I want you to see a belligirent commentary I received and how I responded.

 

This is the original comment.

“Greetings in the name of Jesus and I hope you are covered by his blood. The mouth that roared is never the muslim movement in the singular .because throughout history they had never truly had world dominance Or conquered as much as the Pagan Roman Empire. Nor persecuted so many of God’s people during their rule . Even during our Christ’s human present on earth they were firmly in power and ruled the holy land of Israel . Pagan Rome in this passage is the dragon symbol gave its power to Christendom papacy Rome around 476 AD. Around the middle ages They had brought christianity in to the dark ages of a prophetical period of 1260 years or 42 months . Where bible abiding Christians were denied the right to read the bible and many persecuted for defying the papacy rule that was enforced by the state. Such as the long like of Sunday worship., paying indulgence, and purgatory and all the other laws of a man ‘mouth of a lion.’ Of course inDaniel 7 Daniel’s dream was of a-lion that was symbolic of Babylon the kingdom of King Nebuchadnezzar."

My response goes as follows:

Wow, greetings in the name of Jesus to you also.

I also hope you are covered by his blood because your hostile attitude doesn't demonstrate His love. I said it in this manner because, while it may be important to have a lively discussion, attacking people for stating their opinion – based on facts is not what I deem a lively discussion. 

I have a leftist living in my home, and this time of Presidential transition has been impossible in terms of conversation, as she bases her arguments on emotion and not facts, just as you have. 

It would seem that raising your voice to an angry level is supposed to help win your argument, but you are wrong, and I need you to know that you have NOT gained any sense of respect from me by the tone I perceive in your comments. Strangely, I am prone to allow remarks in opposition to remain as comments on my blog so that others can comprehend the type of garbage that many of us have been dealing with for most of our Christian lives. Surely you did not think I would let your attack just slide by.

You said, "The mouth that roared is never the muslim movement in the singular."

Let's tackle this for a moment. First, I do not and cannot understand your statement. It is certainly not a question, nor is it a respectable argument in rebuttal to anything I may have said in my post. In Daniel chapter seven, we are given two examples of a mouth. One is the description, and the other is the explanation – a fourth beast, out of which comes a little horn (another kingdom,) and out of this kingdom comes its spokesperson.

Daniel 7:7-8 NASB "After this I kept looking in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrifying and extremely strong; and it had large iron teeth. It devoured and crushed and trampled down the remainder with its feet; and it was different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns. (8) "While I was contemplating the horns, behold, another horn, a little one, came up among them, and three of the first horns were pulled out by the roots before it; and behold, this horn possessed eyes like the eyes of a man and a mouth uttering great boasts."

We are NEVER given a firm definition of who the fourth empire is like we are with the first three. 

So arbitrarily assigning Rome as the fourth empire does not work scripturally.

Historically, we know that the third empire was the Grecian under Alexander, but few pay attention to the fact that upon Alexander's death, the empire fell under the rule of two remaining generals – Seleucid in the North and Ptolemy in the South. After the demise of these final two sub-empires, there were the Parthians and the Sassanids. 

In Joel Richardson's book, The Mideast Beast, he states: “Because of their Persian ethnicity and identity, the Parthians and Sassanids were not treated as distinct empires within Nebuchadnezzar’s dream;” and yet, we ignore them as the potential fourth empire; this is an interesting and yet confusing way to handle the interpretation of the iron legs of a statue.

The next passage conveys Daniel's desire to know the exact meaning of the fourth beast. Why? Because it was different from all the others, as it had a mouth and it was significantly larger in appearance than the others. You can look this up in Daniel 7:19-20.

We see this mouth one more time in Revelation.

Revelation 13:5-7 NASB There was given to him a mouth speaking arrogant words and blasphemies, and authority to act for forty-two months was given to him. (6) And he opened his mouth in blasphemies against God, to blaspheme His name and His tabernacle, that is, those who dwell in heaven. (7) It was also given to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them, and authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation was given to him.

Notice that here that “the mouth” speaks blasphemies. There should be an immediate association with the ministry of Christ when He told the Pharisees that they were blaspheming – as they were attributing His actions of casting out a demon to the work and power of Satan/Beelzebub. With that information, you can make a logical assessment as to what this “mouth” is saying.

You said: “because throughout history they had never truly had world dominance Or conquered as much as the Pagan Roman Empire.”

Again I refer to Joel Richardson and the Mideast Beast, where he states, “The three other kingdoms that would be trampled and crushed, as we already know, are Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Greece. The text is clear that the fourth kingdom would “crush” or conquer all three of these empires. The three empires never co-existed of course, and thus we must ask what the text means when it says that the fourth empire would “crush” all of the others.”

Richardson goes on to say, “the Roman Empire only conquered roughly one-third of the regions controlled by Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Greece. But roughly two-thirds of the regions controlled by these empires were left entirely untouched by the Roman Empire. In fact, the Roman Empire never even reached the two Persian capital cities of Ecbatana and Persepolis.”

According to this information, you can see that the Roman Empire NEVER obtained “world dominance,” as you suggested.

You continued your denunciation of the pagan Roman Empire by saying, “Nor persecuted so many of God’s people during their rule.”

