• good4u
    Posted at 00:09h, 20 July

    Right on, Joel!

    This is a very good foundational teaching episode about why and how Turkey is prophetically relevant in the Bible. It is frequently necessary to remind your audience of Islamic paradigm building blocks as it relates to what the prophets state consistently and why prior theories are not aligned with the testimony of those prophets. The recent failed coup d’etat in Turkey just highlights how Turkish history will be very relevant in forming the real and prophetic Islamic Caliphate (i.e., Beast of Revelation) of which ISIS is a forerunner now catching the world’s attention.


  • Mike
    Posted at 01:26h, 20 July

    Can’t hear the audio

  • Joel
    Posted at 02:24h, 20 July

    Hi Mike,

    Vimeo has a small volume bar on the bottom of the window. It is simply five lines. If they are all grey, then your volume is down. All blue, they are all up. That’s probably your problem.


  • jennie Foster
    Posted at 02:45h, 20 July


    We are blessed to have you, and have learned a lot.

    We have 6 boys and l am grateful we have Godly men like you as an example. I have read all your books and ove them all.

    God bless you and your family!

  • linda keyes
    Posted at 02:56h, 20 July

    I came to know that the Antioch of the Syria of old, is today in Turkey, so that was helpfull. While wondering how to explain to someone that Rome is not the resurrected head, it occurred to me simply that God could have quite easily mentioned Rome by name as the last kingdom, as he mentioned the Grecian’s as the 3rd,but he didn’t.

    In fact the Roman empire seems much neglected,save in the gospels and being the 6th head in rev.

    In Daniel 11 we read of the Selucids, then ignore the Roman empire with a huge history leap straight into the ac’s reign.

    Even in Daniel 7, there are only four kingdoms, again we see the Grecain empire, totally skipping the Roman one, we’re taken to the fourth with ten toes.Though yes ch2 says the stregnth of the legs(iron) are in the feet.

    At this time I do think that Rome per se will be in ac’s territory,as will Egypt,by conquest.(Though I could just see a liberal pope falling for a false Jesus.)

    It seems quite surreal, seeing what’s happening and knowing that this is really it. We really need his mercy more than we know,I definitely do.

  • Jeanne T.
    Posted at 12:40h, 20 July

    Daniel 11:20-23 says this about the rise of the anti-Christ:

    “20 “Then shall arise in his place one who shall send an exactor of tribute for the glory of the kingdom. But within a few days he shall be broken, neither in anger nor in battle. 21 In his place shall arise a contemptible person to whom royal majesty has not been given. He shall come in without warning and obtain the kingdom by flatteries. 22 Armies shall be utterly swept away before him and broken, even the prince of the covenant. 23 And from the time that an alliance is made with him he shall act deceitfully, and he shall become strong with a small people. 24 Without warning he shall come into the richest parts of the province, and he shall do what neither his fathers nor his fathers’ fathers have done, scattering among them plunder, spoil, and goods. He shall devise plans against strongholds, but only for a time. 25 And he shall stir up his power and his heart against the king of the south with a great army. And the king of the south shall wage war with an exceedingly great and mighty army, but he shall not stand, for plots shall be devised against him. 26 Even those who eat his food shall break him. His army shall be swept away, and many shall fall down slain. 27 And as for the two kings, their hearts shall be bent on doing evil. They shall speak lies at the same table, but to no avail, for the end is yet to be at the time appointed. 28 And he shall return to his land with great wealth, but his heart shall be set against the holy covenant. And he shall work his will and return to his own land. ”

    IMHO, I don’t think this describes someone like Erdogan, because this prophecy specifically tells us that he comes to power with a “small people” (NASB says “a small force of people; NIV translates it as “with only a few people he will rise to power”), and also that he does not come to power in the usual way (“to whom royal majesty has not been given”), who will gain power through “flatteries”, or “deceitfully”. The NASB and NIV, and several other translations, translate this as “intrigue”. That’s an interesting choice of words, IMO, because it could mean he is installed into power with the help of foreign governments. The leaders of the world are going to be deceived by someone who is boastful (perhaps by claiming he can bring peace to the Middle East), someone who flatters and ingratiates himself to leaders and policy makers, those who have influence. (The U.S., for example, has installed foreign leaders into place, so I don’t think this is outside the pale of possibility.) We really don’t know how every single detail will play out, and we must be careful about speculations. But Daniel gives us the most detail about the person and character of the anti-Christ anywhere in Scripture.

    That said, the most important sign about the identity of the anti-Christ is the one Jesus pointed us to in Matthew 24, i.e., the entering of this Satan-incarnated man who into the temple and the setting up of the abomination of desolation in the middle of Daniel’s 70th week. The Scriptures have given us everything we need to know in order to watch and recognize the signs of Jesus’ coming. We would do well to note what Jesus added in Matthew 24:25: “Behold [Take note], I have told you beforehand [in advance].”

  • Joel
    Posted at 12:51h, 20 July

    Well said Jeanne.

  • Gary Chappelle
    Posted at 15:59h, 20 July

    Terrific insights as usual Joel.It’s awesome to know there is someone out there on top of things. I agree with you. We have to take a wait and see approach as to what is currently going on in Turkey. People need to tap the breaks a little bit and realize there is still so much that has to take place before we get to the revealing of the anti-christ. However, let’s keep a watchful eye, because things can move quickly as we well know. Thanks again for your hard work in keeping us up to date. When do you sleep? 🙂

  • Bill
    Posted at 21:13h, 20 July

    Excellent teaching on a controversial matter. Appreciate your insight and timely persuasion to stick with the Word. Also, excellent job on production!

  • Nelson Walters
    Posted at 23:18h, 20 July

    Great teaching as always Joel. I will be in prayer about the debate as I was for Allen, that the truth of God’s Word is revealed. I’m glad the debate is being filmed.

    Second, I have been questioning why Gog is from Magog (eastern Turkey), but Dan. 8 discusses Yavan. They are obviously different regions of Turkey. Yavan is the Aegean/Bosporus region with the most prominent city being Istanbul(formerly Constantinople). Yavan isn’t really a name for Turkey but rather simply a region of Turkey.

    One of the criticisms of ISIS by the Sunni clerics is that it doesn’t have Constantinople as its capital; that the true capital of the Caliphate needs to be Constantinople. The answer might be that Erdogan will want to re-establish a Sunni Caliphate in Constantinople. To me then, I am looking for the moving of the seat of government from Ankara to Istanbul as a sign of Dan. 8 is about to be fulfilled. Then the new Caliphate can truly be called Yavan.

    This would be a powerful sign IMHO that we are correctly interpreting Dan. 8 as futurist. What are your thoughts?

  • Joel
    Posted at 02:26h, 21 July

    Its hard to say. They did just build the $650 million palace in Ankara. Technically, Gog from Magog is often considered to be a reference to the historical Gugu, King of Lydia, which is the same western region of Turkey. Gomer and Togomrmah are considered eastern Turkey, extending perhaps up into Armenia etc. But Magog is most often considered either eastern or central Asia Minor. Time will tell. I’m quite sure that there are still several curveballs that no one is aware of yet. It’s been a surreal week.

  • DB
    Posted at 15:52h, 21 July

    Pure speculation: In the third year of the reign of King Belshazzar a vision appeared to me, Daniel, after that which appeared to me at the first. And I saw in the vision; and when I saw, I was in Susa(Map: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susa) the citadel, which is in the province of Elam(an ancient Pre-Iranian civilization centered in the far west and southwest of what is now modern-day Iran). And I saw in the vision, and I was at the Ulai(the Hebrew name for a river near the city of Susa) canal. I raised my eyes and saw, and behold, a ram(Iran) standing on the bank of the canal. It had two horns(Iran’s Supreme Leader & President, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Leader_of_Iran), and both horns were high, but one was higher than the other, and the higher one(President Hassan Rouhani, or could be someone else) came up last. I saw the ram(Iran) charging westward and northward and southward(Iraq, or ISIL controlled territory). No beast(ISIL supporting “Islamic” nations, future members of the “Beast” kingdom) could stand before him(Iran), and there was no one who could rescue from his power. He(Iran) did as he pleased and became great. As I was considering, behold, a male goat(Turkey) came from the west across the face of the whole earth, without touching the ground(Air Force). And the goat(Turkey) had a conspicuous horn(President Recep Tayyip Erdogan) between his eyes. He came to the ram(Iran) with the two horns(Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei & President Hassan Rouhani), which I had seen standing on the bank of the canal, and he ran at him in his powerful wrath. I saw him(Turkey) come close to the ram(IRAN), and he was enraged against him and struck the ram and broke his two horns(Ali Khamenei & Hassan Rouhani), which I had seen. And the ram(Iran) had no power to stand before him(Turkey), but he(Turkey) cast him(Iran) down to the ground and trampled on him. And there was no one who could rescue the ram(Iran) from his power. Then the goat(Turkey) became exceedingly great, but when he was strong, the great horn(Recep Tayyip Erdogan) was broken, and instead of it there came up four conspicuous horns(can’t speculate at this point) toward the four winds of heaven(the whole earth). Out of one of them came a little horn(Antichrist), which grew exceedingly great toward the south, toward the east, and toward the glorious land(Israel). It grew great, even to the host of heaven(God). And some of the host and some of the stars(Angels) it threw down to the ground and trampled on them. It became great, even as great as the Prince(Jesus) of the host. And the regular burnt offering was taken away from him(the “3rd Temple” or an OT sacrifice system should be already in place before these events, by the AC), and the place of his sanctuary was overthrown. And a host will be given over to it together with the regular burnt offering because of transgression, and it will throw truth to the ground, and it will act and prosper. Then I heard a holy one speaking, and another holy one said to the one who spoke, “For how long is the vision concerning the regular burnt offering, the transgression that makes desolate, and the giving over of the sanctuary and host to be trampled underfoot?” And he said to me, “For 2,300 evenings and mornings(Read: https://joelstrumpet.com/?p=7191). Then the sanctuary shall be restored to its rightful state.” ‭‭Daniel‬ ‭8:1-14‬ ESV

