The Seven Year Treaty
Just a few days ago, United States Undersecretary of State Wendy Sherman, who along with Secretary of State John Kerry has participated in negotiations with Iran over nuclear issues, warned Israel that abandonment of the two-state solution in Israel would complicate America’s traditional support of Israel in the United Nations.
This was nothing more than a regurgitation of what President Obama and John Kerry said in response to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s statement shortly after he was reelected. A summary of the Prime Minister’s position on the possibility of a Palestinian State alongside (actually inside Israel’s sovereign borders) of Israel is that he couldn’t continue to pursue such a “solution” because neither the Palestinian Authority nor Hamas had budged an inch in their refusal to recognize Israel as a sovereign Jewish State.
Ms. Sherman qualified her comments by noting that the US Administration would withhold a final decision. She said: “We will be watching very closely to see what happens after a new government in Israel is formed on this issue of working towards two states living side by side in peace and security.”
According to Netanyahu, it simply isn’t feasible (at this point in time) to resume negotiations with the Palestinians, as they still maintain an avowed duty to reclaim a land that was never their land in the first place. They don’t really want peace in Israel, they want a piece of Israel … a piece here, a piece there; or, preferably, the entire State of Israel dismantled and the Jews destroyed or at least driven from the land. In some Eye of Prophecy articles, I have partially addressed this matter of a two-state solution and who the land actually belongs to. But in the article entitled, A Palestinian State? (No, say many Arabs), published 1-11-14, I dealt with it more extensively, particularly from the viewpoint of the Palestinians.
Here are a couple of excerpts from that article:
Why would so many Arabs NOT want a Palestinian State? Isn’t that what all Arabs long for in Israel? Isn’t that the reason for past terrorist attacks on Israeli Jews? Or, the incessant demands by the Palestinian Authority headed by Mahmoud Abbas and its rival counterpart Hamas in the Gaza Strip for Palestinian rights? Or the greater majority of world opinion to end so-called Israeli settlement occupation of certain territories within Israel?
There are several divisive issues and obstacles to a peace accord between Arabs and Jews in Israel, including an independent Palestinian State within Israeli borders. But none more so than the question of Israeli control of Golan Heights and the Jordan Valley for national security reasons. And then for religious and political reasons—exclusive control of East Jerusalem by the Arabs which would, for all practical purposes, mean that Jerusalem is not Israel’s capital.
And as Palestinian journalist, Khaled Abu Toameh writes in his article for Gatestone Institute, “It was hard this week to find even one Israeli Arab who publicly supported the proposal.” Khaled goes on to say, “Arab Knesset members … do not want to wake up in the morning and discover that they are citizens of a Palestinian state. It is much easier for them to accuse Israel of racism than to admit that they do not want to be part of a Palestinian state.”
At face value that seems and sounds incredible—that Palestinians wouldn’t want to be governed by their own people. But after further review, it’s all too practical and easy to grasp. Pretty much ever since Israel became a nation, and especially since 1967 when hundreds of thousands more Arabs suddenly became citizens of Israel, those Israeli Arabs have been far better off than their Palestinian brothers living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Although there’s still a lot of hostility emanating from Israeli Arabs toward Israel, they understand that Israeli citizenship affords them much more freedom, democracy, a higher standard of living, movement throughout Israel, more places to shop for and buy the things they want and need; in short, a better way of life. The last thing they want is an abruptly changed life in a Palestinian State, controlled by a Palestinian government that could just as quickly take away many of the privileges they currently enjoy as Israeli citizens.
Why a Palestinian State is Not the Solution
Not just many Israeli Arabs in Israel, but many citizens of Jordan (one of only two Muslim countries that have officially recognized Israel as a sovereign state … Egypt being the other) would pragmatically prefer Israel as the only state to its west. For you see, Jordan relies on Israel both politically and economically, as Jordan no longer trust its fellow-Arab countries. Recently a Jordanian columnist, Maher Abu Tair accused Arab countries of turning their backs on Jordan. Also, he and other Jordanians know all too well: virtually every other Arab nation has spurned the Palestinians within Israel. Actually, this has been going on for decades.
