace treaty caused a major ruckus when Bibi presented the objective before his bitterly divided cabinet. “After 12 hours of rancorous debate, the pact was approved - but only after Netanyahu was vilified by far-right opponents. In Hebron, a bus carried a banner that read: ‘Bibi is a traitor,’” reported the St. Petersburg Times (45). Crowds of angry people walked the streets carrying banners, which demoralized the name of Israel’s Prime Minister.
If what you’ve read has not been enough to convince you of his “deceitful acts” since taking office, then consider this: In fifty years of independence, never before has Israel ever had a Prime Minister up for indictment charges: “Benjamin Netanyahu . . . had been accused by police of committing a ‘breach of trust’, an oddity of Israeli criminal law that applies when a government official doesn’t carry out his public duties for the benefit of the nation” (46). In one of the biggest scandals ever, the Prime Minister appointed Roni Bar-On, a little-known criminal lawyer as attorney general. A wave of protest arose among the country’s legal establishment because Bar-On was viewed as unqualified for the position. Bar-On resigned in less than one day in office.
“On Jan. 22, [1997,] Israel’s Channel 1 news reported that Aryeh Deri, leader of the ultra-Orthodox Shas Party, traded his party’s support for the Hebron deal for the Bar-On appointment,” according to the article “Police Seek Netanyahu Indictment” (47). Once in office, Bar-On was supposed to keep Deri, a popular leader among “religious” Israelis, out of jail. The article also indicated that “Deri has been on trial for three years for corruption stemming from his term as interior minister” (48). Prosecutors stated, despite the prime minister’s actions being puzzling, they lacked the evidence needed to try him: “‘The decision is too close - for lack of sufficient evidence - the case against the prime minister . . . . From the evidence there is suspicion that there were other (than legitimate) considerations. [B]ut we don’t think this can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt’” (49).
Daniel 11:23 continued, And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with a small people.
After this latest scandal, the peace process has been expected to slow down: “David Bar Illan, the prime minister’s senior adviser, admitted little, if any, progress could be expected in the next two months” (50). The St. Petersburg Times reported that within Netanyahu’s own coalition, the fire raged:
The leader of the Third Way, a centrist party in the ruling coalition, said whether or not charges are filed, Netanyahu may have to resign to restore the government’s tainted image. “If it becomes clear there are serious improprieties as far as democracy and the public are concerned, we won’t be able to support the government and will call for early elections,” Yehuda Harel said. [Other members of Netanyahu’s cabinet were wavering also.] Natan Sharanksy’s Immigrants Party, which controls seven seats and has broad influence in the Russian immigrant community, called a meeting to decide whether to support the prime minister. The issue is “not only a political crisis,” legislator Marina Slobotkin said. “It’s a moral crisis.” (51)
Benjamin Netanyahu’s deceitful act surely abased him but not for long. The Bible says he shall not only come up with small people, but he shall also become strong with small people. Prior to this latest happening, it was believed that
Netanyahu’s Likud Party would form a broad-based coalition with Shimon Peres’ pro-peace Labor Party, which it defeated a year ago. The idea was that if Likud and Labor got together, they could form a government excluding the hard-line rightist and religious parties that refuse to even think [about] trading Israeli-occupied land for peace with Palestinians, especially when that land is in Jerusalem. But the corruption allegations against Netanyahu, even without a formal indictment, make a Labor-Likud coalition government almost impossible no matter how beneficial it might be to the peace process. Now Peres is calling for Netanyahu’s immediate resignation and agitating for new elections. That effort is unlikely to succeed and in any case, Peres is stepping down as Labor leader in June [Peres is finished]. (52)
At any rate, if Netanyahu did have any thoughts of uniting with the Labor Party, he will now be forced to stay with the “smaller parties” that he reached out to ten months ago. In fulfillment of Bible prophecy, “he shall come up, and shall become strong with small people.”