  • Tamaira
    Posted at 16:19h, 21 July

    So Daniel sees the abomination being set up in the temple. Right now there is no temple. Does the temple need to be in place before the goat and ram have their battle? There has to be an actual temple in place before the 4th kingdom emerges, before the 7 year covenant, or am I making assumptions? I guess I feel like we will see more of the big picture once the temple is standing.
    And I live in OKC, but I don’t think I can stomach listening to Tommy Ice in your debate. I have looked at some of his blogs and he is too frustrating. One blog he said people who believe in a post-trib have no answer for who is living in the millennium. Which is not true. I don’t want to say he is lies, but… I just don’t like his style and I strongly disagree with his beliefs on how the end plays out. Hope you can keep your cool, if his writing comes off nasty and condescending, I can imagine he’s a real peach in person.

  • Caner
    Posted at 18:50h, 21 July

    Hi Joel,

    This is my first post even though I’ve been following your teaching for years now. I really appreciate your teaching; so thanks for sharing so openly and boldly on such difficult subjects.

    I was saved 8 years ago and even within my first 6 months of coming to Christ I started to believe the AC would be Islamic, mainly based on 1 John 2:22, but I am so thankful you have helped clarify and deepen my understanding. I find the more I understand the depth of deception in Islam I want to love Muslims more.

    I have a question I don’t think I have heard you talk in depth about. Do you believe there is prophetic significance to the fact that most (if not all, I think) of the 7 churches in Revelation are in what is now modern day Turkey?

    Remain blessed.


  • Joel
    Posted at 19:15h, 21 July

    Not necessarily because I view that portion of Revelation as being far more historical than prophetic. I could be wrong, but I’ve never put much stock in that fact.

  • Marcus Maddox
    Posted at 19:37h, 21 July

    I’d like to comment on Jeanne T’s remarks.

    First, I applaud her use of scripture, as it’s the only way we know anything for sure.
    Also I concur with her understanding of what the quote from Daniel is trying to tell us.

    However, I’d like to disagree about the most important sign for alerting us to the anti-Christ.

    I think that will be his name.

    What good will it do anybody to know he’s the anti-Christ when he sits in the temple of God?

    I think the Body Of Christ must pick him out while he is still relatively powerless. Other wise, how will we be able to warn everyone?

    Also, I think speculation is vital as it sharpens our focus. We can be challenged and corrected as we go.
    Since iron sharpens iron, lets all give our best efforts to make our own understanding fit perfectly with every single scripture.
    This is vital and I don’t think any of us have reached that point yet.

    Of course some people think this is all academic anyway but I’m not one who feels that way.

  • Marcus Maddox
    Posted at 20:53h, 21 July

    I looked up the Hebrew words in Daniel, translated as “small people” and
    The word for ‘people’has the root for ‘goyim’ in it and really means nation or perhaps ethic group. That’s the way I understand it anyway. Just trying to be precise.

  • BJ & Alisa
    Posted at 02:46h, 22 July

    Hello Joel, I’m looking forward to watching you on The Jim Bakker show Monday and Tuesday.


  • Gary Chappelle
    Posted at 14:33h, 23 July

    Hey Joel, I do have a question that has been bothering me for awhile, and maybe you can clarify. It involves the verse from Revelation 17:10-11:

    “And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space. And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.”

    If we are to be consistent with what John says, then clearly the Kingdom that “is” (the 6th Kingdom) is Rome. With the 5 fallen being Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Greece.

    The other that has not come (the 7th Kingdom) is the Ottoman Empire.

    The question I have involves the phrase “And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth”. Again, if we are to be consistent, John is saying that the 8th kingdom is one of the ones that “WAS” but is not. That would imply it will be one of the ones that had already fallen, and NOT the one that is still to come.

    I’m not sure it makes a huge difference, since the 8th kingdom actually appears to be a combination of all the previous kingdoms rolled into one. That may be why the Anti-Christ has many names such as the “Assyrian” as well as the “King of Babylon” and the “Prince of Tyre”.

    It seems that ALL prophecy teachers think that the 8th kingdom is a revived 7th, but I’ve never understood that point based on the above, but maybe I am just looking at that verse incorrectly. But I’d appreciate any thoughts you have on it, and where I am wrong in my interpretation so I can finally clarify that point in my own mind.

    Thanks much.

  • llinda keyes
    Posted at 15:22h, 23 July

    Just had all my comments removed by the Guardian Joel, all I said in a none aggressive tone was, if Islam is peaceful, then why are Muslims waiting for the Mahdi who will end Jizyah making conversion obligatory.
    Apparently my comments are being pre moderated. Seems we can’t even slightly question Islam openly,and we definitely can’t mention the awaited one.

    Comments about the unfair ‘Muslims are the new Jews’ statement’s were also removed. Yet a Muslim chap quoting ‘peaceful’ Koranic verses was aloud.

    While speaking with some Christians where I am, their concern was the Free masons and the Bilderbergs.

    Its a good job we have some sane places to go, so thanks for being there for the time you are.

  • Joel
    Posted at 18:36h, 23 July


    The key to properly understanding the phrase “was, and is not, and will come again” is to understand that it is from the perspective of the last days, not John’s perspective from the 1st century. Tense within Greek is always interpretive. This is the only way the phrase makes sense, is to understand it from the perspective of the final generation.

    Second, the “other to come” is not the seventh per se, but the final one. He is the one to which it is repeatedly stated will come for a little while. In fact, it reiterates this only a few verses later when it says the kings give him their authority for “one hour.” Satan is enraged because why? “He knows his time is short. The same is found in Isaiah 26. Hide yourselves for a “little while” until indignation is past.

  • Gary Chappelle
    Posted at 20:27h, 23 July

    Thanks Joel.

    I understand what you are saying, but is it structurally correct to interpret the first part of the verse as being in John’s day (Rome being the kingdom that is), and then switch the perspective to the last days in the second part of the verse?

  • Tamaira
    Posted at 21:58h, 23 July

    Am I mistaken about the temple? Is the temple a metaphor?

  • Joel
    Posted at 21:59h, 23 July

    The Temple is both a metaphor and literal. There will most certainly be a real future temple.

  • Joel
    Posted at 22:03h, 23 July

    Though this may sound like it makes sense, there is absolutely no rule within responsible interpretation that demands or even infers this. Not in this case. It is generally agreed that the tense of most Greek verbs are largely understand through context and far less though any internal coding. In this case, the beast exists at the end of the age. The referent is to the people who see the beast at the end of the age. They are amazed when they see that the beast was, is not and comes again.

  • Tamaira
    Posted at 05:13h, 24 July

    But it says 5 have fallen, how is that not speaking to John’s past and now is being Rome, John’s present. I thought that verse was identifying the history of the beast kingdoms that Satan has controlled and always in the Middle East. Are you saying the whole interpretation of the beast in Rev 17, all 7 kings are at the end of days?That John was seeing kings in our future end of days, and not 5 from his past, one from his present, and 2 to come?

  • Joel
    Posted at 14:25h, 24 July

    Five have fallen is current with John. The statement concerning the beast that was, is not, and will come, specifically says, the people of the earth will marvel when they see the beast that was, is not, etc. Context determines tense.

  • Tamaira
    Posted at 18:41h, 24 July

    You’re hurting my brain again. Lol. I am determined to understand. I find myself reading passages over and over and over. Looking at them with new eyes. Forgetting what I think I know helps. My mind ties things together that are not the same context. Two steps forward one step back.

  • Marcus Maddox
    Posted at 22:34h, 24 July

    Is there anything to theories that John is still alive ?
    Also, is Elijah returning bodily before the Lord?

  • Marcus Maddox
    Posted at 23:01h, 24 July

    Also; is this a scripture that points to the false resurrection of the Anti-Christ ?

    Isaiah 14:19-20
    “All the kings of the nations lie in glory, Each in his own tomb. 19″But you have been cast out of your tomb Like a rejected branch, Clothed with the slain who are pierced with a sword, Who go down to the stones of the pit Like a trampled corpse. 20″You will not be united with them in burial, Because you have ruined your country, You have slain your people.

  • Joel
    Posted at 23:09h, 24 July

    In Isaiah, it is a reference to the fact that although the AC is a king, he will not be given a proper burial in a royal sepulcher, as normal kings. Instead, he will be buried by corpses and bodies in a mass grave.