Said Tair, “This is the unfortunate reality, and those who follow events can see Jordan’s headlong rush towards Israel and the overlap of (their) political and economic interests. It is as if Jordan is saying one of two things: that all Arab doors are closed to it, or that Israel is its safest ally and the only refuge in the region. Alternatively, perhaps the former is pushing Jordan towards the latter. The naked truth is that Jordan no longer has any Arab allies, and today its only ally against the entire Arab east is Israel…”
This is absolutely astonishing! But it reinforces the undeniable practical reality of what is really taking place in Israel and the Muslim nations that surround her. Though not stated by Abu Tair, he and other knowledgeable Jordanians fully grasp the potential effect of thousands upon thousands more Palestinians who would seek refugee asylum in Jordan should a civil war break out between Muslims factions in a Palestinian State. In fact, Jordan has already absorbed thousands of Palestinians who (voluntarily … not by Jewish hands) fled to Jordan during the Independence War of 1948, the 1967 Six-Day War, or the Yom Kippur War of 1973, each of which was initiated by Arab coalitions, including Jordan itself in 1948.
For that matter, the so-called unity agreement of just a few months ago between the Palestinian Authority (Fatah) of the West Bank and Hamas (ruling authority in Gaza) has failed miserably. These two Palestinian organizations are at each other’s throat again in a heated dispute, both claiming the right to govern the Palestinians. Hamas is the more violent of the two, but both groups would use (misuse) a Palestinian State that suddenly would have sovereign boundaries to launch more terrorist’s strikes against Israelis. Moreover, the creation of a Palestinian State would require a route (highway) to connect the West Bank to the Gaza Strip right through the heart of Israel.
In actuality there would be no civil war (one that would last any length of time) between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas if there were no Palestinian State. Why? Because Israel would intervene to (1) protect its own citizens—both Jews and Arab Israelis in Israel proper; and (2) protect its settlements in the West Bank. However, if a Palestinian State was created, national borders would be drawn for such a State. Which, in turn, would exacerbate even more the hostility between Fatah and Hamas and more likely than not precipitate a civil war much like we have seen in other Muslim countries like Tunisia, Libya, Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. Anyone paying the slightest attention to Middle East events is aware of the bloody civil conflict between Shi’ite and Sunni Muslims in those nations.
Aleppo, Syria … Bodies Found After Water Drained
Theoretically, Israel would not be able to intervene in the affairs of a sovereign (Palestinian) State, and would be criticized even more harshly and unjustly by Muslim nations, by the European Union, and even by the United States. Any preemptive Israeli incursion into the boundaries of a Palestinian State would undoubtedly be condemned by the United Nations as an (unlawful) Act of War, with who knows what kind of repercussions.
No, it’s not the Palestinians or majority of Israelis that support a two-state remedy to the problem. And the reason is because most Arabs and Jews fully understand what the problem really is: an ancient animosity of Arabs against Jews that goes all the way back to Abraham’s sons—Ishmael and Isaac. Instead, it’s the United States, the European Union, Russia, and most Mid-Eastern nations that are feverishly working toward a “peace plan” designed to resolve an otherwise irreconcilable dilemma without truly grasping the real source of the problem, let alone the solution to that problem.
What is the underlying motive for the world’s insistence that Israel be divided into two states? Though somewhat of an oversimplification, the two fundamental reasons originate from two divergent sources:
Western Nations (primarily the EU and US): Some sort of conceited super-power desire to create a legacy of the nation or nations that successfully orchestrated peace in the Middle East.
Russia and Mid-Eastern Muslim Nations Hostile toward Israel (principally Iran but all nations other than Jordan and Egypt … for now): Their true agenda would be to usurp control of this Palestinian State (as a proxy) through massive economic and military aid. But it wouldn’t matter which nation exercised this kind of control and influence; as either Hamas or Fatah would continue to compete for supremacy (civil war), for reasons no different from those that have produced the current Mid-East civil wars, including Muslim radical groups fighting against other Islamic terrorists.
In short: Could there, will there ever be an Israeli State and a Palestinian State “living side by side in peace and security?” In my opinion based on Scripture, NO. That is: not until a spectacular occurrence that will shake the inhabitants of this earth like never before … The Rapture of true believers in Messiah Jesus. Soon after this colossal event, the reappearance of the Antichrist beast from the Abyss will stun the world to the extent that he will (easily) manipulate Israel and Muslim nations into signing a treaty.
Right now, the adversarial conditions between Israel and Muslims (including Palestinians) preclude any such pact for several geographical, political, religious, and social reasons, which will be soon explained in this article. But even if all of those disputes were somehow resolved, there is one monumental obstacle to a two-state solution. It is such a barrier that neither the Israelis nor the Palestinian Arabs (indeed, Muslims the world-over) will even place it on the table as a possible point of negotiation.