Daniel 11:24, He shall enter peaceably even upon the fattest places of the province . . . .
The word ‘province’ in Hebrew means region (53). “[F]at places in Hebrew literally means ‘of the oils of the land!’” according to Victor Mordecai, author of Is Fanatic Islam a Global Threat? (54). In the Middle East region, the Arabs occupy the oils of the land. Benjamin Netanyahu has definitely entered peaceably among his Arab neighbors. He has had negotiations with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, Jordan’s King Hussein and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. When meeting with Mubarak, “Netanyahu said he was ready to renew talks with Syria ‘right away’ . . .” (55). Netanyahu, in his first meeting with U.S. Secretary of State Warren Christopher stated, “‘There will be no shortage of communications channels, and we’ll broaden the communications’” (56). After his deal on Hebron, Netanyahu stated, “‘ . . . we shall move on to the principal task before us, and that is the negotiations on the final status arrangements’” (57).
Daniel 11:24 continued, He shall enter peaceably even upon the fattest places of the province; and he shall do that which his fathers have not done, nor his fathers’ fathers . . . .
What have the Jewish people dreamed about for the last 2,000 years? They have dreamed about their temple and establishing a throne of authority where the King would rule and reign from forever. In his Israeli guidelines, Benjamin Netanyahu, unlike the Prime Ministers before him, plans for “Zionist fulfillment.” His election was thought of by many Jews as an act of God, and was it ever. Benjamin Netanyahu will accomplish what his fathers’ fathers have not done. He is going to give the Jews their strongest desire. He has claimed he will establish the throne of David for them! Listen to how he addresses the Knesset on June 18, 1996:
“I was fortunate to be the first among Israeli Prime Ministers to be born [Oct. 21, 1949] after the establishment of the State of Israel. The torch has been passed unto us by the generation born with the founding of the state of Israel 1948. We want a stable and lasting peace, not a temporary one. A fleeting agreement, such a peace is based first of all on the security of Israel and its citizens. The test of peace agreements is security and on this we shall not compromise. But, above all, we will guard and strengthen Jerusalem, the eternal capital of the Jewish people, undivided under the sovereignty of the State of Israel. During the term of this Knesset, we will mark the fiftieth Independence Day of the State of Israel in the beginning of the twenty-first century. We’ve reached the days, generations of Jews have hoped for and prayed for; the Jewish dream has been realized. In us, the words of the Prophet Amos have been fulfilled. I SHALL ESTABLISH FOR THEM DAVID’S FALLEN TABERNACLE AND IT WILL WITH HIS HELP STAND FOR EVER AND EVER.” (58)
The General Superintendent of the U.P.C., Nathaniel A. Urshan commented:
. . . the Likud party with other conservative parties has gained the majority of seats in the Knesset . . . . This means that the strong Orthodox leanings has the upper hand in much of what will take place in the future politically. It also means that the Temple Mount Faithful may have backing for the projects they desire to put into action. One project is to rebuild the Temple of Solomon on Mount Moriah . . . . I doubt very much that Prime Minister Netanyahu will hold back the Temple Mount Faithful but rather give them the opportunity to fulfill the desire of this project. The Temple Mount Faithful is led militarily by a man named Gershon Salomon. He has promised to rebuild the Temple by the year 2000 on Mount Moriah . . . . If this comes to pass, look for a terrible war in Israel. And then stop and consider the possibilities of this escalating into a future Armageddon. (59)
In the Old Testament, the priest, before entering the temple area or Jerusalem’s temple, must first be purified. According to Mosaic Law, if any of them had been rendered impure by contact with a dead body they had to be cleansed. In Numbers 19, the ashes of a red heifer, of her third year, mixed with water were used to accomplish this task. It has been said Melody, the first red heifer to be miraculously born in Northern Israel since 70 A.D., could be ready to be sacrificed around the year 1999. “Avraham Poraz, a member of Parliament from the leftist Meretz Party said, ‘That cow represents the risk of a massive religious war . . .’” (60). But whether or not it is Melody or any other red heifer, the point is war is ready to be raged in Israel.
