White Horse Of The Apocalypse XV

As I have stated in the previous postings (chapters), the idea that the first white horse rider  1) brings peace (first with Israel, then globally), and 2) that such peace is a "treaty" or "covenant" that Antichrist will make with the nation Israel and 3) brings a false global peace, is read into the text and not what is discernible from the text.

So too is the idea that the time period making up the events corresponding to the seven seals (including the trumpets and bowls) is a period of seven years. All this is read into the text.

These ideas are supposedly gleaned from Daniel 9: 24-27 where the final week of that prophecy is made to be the time period of the seals of the Apocalypse. Yet, this is simply all based upon faulty exegesis and from a mishandling of the text.

I have examined every argument used by those who promote these ideas. They have all been shown to be false and the facts have rather shown how the evidence from Scripture and context shows that the white horse rider is Christ.

I have also shown how the Apocalypse is clear that Antichrist is in the bottomless pit and remains there till the bottomless pit is opened, which occurs when the seventh seal has been opened and the fifth trumpet sounds. After that we see him come to popularity by killing God's two witness prophets. Therefore the rider on the white horse of Rev. 6: 2 cannot be the Antichrist.

I believe that the seventy weeks of Daniel's prophecy has been fulfilled and that this has been, until the last century or so, the traditional view. The idea of a "gap" between Daniel's 69th and 70th week is an introduction and not at all warranted from the text of the prophecy. Such a view raises several serious theological questions.

Philip Mauro wrote an excellent book defending the traditional view titled "The Seventy Weeks and the Great Tribulation." Every person who wants to hear both sides of the debate about the interpretation of the seventieth week should read Mauro's excellent work. He in my view upholds well the traditional view and overthrows the "gap theory" that says the prophecy has not yet been fulfilled, it remaining to be fulfilled during the time of the Great Tribulation. I only want to cite some from that work that should prove that there is no gap, but that the seventieth week occurred precisely right after the 69th, and that Christ died "in the midst of the (70th) week" and thereby "confirmed the covenant with many" and "caused the sacrifice and the oblation to cease."

Daniel's Seventy Weeks

"Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate."

It is not my intention to discuss this passage at length. This is not the place to do that, while considering the four horsemen of the Apocalypse. However, I wish to point out that the plain reading of the passage necessitates that there be no gap in time between the 69th and the 70th week as is taught today by so many. Philip Mauro's work is excellent. I read this work about 45 years ago. Let me cite of the things Mauro said on this point.

In Chapter VII - "ARE THE SEVENTIETH WEEKS CONSECUTIVE?" (here) Mauro wrote (highlighting mine):

Mauro wrote (highlighting mine):

"We would point out to begin with that the words "Seventy weeks are determined," etc., are words of clear and certain meaning. They are just the words which would be used by one who wished to be understood as saying that, within the measure of 70 weeks, the six things specified in Daniel 9:24 would happen. If the speaker meant something very different, even that the specified things would not occur for more than two thousand years, then manifestly the words used by him could serve only to mislead those who trusted in them.

Never since the world began has a described and "determined" measure of time, expressed in the way always used for that purpose (that is, by stating the number of time-units making up the complete measure) been treated according to the view we are now discussing. Never has a specified number of time-units, making up a described stretch of time, been taken to mean anything but continuous or consecutive time-units. The Bible-usage in this regard will be shown presently. If, therefore, the period of the "seventy weeks" be an exception to a rule so universal and so necessary, we should at least require Of those who maintain that view such clear and convincing proof as to leave no room for doubt."

I totally agree. When God says the time period is "determined," it cannot be made to refer to any "postponement" of any of the weeks, including the seventieth, for that would make the time period to be rather "indeterminate" rather then "determined." Determined means certain, fixed, destined, etc.

Mauro continued:

"We ask careful attention to the following points:

1. Where periods of time are given beforehand in the prophecies of the Bible they always mean that the time-units composing the period named are continuous. This must be so, else the prediction would serve only to deceive those who believed it. We have no other way of describing and limiting a period of time than by stating the number of time-units (hours, days, months, or years) contained therein. It is therefore a necessary law of language that the time- units be understood as being connected together without a break."

Again, this is such a refutation of the interpretation that says that there can be postponements and gaps in time periods that God has foreordained.

Mauro continued:

"As a most pertinent example of this, let us consider the period of seventy years, with which the period of seventy weeks of years is so closely connected. God had foretold to Jeremiah that "after seventy years be accomplished at Babylon, I will visit you, and perform My good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place" (Jer. 29:10). From this word Daniel "understood the number of years whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet"; and thereupon he set his face to seek the fulfilment of that promise. Have not we exactly the same reason to understand that the "seventy weeks" of years mean what they appear to mean, that Daniel had for understanding that the words "seventy years" were to be taken in accordance with their plain and obvious meaning?"

