A correct answer to the question contained in the title of this week’s article will confirm the identity of the Antichrist, presumed to be unknown until after the Rapture occurs!
I say, confirm, because his identity has already been disclosed and documented in my second book, Out of the Abyss, and in several Eye of Prophecy articles.
Let’s get right to the first part of a well-known Bible passage (Daniel 9:26-27) from which the question posed in this week’s article is derived. Quoting from the New American Standard Bible—one of the older translations that uses the phrase, people of the prince:
“Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary…” (Daniel 9:26a).
Bible scholars, including me, are virtually unanimous: The Messiah identified in this sweeping prophecy is Jesus of Nazareth (Incarnate Son of God) whose extraordinary birth, life, death, and resurrection from the grave seemed to accomplish little … at first. Not until several years later did the Christian faith explode throughout the Roman Empire and turn the ancient pagan world upside down.
But who is “the prince” referenced in this passage?
Once again, the consensus among serious Bible teachers, students, and commentators, including me: The prince is the Antichrist, which is the most common designation given to this evil man; also known as the little horn, ruler, king, man of lawlessness, and beast (of Revelation).
However, the mainstream perception regarding the (Antichrist) prince is that he will be a modern-day born man (some say he’s already alive) who ascends to power shortly after the Rapture. Just like all tyrants before him, i.e. a natural and normal rise to power. Even though Revelation Chapters 13 and 17 depict the Antichrist’s arrival on the scene (reappearance) as anything but normal or natural.
Next question: Who are the “people of the prince” mentioned in this passage?
Again, the answer is accepted by most Bible teachers as a given historical fact in fulfillment of the (first part) of the prophecy. So much so, that newer translations of the Bible get even more specific in order to precisely identify the people of the prince.
Here, then is that same portion of the passage as found in the New Living Translation, from which I always quote, unless otherwise noted in my articles.
“After this period of sixty-two sets of seven, the Anointed One (Messiah) will be killed, appearing to have accomplished nothing, and a ruler will arise whose armies will destroy the city and the Temple…” (Daniel 9:26a, parenthesis mine).
One of the most documented dramatic events of ancient history was that of the Roman Legions assault against Israel that began in A.D. 66, culminating in the sack of Jerusalem, slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Jews, and annihilation of the 2nd Jewish Temple in A.D. 70. Thus, the people of the prince in fulfillment of Daniel’s prophecy were the Roman Legions of the 1st century.
Accordingly, let me rephrase the question contained in this week’s Eye of Prophecy article. A question that, as indicated, will be answered with decisive documentation and compelling commentary on both the prince (his identity) and the people of that prince (Roman Legions).
To Whom Do (Did) the 1st Century Roman Legions That Destroyed the Temple Belong?
This week’s Eye of Prophecy post is the 310th article overall and the 60th in the Category of The Antichrist.
Many of these 60 articles elaborate on one or more of the Biblical passages concerning the Antichrist with extensive evaluation of each of these passages contained in my 2nd book, Out of the Abyss. The passages: Daniel Chapter 7, 9, & 11; Zechariah Chapter 11; II Thessalonians Chapter 2; I John Chapter 2; Revelation Chapters 13, 17, and 19. With Revelation Chapter 17 more of a biographical introduction to the beast-king (Antichrist) regarding his initial appearance during the 1st century, then his reappearance (soon-to-come) in what is now the 21st century … at the outset of the Great Tribulation.
Note: The first mention of the beast—who comes up out of the bottomless pit—in the book of Revelation is in Chapter 11, but in the greater context of the two mighty prophets who are killed by the Antichrist beast.
In follow up to my book, Out of the Abyss, most Eye of Prophecy articles in the category of The Antichrist provide ample evidence (Biblically and historically) to support the startling conclusion that the Antichrist will not be a modern-day born man who rises to prominence before and power shortly after the Rapture.
Rather, he is none other than the Roman Emperor Nero!
For me, it all began with Revelation 17:7-8; the angel’s astounding disclosure to John that the man he had just seen (in the form of a beast) had already lived and died in the first century.
Read with me: “Why are you so amazed, the angel asked. I will tell you the mystery of this woman and of the beast with seven heads… The beast you saw was once alive but isn’t now. And yet he will soon (abruptly) come up out of the bottomless pit… And the people who belong to this world … will be amazed at the reappearance of this beast who had died” (parenthesis mine).