Jerusalem, a City Divided
I’m referring to Jerusalem. More specifically, what is now classified as East & West Jerusalem. Even more precisely, Temple Mount. The Palestinians demand complete control of Temple Mount and have said time and time again that East Jerusalem would be the capital of a Palestinian State. For the majority of Israelis this is unthinkable, not the least of which is Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and what will be his parliamentary coalition headed by the prevailing Likud party.
It was not always this way. It hasn’t been all that long since former Prime Ministers Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert offered East Jerusalem to the Palestinians in exchange for recognition of Israel as a sovereign state (and other concessions from both sides). Each time the Palestinian Authority rejected this incredibly magnanimous offer; which, among other things, reveals their real (not so hidden) agenda of wanting all of Israel.
*Note: What part of the Muslim Palestinian (paraphrased) objective that, “We want all of Israel and will drive the Jews into the sea to get it,” doesn’t our United States President and the European Union understand!? Is the repeated menace from high-ranking Iranian officials including their Ayatollah of “Death to America, Death to Israel,” just an idle threat? Hello? I think not.
Both times, many Israelis breathed a sigh of relief that these offers were rejected by the Palestinians, as they now realize what a stupendous blunder it was to even make such an offer. In the past few years, polls in Israel have demonstrated that even liberal leaning Jews currently comprehend that Palestinian control of East Jerusalem would, in no way, guarantee peace between Arab and Jew. This is particularly true given the realization that stronger Muslim countries (like Iran and Turkey and even Egypt) would seek some measure of control (as alluded earlier in this article) over a Palestinian State, which would endanger exponentially an already volatile, even explosive situation between Jews and Palestinian Arabs.
What about the other issues separating the two sides? Well, why don’t we listen to the words of an Israeli Prime Minister named Ilan Rosen who disclosed the details of an amazingly unprecedented treaty between Israel and Palestinian Arabs (indeed, all Arab nations)!
“Ladies and gentlemen, citizens of Israel, we have a treaty with the Arab coalition. The Knesset and the IDF unanimously support this magnificent achievement. I must acknowledge the splendid efforts make by all parties, especially by the European Union, and specifically by its President, Juan Iago Castilla. Mr. Castilla mediated the more difficult articles of this covenant. He proposed the most radical compromise—one that your own government did not think to introduce. Now, then, are you ready for some details?”
Six million Jews replied in unison, “Yes!”
“Number one: the State of Israel will be unequivocally recognized and accepted by all Muslim nations and by all countries involved in this treaty. This will include parties with terrorist affiliations such as Hamas.
“Number two: Israel will be granted a seat on the security council of the United Nations. Number three: With the exception of two Muslim nations, an Israeli embassy will be placed in the capitals of Arab countries. Number four: All signatories to the treaty will recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.”
“Impossible!” The word reverberated throughout Israel. Muslims had sworn never to accept Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. But then most had sworn never to recognize Israel.
His extended hand had no effect on the deafening shouts, “Jerusalem, Jerusalem!”
“My friends, we must reciprocate. There are times when we must allow even our enemies to be right, so long as it doesn’t jeopardize our security.”
Many (in the crowd) nodded, but some frowned.
Ilan continued: “All Gaza and West Bank checkpoints will be turned over to the Palestinians. Those residents will have free passage in and through Israel, as long as they have a stated purpose. Those purposes will be worked out by the time the treaty is signed.
“An allotment of the so-called (Palestinian) refugees in various Arab nations will be allowed to return if they desire. The number will be limited to 150,000. We will leave this to the Palestinian Authority, but they will probably resettle in the vacated Israeli settlements of Gaza and the West Bank. Subject to the normal citizenship procedures, they can become citizens of Israel if they choose to do so.”
More frowns, but Ilan had expected this reaction.
“If there are no terrorists attacks, mortar launchings, or threats of military mobilization against Israel within one year of the treaty, Israel will accept and recognize a Palestinian State within our borders. And at all times, Arab citizens of Israel will have a minimum of sixteen electorates in the Knesset.
“With the exception of convicted murderers, all Palestinian, Arab, and international prisoners will be released. They must return to their homeland, be it Gaza, the West Bank, or a country outside of Israel.”
Low grumbles and loud groans permeated the crowd, “We give too much,” some shouted.
At this point, Prime Minister Rosen was about to end this remarkable speech to Israel, but he was reminded by the Israeli Defense Minister of the most astounding accomplishment of this treaty. Which was a ploy by Ilan to increase the suspense and heighten the excitement of the moment. He continued with his message:
“This treaty would not have been possible without one additional article. It is the one I referenced earlier in my speech. It would appear that we have another miracle. This one has been two thousand years in the making. Effective the day after the treaty is signed, we will begin construction of Jerusalem’s third temple. The location of our temple will be none other than the Temple Mount.