Daniel had every reason to believe that "seventy years" meant seventy years, with no gaps or postponements that would make seventy to turn into a number far greater. Likewise with the seventy sevens prophecy.

Mauro continued:

"Furthermore, in every other case in Scripture where God has foretold the measure of time within which a specified thing was to happen, the time-measure so indicated was intended to be taken in its plain and ordinary sense. We give some examples:

The 430 years sojournings of Abraham's posterity, whereof God had spoken to him (Gen. 15:13; Ex. 12:40; Gal. 3:17) were accomplished to a day (Ex. 12:41, 42).

The seven years of plenty and seven years of famine, which Joseph foretold, were fulfilled according to the plain meaning of the words (Gen. 45:6).

The forty years wanderings of the Israelites in the wilderness, which God appointed as a punishment for their unbelief (Numb. 14:34), were forty consecutive years.

But let us take a stronger illustration. Our Lord, in foretelling His own death, declared again and again that "the third day," or "in three days," or "after three days," He would rise again. Those expressions all mean one and the same thing, and would never be taken in any sense but one. Suppose, however, that some ingenious person should now come forward with the idea that Christ did not rise from the dead on the third consecutive day after His death, but that His resurrection is yet future; and suppose he should endeavor to make the words of Christ agree with this view by saying that the third day, on which He was to rise, did not follow immediately after the other two, but there was an unmentioned "parenthesis" of about two thousand years in between, would lie not have for his view gas much foundation in the words of Scripture as those who would insert a "parenthesis" of two thousand years between the 69th and 70th week of Gabriel's prophecy?"

Those who espouse the "gap theory" or "postponement" theory must answer these arguments. But, they have not because they cannot.

Mauro continued:

"We are bold, therefore, to lay it down as an absolute rule, admitting of no exceptions, that when a definite measure of time or space is specified by the number of units composing it, within which a certain event is to happen or a certain thing is to be found, the units of time or space which make up that measure are to be understood as running continuously and successively. "Seventy years" would invariably mean seventy continuous years; "seventy weeks' would mean seventy continuous weeks; "seventy miles" would mean seventy continuous miles.

If, for example, one journeying along a road were informed that, within seventy miles from a given point lie would come upon certain specified things, as a hill, a tower, a stream, a mill, and the like, there is manifestly but one sense in which he could understand the statement. Suppose in such a case that he should proceed on his way for 69 miles without meeting any of the specified things, would lie not confidently expect to find them in the one remaining mile of the 70? Suppose, however, he should traverse that mile without coming upon any of those things, would he not have a right to say he had been grossly and intentionally deceived? And would it set the matter right for the one who made the deceptive statement to say that the 70th mile he had in mind did not join on the 69th, but was two thousand miles further on? We say the deception in such case would, be intentional; for if one uses an expression which has a definite and well-settled meaning, but gives to it in his own mind a very different meaning, which he keeps to himself, he can have had no other purpose than to mislead those who might act upon his words."

This argumentation shows clearly how unsound is the gap theory, or the idea that what God has determined shall be a certain length longer or shorter or parts of it postponed and detached from the other units of the time measurement.

Mauro wrote:

"The idea which we have discussed in our last chapter, namely that Daniel 9:27 refers not to Christ but to antichrist is usually coupled with, another, also of a very radical sort, namely, that the 70th week of Gabriel's prophecy does not come where we would naturally expect to find it, that is, immediately after the 69th week, but that it is detached from the other 69, is separated from them by many centuries, is yet in the future, and will be found at the very end of this present age. The extent to which these ideas have found acceptance in our day makes it a matter of importance to inquire very carefully into the reasons that have been given in support thereof."

Indeed, it is of the greatest importance for us to test this interpretation.

Mauro wrote:

"We do not know just when or how these ideas sprang up. That is not, of course, a reason for rejecting them; for God is pleased from time to time to give new light from His Word. But it is a reason for subjecting them to a rigid scrutiny. This we have sought to do, and the result is we have come to the conclusion that, not only are they destitute of support in the Word of God, but they are directly contrary thereto. This we shall endeavor to make clear."

"The idea that the 70th week of the prophecy is detached from its companions and is relegated to the distant future, is a necessary corollary of the idea already referred to, namely, that the "he" of verse 27 (Dan. 9) refers, not to Christ, but to a future antichrist. Manifestly those two ideas stand or fall together; for if verse 27 relates to Christ, then the last week. followed immediately after the 69th; but if it relates to antichrist, or a coming Roman prince, then it is yet future."

In the next posting we will continue our look at Daniel 9: 24-27. Particularly we will look at whether "the "he" of verse 27 (Dan. 9) refers, not to Christ, but to a future antichrist."