• Marcus Maddox
    Posted at 22:20h, 26 November

    Thanks for the Video Joel.

  • Marcus Maddox
    Posted at 23:38h, 26 November

    I am planning on buying your new book (something I have never done before) mostly because it deals with the mystery of Babylon the Great.

    Last night my mind turned to the relationship the Beast will have with the Great Harlot and something occurred to me.

    Daniel says The Beast attains ruler-ship but is never honored as royal
    The schism that develops between The Beast and The Harlot may arise as The Harlot, true to her nature, gets a roving eye and a hot desire for another lover. One who can prove a royal linage. As always her pride may get the better of her.

    If this happens after The Beast has already showered her with many expensive gifts in return for her whorish favors, The jilted lover may indeed, in a great rage , seek his revenge and force on her the one carnal act that she has always refused him.

    Afterward he, in his disgust for her, he may indeed, burn here with fire.

    This seems much like much like Amnon treated Tamar, but spiritually of course.
    I know this seems far fetched but I wanted to share it with you just in case it is accurate.

  • Bill N.
    Posted at 20:02h, 27 November

    ‘How to Win the War Against Radical Islam’ seems a bit of a misnomer. There are much more troubling times to come and I’m not so sure we win on any level outside the ‘blood of the Lamb,’ and ‘not loving our lives even unto death.’ I certainly need to get my mind and heart around that prospect.

    It has also occurred to me the good general is very unlikely stroll into the oval office come January, a KJV tucked under his arm and expound on the prophetic knowledge of Daniel 8; a pretty comprehensive view of future Islamic battles of a radical kind. Neither do I believe such gatherings will occur at the Pentagon or State. So, though I agree with your seminal presentation of the mideast geo-political landscape and efforts to oppose the naiveté of U.S. political leadership, my role as a forerunner must remain focused in helping to remove restraints from the body of Christ by unfolding in the Church its prophetic and apostolic end time mission. An effort to which your writings and insights have made a significant contribution.

  • Jeanne T.
    Posted at 20:41h, 27 November

    Great episode Joel, and thank you for your comments on the hypocrisy of ISIS. There is more than one way to defeat ISIS, and exposing their hypocrisy would be very effective, IMO. We need to pray that President Elect Trump will surround himself with wise advisors who would have the same idea about this. We also need to pray for this nation, which is in turmoil. There are those who are working hard now to overturn the results of the election. This has the potential to cause even more lawlessness.

  • Taryn
    Posted at 16:55h, 28 November

    I propose we abolish the time limit.

  • Joel
    Posted at 20:45h, 28 November


    Of course, this episode is focusing more on how a US government approach should focus on fighting the war against terror. Our role as believers remains the same. From an American military perspective, even if we believe that Islam has a brief period of victory in this age, this does not mean of course that we do seek to forge a righteous approach forward to win the war. Whether or not it will work, based on the Lord’s sovereign prophetic purposes is not really the issue. Doing what is right, what is wise, etc. This should remain our goal.

    Blessings, Joel

  • Jeff Marshall
    Posted at 19:40h, 29 November

    don’t you know you’re never supposed to discuss politics or religion (tongue planted firmly in cheek)? ???? You’re breaking all the rules! ????????
    God Bless,

  • David Tutwiler
    Posted at 02:42h, 01 December

    A lot has happened since your last video. There is a ton of talk of WW3 basically being declared by Erdogan when he publicly stated Turkey is only in Syria overthrow Assad. Russia is demanding clarity of that statement.

  • Lynne Sabatini
    Posted at 04:33h, 04 December

    Wow. That was an Absolutely Excellent episode. I am SO PROUD of you, Mr. Richardson. And so grateful.

    Lynne S. From Portland, OR (We met at New Life Church in Redding, CA last February)

  • Natasha
    Posted at 06:05h, 05 December

    I asked about Trump being the goat and such, in a post on your episode about the Trump administration and Turkey. I checked back to see of you replied, and my post was gone. Not sure if you remember my question, but if you read it, I’d like to hear your take on Trump beING the goat from the west who charges at the ram. My original post was very detailed. Hope you got the chance to read it.


  • linda keyes
    Posted at 13:18h, 05 December


    Dan8:21 tells us clearly who the goat is.

  • Joel
    Posted at 14:20h, 05 December

    Exactly. Donald Trump is most certainly not the goat of Daniel 8.