  • Joel
    Posted at 23:10h, 24 July

    As for John, I would say no, but Malachi says that Elijah will literally paper before the Day of the Lord.

  • llinda keyes
    Posted at 00:41h, 25 July

    Ha Joel, now there’s somthing I have never understood, that literal Elijah will return. Read all the reasonings, but just can’t get passed that Jesus said “this is he who was to come” in the same way Peter said “this is that”.

    In Heb 11 begining with Abel then Enoch then listing other men of faith, it goes on to say in v13 ” these all died” then further listing more saints the CH concludes with none of the saints listed being made perfect without us. I’d not noticed it before but it definitely looks like Enoch actually died with the rest of them.

    I read somthing a good while back( been afraid to mention it to anyone). That gave a reasonable argument for Elijah actually dying, and having not gone to heaven, one point was, that the prophets new by the spirit of God that he would be taken, yet they looked for his body, obviously not expecting it to be in heaven. Elijah told Elisha…if you see me when I am taken …were it not for Elisha’s request, God could have called Elijah to a mountain to be ‘taken’ out of sight,as happened with Moses.

    I thought it very intriguing, though I did not agree with the whole paper,but still wouldn’t discuss it with folks as it probably sounds like I’ve gone nuts.(smiley face)

    I shan’t bother you again

  • Joel
    Posted at 02:19h, 25 July


    John obviously was not literally Elijah, yet Jesus actually said that he was Elijah. Jesus obviously was also not teaching that John was a reincarnation of Elijah. Our only option then is to understand Jesus to have been saying that John was simply one who came in the spirit of Elijah. A preview.

    But the angel said to him: “Do not be afraid, Zechariah; your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you are to give him the name John. He will be a joy and delight to you, and many will rejoice because of his birth, for he will be great in the sight of the Lord. He is never to take wine or other fermented drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even from birth. Many of the people of Israel will he bring back to the Lord their God. And he will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous—to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.” (Luke 1:13-17)

    John also denied that he was literally Elijah. He was not ignorant or being falsely humble. He was being honest. Jesus was obviously speaking metaphorically. John came in the spirit of Elijah, but Elijah is still to come.

    Malachi 4 tells us that Elijah would come when? Within the context of the Day of the Lord. Obviously, the Day of the Lord has not already happened. 1 Thessalonians 5:2 and 2 Thess. 2:2 both make abundantly it clear the Day of the Lord has not yet happened. Thus Elijah is yet to come in the future. This is the only way we can take all of the relevant passages together without disregarding any.

    Jesus absolutely affirmed both the future Elijah who will indeed come in the context of the Day of the Lord, as well as John who is a simply a spiritual foreshadowing of Elijah to come:

    “Indeed, Elijah is coming (future tense) first and will (future tense) restore all things. But I say to you that Elijah has come already (past tense), and they did not know him but did to him whatever they wished. . . .’ Then the disciples understood that He spoke to them of John the Baptist.”

    Other examples of this would be Amos 9. James cited it as being fulfilled, yet in context it is clearly speaking of the millennial age. So it is spiritually or metaphorically fulfilled, and also yet to be fulfilled literally. It is the same when Peter cites Joel 3 and applies it to the day of Pentecost. But contextually Joel’s prophecy is tied to the celestial signs in the sky, (the moon turning to blood etc.) and the Day of the Lord. The Book of Revelation written minimally 20 years (more like 40) after Pentecost places these events in the future. Spiritual fulfillment, literal fulfillment. Both are true. One never changes the original meaning. At times, the Apostles brought clarity to OT passages, but never do they ever abrogate the words of God.

    Along these lines, there isa fun quote from Lactantius that addresses both this, as well as the early Church believe about an eastern Antichrist:

    But I will more plainly set forth the manner in which this happens. When the close of the times draws nigh, a great prophet shall be sent from God to turn men to the knowledge of God, and he shall receive the power of doing wonderful things. Wherever men shall not hear him, he will shut up the heaven, and cause it to withhold its rains; he will turn their water into blood, and torment them with thirst and hunger; and if any one shall endeavour to injure him, fire shall come forth out of his mouth, and shall burn that man. By these prodigies and powers he shall turn many to the worship of God; and when his works shall be accomplished, another king shall arise out of Syria, born from an evil spirit, the overthrower and destroyer of the human race, who shall destroy that which is left by the former evil, together with himself. He shall fight against the prophet of God, and shall overcome, and slay him, and shall suffer him to lie unburied; but after the third day he shall come to life again; and while all look on and wonder, he shall be caught up into heaven. But that king will not only be most disgraceful in himself, but he will also be a prophet of lies; and he will constitute and call himself God, and will order himself to be worshipped as the Son of God; and power will be given him to do signs and wonders, by the sight of which he may entice men to adore him. He will command fire to come down from heaven, and the sun to stand and leave his course, and an image to speak; and these things shall be done at his word,—by which miracles3 many even of the wise shall be enticed by him. Then he will attempt to destroy the temple of God, and persecute the righteous people; and there will be distress and tribulation, such as there never has been from the beginning of the world.

    Lactantius, “The Divine Institutes,” in Fathers of the Third and Fourth Centuries: Lactantius, Venantius, Asterius, Victorinus, Dionysius, Apostolic Teaching and Constitutions, Homily, and Liturgies, ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, trans. William Fletcher, vol. 7, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1886), 214.

    I hope this helps.
    Bless you!

  • Tamaira
    Posted at 04:45h, 25 July

    Going back to your video, you mentioned Erdogen possibly being the 1st of the 4 kings in Daniel. Did you mean chapter 11:2? Or the first king in chapter 8?

  • llinda keyes
    Posted at 08:00h, 25 July

    Thank you Joel, I realise you’re a busy man.I genuinely understand what you’ve said,and will be open while I chew this one over. I always believed that John was simply being honest, he said he was the voice of one crying in the wilderness, but he couldn’t say he was actual Elijah as he simply wasnt. While I know God is able, I just find difficulty’s with the prophet being alive in heaven.
    Kind of hope I’m not around to see those two witness’s on the news.

    Thanks again Joel, be blessed in your ministry.

  • Joel
    Posted at 13:37h, 25 July

    The first king of Javan of Daniel 8. The prominent horn on the goat that is broken off.

  • Jay
    Posted at 15:48h, 25 July

    Hey Joel,

    With the recent events in Turkey, I was pondering the “Madhi” situation as it relates to Erdogen. I was caught off guard by a New York Times Opinion Page (below), where this writer from Turkey was saying (or accusing) that some of the followers of Fethullah Gulen see him as the Mahdi. No doubt the “Mahdi Fever” will continue to grow in the Middle East.




    (Quote) “The Gulen community is built around one man: Fethullah Gulen. His followers see him not merely as a learned cleric, as they publicly claim, but the “awaited one,” as I have been told in private. He is the Mahdi, the Islamic version of the Messiah, who will save the Muslim world, and ultimately the world itself. Many of his followers also believe that Mr. Gulen sees the Prophet Muhammad in his dreams and receives orders from him.”
    “Besides Mr. Gulen’s unquestionable authority, another key feature of the movement is its cultish hierarchy. The Gulen movement is structured like a pyramid: Top-level imams give orders to second-level imams, who give orders to third-level imams, and it goes on like that to the grass roots…”

    NYT – The Opinion Pages | Contributing Op-Ed Writer

    “Who Was Behind the Coup Attempt in Turkey?”

    Mustafa Akyol JULY 22, 2016

  • Joel
    Posted at 16:49h, 25 July


    Yeah, Oktar’s followers told me that Gulen’s folks all think he is the Mahdi back in 2009. Of course, they were upset by this, as they think Oktar is the Mahdi. : ) Now, many are even looking to Erdogan as the Mahdi. Scary atmosphere.

    Bless ya brother.

  • Marcus Maddox
    Posted at 21:08h, 25 July


    Thanks for answering my questions. Your responses mean a lot to me.
    And Joel, don’t let some people’s insults get you down. Would the enemy waste his time attacking you if you weren’t doing a very good job?
    I think you’re doing a very good job.
    I’m really looking forward to streaming your teaching from Morningside this evening.
    Keep up the good work. God will see you through!

  • Obed
    Posted at 22:01h, 25 July

    In reference to Gary Chappelle’s question above about this verse in Revelation:

    “And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space. And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.”

    If we were to say as the scripture says that the eighth beast to come is one of the five that had already passed from John’s standpoint(perspective) in history then which empire would it be? Some as Philip Goodman in his book the “Assyrian Connection” believe it will be a revived Assyrian empire. However, I don’t believe this contradicts the eighth beast being a revival of the Islamic Empire seventh head) because the same territory the Assyrian empire dominated was swallowed up by the historical Islamic empire. Moreover, this scripture may be informing us once again the general area where the Antichrist will arise from as we see in Daniel 11 he is the king of the North and in Ezekiel Gog of Magog but, in Micah 5 he is the Assyrian.

  • Joel
    Posted at 13:33h, 26 July


    Yes, I agree. Its almost as if the eighth is a conglomerate of the previous seven.

