• Joseph Horta
    Posted at 11:18h, 12 January

    The context of the entire biblical landscape is the Gospel’s prophetic plan of Messiah. From Genesis to Revelation it is Christ-centric. It is Yahweh centered. Israel has a key role in that context for sure. God chose Israel as the bloodline of promise, first and foremost starting in Genesis 3:14. The Church is vital to that messianic prophetic thread. Jesus founds the Kingdom of Heaven on earth thru her. This does not displace the bloodline of promise (Abrahamic Covenant) it solidifies it on the Rock of our salvation. We go to far if we claim the Church is the true embodiment of Israel, and we also don’t go far enough when overlooking to acknowledge the Church’s role in taking the Gospel to Israel first and then the world.

    Politically we cannot lose focus of who our leader and king actually is. He is not “the man of God” that people are making our President out to be. It is painfully obvious if he is a believer he has a lot of maturing to do in that faith and he has not fully embraced, in that faith, that he is a new creation called to walk IN CHRIST Jesus’s Spirit, not his own. Fruit is the result of a heart and mind that has experienced a death and a resurrection of the Spirit. What we say coupled with what we do exposes that heart and mind. It concerns me that I see more people praising POTUS among his supporters than Christ Jesus as the answer to prayer.

    I really like how your guest answered concerning this so-called auto-blessing we think we are entitled to if we “bless” Israel. Our current POTUS reminds me of the story of King Saul. God DID give Saul to the people, but for what reasons? Before POTUS was elected had we repented and sought God in prayer for a believing President? Or did we complain about a POTUS who was far too left of center? We should really ponder these questions as the Church in the US and how that relates to the Gospel.

  • Philip B. Brown
    Posted at 11:47h, 12 January

    It’s not up to Trump or the US government to bring the gospel to Israel. However, the more the people of Israel see the United States as their only real friend, the more the people of Israel will be open to Protestant Christian missionaries. The move of our embassy to Jerusalem was strongly praised by Netanyahu. This move and the following vote in the general assembly of the UN, has gone a long way to helping the Jews in Israel as seeing us (Protestant Christians) as their one and only friend.

  • shawn brandom
    Posted at 16:19h, 12 January

    Thank you Joel and Samuel,
    I appreciate both the underground and Samuel’s teachings on his website.
    Listening to this underground I wonder what would be the reaction if the United States elected another Obama type president who rescinded the Dec. 6th announcement of president Trump? I for one am glad the current president made the declaration that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. If for example Oprah (gasp) became our next president and said nope we don’t recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. What then?

  • AndrewW
    Posted at 12:14h, 13 January

    I have a number of questions regarding Israel and the Jewish people, and I thought it would be really helpful Joel if you and maybe also Samuel could do an episode to help clarify some of these things. I’ve read When a Jew Rules the World, One King, and Future Israel by Barry Horner, among other books. I’ve even given several copies of One King to several people including my pastor. It may be that I just missed it in the text but many questions surrounding this most important of issues continue to eat away at me, and I’m having trouble approaching this topic in common discussion in the Church feeling like I have the biblical verses to back stuff up!

    I recently read Heaven by Randy Alcorn, and a thing I have noticed among many Evangelicals he exemplified on page 211. He writes,
    “If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” (Galatians 3:29) New covenant Christians, not just Israel, are heirs of the promises made to Abraham-and these promises center on posessing the land.
    The big thing of note, at least here, is that the Bible says PROMISE (singular, and correct me if I am wrong, but this meaning the third of Abraham’s promises, that is, his offspring being a light to the gentiles) and he turns it into PROMISES plural. This brings up one of my questions. Where does the Church end and Israel begin? That is to say, what is now given to the Church, and what uniquely to believing Israel? Just as an example, among other things, we being grafted into Israel, shall we inhabit the land of/have inheritance in Israel and Jerusalem during the Kingdom alongside the Jews, or will we only have “inheritance” in and live in other parts of the world?