Question: Does the passage state or even imply that the beast will die then come back to life during the Seven-Year Tribulation? No, it does not. What it says is that the beast (the man called Antichrist) HAD ALREADY LIVED AND DIED BEFORE JOHN SAW HIM.
Moreover, the fatal wound of the beast that had been healed is seen by (marveled at) the world after he arises from the sea (Abyss … Abyssal sea, Revelation 17). Meaning that when the world first sees him as described in Revelation 13:1-4, his fatal wound had already been healed. Which when combined with Chapter 17 clearly refers to the reappearance of the beast who had already lived and died even before John wrote Revelation. Which is why (the only reason as presented in Revelation 13) that many give him their complete allegiance, to the point of worship, i.e. his return from the grave as they will perceive it.
From there (for me) it was a matter of extensive and intensive study of every passage on the Antichrist; plus, a deep dose of 1st century Roman and Church history to identify which of the five fallen kings (Revelation 17:10) was the Antichrist. Part of that process was to match the number of the beast (six hundred, sixty-six) to a man of the 1st century through Hebrew gematria (counting by the Hebrew alphabet) after translating from the Greek—the language in which the New Testament was written. This clue was given in Revelation Chapter 13. Remarkably, it matches the name of Neron Kaiser (Greek) or Nero Caesar.
(Bust of Nero)
Yet, there is more evidence in Revelation 13 & 17 than just the number of the beast to convincingly conclude that Nero was the Antichrist of the 1st century and will return from the Abyss (just like Scripture says will happen) to resume his reign of terror for 3 ½ years of the Tribulation. Likewise, that he was the Man of Lawlessness, a term that the Apostle Paul used of him in II Thessalonians Chapter 2. And the little horn/king of Daniel 7, as well as the King of the North in Daniel 11.
Today, we’ll focus on Daniel 9:26-27, which is perhaps the most persuasive passage to confirm Nero as the Antichrist; specifically, his two appearances to mimic the true Messiah’s first and second arrivals (Advents) to this earth.
The Ruler and His Armies
Before we continue with the extraordinary evidence to establish Nero as the prince/ruler of Daniel’s amazing prophecy, let’s look at the entirety of this passage. We’ll see how and when Nero was intricately involved with and linked to in real-time and space the very people (Roman legions) who destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in A.D. 70.
As opposed to a modern-day man who is supposed to arise from some replicated version of the ancient Roman Empire, and, thereby, is somehow considered to be attached or affiliated with the people of that long-gone empire. We’ll see how this stretches the contemporary mainstream connection between a modern-day Antichrist and the ancient Roman legions to the breaking point.
Here is the full passage:
“After this period of sixty-two sets of seven, the Anointed One (Messiah) will be killed, appearing to have accomplished nothing, and a ruler will arise whose armies will destroy the city and the Temple. The end will come with a flood and war and its miseries are decreed from that time to the very end. The ruler will make a treaty with the people for a period of one set of seven, but after half this time, he will put an end to the sacrifices and offerings. And as a climax to all his terrible deeds, he will set up a sacrilegious object that causes desecration, until the fate decreed for this defiler is finally poured out on him” (Daniel 9:26-27).
It is from this passage that we know the duration of the Great Tribulation to be seven years (one set of seven), as that is the length of the treaty with Israel orchestrated by the ruler (Antichrist). But half-way through, the ruler will break the treaty and abruptly end the sacrifices and offerings that will have been restored to and through the rebuilt Jewish Temple.
This also tracks with the full power and authority given to (permitted by the Lord) Antichrist during the last half of the Tribulation—42 months as stated in Revelation Chapter 13.
Note: just a quick reference to the sacrilegious object erected by the Antichrist. Most Bible teachers propose that this will be done when Antichrist breaks the treaty. Yet, this passage combined with Daniel 12:11-12 strongly suggests that the profane object won’t be set up until the very end of the Tribulation. As indicated in a couple of prior Eye of Prophecy articles, I’m convinced this will take place (as a climax to all his terrible deeds, as the passage states) after Messiah Jesus returns to Jerusalem to rescue Israel from Antichrist and his ten-nation coalition. In fact, 30 days after the last 3 1/2 years of the Tribulation. This will be just before Christ defeats Antichrist and his armies at Armageddon.