  • Natasha
    Posted at 02:14h, 06 December

    Okay. Thanks Linda and Joel. I guess I just took Greece, or the realm (synonymous with territory or sphere) of Grecia as possibly meaning the realm of the west. As the United States of America are not named in the Bible, though talked about. I thought the goat charing at the ram across the whole face of the earth, sounded a bit like the United States of America. We are of the realm of the west. Thank you, Joel, for your clarity.

    God bless,

  • Joel
    Posted at 10:03h, 06 December

    Hi Natasha,

    I appreciate your perspective. There are a few reasons why I would argue against this. First, the word most often translated as Greece is actually the Hebrew Yavan. It does not simply mean the West in general, but in Daniel’s day would have pointed to Asia Minor, primarily Western Asia Minor. Later it came to be used of all of the Alexandrian Greek Empire. There can be no doubt that the events of the Medo-Persian invasion of the west into Asia Minor into even Europe, followed by the Alexandrian response is in mind here as a historical pattern of what is to come in the last days. The principalities of these regions, Persia and Yavan, continue to collide until these days. Thus, there would seem to be little reason to generally interpret Yavan here as pointing to the United States or Donald Trump.


  • Adam
    Posted at 11:50h, 06 December

    Off topic Joel,

    In your books, you focus on specific words to bring out the meaning on a text. But I have not seen you comment on Rev 17:11 in a way that was specific imo. “The beast that thou sawest (in the dream) was and is not, even he is the eighth, and of the seven”. If the beast John saw was, that would imply it existed before johns life. Then it is not, as evident not during Johns time, and in the future this 8th empire is one of the 7 previous empires. I enjoy your books and persuasive style but this specific verse I don’t feel has been explained satisfactory. On a superset note, are you aware of a website that has 3 long internet pages of info on “Mystery Babylon by Joel Richardson” on a random personal website before the books out? If you yahoo “Mystery Babylon Joel Richardson” it comes up on Ted’s website.

  • Natasha Davis
    Posted at 12:27h, 06 December

    I understand what you are saying and I’m sure you are right, considering that you are an expert on the subject and I am not. I took into consideration the invasion of Alexander the Great, and am aware of the conflict between those nations. I suppose I saw that as being a pattern of things to come, as you said. And if it were, than I can’t help but to recognize that Iran calls the U.S. big Satan, not Greece, today. Even this morning, President Rouhani is in the news threatening Donald Trump, he said, “Some man is elected in the U.S. whatever plans he has, it will be revealed later. Yes, he may desire many things. He may desire to weaken the nuclear deal. He may desire to rip up the deal. Do you suppose we will allow this?” https://www.google.com/amp/www.foxnews.com

    But I trust your perspective Joel and I appreciate your work, especially with the Front Line Alliance. Keep it up, brother.

    God bless,

  • Natasha Davis
    Posted at 12:47h, 06 December

    Asia Minor/Turkey being predominantly Sunni and Persia/Iran being predominantly Shia, I can see how this could be what Daniel 8 refers to. That would fit the narrative, because I agree 100% with the AC being muslim, possibly the second or third to rise up after Erdogan,if he is the first king. I simply saw the U.S. charging first, and then loosing her sovereignty i.e. her horn being cut off. And then the power shift, back over to the epicenter. However, I trust your expertise and will get that idea out of my head. It’s kind of a relief really. You do not have to publish this or my last post. I just wanted to tell you these things. It’s not necessary that it be published on your website. Thanks again.

    God bless,

  • Joel
    Posted at 16:45h, 06 December


    Those pages concerning Mystery Babylon are some brief things I had written about 10 years ago concerning Mystery Babylon. I had posted it and taken it down. Ted still has that up.

    Concerning Rev. 17, I’ve actually explained this on several occasions. This passage is frequently misunderstood, in my opinion, for a couple reasons. First, in more recent years, Greek scholarship has come a long way with regard to the issue of tense encoding within Greek verbs. Some very prominent scholars such as Stanley Porter reject the notion that there is any tense encoded in the Greek verb at all. Others are not convinced. Either way, all agree that the notion that Greek verbs carry a clear particular tense is now viewed as an outdated approach. Tense is primarily determined by context, and thus becomes a bit of an interpretive matter. My point is that the Greek does not necessarily say the beast “was” as in past tense to John’s day. It is more likely simply communicating the concept of resurrection/revival. Beyond this, even if we see it as having the tense that most English translations convey, there is still the open question as to the actual timing of this statement. You’ve assumed that it pertains to John’s perspective, thus casting the final beast empire as having existed prior to John’s day. I think a better case can be made that the statement pertains to those who are alive at the time of the revival of the beast — ie. the end times. If you note, the prophecy specifically goes on to state that those who actually “see” i.e.., live to witness the beast revive will be in awe:

    “those who dwell on the earth, whose name has not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, will wonder when they see the beast, that he was and is not and will come.” (v 8b).