If you could segregate the actions of the Roman military from the governing body in Italy, you might be able to say that God's people were not persecuted so frequently, but historically we cannot do that. We have at least a couple of examples of Rome's (Nero) persecution. When Paul writes to the church in Rome, it has barely been reestablished since the followers of Christ were driven out of Rome. 

In saying followers of Christ, our gentile minds only picture evangelical non-Jewish believers, when the majority of this body was just the opposite and gentile followers were in the minority. So when you say “God's people,” you must be talking about Jewish followers of Christ. 

In Romans 16:3, Paul tells the church in Rome to greet Prisca and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus. We can learn that “They had come to Corinth from Rome because of Claudius’ decree that all Jews must leave Rome” The Bible Knowledge Commentary adds: “Suetonius (a.d. 69? -140), a biographer of Roman emperors, described what may have been the occasion for such a decree. In his Life of Claudius (25.4) he referred to the constant riots of the Jews at the instigation of Chrestus. Possibly the name Chrestus is a reference to Christ.” Our strong assumption is that these followers of Christ were doing everything possible to stand against unjust laws and therefore deemed troublemakers, just like today.

It is obvious that persecution under the Roman Empire was quite common for Jews and followers of Christ.

Allow me to show one more example. As we fling about our traditional and fearful language about eschatology, we denounce anyone who suggests a potential timing of the Lord's return. The blasting argument usually comes from Matthew 24:36, where Jesus was speaking to a Jewish audience about Jewish things in a language they understood, but we Gentiles, because of a lack of teaching, do not understand said,
“but of that day and hour, no one knows, not even the Son,...” 

A dive into the surrounding events (context) might help us to understand, so we go to Daniel's prophecies, and there we find a reference to the people of the prince.

Daniel 9:26 NASB "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. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end, there will be war; desolations are determined.

Preterists will argue that this scenario has been fulfilled. I suppose to them, that means we are living in the time of God's wrath; that is NOT the case, and the events will have a second fulfillment. 

The point I want to make is that the people of the prince is an established historical event, fulfilled initially during the rule of Titus Vespasian in 70 AD.

You added: “Even during our Christ’s human presence on earth, Rome was firmly in power and ruled the holy land of Israel.”

Rome comes into the picture only because: 

First, Rome conquered Jerusalem;

Secondly, Herod’s temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. under the Roman rule of Titus, just as Jesus said it would. 

Sadly, few take this study of the destruction of the temple to the next step, as that is where we find Josephus and Tacitus. Both of these historians recorded that the destruction of the temple can be directly attributed to Assyrian conscript troops, who refused to follow orders to quench the fires that they had started because they had an open hatred of the Jews. 

Since we choose to read Daniel 9:26, which says, the people of the prince that is to come, as Titus – the Roman, instead of what the historians provided – Assyrians. With such skewed information, we only have one logical conclusion, we must be looking for the Catholic Pope as the Antichrist, and that does not work. Therefore, our entire concept of eschatology is tainted by the false narrative of a final Roman world leader/Antichrist.

Here, in this next set of run-on sentences, you have run together multiple topics and ideas to fuel some twisted theology.

• “Pagan Rome in this passage is the dragon symbol”

  What passage? You have not once referred to scripture - merely conjecture.

  If you did a search for “the dragon,” references that are significant primarily come out of Revelation; there is, however, one found in Isaiah.

  Isaiah 27:1 ESV In that day the LORD with his hard and great and strong sword will punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent, Leviathan the twisting serpent, and he will slay the dragon that is in the sea.

  
  

  While in the next verse, the dragon is referred to as a sign; it is well understood to be Satan.

  Revelation 12:3-4 ESV And another sign appeared in heaven: behold, a great red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, and on his heads seven diadems. (4) His tail swept down a third of the stars of heaven and cast them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to give birth so that when she bore her child, he might devour it.

  We understand the woman to be Israel and the child to be Yahshua/Jesus.

  
  

• I must assume, in your narrative, that Rome would have “gave its power to Christendom papacy Rome around 476 AD.”

  There is a semblance of clarity only because you initiated this barrage with “ Pagan Rome … is the dragon symbol.” 

  The assumption that this is between two “Christians,” means that you, by your twisted theological inferences, are that you are including yourself in one of those groups. 

  Ideally, we should be having this discussion based on the Word of God. So, let's get back to scriptural associations found in the Revelation.

  
  

  Revelation 13:1-2 NASB And the dragon stood on the sand of the seashore. Then I saw a beast coming up out of the sea, having ten horns and seven heads, and on his horns were ten diadems, and on his heads were blasphemous names. (2) And the beast which I saw was like a leopard, and his feet were like those of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion. And the dragon gave him his power and his throne and great authority.

  
  

  This says NOTHING about Rome, pagans – although we, outside of Judaism, are thought of as pagans, and it does not say anything about the papacy. So here, you have Rome playing the role of Satan and giving its power to the papacy. Much too far of a stretch for me.

• Your next dip into darkness rears its ugly head as you refer to “they.” Since you have talked about your distaste for Romans and the papacy, I am NOT sure who you are referring to when you say, “Around the middle ages, They had brought christianity in to the dark ages of a prophetical period of 1260 years or 42 months .”