However, today’s emphasis is on the ruler of this passage, particularly the relationship to his people (of the prince); more specifically that those people were the Roman legions that destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in A.D. 70.
Notice that Daniel first introduces the ruler (Antichrist) as “a ruler will arise…”
Which begs the question: When will this ruler arise?
Narrowing it down further: Has he already arose (appeared on the scene) or will this take place (for the first and only time) after the Rapture at the outset of the Tribulation?
One way to answer those questions is to simply repeat what the angel told John in the subsequent New Testament revelation of the beast … Revelation Chapter 17. Which is the FACT that the Antichrist beast had already lived and died before John twice saw visions of this man. Plus, the FACT that the Antichrist beast would reappear from the Abyss to the utter amazement of those left behind at the Rapture—unbelievers. Then more disclosure in Revelation 17 that the beast would return to form a ten-nation coalition during the Tribulation period.
However, in keeping with the main subject/passage of this week’s article, let’s concentrate on Daniel Chapter 9 to answer the question as to when the ruler would (first) arise or appear on the scene of history. To also state that the man (a ruler) who would arise is “the ruler” (the same ruler) who would make a treaty with Israel that would usher in the Great Tribulation.
As indicated, the prevailing view (assumption) is that this ruler will make only one appearance, as he must be a modern-day born man. But that’s not what the passage says. It first states that this ruler would arise, “whose armies will destroy the city and the Temple.” Which we know happened in AD 70.
Next, we read: “The end will come with a flood and war and its miseries are decreed from that time to the very end” (Daniel 9:26b).
We must recognize that Daniel is talking about the Jews and Israel, and her Messiah and the Anti-Messiah whose armies would destroy the Temple. The entire passage even beginning with verse 24 is a prophecy concerning Israel’s destiny, with the rest of the world affected by what happens to Israel.
Moreover, there is a strongly suggested time-gap between verse 26 and the beginning of verse 27.
“The end” (that) will come (last days) begins with a flood (“from that time to the very end”) which is undoubtedly the Roman conquest of Israel in A.D. 70 (what else could it be, plus flood is used symbolically in Scripture of a great army). Followed by centuries of wars, including two World Wars of the 20th century, and the Holocaust itself which was the ultimate “misery” or devastation of God’s chosen people, the Jews.
There is no way to ignore or even minimize the insertion of this part of Daniel’s prophecy (“the end will come…”) precisely between the ruler’s arising and his armies destroying the Temple, followed (much later) by this same ruler striking a seven-year treaty with Israel. The only way that could happen is for the ruler to return after he had already lived and died (in the 1st century).
Which is EXACTLY what Revelation 17 is telling us when it says the beast (Antichrist) will reappear from the Abyss.
Once again, the question: To whom were the Roman Legions directly connected?
Answer: To the ruler or prince who is also the Antichrist.
Yet, as alluded, there are two options from which to choose: (1) To a Roman Emperor directly associated with those same legions that destroyed the Temple in the first century. With this same ruler (Antichrist) reappearing from the Abyss as Scripture said will happen. (2) To a far-off (what is now 2,000 years and counting) modern-day born ruler who would bear no time/space link to those legions, no matter from where this ruler arose—even if it were from Rome, Italy.
To provide more validation that the correct choice is #1, thereby confirming that Nero Caesar was the ruler, king, and man of lawlessness in the first century (Antichrist) and will return as the Antichrist beast soon after the Rapture, we’ll examine two key areas of proof. (A) Syntax of the text itself, especially the prepositional possessive correlation between the ruler and the people of the ruler. (B) First Century history that distinctly ties Nero to the people (Roman legions) who sacked Jerusalem and destroyed the Temple in A.D. 70, followed by a world-wide exile of Jews from Israel that lasted until Israel’s rebirth in 1948.
(This is when end times prophecy began to unfold. Which sets the stage for the return of the ruler to make a treaty with the nation of Israel. Right after the Rapture, which is more imminent than ever before)
(A) Possessive Language of the Passage Itself
Again, citing the second part of Daniel 9:26, this time from The Amplified Bible, which uses the same designation (prince) as other older translations.
“…And the people of the (other) prince who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary…” [parenthesis in the text, to further identify the “other” prince as the Antichrist in contrast to the “Anointed One” or “Messiah” who would be killed (just) before the second prince would arise].