  • Christopher Farrell
    Posted at 21:21h, 26 July

    Most enjoyable to read not only Joel’s analysis but that of other Brothers who search Scripture.

    Fascinating stuff. Sobering to consider that as prophecy is unfolding before our very eyes and the End Times apostasy proceeds like a malignant cancer we in the Body of Christ must continue to contend for the faith once given to the Saints.

    The Lord Jesus has got this. We already possess victory in our Lord and Saviour. No doubt the current apostasy is a separating of the chaff from the Wheat.

    When the risen Lord Jesus of the Bible returns I want to be serving Him faithfully, obediently. Deep investigation into the Word of God in my humble opinion is not only an exercise in intellectual investigation, but a form of worship if undertaken with the right disposition of one’s heart and mind.

    When I think of all the ways in which my time is frequently occupied, studying Scripture with Joel and the rest of you would definitely be one of the things that I hope that I’m doing when our Lord returns like a thief in the night.

  • Howard
    Posted at 10:55h, 27 July

    Hi Joel.

    I was just re-reading Daniel 10-12, and the matter of the “holy covenant” is referred to in vv 28,30,32.

    As you have heard in the news, the Palestinian leadership is asking the Arab League to help them sue the British government over the Balfour Declaration, which set into action the legal basis for the Jewish people to return to their historic homeland.

    The Land of Canaan (later and still the Land of Israel) was an integral component of the holy covenant which YHVH cut with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob, to give to them and to their descendants as an everlasting possession.

    Could it be that the covenant which the antichrist confirms with Israel (Dan 9:27) is that he deviously acknowledges right of the Jewish state in Israel, connected at that time with also allowing for temple sacrifices?

  • Joel
    Posted at 11:34h, 27 July

    It very well could. My suspicion is that it will include the right to the Temple Mount to offer sacrifices. In order for such a huge concession however, I suspect that something large will have to happen first. Some major regional wars in all likelihood.

  • Perry Brown
    Posted at 14:57h, 27 July


    I know that you and most prophecy students and scholars view that at least Daniel 11:2-20 is fulfilled in ancient history, however if one would perceive these verses as having a dual fulfilment, ancient history and near future, verses Daniel 11:14-16 could give some insight into the context to the necessary conditions related to Israel and the coming confirmation of the covenant of Dan 9:27.


  • Pam Everton
    Posted at 01:12h, 28 July


    My question concerns the timing of Ezekiel 38 & 39. Gog of Magog comes against Israel at a time that Israel is living securely in the land.

    Ezekeil 38:8 After many days you ( Gog) will be summoned; in the latter years you will come into the land that is restored from the sword, whose inhabitants have been gathered from many nations to the mountains of Israel which had been a continual waste; but its people were brought out from the nations, and they are living securely, all of them.

    It SEEMS from the context of Ezekeil 33-48 that this points to the time of the Millennial, when Israel is restored to the land and God’s promises to them are fulfilled. Surely Israel is not living securely in the land now, nor at the time of the Jacob’s trouble!

    Could you please shed some light on the timing of this?

    The blessing of the Lord be upon you.

  • Joel
    Posted at 03:27h, 28 July

    Hi Pam,

    Specifically, it speaks of a people who have been regathered from the nations, and has resettled the ancient ruins, etc. They are then rich in livestock and resources. This is describing the condition presently. They are not genuinely secure, but have a false sense of security, which is actually how some translations word it. Obviously, they are not genuinely secure as they are about to be invaded. However, after the invasion, they are specifically returning as former prisoners of war, captives from the lands of their enemies and recognizing the sinful manner in which they related to God back when they were in the land living securely. He will never again hide his face from them and they all get saved. It is in seeing the contrast of their initial state to their final state that it becomes all too clear that this cannot be during the millennium. If this is millennial, then Jesus is a terrible Messiah as they live with him but are not even saved and all living treacherously toward him. Study the final sections of chapter 39 in particular and compare them to the beginning of ch. 38

    21 “And I will set My glory among the nations; and all the nations will see My judgment which I have executed and My hand which I have laid on them. 22 And the house of Israel will know that I am the LORD their God from that day onward. 23 The nations will know that the house of Israel went into exile for their iniquity because they acted treacherously against Me, and I hid My face from them; so I gave them into the hand of their adversaries, and all of them fell by the sword. 24 According to their uncleanness and according to their transgressions I dealt with them, and I hid My face from them.”’” 25 Therefore thus says the Lord GOD, “Now I will restore the fortunes of Jacob and have mercy on the whole house of Israel; and I will be jealous for My holy name. 26 They will forget their disgrace and all their treachery which they perpetrated against Me, when they live securely on their own land with no one to make them afraid. 27 When I bring them back from the peoples and gather them from the lands of their enemies, then I shall be sanctified through them in the sight of the many nations. 28 Then they will know that I am the LORD their God because I made them go into exile among the nations, and then gathered them again to their own land; and I will leave none of them there any longer. 29 I will not hide My face from them any longer, for I will have poured out My Spirit on the house of Israel,” declares the Lord GOD. Ezekiel 39:21-29

  • Pam Everton
    Posted at 04:29h, 28 July

    Thank you for your response, your insight!

    I agree that Israel will not be living in the Millennial unsaved. Yet, it is the Lord who says to Ezekiel (verses 38:8, 14) that Israel is living securely in the land (it is a fact)…not that they think they are living securely ( a false sense of security). Nevertheless, I will examine these chapters again and look for the contast.

    Please know I am not trying to be argumentative but seeking to understand!

    Blessings and thank you for it was your presentation of the 4th Kingdom of Daniel 2 in the summer of 2015 at El Shaddai Ministries that has caused me to rethink the idea of a Revived Roman Empire!

  • Joel
    Posted at 11:25h, 28 July

    The Lord uses expressions throughout the Bible just as consistently as humans do. How can they be living in real security if they are about to be invaded and largely taken captive to the land of the enemies?

  • Gary Chappelle
    Posted at 14:35h, 28 July

    Hey, thanks again Joel. I saw your response to Obed:

    “Yes, I agree. Its almost as if the eighth is a conglomerate of the previous seven.”

    That is the view I am taking for now based on the tense of the verse but obviously I need more study.

    I have another question that has been bothering me. If you could answer it here, then great. Or maybe do a video on it for the future.

    I’ve been trying to reconcile Ezekiel 38 and 39 with what we know about the anti-christ in other verses. I agree that those 2 chapters apply to the anti-christ because it clearly identifies Gog as “that one” all the prophets have spoken about, and it’s regarding the latter days.

    However, my difficulty is reconciling the descriptions of what happens to anti-christ in chapters 38 and 39 with what we know about him from other passages.

    Chapters 38 and 39 seem to indicate that God brings anti-christ down from the north when Israel is at peace and God defeats him right then.

    Verse 18 “And it will come to pass at the same time, when Gog comes against the land of Israel,” says the Lord God, “that My fury will show in My face.” It then mentions a GREAT earthquake. This seems to be happening during the Day of the Lord and the wrath of God.

    But verses elsewhere say that anti-christ comes down from the north when Israel is at peace, invades israel, desecrates the temple, and massacres the Jews for 3 and 1/2 years. This would seem to be at the midpoint of the last week of Daniel and starting the tribulation period.

    So it’s almost as if we have two different time periods here, one that begins the tribulation period, and one that begins the wrath of God. How do you reconcile these passages?

    Thanks again.

  • Gary Chappelle
    Posted at 14:41h, 28 July

    Sorry. It looks like Pam was raising the same timing issue, although from a different angle. If anything, it looks like this issue is probably on the minds of a lot of people.

  • Linda H.
    Posted at 15:09h, 28 July

    Rereading all the post, I focused on the post by Jeannne T. where she brought up Daniel 11:20
    “Then shall arise in his place one who shall send an exactor of tribute for the glory of the kingdom. But within a few days he shall be broken, neither in anger nor in battle”. And I thought, Erdogan could very easily fulfill “send an exactor of tribute…….” Then after him comes the antichrist, Dan. 20:21 “And in his place shall arise a vile person…..”

    Adding a quote from 2 Thess. 2:3, “Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed…….”
    I read a commentary about the “falling away”, and he expressed it as a falling away from the truth. I read, at least on a monthly bases, articles of this nature among “Christians” promoting the gay life style and abortion, to name only two of the issues.


  • Joel
    Posted at 15:22h, 28 July

    Gog is absolutely not immediately defeated. They invade, and their destruction is described, but do not assume it immediately follows. Read Isaiah 9 with similar assumptions and you have the very reason the Jews reject Jesus. The child is born, and he rules. Not a single hint at any 2000 year gap in between. Yet it is there. Likewise in Ezekiel, be very careful of making rash assumptions. If you simply read the whole oracle, particularly the final portions of ch. 39, it is very clear that it is a very successful invasion, as Israel is seen largely as captives in the lands of their enemies. Gog Magog is entirely successful. Their judgment and death is the same as described in Revelation 19, where the beast and birds then feast on their flesh. This is the great feast of God. There is only one.