“Religious or secular, for or against a rebuilt temple, it did not matter. Israel gasped as such a tremendous accomplishment, both real and symbolic. The bewildered crowd exploded in jubilation. All of Israel joined them with shouting, laughing, weeping, and dancing. Loud cries of, “Praise God,” erupted from the chief rabbi, who had leaped from his chair only a few feet from Ilan. Soldiers began to sing, Politicians praised their prime minister with a symphony of continuous adulation. An orthodox rabbi jumped in the air. He pointed in the direction of Temple Mount, fell to his hands and knees, and kissed the ground. Children screamed in delight. A young liberal rabbi did a backflip, then another one.
“Cars and buses screeched to a halt, doors flung open, and occupants pranced around their cars with outstretched arms. From every building in Israel, the celebration spilled into the streets. People held hands and danced in circles to the right. Circles within circles danced to the left. They struck beautiful chords of harmony as they sang “Hava Nagila.” Strangers hugged and kissed. The orchestra had become a concert ensemble, replete with singers and dancers. Like floodwaters from a breached dam, cascading chants filled the air.
“Eelan—Isra’el! Eelan—Isra’el! Eelan—Isra’el!”
“Such rejoicing had not been heard since Israel achieved statehood. Some would say not since the Exodus.”
Temple Mount Model
Perhaps not, but by now you have probably figured out that the above scene has not actually occurred in Israel … not yet anyway. You would be right, as this unheard of treaty comes from a fictional Israeli Prime Minister Ilan Rosen as found in Chapter 19 of my novel, O Israel … The end is the beginning for those left behind. And, as stated by Ilan Rosen, credit is given to Juan Castilla (Antichrist in the novel) for initiating and moderating this treaty, particularly the most troublesome item of a rebuilt Jewish Temple.
Though O Israel was published in 2007, this fictional treaty produced resolution of the core elements of the current and virtually impassable areas of disagreement between Jew and Arab in Israel. And, I’m completely convinced that some, if not all, of these disputed matters will be zones of concession and agreement in the treaty orchestrated by the Antichrist shortly after the Rapture. As, however, I later realized through an amazing disclosure from the Lord (the main theme of my subsequent non-fiction book Out of the Abyss), the Antichrist beast of Revelation will not be a modern-day born man; rather he is none other than the Roman Emperor, Nero.
The Seven-Year Treaty
First, where in Scripture do we find the announcement that there will be a Seven-Year Tribulation? What passage or verse? Is it found in the Book of Revelation? No, it is not found in Revelation. Surprised? Then it must be in the book of Daniel, you say? No, not there either. In fact, nowhere in the Bible do we actually see the phrase Seven-year tribulation. Yet it is, by far, the most commonly used expression by prophecy students.
Alright, to a certain extent these are trick questions, but only in part. The phrase is actually a hybrid of two passages in Scripture. (1) “For then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will” (Matthew 24:21, NASB). These are the very words of Jesus who, in response to his disciples request about the end times, warns about the cataclysmic events of the last days.
(2) The reason that this period of tribulation is given a seven-year duration is, of course, directly from Daniel’s astonishing prophecy of, “a ruler (who) will arise whose armies will destroy the city and the Temple” (Daniel 9:26). For those who have read my book Out of the Abyss or some of the Eye of Prophecy articles on this subject, you have found ample documentation from this passage and several others than pertain to the little horn, king, ruler, man of lawlessness, beast (all designations of the most frequently used term, Antichrist); that Nero is the beast who returns from the Abyss (Revelation 17:8). These articles can be found in the category of Antichrist, most recently the three-part series entitled, A Beast by Any Other Name … Is Still a Beast.
More specifically, the seven-year tribulation finds its origin of time (seven years) in the following verse: “The ruler will make a treaty with the people (Israel) for a period of one set of seven, but after half this time, he will put an end to the sacrifices and offerings…” (Verse 27).
Thus, Bible scholars and teachers have, by logical deduction and correlation, linked the one set of seven (Hebrew expression for seven years) to Jesus’s prophecy of the coming great tribulation, with the two prophecies combined together in the catchphrase, Seven-Year Tribulation.
This is further reinforced by companion language in Revelation that tells us the Antichrist’s (full) authority will last three and a half years (42 months), which undoubtedly will begin when he breaks the treaty with Israel half way through it. “Then the beast was allowed to speak great blasphemies against God. And he was given authority to do whatever he wanted for forty-two months” (Revelation 13:5).