  Since nothing happens outside of God's plans and ordination, perhaps you should rethink much of this statement. I am not an expert on church history and, therefore, am not equipped to argue about who brought Christianity into the middle ages. I do not see how it is relevant to your life either.

  I did note that you had to drag numbers that are integrally associated with eschatology, but you did not put them into that setting. We find an association of this person with a mouth in the Revelation.

  Revelation 13:5 NASB There was given to him a mouth speaking arrogant words and blasphemies, and authority to act for forty-two months was given to him.

  I suspect you played with the numbers and found that 42 months on a 30-day Jewish calendar equals 1260 days. Bizarre and yet fascinating that you would tie these numbers into Christianity coming into the middle ages.

  
  

• “Where bible abiding Christians were denied the right to read the bible and many persecuted for defying the papacy rule that was enforced by the state.”

  I think many of us are aware that the Catholic church was the state church. Their abuses, then, just as now, are, I am sure, an offense to God. I recently learned that it was the state church that changed the wording of 2 Thessalonians 2:3, where, in Greek, the word apostasia was used. One of the earliest Bibles – the Geneva Bible, properly translated apostasia as the departure – refers to the gathering of the church back to Jesus. The Catholic church ordered a rewrite that reflected their angst over people leaving the Catholic church for Protestantism, and hence the word apostasia was read as apostasy – a falling away from, at the least, religion proper.

  If the Congress of the United States can be opened in prayer, by a Methodist minister, in “the name of the monotheistic god Brahman,” we are deeply entrenched in apostasy.

  
  

• “Such as the long like of Sunday worship., paying indulgence, and purgatory and all the other laws of a man ‘mouth of a lion.’ Of course, in Daniel 7, Daniel’s dream was of a-lion that was symbolic of Babylon, the kingdom of King Nebuchadnezzar.”

I am done with this commentary, as it makes little to no sense, and I am exhausted trying to respond to you. It is quite obvious to me that you came here to pick a fight. I strongly suggest that you save a few dollars, stop buying Starbucks, and buy yourself a grammar checker like Grammarly. I say this because you have tried to come across as a learned scholar, but a quick glance at your commentary proved otherwise. I would have never let something like this out to public view.

I will have no further conversations with you about this, and any continued belligerent hostility will result in your getting blocked.

I close this with all the love you expressed to me.

“I hope you are covered by his blood.”

Why would a shy introvert have such a craving to teach?

Not that long ago I got set up for a trap by my pastor. I was taken to lunch under the premise of talking about a study I was to lead, but, his plan had everything to do with challenging me about teaching on the Revelation, and speaking about end times events. Strangely, he had never heard me talking on any of these subjects other than a couple of private conversations where I shared my heart with the man. He, operating on presumption, decided that this was all I knew or was capable of speaking about, and he was going to put me in my place. Just out of curiosity, where is my place? The obvious answer to me, is in the arms and safety of my Father, as I do His will. And, if it requires that speak on what I know and understand, then it is teaching, and that is precisely what my heart longs to do.

Why would a shy introvert have such a craving to teach? Because, the Church, in general, is like a bunch of witless sheep, willing to let someone else do their reading for them, and so they have no clue what God's word says. The other problem is that these Bible teachers we are adorned with, have spewed distortion for so long that most of the Church think God is merely an ominous, angry, and untouchable God. Nothing could be further from the truth.

This pastor I mentioned, during his ambush, asked me why I focus on the end times so much and speak about it. The answer to that question became clear recently as my father, within minutes of coming out of brain surgery, had to challenge me by saying, everyone that stands before the Great White Throne of judgment is sent to hell. Several weeks have passed since the pastor's warning not to study or speak about the end times for five years, so it was befitting to tell him about my dad's recovery from brain surgery, and the fact that he let me know he was all right by espousing a false teaching he had learned.

Here is what I have come to understand as my motivation for teaching and speaking about the Revelation and end times. That those, and I include myself, who have insight, ... will lead many to righteousness.

Daniel 12:3 NASB "Those who have insight will shine brightly like the brightness of the expanse of heaven, and those who lead the many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever.

Insight is the Hebrew word sakal and means to be prudent: - act wisely, behaved himself wisely, comprehend, consider, and discern. It also conveys the implications of "giving attention to."

Lead is the Hebrew word ṣāḏaq: A verb meaning to be right, to be righteous, to be just, to be innocent, to be put right.

So, if I do one of my rewrites, inserting the alternate understandings of the Hebrew, I get this:

“Those who act wisely, giving attention to the Word, will shine brightly like the brightness of the expanse of heaven, and those who cause others to be right, and to be put right, will shine like the stars forever and ever.”

What if that is the case, where I might be included among those who cause others to understand, be right, and to be put right? I gave myself to pay attention to His Word. And then, there is the admonition from the Book of the Revelation itself, where it says,

Revelation 1:3 NET. Blessed is the one who reads the words of this prophecy aloud, and blessed are those who hear and obey the things written in it because the time is near!