Daniel 11:27, And both these kings’ hearts shall be to do mischief, and they shall speak lies at one table; but it shall not prosper: for yet the end shall be at the time appointed.
The Lord spoke to me as I was reading here and said, “Just like Judas did to me; he is going to sell out his country.” Bibi, like Judas, is going to sit at a table and betray his own country, but the transgression will not prosper, for the end will be at the time appointed. Judas’ past is the key to the Antichrist’s future. Understand that Judas betrayed Christ times two, first at Bethany then at the table.
First of all, when Jesus was at Bethany, Mary poured some very costly ointment on Christ’s feet. Judas, murmuring, wanted to know why the ointment wasn’t sold and given to the poor: “This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief” (John 12:6). Jesus stated, in Mark 14, the woman came to anoint his body for the burying. Judas didn’t want to hear this. He wanted his earthly reward now. So, Judas gave up on the idea of an earthly kingdom restored to Israel, and he went to the chief priest to betray Christ for thirty pieces of silver, the price of sheep for the slaughter. He made a covenant to deliver Jesus to the opposition at the “opportune time.” The story of the Antichrist is a replica of Judas’ day. Benjamin Netanyahu made a deal with the enemy and sold out the birthright, the Jews inherited land of Israel; this marked the first betrayal. As Judas did with Christ, Benjamin dealt with the Israeli’s inheritance thereby setting the sheep up for the slaughter.
Later, Judas with his “heart” now being evil sat at a “table” and betrayed Christ for a second time. This time he sold out the cause, and this was the final thrust. (The “cause” will be discussed momentarily.) The Bible says when Judas left the table he went into the “night.” Judas, with this last action, chose whose side he was on. There would be no hope for him now and Matthew 27:3 confirms this stating, “he saw that he was condemned.” It was too late for Judas; his deal never prospered. In his second betrayal, Benjamin Netanyahu with his heart now being evil shall sit at a table and sell out the cause. Like Daniel 11:27 states, “. . . but it shall not prosper: for yet the end shall be at the time appointed.” (*Verse 28 confirms a deal was made in verse 27.)
Daniel 11:28, Then shall he return into his land with great riches; [thus, he made an agreement] and his heart shall be against the “holy” covenant; and he shall do exploits, and return to his own land.
Notice how the covenant is referred to as the “holy covenant” in this verse. Before, in verse 22, it was only called the covenant. Why the name change? To help explain what had transpired between verses 22 and 28, we need to understand something about the anointed one. Old Testament prophets foretold that the Messiah, “anointed one,” would appear to set the captive free and reclaim the throne of David (Isa. 61:1, Ps. 2:2-9). The throne of David was located on the most sacred site in all of Jerusalem, Mount Moriah, also known as Mount Zion. In brief, God promised Israel a “house” that shall not be moved (II Sam. 7:6-16). David wanted to build the house, but Solomon his son was appointed of the Lord to build it instead. Thus, Solomon built the temple on Mt. Moriah the threshingplace where David had also sacrificed, II Chron. 3:1. The Ark of the Covenant where the Lord was “enthroned” was moved from the city of David, Mt. Zion, to Mt. Moriah, and the staves for the first time were removed from the ark symbolizing an establishment of authority. Mt. Moriah would then become known as Mt. Zion the place where our King would rule from forever. The Revell Bible Dictionary states, “After Solomon built the Jerusalem Temple on a site north of the citadel, the name Zion was extended to incorporate the Temple Mount . . . . The name continued to be extended, becoming a metaphor for all Jerusalem as the religious capital of Israel, and later as a metaphor for Israel and all its inhabitants” (61).