  • linda keyes
    Posted at 17:37h, 28 July

    Hi Gary

    It greatly helped me to understand that Ez38-39 covers a three and a half year period. It begins with Israel being free people ch38v11(free as in they are now, also feeling seemingly more so while benefiting from the short lived false peace treaty before ac invades.

    It ends with them being delivered from captivity ch39v22-25 as Joel states above.

    So two gatherings are spoken of, the first at the beginning of the last three and half years vch38v11, and the second at the end of of it, more time is spent describing the second.

    The thing that used to confuse me, was the fact that many commentators call the first gathering Armageddon, making it look like the ac fails.

  • linda keyes
    Posted at 18:41h, 28 July

    Hi Gary

    It greatly helped me to understand that there are two gatherings spoken of in Ez38-39. The first ch38vll is at begining of the the last three and half years, with Israel being free as they are now,but more so while enjoying the benefits of the false peace treaty.(Israel then go into captivity as zech 14v1-3 says)

    The second gathering is at the end of the three and half years while Israel
    are in captivity ch39v2 +v23.

    So if you like it compasses three and
    Half years. Israel begin as free people and end up as captives.

    I found it unhelpful when preachers referred to the whole of the chapter as Armageddon, although it’s probably
    the main emphasis.

    Sorry if this duplicates, had connection glitch

  • Adamant
    Posted at 19:54h, 28 July

    Israeli’s nowadays feel more secure than ever right now for two reasons:

    1. The wall that now shields them from the Palestine territories has decreased the number of terror attacks enormously compared to when it was not yet built.

    2. Against large scale foreign attacks, they have a great trust in their military, the IDF (Israeli Defence Forces), including the Samson Option: their nuclear deterrence.

    The second is the most important. Poetically speaking, this trust in their nuclear bombs already is a “covenant with death” of sorts.

    This will some day fail however, either because they trust the Beast so deeply that they even give him their nukes (their covenant with the Beast being the true “covenant with death”), or because when the Beast invades with armies of suicide fanatics, the Beast and his minions do not care that the IDF takes out part of their armies and cities until the IDF runs out of nukes.

  • Gary Chappelle
    Posted at 20:41h, 28 July

    Thanks Joel and Linda. I think what threw me off is that he says “at the same time” his fury would show in his face and then talks about the great earthquake. But your explanation about His first coming where He is a child and He then rules makes sense. That helps a LOT!

  • linda keyes
    Posted at 21:12h, 28 July

    Very sorry to double post. I had connection glitch

  • Matt Walton
    Posted at 00:17h, 29 July

    Hi Joel,
    Thanks so much for your great teaching and kingdom work mate!
    Just a quick question – I’m curious to know your thoughts on The Sheep and Goats Judgement in Matthew 25. Is that just another picture of the Great White Throne Judgement (after the millennium)? or is it (as dispensationalism sees it) a separate judgement of the nations (in the valley of decision) before the millennium, judging which peoples go into the millennium, based on their treatment of the Jews – ‘least of these brothers of mine’? The ‘brothers of mine’ – is that a reference just to the Jewish people or Christians or both?

  • Joel
    Posted at 00:38h, 29 July

    This would seem to be a premillennial judgment of some kind.

  • Matt Walton
    Posted at 01:08h, 29 July

    Great, Thanks Joel!

  • Jason
    Posted at 22:02h, 29 July

    Hey Joel I have been really studying what the coming Bible prophecy reformation’s site believes and its definetly something we all should keep an eye on. They believe the AC is from Iraq. Micah 5 calls the AC the Assyrian and associates him with the land of Nimrod (Iraq). In Genesis 10:10 it says And the beginning of his (Nimrod) kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. All those were located in modern Iraq. In Isaiah 14 hes called both the Assyrian and the king of Babylon (Iraq). Isaiah 14 also says that Israel’s last days oppressor is Babylon (Iraq). Isaiah 14:4 That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased! the golden city ceased! This chapter also talks about Lucifer being cast out of heaven and possessing a man (AC) and he is this king of Babylon this chapter is talking about. The beast in Revelation 13 is lion (Babylon/Iraq) Bear (Persia/Iran) and they believe as some others do too that leopard is Syria and Lebanon. They believe Babylon is the capital of this beast because the beast has the mouth of a lion (Babylon) where the empire is voiced from, its military might is its feet of a bear (Iran) that stamps the residue with its feet, which makes sense since Iran has massively beefed up its military lately. And it has the overall body of a leopard (Seleucid like kingdom) Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Iran. Daniel 11 does show the AC as the final king of the north. They believe this empire will be Shiite too. I know you believe he is from Turkey and that’s the main point where you guys differ they believe hes from Iraq and that Ezekiel 38 and 39 happens after the Millennium (Rev 20). Just wondering your thoughts on all this not about Ezekiel 38 and 39 but about the possibility of him being from Iraq based on those verses.Thanks

  • Joel
    Posted at 23:34h, 29 July

    I’ve been friends with Rodrigo form many years. He has some great original thoughts. I plan on having him on the show sometime. My suspicion is that after a series of wars and regional changes, both views could be true. I would disagree with it being Shite however. I would be shocked if this were true. Shite make up around 12% of the Muslim world. Either way, we cannot only focus on one or some particular passages while ignoring others. We must take them all into consideration. My view of Turkey is not dogmatic. Time will make these things clear. God knows best.

  • Marcus Maddox
    Posted at 22:31h, 30 July

    While people are saying, “Peace and safety,” destruction will come on them suddenly, as labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.
    4 But you, brothers and sisters, are not in darkness so that this day should surprise you like a thief. 5 You are all children of the light and children of the day. We do not belong to the night or to the darkness. 6 So then, let us not be like others, who are asleep, but let us be awake and sober
    NIV 1st Thess. 4-6

    I was thinking on the difficulties of reconciling ALL the various scriptures into an internally consistent narrative and the thought struck me that this kind of difficulty is necessary because the prophecies must be specific enough to alert the faithful while still vague enough so that the powers of darkness remain….well.. in the dark on the exact nature of unfolding of events.

    We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. 7 No, we declare God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. 8 None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
    NIV 1st Cor. 2:6-8

    It is the glory of God to conceal a matter;
    to search out a matter is the glory of kings.

    Proverbs 25:2 NIV

  • DanB
    Posted at 23:15h, 30 July

    Blessings Brother!

    Thank you for work in the Lord!

    I have been reading some of Chris Whites books. He has some interesting views and is critical of some your teaching. I think some of his disagreements are unfair, but other may have merit. I am wondering if you have responses to Mr Whites writings?

  • Joel
    Posted at 01:09h, 31 July

    Chris is quite articulate, and as such his criticisms sound fair on the surface. Because I am familiar with the actual subject matter however, I was very disappointed when I read his book. He tends to either misrepresent my views, twist things, or use straw man arguments. I was in actually in dialogue with Chris via e-mail and helping him with some research when he was writing his book, yet he never once mentioned it to me. I felt disappointed in him personally by this. It’s simply not Christ-like. He does express some respect at the onset of his book, but then goes on to make some fairly harsh claims, even inferring that I am dishonest and so forth. This is when I came to see that his compliments at the onset was merely feigned to cast himself as a fair observer. To top it all off, his hermeneutic is rather abysmal. I mean genuinely bad. In my next book, I address his view of Babylon. As for his general criticisms of the Islamic Antichrist paradigm, if I am to be honest, most are so bad, I didn’t feel as though they were worth responding in any substantial way. Perhaps I will address some here and there in some of my future shows. Actually, one show that does corrects one of his perspectives is here:


    I hope this helps.
    Bless you,

  • Buddy
    Posted at 01:42h, 01 August

    If Daniel 2 describes only four kingdoms, and we know that the Roman Empire is the fourth Kingdom, how can the Ottoman Empire be a part of that prophecy? How can the ten toes of Daniel 2 be the Ottoman Empire if we already know that those ten toes are simply an extension of the legs which are the Roman Empire? How do you explain this? I’m guessing the only way to explain it is to eliminate Rome from the equation altogether, and say that the statue moves top down from Babylon to Persia to Greece to the Ottoman Empire…please explain…

  • Joel
    Posted at 02:26h, 01 August

    The Fourth Kingdom is not the Roman Empire.

  • Greg
    Posted at 09:05h, 01 August

    Hey Joel,

    Was curious if you had checked out the Genesis Apocryphon found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. It’s multiple references to Magog certainly seem to be inline with what you have been talking about. Blessings in Yeshua!


  • DanB
    Posted at 09:06h, 01 August

    Thanks for the response regarding Chris White. Sorry about the lack of cooperation. I am mostly wondering about his central theme that the AC will portray himself as Israel’s Messiah and gain their confidence through fighting Islamic enemies and his “resurrection”. This seems plausible to me.

    Blessings in Him!

  • Joel
    Posted at 12:15h, 01 August

    Hi Dan,

    Yeah, totally implausible. He fundamentally misinterprets numerous passages to arrive at this conclusion. Daniel 8 and 11 in particular.

  • Buddy
    Posted at 19:41h, 01 August

    Ah. But Joel you stated in your video that you believe Rome is the 6th head of Revelation 17. So, at this point, if you’re saying that the Roman empire is included in these other passages of scripture but not in Daniel 2, then I would say your argument is losing scriptural consistency here.