Do I read it aloud in the assembly? Occasionally and sometimes to myself; I find that hearing it causes the word pictures to develop in ways that mere reading does not provide. Most often, I sit quietly and let my head and heart busily stir within me, as they are doing now. Sitting with the men's group on Thursday mornings, we take turns reading aloud out of the book of the moment. (Our next book, in case you are interested, will be Timothy Keller's, The Freedom of Self-Forgetfulness. Having recently slogged our way through one of his books, I am not looking forward to this.) And, whether the words themselves stir me, or the manner in which it is read does, I am not sure, but, I am always invited by the Holy Spirit to consider something that fits the theme or that God needs to convey. I say all this because I struggle with the possibility that I am merely envious of the pastor with the $1500 suit that used to stand before me; Or, perhaps, the notoriety that the television prophet gets draws in enough money to buy fancy jets and a private island. There are more than enough things going on around me to keep me in my place (whatever place that is,) and besides that, the doors that seem to open, have on several occasions recently, slammed shut in my face. It is only natural to ask why; I even examine myself and ask if there was some role I played in making the door close in the manner that it did. Trust me, our past stays with us, even if it is just in our heads, and those memories still flavor our lives, more than we know. I firmly believe that God can and does use those unsavory events to create the person we are now, therefore events we deem unsavory, have all been, in the end, to serve God's purpose. Now, don't get silly with this, thinking that you need to indulge in some stupidity so God can use you. Spend some serious time in His Word, and He will use you.

So, the bottom line for me is, that God gave me this desire and passion for His Word, and it is Him alone who grants rewards for work done. My reasons for getting into this prophetic end times game came out of a lifetime of unfulfilled yearning to understand, and a mother, who told us twisted tales of how she envisioned heaven.

I mentioned to one of the men I sit with on Wednesday mornings that I can thank Joel Richardson, the author of several books, one of which is The Islamic Antichrist. I have always had a desire to understand the book of Revelation, and even when someone like, the late Hilton Sutton came to church, which he did, I would have fifteen minutes of clarity. Sixteen minutes later it was all muddy water again. I can remember thinking, how can anyone understand this stuff, with its seven-headed beasts that die and rise over and over. And then, there were the loud mouths that still insist that we are looking for a Roman antichrist to rise to power. Richardson clarifies all this distorted teaching by showing you from scripture why a particularly distorted theory works or not. I walked away from his book, The Islamic Antichrist, and its scriptural references, with understanding, passion, and a burning desire for more. Those books within the Bible that seemed so incomprehensible, like the Revelation, Daniel, and Ezekiel, suddenly made sense, as did the other end times prophetic writers of the Bible. Do, I still have to study things out by looking at context, and analyzing words? Absolutely; I think its safe to say, that only a fool would ignore those factors, especially if you are trying to gain insights and prepare for a decent Bible study.

So, what does it mean when, for the past several weeks, I have been barraged with a variety of questions, and distorted misunderstandings about the Great White Throne judgment? These questions challenged me about my understanding and beliefs in God, about God's right to show mercy and grace, and me, as the underlying question is why do you teach such things  – the same things Paul taught. One religious zealot ranted that the angry, ominous God, is coming and that I, along with those who believe that God is only mercy, will pay because we have made God weak. (Is that even possible?) There is also the brother in Christ who asks me a vague question, which I answered proficiently, only to have him respond back by blending three different doctrines to create another vague question about who it is that stands before God's throne at the end. To top it all off, one of my closest friends, recently divulged that he was an adamant believer in hellish penalties for all who come to the Great White Throne.

What am I to make of all this?

We, as a church, do not know our Bibles, AT ALL, and because of that, I can safely say, WE, do not understand God's nature and character.

Do you not realize, that

Jesus Christ is the express image of the Father and demonstrated His qualities and character in every way, shape, and form. 

My notes as I prepared to teach on the Discipline of Fasting by Richard Foster.

I had been asked by my pastor to teach a couple of sessions out of one of the books from which he was yet to pick. When he named off the potential authors, I cringed internally as my pastor can turn anything into legalism. He settled on The Discipline of Fasting by Richard Foster.

Considering my understanding of discipline and the belt my father used to administer that obedience, my stomach was turning. Add to that a verbal image portrayed by the pastor, in which he told us that the shepherd would snap the leg of the sheep which kept running astray. I can't remember anything about that story that would help to give it a redeeming quality. However, in relating this story to a friend recently, I pointed out how it was the shepherd's purpose and intent to sale unblemished lambs to the surrounding Jewish community, a necessity for sacrifices. Having broken the lamb's leg, it was now a cripple and unable to survive on its own. The shepherd was now responsible for this offending little one and would have to carry it to water, food, and set it down to do its normal business as all lambs do. In the process of holding and caring for this lamb, the shepherd and the lamb build a tight bond, one in which the lamb becomes fondly and permanently attached to the shepherd. I image that the shepherd could develop a strong attachment for that particular sheep. You should not have to dig that deep to figure out that the shepherd is Jesus in the larger picture, and, the pastor in the smaller picture. We are the "offending" sheep. I can remember thinking that this is not the God that I have come to know, and, I did not want this pastor to ever get that close to me, and yet he has. Most recently, he asked me to lead this book study.

Under the pretense of discussing the lesson that I was to teach, the pastor asked me a question that he did not want an answer to. The question was: Why do you teach on Eschatology so much, and where do you get your conclusions. (I suppose it is important to note that pastor has never heard me speak, nor does he know what I teach, therefore these questions were really based upon things I shared with him personally in a previous meeting.)