    For us to be good stewards and go “first to the Jew,”
    Who is a Jew? Is there a specific lineage or % of genetics that needs to be there?
    Is there a distinction between Jews, Samaritans, and the lost tribes or Israelites today?
    Are Messianic Jews bound by at least parts of the Mosaic law?
    Was Ruth the Moabitess in the line of David considered a Jew, and if so, can other people, even perhaps non-Jewish Christians, still “become Jewish”?
    Are those Jews who were to be cut off from their people for various reasons in deuteronomy not to be considered Jews today?
    Do we recognize only the Orthodox as true Jews?
    Would it be wise to just give anyone the benefit of the doubt that they are (if self identified) a Jew?

    What specific Biblical support can be given for supporting the modern state of Israel (and particularly any specific borders) apart from modern history? God said that the land is theirs and their descendants’ forever, but can they not still be (though it may be prophetically awkward or unfeasible) kicked out of the land again by God for disobedience under the Mosaic covenant? How do we specifically bless Israel in this great controversy? Would it be for us to say that it is the Palestinians settling on Israeli land, and not vice versa? (As per the pre armistice line borders?) Or are we to biblically support Israeli ownership from the Nile to the Euphrates?

    Jesus in Matt 24/25 seems to be talking specifically about Israel (run from Jerusalem, etc.) during the last days. You say that when Jesus talks about “these brothers of mine” that he is talking specifically (quoting Joel 3) of the Jews/people of Israel. Are we to take the falling away spoken of in Matt 24:10 as specific to Jerusalem as well? So would this be specifically for Christian Jews or, being “blinded in part”, Orthodox Jews living in the land? (In short, what should we be looking for or keeping our minds open to as a possible fulfillment?) Is there reason to believe, as is commonly thought, that this is going to be fulfilled by many in the global church falling away, or is it possible that this common interpretation falls under the same exegetical fallacy as replacement theology? As sort of a side question, are these tied to 2 Thess 2:3 and Daniel 8:23, or are these not related?

    Thank you for any help you can give!

  • Greg Parker
    Posted at 17:58h, 14 January

    Joel & Samuel – excellent dialog, I like this format even better than an interview which I enjoy. I would love to come to the OneKing at some point, I’ll see how the Lord leads and provides. And I appreciate what you guys bring to the “table” for all believers – at the least is simulating things regarding the gospel at the end of this age. Thanks.

  • Chuck
    Posted at 01:53h, 16 January

    Joel, you and Samuel mentioned that there are legitimate faults on the part of Israel. I believe this must be true but I always have the hardest time knowing what in the world is actually a legitimate complaint against Israel because there’s so much misinformation out there. I wish that you or someone could direct me to reliable information that could give me understanding of the history of the situation and what Israel could do better. I am of course pro-israel.
    Also I just want to note anecdotally that I am really amazed at the number of people that I run into everywhere I go now that seem to be practically brainwashed into believing that there is a Zionist conspiracy in the world and that the US is a sock puppet for the Mossad. It’s really crazy and I can’t believe how many people who are even conservative and amenable to Christianity that believe this. Simply noting that on a street level in America anti-Semitism is on the rise at a geometric pace from what I’m seeing. I understand this aligns with what will take place in the end times but the pace is shocking to me.
    Come Lord Jesus.

  • Gary C
    Posted at 20:25h, 29 January

    Joel, Hoping you’re going post an episode about this current debate you did with Bill. Starting to reconsider some arguments for Rome.

  • Joel
    Posted at 11:41h, 30 January

    Been meaning to do some shows on this. I was waiting until I could pull my books out from storage to be a bit more thorough. GO ahead an share your questions. Perhaps I could answer them.