David, the king of Israel, was a great warrior; the Jews expected the one who would take David’s throne, or place of authority, to be even mightier. They wanted out from under the Roman rule. The Israelis had been waiting for their earthly kingdom to be restored unto Israel. Because of Jesus Christ’s lowliness, the Jews rejected Him as the “anointed one,” who would fulfill the prophecies. Therefore, the Jews are still looking for their Messiah to reclaim the throne of David. So when Benjamin Netanyahu stands in the holy place, “Mt. Zion,” and claims to be Israel’s King, the Jews being blind to his identity will bless him as the anointed one, their Messiah.
Now recall the “covenant” in Da. 11:22 dealt only with the birthright (refer to verse 22 on pgs. 33-35). Yet in verse 28 the covenant is referred to as the “holy covenant.” You see, between verses 22 and 28 it has been said that a throne of authority shall be established in line 24 and that Netanyahu shall claim to be God. Netanyahu will not only step in as king but also as high priest to Israel. Thereby, here is something even more significant to consider. Netanyahu claiming to be the “High Priest,” the prophesied anointed one who would reunite mankind to God, will be against what Christ came to do. The devil does not want the captive to be set free and will be against the reunion.
The Antichrist with his heart against the holy covenant, against man’s reunion with God, will mimic Judas Iscariot. When Judas sat at the table with Jesus Christ, he did more than just betray our Lord and Master. Judas betrayed the “cause,” and Netanyahu will do the same. Unlike Judas, Netanyahu will not sit at the table with Jesus; yet, he will sit at the table to betray the cause. *Understand the cause is not the death, burial and resurrection, even though that is necessary to get to God, but THE CAUSE IS GOD BRINGING MAN BACK INTO HIS HOLY PRESENCE (see also I Tim. 1:15, 16).
Allow me to explain:
Adam and Eve’s transgression in the Garden of Eden caused a wide chasm, which separated man from God. Jesus Christ, or the “anointed one” is the “. . . one mediator between God and men” (I Timothy 2:5). He is the only one capable of bridging the gap. The gospel, the death, burial, and resurrection, is the solution to the problem, and it is most definitely necessary. Yet once the cause is accomplished, God reuniting Himself to man, then Sonship will cease.
I Corinthians 15:24-28 states,
(v. 24) Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father [the Son is delivering the kingdom back to the Father]; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. (v. 25) For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. (v. 26) The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. (v. 27) For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. (v. 28) And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.
Many people do not understand that this is speaking of offices and not people. *Once the kingdom is delivered up to God and death is destroyed then there will no longer be a need for a redeemer, for “the office of the Sonship (mediator, intercessor) will end and He will be known not as Son, but as the Almighty God, and God will be all in all” (62). Nevertheless, Benjamin Netanyahu will sell out the cause. He, like Judas sitting at the table, will sell out to what our Lord wants the most, which is you and I getting back to God!
Daniel 11:30, For the ships of Chittim [Cyprus (63)] shall come against him: therefore he shall be grieved, and return [retreat, lodge (64)]. . . .
The Island of Cypress is located in the Mediterranean, sixty miles off the coast of Syria. Cypress contains two types of people, the Turks and the Greeks. The island of Cypress shall come against Netanyahu and push him into keeping his previous promise of betrayal held at a table. Feeling the pressure to hand over, Bibi shall be grieved, and return (to lodge) thinking to himself.
Daniel 11:30 continued, For the ships of Chittim [Cypress] shall come against him: therefore he shall be grieved, and return, and have indignation against the holy covenant: so shall he do; he shall even return, and have intelligence with them that forsake [relinquish (65)] the holy covenant.