Considering that he never gave me the chance to refute his assertions I will defend my actions now. I teach on end times and eschatology because (1.) I have always wanted to understand. (2.) Having sat under a false teacher for about three years, during which time, he would focus on one thing for as much as six months. I would make notes and then go home and research his assertions to find out if they are in scripture; I could rarely find anything he claimed to be the truth. (3.) Having spent the majority of my life in churches, I became thoroughly disgusted with religion. The solution was to take my bible and read it for myself. I started doing this with a strong determination in 2007 when I started working for a building materials store. I cannot remember a day when I did not spend at least 30 to 45 minutes each day reading and writing. In writing I would make notes; challenge what I read, and ask God questions. Not surprisingly, God began to speak to me. In addition to reading my bible, I ran across an author named Joel Richardson. He had written a book called the Islamic Antichrist. After reading that book the bible just started to come alive; there was not a book of the Bible that gave me trouble after that. My friends, perhaps sarcastically, began to call me the expert on end times things. I don't buy into that, but I am not afraid to answer questions, although some questions require a little research.

As to the concept of only teaching on Eschatology, my pastor, was himself in a semi-retirement, as I taught for almost a year on the book of John at another church.
So, with that introduction, I was supposed to lead the group discussion on Chapter 4, The Discipline of Fasting this last Wednesday. When I walked into the room pastor is the only one there. He had taken the seat at the center of the table, and I could not help but notice that he had notes on the same topic. An aspect I failed to mention, I gave him a copy of my notes, to which he blurted out, you can't teach this, it's too much. Again, he had no interest in asking my intent. He repeatedly said he was worried about what I was going to say and would I offend everyone. Apparently, he took actions into his own hands and pushed me out; blindsided, I said nothing. 

Here is what I believe I would have taught.
On the subject of Fasting, can I speak from experience?
Yes, but for only three days.

In the second paragraph of chapter 4, Richard Foster tells us one of the reasons why there is a disregard of fasting.
“With the decline of the inward reality of the Christian faith, an increasing tendency to stress the only thing left, the outward form, developed.” Foster goes on to say, “And whenever there is a form devoid of spiritual power, the law will take over because law always carries with it a sense of security and manipulative power. Hence, fasting was subjected to the most rigid regulations and practiced with extreme self-mortification and flagellation.”

There is another aspect of this world that has distracted us from fasting, and that is Hedonism. Hedonism, according to the dictionary, is the pursuit of pleasure - sensual self-indulgence. It is the ethical theory that pleasure (in the sense of the satisfaction of desires) is the highest good and proper aim of human life.
Food falls into this category.

It almost sounds like I am advocating the law. However, operating under the law or laws is not what we are trying to convey.
Jesus, speaking to men under the law, said in Matthew 6:16-18

"Whenever you fast, do not put on a gloomy face as the hypocrites do, for they neglect their appearance so that they will be noticed by men when they are fasting. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full. 17) "But you when you fast, anoint your head and wash your face 18) so that your fasting will not be noticed by men, but by your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you. [NASB]

As Richard Foster explains, “these words of Jesus do not constitute a command. Jesus was giving instruction on the proper exercise of a common practice of his day.”

When we start to emphasize a discipline, a common argument heard within the church might be, we are not under the law and therefore have no clear mandate to fast. And yet, Richard Foster makes a good point when he says, “Our freedom in the gospel, however, does not mean license; it means opportunity. Since there are no laws to bind us, we are then free to fast on any day.”

Then what Biblical direction and encouragement do we have?
Jonah – The prophet eventually delivers a prophetic word to a hated people, hoping that they will be destroyed by God. God, however, had other plans.

Jonah 3:4-10 NASB Then Jonah began to go through the city one day's walk; and he cried out and said, "Yet forty days and Nineveh will be overthrown." 5) Then the people of Nineveh believed in God; and they called a fast and put on sackcloth from the greatest to the least of them. 6) When the word reached the king of Nineveh, he arose from his throne, laid aside his robe from him, covered himself with sackcloth and sat on the ashes. 7) He issued a proclamation and it said, "In Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles: Do not let man, beast, herd, or flock taste a thing. Do not let them eat or drink water. 8) "But both man and beast must be covered with sackcloth; and let men call on God earnestly that each may turn from his wicked way and from the violence which is in his hands. 9) "Who knows, God may turn and relent and withdraw His burning anger so that we will not perish." 10) When God saw their deeds, that they turned from their wicked way, then God relented concerning the calamity which He had declared He would bring upon them. And He did not do it.

Richard Foster told us of Britain in 1756. The King of Britain called for a day of solemn prayer and fasting because of a threatened invasion by the French. John Wesley tells us "that every church in the city was more than full, and a solemn seriousness sat on every face." That invasion wrote Wesley in one of his footnotes, was averted.

Look up the word fasting in the New Testament, and you will find instances such as this:

Matthew 17:21 Where Jesus said, "..this kind (of demon) does not go out except by prayer and fasting."