  • Gary C
    Posted at 17:43h, 30 January

    I got to thinking about this more and have read your book on this and thoroughly enjoyed it. You do a great job in presenting the options and going through each one. I can’t get to it currently as it is in storage while in the process of moving. I got to thinking about the various “city” options and find it hard to eliminate Rome. The only three that have any merit are London, Rome, and Mecca.. I read Papal Power by Henry T Hudson years back and remember some of the things that he wrote.. The front of the cover has the archbishops prostrating before the pope. I find it hard to consider that the Islamic world would destroy Mecca although I do think Iran will reduce the significant power of the Saudis and dominate the Middle East eventually much as Mark Davidson states. That’s the only argument that I have in thinking Mecca is not it.. Rome would make more sense as it stands in the way of Islamic dominance..

  • Joel
    Posted at 10:33h, 31 January


    You are correct that Rome has many reasons to look to it as a candidate worthy of consideration. As I have said however, although it is tempting to rely on our (very limited) understanding of world events to help us interpret prophecy, rather then focus on whether we can picture or imagine Mecca being destroyed by Muslims, it is much more important to consider the reasons why Rome does not meet the Scriptural criteria. What dos the Bible say? This is really all that matters. And Rome falls short on some very critical Scriptural matters. For example, Rome is not responsible for the shed blood of the saints throughout the earth. Yet the Harlot Babylon is repeatedly emphasized as the primary entity responsible for the shed blood of the saints and even “all who are slain throughout the earth.” The notion that Roman Catholicism will become a great killer of Protestants throughout the earth again is extremely unlikely. Islam is currently fulfilling this role today and will likely continue to do so. Rome pales in comparison to Islam in terms of the largest, greatest false religious system that man has ever known. There are roughly 1.2 Billion Catholics and roughly 1.8 Billion Muslims. Islam is also growing much faster. Rome is not a great economic powerhouse. I know of no kings who are controlled economically by Rome. Yet, every American President has been profoundly influenced by the corrupt Saudi Kings. Saudi Arabia is the ingle greatest lobby power in Washington and the United States. That is no small matter. Rome does not align with the specific doctrines of the Antichrist as delineated in 1 John 2:22. We can vehemently disagree with Rome regarding the Pope, or idolatrous ways of relating to Mary, or a works based soteriology, but it is undeniable that Rome has always defended the doctrines of The Divine Incarnation of God in Christ, the Doctrine of The Holy Trinity, and the historical reality of the atoning work of Christ on the cross. Islam denies all these things vehemently, within its “holy book” the Qur’an. As I said in the debate with Bill, why would Satan want a Muslim to convert to Catholicism and not the other way around? We would moving them in the wrong direction. Catholicism is closer to the truth than Islam. Again, Catholicism affirms the specific doctrines that John the Apostle identifies as the doctrines that the Antichrist denies. Islam clearly denies them, these most critical, essential doctrines of the Christian faith. Finally, Rome does not ride the beast. In other words, the case for Mecca largely rests on the case for an Islamic Antichrist, which is far more Scripturally tenable than the case for Rome. If anything there, is no basis for a Roman Antichrist. The two pillars of this view (Daniel 9:26 and Daniel 2 both fall apart when considered more critically. From the perspective pf what we can imagine, unless we believe that the entire Middle East is going to convert soon to Catholicism, again, there is simply not a case. So these are just a few very brief issues to ponder. I hope that it helps. I will try to do a more thorough show on this soon.


  • Gary C
    Posted at 21:09h, 31 January

    Thanks, Joel. I was thinking about being taken to “a place in the desert.” today.

  • Gary C
    Posted at 21:13h, 31 January

    I forgot to add this…I was re- thinking some about Rome some due to reading Leonard Ravenhill’s input in Why Revival Tarries. Thanks again.

  • Arrona Comer
    Posted at 16:28h, 12 February

    I used to think there was a possibility of Rome being the antichrist , but when I saw people being beheaded in this modern world for being Coptic Christians , or anyone who didn’t fit in their agenda, it left no doubt who the antiChrist , and one world religion was going to be. Islam fits the bill. Are we really so blind that we can’t see this.

Post A Comment