  • Joel
    Posted at 22:49h, 01 August


    Revelation 17 also includes Egypt and Assyria, but Daniel 2 and 7 do not. So no, there is no inconsistency here. Daniel 2 was a dream given to who? Nebuchadnezzar, ruler of Babylon. The subject of the dream was what? The kingdoms that would come after and replace his. Rome is not in this list because it didn’t crush Babylon. Simple fact of history. Trajan’s short lived excursion into the east lasted less than several months before Rome forever returned to its western orientation. As George Rawlinson, author of the Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire accurately said, “There was no soil beyond the Euphrates, in which Roman institutions could take root, while the expense of maintaining them would have been utterly exhausting.” Islam on the other hand absolutely crushed this region and has had it under its control until this very day. It’s a simple matter of accepting what the Scriptures say and having the courage to leave unscriptural traditions of man behind.

    I hope this has helped.

  • Buddy
    Posted at 01:38h, 02 August

    Thanks for the response, but I do not find your answer satisfactory. I would assume you know very well the reasons that Egypt and Assyria are not a part of Daniel 2 & 7. Those empires rose prior to Babylon. It would not make sense for either of them to be included in those particular prophecies.

    The Roman Empire did have sovereignty over Israel for a long period of time, did it not? I thought that ruling over Israel was the main pre-requisite for a world empire to be included in these prophecies. Isn’t that sort of what defines these beast empires in the scriptures? That they not only controlled an enormous portion of the “civilized” world for a long period of time, but that they specifically controlled Israel? Please correct me if I’m wrong, but it sounds like you are saying that the more important defining prerequisite here is that the empire conquer the geographical location of ancient Babylon? If that is what you are indeed saying, then I think you are now exposing an even greater degree of inconsistency in your argument.

  • Joel
    Posted at 03:04h, 02 August


    The requisite for fulfilling any passage is that it meets the criteria of the actual passage. It’s very simple. What then does Daniel 2 say? Daniel says to Nebuchadnezzar, “You are the head of gold, after you will come another kingdom… then another…finally…” To Nebuchadnezzar, Rome would not have been that significant. It came to his area and stayed for a matter of months and left forever. Daniel 2:40 is explicit. It says that this “fourth kingdom” would crush ALL of the others. Rome simply does not meet this most basic criteria. Yes, Rome ruled over J’lem, which is certainly important, and thus it is included in Rev. 17, which is a much fuller pan-historical vision. Notice also that the beast in Rev. 13 is a composite Lion, Leopard, Bear. Again, not Rome. Islam is the only empire that meets the actual criteria of the text. Again, I understand if this is a new idea to you, but it is indeed what the text says.

    Again, I hope this has helped.
    Bless you!

  • Buddy
    Posted at 05:07h, 02 August

    Thanks for taking the time to respond Joel. I appreciate it. I do have a couple of concerns though. First of all, you keep referring to Islam as an Empire. Are you really meaning the Ottoman Empire? I also think because of the eschatological nature of this fourth kingdom, we could easily say that this “crushing of all the other kingdoms” is actually yet future, which would mean that no kingdoms have fully met this criteria yet. You do seem to prefer the consistent futurist approach…right?

    Also, the obvious reason why the Beast of Revelation 13 is described only as looking like a lion, bear, and leopard is because those are the only 3 animals used to describe the 4 beasts of Daniel 7. The text does not use any kind of animal at all to describe the fourth beast. It simply says that it is different from all the others. Therefore, I’m not sure if your point about Revelation 13 is a solid defense of your argument. Whether the fourth Beast of Daniel 7 is Rome or the Ottoman Empire, no animal was used to describe it in the text.

    I have one final serious concern/question. I assume you believe that the leopard of Daniel 7 is the Greek Empire? If so, how do you reconcile that with your belief that the goat of Daniel 8 is not the Greek Empire?

  • Joel
    Posted at 11:07h, 02 August


    By “Islam” I am referring to the historical Caliphate. Like the Roman Empire, it had its various dynasties. The Ottoman was the final ruling dynasty, but it began with the Rashidun, Abbasid, and Umayyad. Lasted roughly 1300+ years. Crushed the entire Middle East and was larger than any of the other empires.

    I reject the view that Daniel 7 is all future, as it simply doesn’t work exegetically. The two arguments often used to support that view both fail. One concerns the phrase “shall arise” which is not in the original aramaic, and the other speaks of an extension of life being given to the beasts. This is simply a statement concerning the nature of the defeat of these other empires however. They would not be destroyed absolutely and instantly as the final one will. Instead they are each defeated, but live on for a time in their successors. Daniel 2:34-35 informs us that when the rock strikes the feet (the final kingdom of the Antichrist) that ALL of the others (Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece) will all be destroyed “at the same time.” By virtue of the destruction of the Antichrist empire, all these others will be destroyed at that very time.

    The fourth beast is not described UNTIL Revelation 13 at which time we are told is it a composite or combination of Babylon, Medo-Persi, and Greece. Again, this resembles the Islamic Caliphate and not Rome.

    Regarding Daniel 8, the angel Gabriel says it concerns the end times three times. I just cannot get around that. Remember, the actual word Javan (translated as Greece in Daniel 8) is not used in Daniel 7. Remember that Daniel 8 was written long before Greece emerged. Javan was simply western Turkey at the time. Its a regional term.


  • Buddy
    Posted at 15:14h, 02 August

    Again, thank you for taking the time to respond. I did not say that I thought Daniel 7 was all future, only that the fourth Beast (at least how it crushes all the other kingdoms) may yet be future.
    Also, I feel that the Roman Empire could just as easily be described as a composite of the first three empires as the Islamic caliphate could.

    Finally, I do agree that a portion of Daniel 8 is yet future, and that a part of it does concern the time of the end, but I can’t easily dismiss the historical nature of most of that passage. It irks me when folks try to deny even a partial historical fulfillment of the Ram and the Goat story. And I definitely do not see events playing out in the Middle East right now the way you teach that they will, with Iran completely conquering it, then followed by a Turkish invasion.

    I guess we can agree to disagree! Thank you for helping me to better understand your perspective though.

  • Joel
    Posted at 17:38h, 02 August

    Hi Buddy,

    As for the idea that the fourth kingdom is entirely future, that is a view that some have offered, but then it would not be Roman. Daniel 7:24 shows that the ten horns come up to of the beast as a later phase, if you will of that kingdom. The same two phase kingdom is described in Daniel 2.

    While we are all entitled to our opinions and feelings, in matters of simple history, we are not. It is simply a matter of fact that the Roman Empire did not crush the other three empires. If you combine Babylon (Iraq), Persia (Iran) and Greece, you do not have the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire crushed roughly one-quarter of “the others” while leaving the other three quarters untouched. Here is a map which shows the are of the “others” that was crushed by Rome versus the portions that were not. ind you, this does not include Trajan’s short lived and ill-fated excursion into the east in AD 116. Note the red dot as Babylon, the actual spot where the dream was given.

    If there is an empire that fits without the help of some serious shoehorning, then why opt for the latter?

    Regarding Daniel 8, the historical events simply do not fit. At least not neatly. This is my point. Tommy Ice actually stated on the Berean Call radio that it took only 9 years for the four kingdoms to develop. No truth to this whatsoever. Simple historical ignorance. Twenty six years after Alexander died, there were five primary dynasties that controlled his former empire.

    When Antiochus Epiphanies emerged, there were not four dynasties, but two main dynasties and a handful of smaller fiefdoms. No need to get “irked.” Of course, the events of history were a shadow, but their ultimate fulfillment seems to remain in the future. Once again, why ignore Gabriel’s very clear words to opt for a shoehorn? Why place tradition over the very clear words of God?


  • Buddy
    Posted at 21:56h, 02 August

    Ok. It was my fault for not speaking clearly enough…

    I share your belief that the 4th kingdom has two phases, one based in history and one yet future. All I have been trying to say is that the “crushing all the other kingdoms” is part of the future phase. Therefore, it doesn’t matter which kingdoms the historical Roman Empire did or did not crush. I believe it’s a future “crushing.”

    Also, everything I have researched shows that Alexander divided his kingdom amongst 4 generals, which does fit the prophetic mold. If, years later, those 4 generals ultimately shaped it all into 5 kingdoms, or 2 kingdoms, or 43 kingdoms, I don’t think that really matters. The Bible doesn’t specify how long they would remain as 4 kings/kingdoms. It does state, though, that the “little horn” (anti-christ) would one day come “out of one of the [horns],” and that it would “grow towards the south and the east and the beautiful land.” It really seems like that fits directionally much more with Rome than Turkey.
    I do respect your attempts to break from traditions and strictly follow the Word of God. I like that about you. As for me, I have always studied things carefully and tried to be a Berean. For instance, I am a pre-wrath adherent and do not subscribe to traditional pre-trib views, because the Bible simply does not support a pre-trib view. So I think we have that in common, a desire to not follow certain views simply because they were passed down to us. But in regards to this specific discussion, I feel very strongly that you are not being consistent in the way you are choosing to interpret scripture and history.