Whether the act of fasting makes you fearless, gives you power, or perhaps an insight into what is going on in peoples lives, or merely the knowledge that God has your back, I don't know. What gave the disciples the skills or abilities to cast out demons; perhaps Jesus had been schooling them in prayer and fasting. The evidence for this comes from Mark's gospel, chapter 6, where we see Jesus sending out the disciples with the instructions that they had power over unclean spirits. What we don't see is the fasting. However, we can safely assume that those who went out were equipped by example, for upon their return, they reported that the demons responded to their commands.

Mark 6:13 And they cast out many devils, and anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed them.

Luke 10:17 KJV And the seventy returned again with joy, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy name.

Acts 13:2 While they were ministering to the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for Me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them."

While fasting may have been a standard within the Jewish community from which they came, it still played a part in the clarity of decision, and prophetic word, that caused Barnabas and Saul to be sent out.

I want to point out 1 Corinthians 7:5 independently because translations have become part of the problem as we try to understand and perhaps integrate fasting back into our lives. The context of the verse is an admonition for marriages. In this case, the separation, perhaps under the guise of fasting (a Jewish tradition,) has been used to deprive the other of some relational aspect of the marriage. Paul, who knew too well that this takes place, instructed that in doing such, with the intent of punishing the other, opens the door to Satan because of their lack of self-control. Self-control? Yes, as this would push you to overflow your own rivers banks into areas that you should not go. The problem is that you do not get the word fasting when you use most newer translations.

1 Corinthians 7:5 NASB “Stop depriving one another, except by agreement for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer, and come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.”

The King James version, as well as several literal translations, used the word fasting.

From the Word Study Dictionary - The Greek word is nēsteía; to fast. A fasting, fast, abstinence from eating, generally for want of food (2Co_6:5; 2Co_11:27). In a religious sense of the private fastings of the Jews (Mat_17:21; Mar_9:29 [TR]; Luk_2:37) to which great merit was attributed, the Pharisees practiced often, sometimes twice a week (cf. Luk_18:12; Sept.: Isa_58:3 ff.; Dan_9:3). In their longer fastings, they abstained only from better kinds of food. The Jews used to call such a fast "The great annual public fast of the great Day of Atonement" which occurred in the month Tisri, corresponding to the new moon of October.

Now, look at the KJV which did include the word fasting.

1 Corinthians 7:5 KJV Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.

The point is that we do have an example of fasting in the New Testament, although with a negative spin.

Richard Foster, under the heading of “The Purpose of Fasting” states, “It is sobering to realize that the very first statement Jesus made about fasting dealt with the question of motive.” We are given Matthew 6:16-18

"Whenever you fast, do not put on a gloomy face as the hypocrites do, for they neglect their appearance so that they will be noticed by men when they are fasting. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full. 17) "But you when you fast, anoint your head and wash your face 18) so that your fasting will not be noticed by men, but by your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you. NASB

Foster goes on to say, Fasting must forever center on God.

• It must be God initiated, and God ordained.
• Every other purpose must be subservient to God.

"Our avoidance of fasting has much to do with the condition of the heart; the heart, therefore, needs to be firmly fixed before you go there." There are secondary purposes in fasting, and fasting, according to Foster, reveals the things that control us. We are very good at covering up what is inside of us. We do it with food and other “good” things, but in fasting these things surface. If pride controls us, it will be revealed almost immediately."
Things you might expect to find:

• Anger
• bitterness
• jealousy
• strife
• fear

If they are within, they will surface during fasting. Foster explains, “At first we will rationalize that our anger is due to our hunger; then we will realize that are angry because the spirit of anger is within us. We can rejoice even with this knowledge as we know that healing is available through the power of Christ."

Concerning direction and instruction, few passages speak more clearly than Isaiah 58:1-14
Yes, I get it, the generalized idea is that the Old Testament represents the law, and some act as though it should be avoided, but do not forget that our freedom sets us free to fast. It is not, therefore, a law to us, but an addition to our lives which are increasingly beset with troubles. I might also add that fasting is a tool and a weapon, as we are that thing that restrains in the last days, and if fasting assists in that battle, then so be it (Amen.)

2 Thessalonians 2:7 AMPC For the mystery of lawlessness (that hidden principle of rebellion against constituted authority) is already at work in the world, [but it is] restrained only until he who restrains is taken out of the way.

I am convinced that this is the faith-filled church, standing against the enemies onslaughts. You do not have to look far to see how this is playing out around you. On a daily basis, our freedoms are progressively being stripped away, even to the point where your thoughts, expressed on social media, can and will be used against you. All someone has to do is say, that offends me, and you can find yourself in handcuffs for hate speech. Can you see why we need every arrow in our quivers; fasting is one of those arrows, and, as you will see from Isaiah, it is a powerful one.

Isaiah 58:5, in the NASB, begins with:
"Is it a fast like this which I choose,
a day for a man to humble himself?
Is it for bowing one's head like a reed And for spreading out sackcloth and ashes as a bed?
Will you call this a fast, even an acceptable day to the LORD? 6)
"Is this not the fast which I choose,
To loosen the bonds of wickedness,
To undo the bands of the yoke,
And to let the oppressed go free
And break every yoke?
Is it not to divide your bread with the hungry
And bring the homeless poor into the house;
When you see the naked, to cover him;
And not to hide yourself from your own flesh?