Actually, the first descriptive reference to this horrendous period of turmoil and terror is, in fact, from the prophet Daniel. It follows Chapter 11 in which Daniel is given detailed prophecies of the Antichrist prototype, Antiochus IV, then the Antichrist, himself. The angel continues this revelation by telling Daniel, “At that time Michael, the archangel who stands guard over your nation (Israel), will arise. Then there will be a time of anguish (tribulation) greater than any since nations first came into existence” (Daniel 12:1).
Then later in this chapter, at Daniel’s request of, “how long will it be until these shocking events are over?” the angel’s response is: “It will go on for a time, times, and half a time…” (Verses 6-7).
As we know, neither Daniel nor anyone else could or would understand these phenomenal predictions until the Messiah was born, lived, died, and arose back to heaven. And even then, not until the (final), “revelation of Jesus Christ,” was given to John as recorded in the book of Revelation.
In returning to the main theme of this article (is peace or some form of peace through a covenant between Jews and Arabs possible), I believe Scripture is foundationally very clear that only a miraculous event or series of events can and will be the catalyst for an otherwise impossible treaty agreement between Israel (Jews) and Arab countries (Muslims). The first event is the divine supernatural resurrection from the dead of believers in Christ (hundreds of millions the world over) and transformation/transference of all living believers to heaven. Followed shortly by the reappearance of the beast from the abyss (Revelation 17:8) and his arrangement of a seven-year treaty. Culminating in the magnificent return of Jesus Christ to the earth to rescue Israel by soundly defeating the kings and nations of the earth aligned against him (Armageddon).
You might ask: “How will Nero achieve what no one else has accomplished, i.e. a treaty between Jews and Muslims? First to preface the answer on the scriptural clear premise that God gives this authority to Satan and, indirectly to the Antichrist. Second: this treaty of peace is anything but real peace. Rather it will be a deliberate deception perpetrated by Nero to accomplish his malevolent agenda which is to establish the kingdom of Satan over the earth. In reality it will be a false peace that will plunge the world into the greatest war induced carnage of all time.
The answer to your question is found primarily in Revelation Chapter 13. For two reasons, Nero will have virtually no problem with or opposition to this treaty.
“I saw that one of the heads (Nero is one of the seven heads or kings of Revelation 13 and 17) of the beast seemed wounded beyond recovery—but the fatal would was healed! The whole world marveled at this miracle and gave allegiance to the beast. They worshiped the dragon for giving the beast such power, and they also worshiped the beast. ‘Who is as great as the beast?’ they exclaimed. ‘Who is able to fight against him?’” (Revelation 13:3-4).
First, Antichrist Nero will dazzle the world with what they perceive to be the miracle of resurrection. Thus, many (including most Arabs and many Jews) will give him their immediate loyalty, even to the extreme of worship. Secondly, they will also fear him greatly. After all, who could possibly oppose or fight against someone who returned from the dead? How on earth can you even kill someone like that!? Their conclusion: you can’t, so the only choice is to do what he says. Thus, if he wants the Jews and Arabs to broker a treaty, neither side will have much of a problem with resolving all the irreconcilable issues listed earlier in this article, not the least of which is permission (accepted by the Arabs) for the Jews to rebuild the Temple.
Things to Ponder
Following the Seven-Years of Tribulation, Christ will return in great power and glory. At that time, “The Lord will mediate between nations and will settle international disputes. They will hammer their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will no longer fight against nation, nor train for war anymore” (Isaiah 2:4).
It can’t be stressed enough: True, lasting peace will only be possible through the Prince of Peace, Messiah Jesus.
But before there can be national peace between peoples, there must first be individual peace with God. How can that happen? “Therefore, since we have been made right in God’s sight by faith, we have peace with God because of what Jesus Christ our Lord has done for us” (Romans 5:1).
Whether individual or national peace, the Hebrew word, Shalom, is by far the best expression for peace. It is much more than the absence of war. Shalom conveys wholeness, wellbeing, harmony, contentment, security, rest, and tranquility.
During the Millennial Reign of Messiah on earth, he alone will mediate disputes between nations. Likewise, now (until then), “…there is only one God and one Mediator who can reconcile God and humanity—the man Christ Jesus. He gave his life to purchase freedom for everyone…” (I Timothy 2:5-6).
Then there will be no need for treaties, whatsoever. For there will be one Man (the God-man Christ Jesus) who will be the very embodiment of Righteousness, Justice, and Shalom throughout the earth.