Because the historical record is crystal clear that “the people of the prince who will come” were more precisely the Roman Legions that destroyed Jerusalem and the 2nd Jewish Temple, the New Living Translation renders this part of the passage as: “…a ruler will arise whose armies will destroy the city and the Temple.”
Let’s scrutinize the simple but often used word in the Old Testament (written in Hebrew) found in this passage that is crucial to comprehending this prophecy. That and the prepositional phrase that emphatically establishes a possessive correlation between the ruler and his armies.
It is the English word, people, translated from the Hebrew word “am” (pronounced ahm) which is used some 1,620 times in the Old Testament.
The meaning is clear: peoples, people of a nation, members of one’s peoples, kinsmen, one’s countrymen (or women), or compatriots. Especially in the context of what’s going on in this verse, it’s imperative that we grasp what should be obvious: the “people” (of the prince) is used in the same sense that people or peoples is used throughout Scripture. For that matter, in and through any literary source.
Whenever people is found in Scripture that relates those people to God, a king, a ruler, or a nation, it invariably refers to and is in the context of an immediate, possessive, generational (at that time in whatever scene is taking place) relationship. This is the commonsense case even if the word “people” is part of a prophecy, as it is in Daniel 9.
Have you heard of Moses, Pharaoh, and the deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt … the Exodus? Of course, you have. Read with me:
“After this presentation to Israel’s leaders, Moses and Aaron went and spoke to Pharaoh. They told him, ‘This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says: Let my people go…” (Exodus 5:1, emphasis added).
(Moses before Pharaoh … scene from the movie, The Ten Commandments)
Who were the people?
Easy and obvious answer: The Hebrews alive at that specific time in history. Furthermore, God called them, “my people.” Meaning the descendants of Abraham whom God chose as a special people to bring God’s Word and the Messiah to the world. When Messiah Jesus came (born from the tribe of Judah), his flesh and blood people were the Jews of that time, just like the Hebrews of Moses time were “my (God’s) people.”
This (possession) principle is also what’s taking place in Daniel 9. “People” of the prince or ruler to come includes (would include when the prophecy was fulfilled) the prince’s countrymen. Regarding the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, more precisely it was the Roman Legions that fulfilled the prophecy.
Whose armies, were they? Whose people, were they? The answer is found in the possessive pronoun or prepositional phrase, depending on which Bible translation is used. Thus, whether we read, “people of the prince” or “a ruler… whose armies” the same possessive relationship is established.
As a result, we can say with a great deal of certainty: The people directly affiliated, associated, or united with the prince (during the 1st century) are the ones who destroyed the Temple. They belonged to that ruler (of their time), not to some far-off ruler who would come at a much later date in history.
There’s no way the grammar or syntax or linguistic meaning of the text (or any text) allows for a ruler who would arrive on the scene long after his people destroyed the city. Thus, an (the) Antichrist born in the 20th or 21st century would be a direct contradiction of the textual time/space connection between the ruler and his people (armies) as clearly stated in Daniel’s prophecy.
To further amplify this point, the following is an excerpt from my book, Out of the Abyss (in italics):
In verse 25, the angel Gabriel tells Daniel, ‘Now listen and understand!’ There should be no confusion or misunderstanding here. If Gabriel had meant that the Temple would first be destroyed by the people of the prince, and then the prince would come at a (much) later date, he would have told Daniel that the armies or people of the prince to come will have or would have already destroyed the city and the Temple…. In some fashion Daniel would have clarified that the people or armies would first destroy the city, and then the prince would come (Page 255).
However, Gabriel through Daniel is not saying that. In fact, the passage—especially the New Living Translation—says just the opposite. The ruler would arise (meaning first) and his armies would (subsequently) destroy the Temple.
“…A ruler will arise whose armies will destroy the city and the Temple” (Daniel 9:26, emphasis added).
Returning to Out of the Abyss:
“People of the prince who is to come” is a prepositional phrase that demands a possessive correlation. “People of the prince who is to come will destroy the city” neither prophetically or grammatically state nor even imply that the city would be destroyed before the prince arrived. In other words, this ruler and his armies are inseparably linked together in possessive relationship and in a real time context. Both events were future to Daniel.