  • Joel
    Posted at 22:53h, 02 August


    I actually am a fairly firm traditionalist. It took me perhaps three years to “come out” and teach the things that I am expecting you to grasp in a day, so I assure you that I sympathize with your hesitancy. I deviate from tradition very slowly, cautiously, and stubbornly.

    I hold to the rule of Occam’s Razor which says that the solution which requires the least amount of assumptions is most often corrupt. You are making an assumption that is not indicated within the text. Namely that the “crushing” being described only applies to the second phase of the fourth kingdom. Daniel 2:40 speaks of the rise of the 4th Kingdom and how it will crush all the others. Daniel 2:34-35 speaks of its demise when Christ returns. Then Chapter 7:7 makes it clear that this crushing is not simply a reference to the second phase of the 4th kingdom, but applies to the historical phases first and foremost.

    “After this I kept looking in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrifying and extremely strong; and it had large iron teeth. It devoured and crushed and trampled down the remainder with its feet; and it was different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns. Daniel 7:7

    I can assure you that there were not four successors. For 26 years after Alexander died, there was never four. I appreciate that you have done some research on this. I recently worked through four separate books on the Diadochi. The history is quite clear. If you would like to work through them, let me know, I can tell you the best one to begin with. If you are adamant that there were four, then go ahead and name them. Which successors are these that Daniel was speaking of?


  • Buddy
    Posted at 23:43h, 02 August

    Ok. Cassander, Ptolemy, Antigonus, and Seleucus.

  • Joel
    Posted at 23:57h, 02 August


    Thanks. So next question: Why did you leave out Lysimachus? Note John Walvoord’s comments:

    John Walvoord: “Practically all commentators, however, recognize the four horns as symbolic of the four kingdoms of the Diadochi which emerged as follows: (1) Cassander assumed rule over Macedonia and Greece; (2) Lysimacus took control of Thrace, Bithynia, and most of Asia Minor; (3) Seleucus took Syria and the lands to the east including Babylonia; (4) Ptolemy established rule over Egypt and possibly Palestine and Arabia Petrel.” (Daniel: The Key to Prophecy)

    For example, here is a map from 312 BC, 11 years after Alexander’s death:

    This is after famed the Battle of Ipsus in 301 BC, (now 22 years after Alexander’s death) after Antigonus’ died on the Battle field. His son Demetrius survived and took a section of Macedonia, continuing the Antigonid dynasty:

    Again, I hope this is helpful.


  • Buddy
    Posted at 00:08h, 03 August

    Lemme answer your question with a question… Why are you proving my point and posting a reference that lists four generals? Who cares what the exact names of the four were, if the general consensus is that there were, in fact, four.

  • Joel
    Posted at 00:16h, 03 August


    Ahhh! The answer is simple. Walvoord is wrong. If it were so clear as he says, then why is there a discrepancy between what you said and he said? Why does Walvoord leave out Antigonus? He was the greatest of all of the diadochi. For the first five hundred years of the Church, there were at least three different lists set forth.

    Hippolytus & Ephrem the Syrian listed: Seleucus, Demetrius, Ptolemy, Philip.
    Eusebius and Jerome listed: Seleucus, Antigonus, Ptolemy, Philip.
    And Theodoret of Cyrus listed Seleucus, Antigonus, Ptolemy, Antipatter.

    If this was so clear, then why cannot anyone agree as to which four? Because there were not four. There were five. This is simply a classic case of folks trying to shoehorn tradition into a text where it doesn’t fit. There is also the unfortunate fact that most commentators simply study other commentaries and thus pass on ideas that are common. Rarely does anyone do any genuine original research. I mean, it is unfortunately rare. Again, I would rather have folks say that I am out to lunch than teach a view simply because it is popular. If tradition is wrong, then a true Berean must stick with Scripture and not tradition.

    Bless ya,

  • Buddy
    Posted at 00:17h, 03 August

    Okay… Well I posted my last comment before you edited yours to include the maps…

    I appreciate how thorough you are being and I will continue to do more research on this.

    We will certainly find out, probably sooner rather than later, whether or not the futurist interpretation of Daniel 8 turns out to be correct. It certainly does not seem to be playing out that way currently, but we shall see.

  • Joel
    Posted at 00:19h, 03 August

    Sorry, I post and then edit. : )

  • Joel
    Posted at 00:22h, 03 August

    And please know that I am open on this one. I could be wrong. But I think the consistent futurist view is certainly worthy to be considered. We see through a glass darkly and thus we must remain humble and watchful. You are correct in that time will tell. As for whether or not Iran might invade the ME, things can transform overnight. We must stick with Scripture and allow world events to prove (or disprove) our views. Far too many allow their views of Scripture to be defined by world events. That’s Newspaper Exegesis. Ironically, that is what Dr. Ice accuses me of, despite the fact that I fight against it so vehemently.

    Bless ya Buddy,

  • Joel
    Posted at 00:27h, 03 August

    On my computer, the maps are all cropped out. Here are the links to the originals:



  • Buddy
    Posted at 00:46h, 03 August

    Thank you Joel.

    If you guys get to discuss the rapture, I’m definitely rooting for you to destroy Ice in that aspect of the debate. Given that Alan Kurschner has already debated him on that issue though, I’m not holding out much hope. As for newspaper exegesis, he is most certainly being ridiculous to accuse you of that.

  • Buddy
    Posted at 00:51h, 03 August

    Haha that didn’t quite come out right. Of course you will destroy him in that aspect of the debate, as Alan Kurschner has already done. What I meant is that I don’t hold out much hope for Dr. Ice to see the light and actually change his perspective.

  • Joel
    Posted at 01:33h, 03 August

    Ha. I am not looking to “destroy” anyone. I just want to present my case so as to encourage folks to be Bereans and faithful watchers. And of course, I want folks to respond to Islam in a proper gospel centered way. Not through the lens of, “Well, its all going to be destroyed anyway.” We will not be discussing the rapture, although I’m sure Tommy will throw that at me, as for him it is some strange barometer of genuine Christian standing. I am however a pre-wrather and unashamed. Of course, I have great respect for pre-tribbers, and know many great men who hold the view.

    Blessings Buddy. Good chatting.

  • Obed
    Posted at 22:20h, 03 August


    In carefully reading the conversation (thread) between you and Buddy, I can’t help to say that I understand where Buddy is coming from becuase I was once there. I held the same understanding and reservations of the kingdoms in the book of Daniel that Buddy does. I believe the key that unlocked my understanding to the “legs of iron” (Dan. 2) and the fourth beast (Dan. 7) not being Rome is two-fold. One, is to understand that the dream in Dan. 2 was given to Nebuchadnezzar King of Babylon about future kingdoms that would crush his own kingdom. This crushing (of the fourth kingdom) must include geographical region (Babylon’s land holdings), language, culture and religion. Clearly, the Roman empire did not do this. Please understand, the empires or kingdoms in the book of Daniel deal strictly with those that would geographically “swallow up” Nebuchadnezzar’s own. Medo-Persia and Greece qualified for this but, Rome did not. Secondly, working through Joel’s book MidEast Beast slowly with my Bible (and Logos software) in hand, have been the keys to helping me come to believe that the fourth kingdom/empire of Daniel 2 and 7 is the Islamic Empire. In conclusion, I would humbly say that many of the questions that I see asked of Joel here in the comments section are those which he has dealt with and answered in his book “MidEast Beast”. Brethren, take the time and go through the book to the degree you can teach it to others. The lost need us to give them understanding and lead them to salvation as perilous times continue to encrouch upon us.



  • Joel
    Posted at 22:32h, 03 August

    Thanks Obed. Bless you brother!

  • donal
    Posted at 01:45h, 04 August

    Technically Alexander the great empire finally divided to 4: Cassander, Seleucus, Ptolemy and Antigonus. Lysimachus didn’t included because his successor was Ptolemy Keraunos son of Ptolemy.

  • Joel
    Posted at 02:39h, 04 August


    Technically, nothing. Lysimachus didn’t die until 281, 32 years after Alexander’s death. The Lysimachan dynasty lasted longer than the Cassandrian dynasty. By the time Antiochus Epiphanies came along, there were only two dynasties.

    Again, why are we so determined to fight against what Gabriel said so clearly?


  • MB
    Posted at 14:31h, 08 August

    Our family has been serving Father in Asia for the past 12 years and love the journey He has taken us. We are originally from the States. Over that time we have been surrounded by many brothers and sisters who have excellent theology in general. More recently I have discovered that many also hold a supercessionist perspective on end times and prophecy. It has taken me about 2 years to be introduced to your works by a close brother in the States from the time that I first began to struggle through these issues (i.e. prophecy interpretation, replacement theology, etc). My wife and I have recently begun to read your 2 most recent books and are thoroughly enjoying them. I would say we are closer to your perspective currently than many of our colleagues. Interestingly many Asian Christians have a very positive perspective towards the Jews. You may have heard of the Back to Jerusalem movement – which depending on how you view the theological foundation for it – at least it is a very pro Jewish concept. So I wanted to add this to the mix of discussion. I have seen the anti-semitism in the west to some degree, but so far I only see from Asian Christians in my context the opposite. In conclusion I will just mention something unrelated. As a hobby I love ancient history and apologetic issues. While I don’t want to endorse this as truth, as I don’t think anyone will ever know the answer to this question, I have found the following article about ancient Babel as quite interesting – especially as it relates to the Kurdish people and their current geographical location along with the hotbed of ISIS, etc. Again – this is just the most fascinating article I have read on this subject, but only God truly knows the location of the original tower. https://answersingenesis.org/tower-of-babel/where-in-the-world-is-the-tower-of-babel/

  • Steve Smith
    Posted at 16:11h, 21 August

    Joel the answer to your Daniel 8 four generals is that yes there were five prominent generals but there were 3 prominent kingdoms (dynasties), with a lesser one making up the 4.