The word flesh means just that in the Hebrew but can also mean blood relations. Albert Barnes commentary explains, To hide oneself from them may denote either, first, to be ashamed of them on account of their poverty or humble rank in life; or, secondly, to withhold from them the just supply of their needs.

Values and benefits of Fasting (from Foster's book.)
Fasting helps us keep our balance in life. “How easily we begin to allow non-essentials to take precedence in our lives. How quickly we crave things, we do not need until we are enslaved by them.” Paul wrote, “All things are lawful for me, but I will not be enslaved by anything” 1 Cor. 6:12.
Foster again, “Our human cravings and desires are like rivers that tend to overflow their banks; fasting helps keep them in their proper channels.” Others, according to Foster, have written that fasting gives us an increased effectiveness in intercessory prayer.

• Guidance in decisions
• Increased concentration
• Physical well being

Let's camp here for a minute. What do we ingest in our bodies? A few ingredients from an instant macaroni and cheese product: Glyceral monostearate; Calcium carbonate; Sodium triphosphate; Sodium phosphate, and medium chain triglycerides. Perhaps the occasional purging of some of these cryptic products would be a benefit to us.

• RevelationIn this case, Revelation is primarily referring to Godly insights, but it could mean other things as well.

The Practice of Fasting
We are admonished by Foster to walk before we run. With that said, I cannot imagine trying to take on a water or juice fast for seven days, while continuing to work as a high voltage electrical worker. Having fasted for three days, I know how those three days felt. On day two, I can assure you that no one needed to be around me; and on day three, I was so weak I felt like all I could do was lie in bed and rest; everything exhausted me. In no way was I in any condition to deal with the outside world, let alone my wife.

Could I accomplish much if I merely fasted a meal? With purpose, of course, I could. I do it frequently with television and now the cell phone. You have to keep in mind that the body is, as Foster puts it, like a spoiled child, and a spoiled child does not need indulgence. So, perhaps then, you can understand Paul a little better when he says, “I pommel my body and subdue it. 1 Cor. 9:27.
Foster states, "If family obligations permit it, devote the time you would normally use eating to meditation and prayer."

Let me end with some wisdom from Richard Foster.
“Although the physical aspects of fasting intrigue us, we must never forget that the major work of scriptural fasting is in the realm of the spirit. What goes on spiritually is much more important than what is happening bodily. You will be engaging in spiritual warfare that will necessitate using all the weapons of Ephesians 6.” Foster goes on to say, “I do not want to leave the impression that all fasting is a heavy spiritual struggle.”

“Fasting can bring breakthroughs in the spiritual realm that will never happen in any other way.”
We all seem to understand that Jesus would get alone, in the garden, apparently for the purposes of finding the nature, and character of the Father; and to, commune with Him. In so doing he could come to know the Father's heart. Some would argue that Jesus, whose relationship with the Father has always been, would have known the Father's heart already, and merely drawn from that knowledge. The problem with that is that we forget that Jesus set aside the glory he had with the Father to become a man. Another way of putting this, Jesus willingly stripped himself of heaven's advantages and continued to remain in that state, as a man. That would mean He had to sort this out, just as we have to. He had one small advantage that we don't have, no Monday night football to distract him.
While changing the world around us is a good thing, I need to seek to learn His voice. You see, in Proverbs, we are told that wisdom cries aloud in the streets. The impression I get from that is, the Holy Spirit/the Father is talking all the time. If I am not hearing Him, then I need to get in tune.

Daniel 11, the rise of the kings of the North and South. Verses 5-16.

Alexander is dead and now we have four generals struggling for power. At the end of this power struggle, two will remain, but one seems to take central focus as it integrates the Assyrian empires, and has interactions with the Roman empire, and battles with the South - the Egyptian/Ptolemaic empire.

The four generals: Lysimachus; Cassander; Ptolemy Lagidae; Seleucus I.

Daniel 11:5 AMPC+ Then the king of the South (Egypt) shall be strong, but one of his princes shall be stronger than he is and have dominion; his dominion shall be a great dominion.

One of the most powerful of those monarchies, if not “the” most powerful, was Egypt.

• the king of the South (Egypt) shall be strong. - This was Ptolemy l
• “but one of his princes shall be stronger than he is and have dominion; his dominion shall be a great dominion.”
  Albert Barnes commentary indicates: “The meaning of this passage is, that there would be “one of his princes,” that is, of the princes of Alexander, who would be more mighty than the one who obtained Egypt, or the south, and that he would have a more extended dominion. The reference is, doubtless, to Seleucus Nicator, or the conqueror. In the division of the empire, he obtained Syria, Babylonia, Media, Susiana, Armenia, a part of Cappadocia, and Cilicia, and his kingdom stretched from the Hellespont to the Indus.”
  • • This is Seleucus Nicator, also known as, the king of the north.

The league between Egypt, the south, and Syria, the north, through the marriage of Bernice, daughter of Ptolemy Philadelphus, to Antiochus Theos, the third king of Syria.

Verse 7: A branch of her roots; a brother, Ptolemy Euergetes.