Where have you ever read or seen or thought that a ruler of any era would be connected to armies or people hundreds or thousands of years earlier. All monarchs, both in Biblical and secular history, are linked directly with the armies of that time of the ruler’s life. Contextually and grammatically it makes no sense for Gabriel to tell Daniel that the ruler’s armies would destroy Jerusalem, but the ruler wouldn’t come until much later…. Conversely, the text clearly delineates and specifies that when the ruler comes, his people or armies will destroy the city.
…Why, then, should Gabriel and Daniel mean a far-off, time-warped differential between the Roman Legions and a prince that wouldn’t arrive on the scene for what is now a nearly two-thousand-year gap?
…Stating it bluntly: The Roman Legions of 70 AD could not be of, from, or belong to a ruler born some two thousand years later. This would stretch the chain that tries to bind the Roman Legions of 70 AD to a modern-day man to the breaking point.
…Daniel tells us that the ruler will come, and the people of the ruler will destroy the city. He does not say that the Temple must be or is first destroyed before the prince arrives. But that’s the current hindsight application made by those who hold to a modern-day Antichrist and a Revived Roman Empire. Meaning that this “prince who is to come” must be born and rise to power after an enormous lapse of time (2000 years), with a 21st century result of an impractical and unrealistic time-capsule detachment from the armies that destroyed the city and Temple (Pages 255-257).
Now let’s examine 1st Century history to emphatically establish the association between the ruler/prince and his people/armies who destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple.
(B) The Stunning Historical Connection
Beginning with three questions that will set the stage for what was (at that time), a dramatic partial fulfillment of Daniel’s prophecy. Then to better grasp the angel’s astonishing disclosure to John that this ruler prophesied by Daniel had already lived and died before the book of Revelation was written in the first century. Even more remarkable: this same ruler would return from the Abyss at the outset of the Great Tribulation to the amazement of those left behind after the Rapture.
Question #1: What Roman General was in command of the legions that destroyed Jerusalem and demolished the 2nd Jewish Temple in A.D. 70?
Question #2: What Roman General initiated the campaign to crush the Jewish rebellion against Rome, which was completed by the Roman General of question #1?
Question #3: Who was the Roman Emperor (Caesar) that hand-picked these two generals?
Many details are presented in my book, Out of the Abyss regarding identification of these well-known men of their time. However, time/space does not permit more than a summary overview in this week’s article. So, right to the point.
Answer #1: Titus
Answer #2: Vespasian, father of Titus.
Answer #3: Nero
(Both Vespasian and Titus later became Roman Emperors themselves, 69-79 AD; 79-81 AD, respectively. Nero was the fifth and last Emperor of the Claudian dynasty, He ruled from 54-68 AD)
I’m sure you were clued into Nero as the Roman Emperor, if for no other reason than this article had already given that answer away by now. However, not too many students of the Bible or world history would remember or even know in the first place that Nero personally selected Vespasian and Titus to lead the military campaign against Israel in A.D. 66. Plus, the fact that Nero died in A.D 68 (half-way through this assault against Israel) causes even more disregard for his direct connection to Daniel’s prophecy.
Consequently, most Bible scholars overlook or dismiss outright Nero’s involvement in this historic event, as not being all that relevant.
Why? Because they endorse the contemporary view of a modern-day born Antichrist, and a kingdom application to the seven heads of Revelation’s beast. Instead of the correct application that the seven heads are seven Roman Emperors, five of whom had already died (The beast you saw was once alive but isn’t now, Revelation 17:8).
Here is another excerpt from Out of the Abyss to explain this significant connection more clearly (in italics):
In Daniel Chapter 9 … the angelic messenger told Daniel that it would be the (specific) people or armies which belong to the prince that would destroy the city and the Temple.
Think about it! Historically, that’s exactly what happened. Nero issued direct orders and personally selected the Roman generals to carry out the directive. But Nero wasn’t around to see the outcome…. Thus, it was necessary for Daniel to prophetically tell us that it was the armies of the ruler who finished the job.
…To eliminate any misunderstanding as to when the ruler would arise, the angel would have told Daniel that when the ruler arrives, his armies would have already destroyed the city. But that’s not what Daniel says, nor did it happen that way in history.
