PROPHECY OF THE ANTICHRIST: WHERE DO WE GET THIS IDEA OF A SEVEN-YEAR ANTICHRIST REIGN?

FREE DOWNLOAD

You will recall in the previous post I wrote about the seven-year vs 3 ½-year theory concerning the reign of the Antichrist. And, of course, I have shown where the testimonies of both Daniel and John are clearly in favour of the 3 ½-year position. 

It was in a discussion on the subject of the Antichrist with a church sister (not from my church) that I first heard about this seven-year argument. This was round about the time when I just got baptized, and you know what it's like when you just get converted - you tend to have a zeal and a fire in your soul for the word. That was how I felt then, and in my youthful exuberance I always wanted to straighten out everybody whom I believe is not preaching the truth. 

And so I was thrown in a doctrinal 'duel' with this young lady over this seven-year issue. I don't think she was able to explain from the Bible where she got it from. And I remember showing her a few  texts validating the 1260-day / 3 ½-year Antichrist reign whereas she was not able to furnish a single texts to prove her seven-year position. And so she conceded that she must have made a mistake and accepted the 3 ½ year as correct.

Since then, I was sure that there was no such teaching after all, until (to my surprise) I heard a host of other people with the same seven-year argument! Then I became curious and started to wonder where in the scriptures they got it from!

It was not until I read this book on prophecy that was widely advertised on TBN network that I finally got what is supposed to be a biblical basis for this position. It was taken from the book of Daniel, chapter 9 verses 24-27:     

^“Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
²⁵ Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
²⁶ And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
²⁷ And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

 According to the proponents of the seven-year theory, in this verse 'one week' referred to in verse 27 is equivalent to 'seven years', which I am in total agreement with. However, what I cannot understand is how does that prove a seven-year Antichrist reign?

Here is the dilemma. This prophecy is given to us within the framework of a 70-week period (vs 24). Then in verse 25 it went on to say that from the going forth of the command to rebuild Jerusalem to the Messiah is a total of 69 weeks (7+62wks). That means only one week would be left.

The Bible says that after the 62 weeks the Messiah would be cut off, an event that is to take place in the 70th week! And for your information, just in remote case you are not aware, this Messiah is referring to none other than Jesus Christ Himself (St. Jn 4:25, 26).

Are we to believe that the Antichrist is to reign in the same week (seven-year period) when Christ is to be cut off!? This is very hard to explain since this seven-year theory puts the Antichrist in the last days, whereas this prophecy is clearly speaking of Jesus Christ who is supposed to have fulfilled His messianic mission way back in the first century!

My real problem with this position is not only this obvious dilemma, but also the manner in which its advocates arrive at this conclusion. What they attempt to do is to try to solve what appears to be a difficult Bible text by analyzing the text itself independent of its context.

Here is the context:

·         The going forth of the commandment to rebuild Jerusalem

·         The rebuilding of the Holy City was completed in seven prophetic weeks

·         Sixty-two weeks after the rebuilding is completed the Messiah came on the scene

·         The Messiah was cut off (killed) in the middle of the prophetic week (at the 3 ½-day point) putting an end to sacrifice and oblation

·         The seventy prophetic weeks ended 3 ½ days after Messiah was killed

What the proponents of the seven-year theory fail to recognize is the fact that there are parallel texts from both the Old and New Testament to compare it with; texts that would shed light on the seventy-week prophecy. In this way they would have known that this text is in perfect harmony with the prophesied mission of Christ, while at variance with all those texts that speak unequivocally of the work of the Antichrist and the period of his reign. This is what you call the principle of scripture comparison of parallel prophecies.

Because the 70 weeks period is to be interpreted on the basis of the day-for-a-year principle (Ezek. 4:6; Num. 14:34), 70 prophetic weeks, being 490 prophetic days, are to be considered to be 490 literal years. This period began in 457BC and terminated in 34AD. Therefore, from the time the command was issued to rebuild the holy city to the Messiah should really be 483 literal years (69 prophetic weeks). The Messiah came on the scene seven years before the end of the 70 prophetic weeks (27AD).

The meaning of the term ‘Messiah’ is ‘anointed one’. Thus it was on account of Jesus’ anointing by the Holy Spirit at His baptism that He officially began carry out his messianic functions. After the Spirit of God descended upon Jesus the Bible states that He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day and made the following declaration:   
  

^“ The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, To preach the acceptable year of the Lord. And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him. And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.” Luke 4:18-21

Just about every Bible student would agree that the ministry of Christ went for 3 ½ years. The ministry of Christ was terminated by His crucifixion. When Christ, the true Sacrifice, expired on the cross the veil of the temple was rented from top to bottom (Matt. 27:51) signaling an end to the sacrificial sanctuary system. This event took place in 31AD.  Three and a half years later the 490 years came to an end with the stoning of Stephen and the spreading of the gospel far and wide to the Gentiles (34AD).

  

Thus we can see a clear parallel between Daniel 9:27 and other texts in the New Testament. The principle of scripture comparison of parallel prophecies is one of the most powerful tools of interpretation of Bible prophecy. In the prophecy course I have demonstrated how this principle is put to work in many situations. If you should properly apply this principle you will see how critical they are to a thorough understanding of what we would consider difficult prophecies.