    In my view it is simply conveying an empire which experiences a revival. The statement concerning the beast having been, ceasing to exist, and then coming back, is, I would argue, most likely a statement that relates to those who live to actually see or witness its revival, not from John’s 1st century perspective. I think this is most in keeping with the context of the passage. I hope this has helped. God knows best, and time will tell.


  • Adam
    Posted at 21:22h, 06 December

    God does know best and I appreciate your well thought reply Joel. Looking forward to your next book in Febuary! -Cheers

  • Dave
    Posted at 18:33h, 07 December

    Hi JOEL, I fully agree with your viewpoint on this. Military experts, as well as students of military history, recognize that there is a spectrum of conflict. This ranges from low level insurgencies (such as in the Philippines) to full nuclear exchange. There is no single application of military force which effectively addresses the range of conflicts the
    World presents. I think you make an excellent argument on one tool in combatting Islamist extremism.

    On a separate note, I understand you to make the point that the war of Ezekiel 38-39 comes at the end of the Tribulation. One argument you use to support this is Ezekiel 39: 7 where you say that the nations will not profane the name of God anymore and that this will certainly not be the case during the reign of the antichrist. But, depending on the Bible translation you are citing, this passage may be saying something else. My translation (NKJV) says,” I will make My holy name known in the midst of My people Israel, and I will not let them profane my holy name anymore.” The issue isn’t that God’s holy name won’t be profaned anymore, it’s that Israel will no longer profane His name. So if this verse says that Israel will cease to profane God’s name, rather than the nations, it (Ezekiel 38-39) could come earlier in the Tribulation, or even before. I’m asking your thoughts on this as my resources for searching this out are rather limited.

    It makes sense though because if Israel is miraculously rescued from this war before the Tribulation, this may propel them to make a deal with the antichrist just so they could raise a Temple to worship God and give thanks for their deliverance. They may also feel that they are in a stronger position to claim part of the Temple Mount and build a new Temple having just come through this miraculous event Also, the idea that Israel would use weapons as fuel for seven years at the end of the Tribulation has never made sense to me as I don’t see any need for doing this once the Millenial Reign of Christ has begun.

    I really enjoy the forum you’ve created to explore these issues.

  • Joel
    Posted at 22:58h, 07 December

    Hi Dave,

    First, as to your question regarding Ezekiel 39:7, I would suggest that the KJV translation here is not the best.

    So will I make my holy name known in the midst of my people Israel; and I will not let them pollute my holy name any more: and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD, the Holy One in Israel. (KJV)

    As you will likely see in the text, the “let them” is italicized. This means that those words are not in the original Hebrew. These were added as a matter of interpretation on the part of the translators. I would suggest the NASB, NET, HCSB, NIV, RSV, ASV, YLT, and ESV which all consistently use a different phrasing are more true to the text.

    Second, a fuller reading of the whole verse goes on to show that beyond the Lord no longer allowing His name to be profaned or blasphemed, it also states the gentiles (nations) will come to know Him. Obviously this cannot happen until the end of the tribulation.

    Ultimately, my case for Gog as Antichrist and Ezekiel 38-39 culminating at the end of the tribulation rests on the list of events that the text states will occur as a direct result of the destruction of God and his hordes. Not only does the Lord say He will no longer allow His name to be blasphemed, it also says Israel will come to know the Lord, the nations will come to know the Lord, the Lord will pour our His spirit on Israel, He will restore the fortunes of Israel, and deliver all of Israel’s captives, leaving none any longer among the nations. These are all things that can only happen at the return of Jesus.

    There are several other fairly incontrovertible matters that set the timing context of this prophecy. I disgust these in detail in Mideast Beast. I would encourage you to dig in.

    As for burning weapons during the millennium, I’m not sure why this wold be a problem. Do not the Scriptures state that during the millennium, they will beat their swords into plowshares? Is not burning weapons for use the same as converting instruments of warfare into tools for agriculture etc? Life during the millennium is not accomplished through magic, it si accomplished in vary blessed, though natural ways.

    I hope this has helped.

Post A Comment