Nor has any conquest, in ancient or modern warfare, been accomplished or even recognized by means of troops conquering a city or country, then the supreme leader (king or emperor) of that army born hundreds of years later or even a few years later. In fact, that makes no sense at all. The only way the armies can be connected to, belong to, controlled or ordered by their leader, is a direct result of the leader—by virtue of being alive—delivering commands to his subordinates; thus, for that ruler to be unequivocally associated with and attached to the people that do the conquering.
…The armies are of or belong to the ruler himself, by virtue of the possessive correlation clearly articulated in the passage (Daniel 9). The passage does not state nor even imply a (far away) future ruler to the Roman Legions of the first century. Instead, we see culpability by direct possessive association with and correlation between first century Rome and a first century Roman ruler.
…The armies or people who destroyed the city and the Temple were Roman Legions that belonged to Nero, as ultimate Commander in Chief of all Roman legions. These legions are long gone and couldn’t possibly be the people or armies of a modern-day born Antichrist. Again, I will stress: the ruler and his armies of Daniel 9 are inextricably conjoined, coupled, and connectively linked by the possessive pronouns employed in the text, whether the translated pronoun is “of” or “whose.”
This ruler would return from the Abyss. This same ruler whose armies annihilated Jerusalem in 70 A.D. would strike a treaty, would mesmerize the nations by returning from the dead, and would require that his name or the number of his name be implanted in every human being. It just so happens that the name of a Roman emperor matches the gematria numerical code of six hundred, sixty-six… (Pages 263-265)
Things to Ponder
I’m convinced that the main purpose for the correct retrofitting of the prophetic puzzle regarding the Antichrist is that some (hopefully many) will not be so amazed at Nero’s reappearance.
Instead, they will soon (after the Rapture) see that the Bible and the God of the Bible had predicted this hundreds of years ago. They will further understand that Nero did not return from his grave. Rather, he would reappear from the Abyss, having been confined there after the Lord revived him. (If the Antichrist comes up out of the Abyss—Revelation 17:8—then he must first be placed there). That many will then choose the true Christ over the false (anti) Christ, even on the pain of death.
Where did the Roman Legions camp and prepare for the march on Jerusalem in 70 AD? Answer: Megiddo. Who ordered this campaign against Israel? That right; it was Nero. Where will the final conflict of Revelation be decided? Right again … Armageddon. Who will be leading these armies against Israel, then against Messiah himself? Easy answer: Antichrist. A chilling connection, don’t you think?
One last little asterisk footnote of history if you will. What was it that, in part, contributed to the Jewish revolt against Roman occupation in 66 AD? Answer: A Jewish priest refused to administer a pagan sacrifice in the Temple. And, this pagan sacrifice had been ordered by none other than Caesar. Now who do you suppose this Caesar might have been? …none other than Nero! Subsequently, Nero hand-picked Vespasian and Titus and ordered his generals to set things right in Judea (Out of the Abyss, Page 265).
In closing, let’s read Revelation 17:8 again, as this is the pivotal (starting) point in refitting the prophetic puzzle concerning the Antichrist.
“The beast you saw was once alive but isn’t now. And yet he will soon come up out of the bottomless pit and go to eternal destruction. And the people who belong to this world … will be amazed at the reappearance of this beast who had died.”
There is no question; the meaning of the verse is as irrefutable as anything can be. The beast had already died before John received this revelation.… John didn’t see the vision in the future; he saw it in the present—that hour of that day. The beast is past tense … no longer alive when John saw the vision. The beast isn’t born and doesn’t die in the future; he’s already dead. When will the beast become future tense? Correct: When he reappears from the Abyss. At the beginning of the Tribulation, the world will be amazed at the reappearance of the beast that had died. Will the beast die during the Tribulation? No, he died even before John saw him from Patmos (Out of the Abyss, page 271).
“…until the fate decreed for this defiler is finally poured out on him” (Daniel 9:27b)
“Then I saw the beast and the kings of the world and their armies gathered together to fight against the one (Messiah Jesus) sitting on the horse and his army (all believers). And the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet…. Both the beast and his false prophet were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur. Their entire army was killed by the sharp sword that came from the mouth of the one riding the white horse…” (Revelation 19:19-21, parenthesis mine).
Do you want to know the future? It’s quite simple.
Those who belong to the world—refusing to trust Jesus as personal Savior—will (sadly) lose.
We who belong to Messiah Jesus will WIN!
Thank you, Lord. We trust you. All your promises are true.
And we love you because you first loved us!