Being now possessed of Satan, the Antichrist will follow in the same planned course of events as Judas. What did Christ say to Judas, “THAT THOU DOEST, DO QUICKLY” (John 13:27). Judas then leaves the table to RETURN with a multitude of Jewish people, i.e., chief priests, elders and Pharisees. They having in mind to destroy the “temple of God,” or Jesus Christ, then lead Christ into the power of the Roman hands. Benjamin Netanyahu shall follow in Judas’ footsteps. Daniel 11:30 states concerning the Antichrist, “SO SHALL HE DO.” Netanyahu, against mankind’s reunion with God, will RETURN and have intelligence with them (Jewish leaders) that forsake the holy covenant. They are going to desecrate the temple of God as shown in the next verse, (see also II Th. 2:4). It’s the kiss of death! He is going to betray his country with the kiss of death!
Daniel 11:31, And arms [as with Judas, power] shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.
Notice in Da. 11:31 “arms” shall stand on Netanyahu’s part to desecrate the temple of God. The Antichrist’s power will ultimately come from the men in the region of the former Eastern Roman Empire. The men in the east will, as in Judas’ day, desecrate the temple of God. A greater description is given on pgs. 57-58.
Daniel 11:32, And such as do wickedly against the covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits.
It is important to note the covenant in this verse is no longer referred to as holy like in verses 28 and 30. The abomination of desolation has taken place. Netanyahu has sat in the temple of God showing himself to be God. The transgression has come to its fullest as the Israeli leader through deception will try to take away mankind’s hope in reuniting to our Lord. Thus, he will have betrayed the cause.
Daniel 11:32 continued, And such as do wickedly against the covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits.
Do the Jews know God? Do those that haven’t taken on his name in baptism know God? Who knows God? We do, the church. We know Jesus Christ. We have been baptized in His name and filled with His Spirit. We, who know God and have obeyed the gospel of Jesus Christ, shall be strong doing exploits. Hallelujah! II Thess. 1:7-10 attests to this:
(v. 7) And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, (v. 8) In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: (v. 9) Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; (v. 10) When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.
Brother and Dr. Larry Smith, author of Rightly Dividing the Word commented:
Notice how he [Paul] mentions the gospel he preached as being the same gospel that will judge people at the coming of the Lord. Verse 10: *Because our testimony was believed, meaning they believed what the apostles preached (66).
II Thess. 1:7-10 proves that the message the apostles preached will not change until Jesus Christ comes for His church. Galatians 1:8 states, “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” God felt so strongly about this statement that Paul reiterated it again in verse 9. Those people, whatever nationality they are who are preaching the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, shall be witnessing in that day.
Click on a link below to continue visiting our website:
| Home | Deadly Wound | Ch. 1 | Ch. 2 |
| Ch. 3 | Ch. 4 | Ch. 12 | Word to Wise |
| Tract 1 | Tract 2 | Donation | Order Book |
Endnotes:
1) Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, pg. 369, Hebrew Section pg. 70, #4672.
2) Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, pg. 364, Hebrew Section pg. 69, #4581.
3) Stearman, Gary, “A Biblical Bird Disappears From the Israeli Landscape,” Prophecy in the News, July 1996, 13.
4) Fletcher, Elaine Ruth, “Rabin death laden with religious symbols, ironies,” St. Petersburg Times, November 11, 1995.
5) Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, pg. 999, Hebrew Section pg. 76, #5065.
6) The Merriam-Webster Thesaurus, Pocket Books, a division of Simon & Schuster, Inc., New York, August 1978, 176.
7) Guralnik, David B., Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language, Warner Communications Company (published by arrangement with Simon & Schuster, Inc.), 1984, 613.
8) The Merriam-Webster Thesaurus, 35.
9) The Merriam-Webster Thesaurus, 580.
10) Dissentshik, Ido, “Why Yitzhak Rabin changed his mind,” St. Petersburg Times, September 14, 1993, Section 12A.
11) Landrey, Wilbur G., Compiled from Times Wires, “Netanyahu headed for win...Peace process is dealt a blow [-] The Likud leader ‘is deeply committed’ to continuing the peace process, a spokesman says,” St. Petersburg Times, May 31, 1996, Section A.
