Dear Doves,

 

Here is an excellent article outlining the fallacy of the Seven Year Peace Treaty and the false notion that the “prince that shall come” is referring to the Anti-Christ.

 

YbiC, MathMan

 

THE PRINCE THAT SHALL COME
By Martel Trevor

In Daniel 9:27, there's a reference to a prince that shall come and "destroy the city (Jerusalem) and the temple".

Who is this mysterious "prince"?

If you listen to prophecy gurus they will tell you, time and again, it's the Antichrist.

There are only 5 problems with their ludicrous theory:

1. The Antichrist is NOWHERE mentioned in this verse.

2. The Antichrist, according to the Bible, will NOT destroy Jerusalem and the temple. Rather, he will occupy Jerusalem [Zechariah 14:2] and sit in the temple, passing himself off as God [2 Thessalonians 2:4]. Hence, there's NO WAY this "prince" can be the Antichrist.

3. This prophecy was already fulfilled, in precise detail, 2,000 years ago.

4. There's no "mystery" whatsoever as to the identity of this prince.

5. The fulfillment of this prophecy, exactly as foretold by the prophet Daniel, is HISTORIC FACT.

The prince in question is the Roman prince Titus, son of Caesar Vespasian, who destroyed Jerusalem and its temple in 70 A.D., EXACTLY as Daniel predicted.

Jerusalem and the first temple had been destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 B.C.

Daniel predicted that Jerusalem and the temple would be rebuilt, then ONCE AGAIN destroyed.

He predicted that, from the edict to rebuild Jerusalem to the Messiah, there would be 69 sabbatical "weeks" [483 years].

After the 483 years, in the middle of the FINAL week [3½ years later] Messiah would be killed (Daniel 9:27).

Then [after Messiah's death] this prince would come and destroy the city and the temple.

Everything happened, in exact sequence:

Jesus was crucified and rose from the dead in 33 A.D.

In 70 A.D. Jerusalem and the temple were totally destroyed, for the second time in history, this time by the Romans.

It even happened on the EXACT date on the Hebrew calendar on which the first temple and Jerusalem were destroyed, the 9th of Av.

According to historian Josephus, who was an eyewitness, both the city and the temple were so thoroughly and ruthlessly destroyed that, if he had not seen with his own eyes, that a city had once stood there, he wouldn't have believed it from the aftermath.

None of these things are in our future. They've ALREADY TAKEN PLACE IN OUR PAST.

All that remains of the "70 weeks" to be fulfilled is HALF A WEEK, which will be the future 3½ year reign of Antichrist. That's the ONLY part of this prophecy that still lies in our future.

So, why does the prophecy establishment insist this "prince" is the Antichrist?

Perhaps to bolster their even more ludicrous theory that the Antichrist will sign a "7-year peace treaty" with Israel and the Arabs. 

It was our precious Lord Jesus Christ who [ALREADY] CONFIRMED THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT WITH HIS EQUALLY PRECIOUS BLOOD [Galatians 3:17].

There are only two ways you can TWIST Daniel's prophecy to make it "fit" the Antichrist.

One, by IGNORING Galatians 3:17, where it states, UNEQUIVOCALLY, it was the Christ who confirmed the covenant.

Two, by taking verse 27 totally out of context, which amounts to scriptural and intellectual dishonesty.

That's another way of saying, it's a blatant lie.

If the "prince" mentioned in this verse were the Antichrist, prophecy quacks would THEN be forced to make the case that Titus is the future Antichrist, and that he will make a peace covenant with the Jews, who hate and despise him to this very day.

Whichever way you look at it, it simply doesn't hold water.

This already happened. Antichrist won't make a peace treaty with anybody, since he's a man of war.

People will either submit to his rule willingly, or they'll be FORCED to do so.

Those who refuse, WILL BE KILLED.

There won't be ANY peace [false, real, or imagined] during the tribulation.