    Two of the generals belong to one dynasty because Cassader’s (Antipatrid) didn’t last long and so historians put them under the Antigonid dynasty.

    So in fact four prominent horns is still correct. I’ve checked a lot of secular sources and they confirm this.

    Oh and you never addressed the 1150 days + intercalary months and Maccabees confirms it was exactly 1150 days from the stopping to resotration of sacrifices at the 2nd temple.

  • Joel
    Posted at 22:04h, 21 August


    Over the past year or two, I’ve read five secular works which are solely focused on this period. For nearly 30 years after Alexander’s death, there were five very clear distinct dynasties. Lysimachus, Cassandra, Antigonus, Seleucis, and Ptolemy. Then after Cassander’s death, for roughly 10 years, one could say there were four. At this point however, there were really only two dominant dynasties with two much less significant dynasties. I don’t have any problem with saying the Bible generalizes four, but to insist there were four clear dynasties throughout the period is simply not accurate. With regard to Daniel 8, the one issue that none can argue with however are the words of Gabriel concerning the end time content of the vision. Three times does Gabriel say it concerns the end times. This is something we need to take very seriously.

  • Steve Smith
    Posted at 22:50h, 21 August

    Cassnder’s empire only lasted 8 years and then it was conquered by Antigonid. Cassender’s dynasty was fought by Alexander V and Antipater II. Antigonus’s son Demetrius helped Alexander V oust Antipater II, but then killed Alexander V. Demetrius established the Antigonid dynasty and it lasted until the Romans.

    Lysimachus was king at three different places. 25 years in Thrace, 20 years in Asia Minor, and 7 years in Macedon. His commander Philetaerus took over and founded the Attalid dynasty which lasted until Romans.

    Ptolemy and Selecuid lasted until the Romans.

    That is why historians say there were four main dynasties from Alexander’s successors. That fits with Daniel 8 in a plain way. Of course there were other minor cities/dynasties, and other generals and leaders, but if you want to say which main four lasted until Roman times those would be the four.

  • Steve Smith
    Posted at 23:01h, 21 August

    Oh and I do agree with Daniel 8 is mainly futurism. I agree with usual interpretation that it fades from Antiochus to the Antichrist, and for instance only the antichrist at the midpoint has angels falling from heaven in Daniel 8 / Rev 12. Also the defiling of the temple by Antiochus foreshadows the antichrist. Hanukkah is the 4th fall feast that Jesus will fulfill during the extra 75 days.

  • Joel
    Posted at 11:07h, 22 August

    Cassander ruled more than a mere eight years. He declared himself a king from 305 to 297, but he actually began ruling twelve years prior to that in 317 when he defeated Polyperchon and assumed control of the Antipatrid dynasty. It is not until 301 BC, (twenty two years after Alexander died) that most commentaries say they were only four. There were in fact still five however, as Demetrius, Antiogus’s son immediately took a large section of Macedonia. So again, it is not until 297, twenty seven years after Alexander died (At Cassander’s death) that anyone could say there were only four. The problem of course is that even then there were other smaller dynasties by then as well, such as Epirus, and there were only really two dominant dynasties (Ptolemy and Selecucis). Again, the only way one can say there were four is as a fairly vague generalization. Four dynasties is not the defining characteristic of the breakup of Alexander’s dynasty. I think we allow for it as a generalization, as the Bible obviously uses that number in chapter seven (though from the start, which is also not accurate). As such, one would be hard-pressed to demand the traditional transitional interpretation. Prophecy is always fulfilled rather precisely, even if mysteriously at times (cf. Psalm 22, Isaiah 9, etc.).

  • Steve Smith
    Posted at 18:49h, 22 August

    You agree though that Daniel 11:1-4, which again starts with Persia like in Daniel 8, and then mentions in a similar manner as Daniel 8 Javan/Greece, as being Alexander’s empire going to his successors.

    Daniel 11:
    “After he has arisen, his empire will be broken up and parceled out toward the four winds of heaven. It will not go to his descendants, nor will it have the power he exercised, because his empire will be uprooted and given to others.”

    Daniel 8:
    “but at the height of its power the large horn was broken off, and in its place four prominent horns grew up toward the four winds of heaven.”

    “The four horns that replaced the one that was broken off represent four kingdoms that will emerge from his nation but will not have the same power”

    Look how similar that is. They both mention one king’s empire broken up to the four winds, and that it won’t have the same power of the original kingdom.

    And you also agree that in Daniel 11 it eventually leads to Antiochus IV defiling of the temple. Well in Daniel 8 and again Antiochus IV with the 1150 days does match perfectly when you add two intercalary months making up the missing 60 days. The Greek calendar would have been used at that time with every other year adding an extra 30 day intercalary month. This is recorded exactly in Maccabees. 9-15-145 to 9-25-148 is the date of the stopping and restoration of sacrifices at the temple, evening and morning sacrifices. 3 years = 1080. Two interclaary months which would have occurred once every other year = 60 days. And from the 15 to the 25th is 10 days. 1080 + 60 + 10 = 1150.

    I just can’t ignore those similarities in Daniel 8 and 11, very plain connection to Greece and it leading to Antiochus who is a type of antichrist. I feel it does generalize because it was a complex time with everyone very closely connected during a short period of time, few decades, lots of battles, but in the end we understand the empire was split in all directions, and wouldn’t be as powerful, and eventually 4 would lead to the next empire off Rome as per Daniel 2, which I know you disagree with.

  • Joel
    Posted at 19:06h, 22 August


    I agree that Daniel 11 seems to be speaking about Alexander and his kingdom being parceled out. This is how I understand it. The statement, “toward the four winds of heaven” however is a general expression quite different from the statements being made in Daniel 8. Its similar to the expression toward the four corners of the compass. It need not describe four kingdoms.

    Though I used to see Daniel 11:21-35 as referring to Antiochus, I have come to see the problems with the traditional futurist interpretation. See this article here for a more detailed explanation: https://joelstrumpet.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Daniel-11-Abomination1.pdf

    Concerning Daniel 8, as I have said, Alexander’s kingdom simply was not broken into four in as clear a manner as so many claim. History simply does not fit as neatly as many would like to infer. As such, we should consider the possibility that it has a future fulfillment, with precision. This would be in keeping with Gabriel’s comments which give us no indication that only the last segment has some end time application. His words are rather unqualified.

    As far as the 1150 days, I don’t think there is any way to make it work with Antiochus without fudging it. All of this Greek Calendar / Biblical calendar stuff is very suspect at best. If the Bible had intended us to add two months, it would have said so. See this article here for a brief discussion:


    I hope this is helpful.

  • TM
    Posted at 15:45h, 12 September


    8The beast, which you saw, once was, now is not, and yet will come up out of the Abyss and go to its destruction.

    I get what you are saying about this verse and how to view it, however, no one has mentioned the second part of the sentence, “will come up out the abyss.” As far as I know, the abyss is where fallen angels reside. How does the beast come out of the abyss? How does the Ottoman Empire come up out of the abyss? My apologies if you have already answered this question.


  • TM
    Posted at 18:24h, 12 September

    To Obed (and Joel),

    Clearly Joel’s teaching has gone against what we lay folk have been taught since Hal Lindsey. To say the 4th kingdom in Dan 2 and Dan 7 is NOT Rome will take some time for people to ponder and absorb. If you say the 4th kingdom is the Islamic Kingdom, I suppose the Ottoman Turks, then you have that long gap from Greece to it. Rome of course naturally followed Greece. And to omit Rome makes the average person of knowledge of history scratch their head, because everyone knows how important the Roman Empire is to history. Look at all those movies we have portraying that period of time. Do you have that for the Ottoman Turks? Lol.

    I guess the argument being used is- the 4th kingdom has to swallow the land boundaries of the first three kingdoms, and Rome didn’t do that, the Ottoman Turks did. Since so many “experts” have told us otherwise, and apparently they told us things not true, is it prudent for us to just believe Joel or you on this now? So, we are now put in a position to either become history experts or believe the people who teach us, be it right or wrong.

    All this can be very frustrating and unsettling. Things just may take time, and better yet, may require the illumination of the Holy Spirit to guide our intellect through our studies. I ve been studying this stuff for over 30 years and still feel like I don’t know anything and change my thinking every year.


  • Anne L Tagoilelagi
    Posted at 23:49h, 30 July

    Please email me about the Islamic Antichrist. I had a unique supernatural experience that affirms your research. I also sent you a message through Facebook, but I am not sure whether you received it.

Post A Comment