12) “Likud at odds,” The Economist, February 10, 1996, 44.
13) Landrey, Wilbur G., “In Mideast, more courage needed,” St. Petersburg Times, January 27, 1995, Section 2A.
14) Halevi, Yossi Klein, “Bibi Netanyahu’s new Likud...THE SAVIOR,” The New Republic, June 21, 1993, 20.
15) Halevi, Yossi Klein, “Bibi Netanyahu’s new Likud...THE SAVIOR,” The New Republic, June 21, 1993, 19.
16) “Likud at odds,” The Economist, February 10, 1996, 43.
17) Wallsten, Peter, “Rabin’s death leaves many Jews uncertain,” St. Petersburg Times, November 20, 1995, Section 2A.
18) Compiled from Times Wires, “‘A Martyr for Peace’...Israelis wonder what ties now bind,” St. Petersburg Times, November 7, 1995, Section 1A.
19) Compiled from Times Wires, “Dazed Israelis mourn Rabin and ask, ‘why?’,” St. Petersburg Times, November 6, 1995, Section 1A.
20) The Revell Bible Dictionary, 277, under “Daniel, Book of.”
21) Holmes, Charles W., “Current peace effort unlikely to survive,” The Tampa Tribune-Times, May 31, 1996, Section 12A.
22) Katz, Lee Michael, “Anxious world waits as a new leader emerges,” USA Today, June 3, 1996, Section 2A.
23) Landrey, Wilber G., “From Jordan’s king, a hopeful note,” St. Petersburg Times, June 5, 1996, Section 2A.
24) A Prophetic Publication of Mike Evans Ministries, “Jerusalem Betrayed...The Tragedy Continues In The Battle For Jerusalem.” The Jerusalem Prophecy, Volume 4, April 1997, 2.
25) Los Angeles Times, “Brash ‘Bibi’ honed political skills along American lines,” St. Petersburg Times, May 31, 1996, Section 2A.
26) Jerusalem, “Likud at odds,” The Economist, February 10, 1996, 43-44.
27) Jerusalem, “Likud at odds,” The Economist, February 10, 1996, 44.
28) Los Angeles Times, “Brash ‘Bibi’ honed political skills along American lines,” St. Petersburg Times, May 31, 1996, Section 2A.
29) Halevi, Yossi Klein, “Bibi Netanyahu’s new Likud...THE SAVIOR,” The New Republic, June 21, 1993, 20.
30) Associated Press, “Netanyahu pledges to support peace,” PALLADIUM-ITEM, June 3, 1996, Section 9A.
31) Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, pg. 765, Hebrew Section pg. 115, #7857.
32) Landrey, Wilbur G., “Israel to chart changed course,” St. Petersburg Times, June 2, 1996, Section A.
33) “Israeli military vote to decide who becomes prime minister,” The Tampa Tribune-Times, May 31, 1996.
34) Landrey, Wilbur G., “Netanyahu headed for win...Peace process is dealt a blow,” St. Petersburg Times, May 31, 1996, Section A.
35) Compiled from Times Wires, “Netanyahu headed for win,” St. Petersburg Times, May 31, 1996, Section 9A.
36) “Israeli military vote to decide who becomes prime minister,” The Tampa Tribune-Times, May 31, 1996, Section 12A.
37) “Israeli military vote to decide who becomes prime minister,” The Tampa Tribune-Times, May 31, 1996, Section 12A.
38) Landrey, Wilbur G., “Netanyahu headed for win...Peace process is dealt a blow,” St. Petersburg Times, May 31,1996, Section A.
39) Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, pg. 590, Hebrew Section pg. 36, #2266.
40) Associated Press, “Israel may deal on land,” St. Petersburg Times, June 22, 1996, Section 2A.
41) Associated Press, “Israel’s leader swallows words, meets with Arafat,” The Tampa Tribune-Times, September 5, 1996, Section 8A.