Daniel 11:6,7 AMPC+ At the end of some years they [the king of the North, Syria, and the king of the South, Egypt] shall make an alliance; the daughter of the king of the South shall come to the king of the North to make [a just and peaceful marriage] agreement; but she shall not retain the power of her might, neither shall he and his might endure. She shall be handed over with her attendants, her child, and him who strengthened her in those times. (7) But out of a branch of the [same ancestral] roots as hers shall one [her brother] stand up in his place or office, who shall come against the [Syrian] army and shall enter into the fortress of the king of the North and shall deal against them and shall prevail.

• “At the end of some years they [the king of the North, Syria, and the king of the South, Egypt] shall make an alliance;”
  This was done through marriage.

• “the daughter of the king of the South shall come to the king of the North to make [a just and peaceful marriage] agreement”
  “These prophecies seem to have been fulfilled many years later in the Seleucid wars between Egypt and Syria. In 252 B.C., Ptolemy II of Egypt ("the south") gave his daughter Berenice in marriage to Antiochus II of Syria ("the north") to finalize a peace treaty between their two lands.

• “but she shall not retain the power of her might, neither shall he and his might endure”
  But Berenice was murdered in Antioch by Antiochus II's former wife, Laodice.

• “She shall be handed over with her attendants, her child, and him who strengthened her in those times”
  Berenice's brother, Ptolemy III, ascended the Egyptian throne and declared war against the Seleucids to avenge his sister's murder.” Life Application Study Bible

• “But out of a branch of the [same ancestral] roots as hers shall one [her brother] stand up in his place or office, who shall come against the [Syrian] army and shall enter into the fortress of the king of the North and shall deal against them and shall prevail.”

Daniel 11:8 AMPC+ And also he (Ptolemy III Euergetes (246-221)) shall carry off to Egypt their [Syria's] gods with their molten images and with their precious vessels of silver and of gold, and he shall refrain for some years from [waging war against] the king of the North.

Ptolemy III ascended the Egyptian throne and declared war against the Seleucids to avenge his sister's murder.

Pay attention to the phrase: “And also he shall carry off to Egypt their [Syria's] gods with their molten images” Both the north and the south had their select gods. Soon we will see Antiochus Epiphanes substituting other gods from Rome and Greece. 

Why is this a problem; I thought Alexander was Greek? The problem is that all of the northern empires up to Antiochus IV were distinctly Syrian. Look at a map of this time period and you will see territories covering from Asia Minor to the furthest reaches of Babylon and South to Palestine.

Daniel 11:9 AMPC+ And he [the king of Syria -Seleucus II Callinicus (246-226)] shall come into the kingdom of the king of the South but shall return to his own land.

• • Seleucus II Callinicus (246-226). Laodice's son, Seleucus II, emerged the beneficiary of all of the treachery and intrigue of his mother. In 243 he attempted to gain control of southern Syria and Palestine. Not only was he unsuccessful, but the momentum turned against him and he ended up losing territory. IVPBBC

A question: What is Israel doing while all this is going on? Hanging by a thread.

The defeat of Antiochus the Great by Ptolemy lll of Egypt (the south.)

Daniel 11:10 AMPC+ But his sons shall be stirred up and shall prepare for war and shall assemble a multitude of great forces, which shall come on and overflow and pass through and again shall make war even to the fortress [of the king of the South].

• • Seleucus III (226-223). For the last fifteen years of his reign, Seleucus II was engaged in an ongoing struggle with his brother, Antiochus Hierax. Both died about the same time, and Seleucus III came to the throne. Verse ten telescopes the events of the next ten years. Seleucus III was killed in a campaign against Pergamum in Asia Minor. He was succeeded by his brother, Antiochus III, who began mustering troops for the Fourth Syrian War (221-217) against Ptolemy IV. IVPBBC

• • Ptolemy IV Philopator (221-203). For most of the years of the Fourth Syrian War, Ptolemy IV had little success militarily against Antiochus (lll) the Great and only forestalled his progress south through repeated diplomatic initiatives. Many of Antiochus's successes were carried out with the help of traitors rather than through military power or genius. In fact, his lackadaisical tactics allowed Ptolemy to gather, train and field a significant armed force by 217. IVPBBC

Antiochus the Great (III)(Syria/the north), renews the war after fourteen years and defeats Ptolemy V (Egypt/the south.)

Daniel 11:11-13 AMPC+ And the king of the South (Egypt) shall be moved with anger and shall come forth and fight with the king of the North (Syria); and he [the Syrian king] shall set forth a great multitude, but the multitude shall be given into his [the Egyptian king's] hand. 12) When the multitude is taken and carried away, the heart and mind [of the Egyptian king] shall be exalted, and he shall cast down tens of thousands, but he shall not prevail. 13) For the king of the North shall raise a multitude greater than [he had] before, and after some years shall certainly return, coming with a great army and much substance and equipment.

• • Fourth and Fifth Syrian Wars. In 217 Ptolemy IV engaged Antiochus III at the Battle of Raphia for what would turn out to be the climactic battle of the Fourth Syrian War. Raphia was a traditional dividing line between Palestine and Egypt, about twenty miles southwest of Gaza on the Mediterranean coast. Antiochus claimed an army of seventy thousand, but even with the superior size of his armies, he was beaten badly by the Egyptians. This victory restored Syro-Palestine to the control of the Ptolemies. This status was maintained until the death of Ptolemy IV in 204 (13 years). The suspicious circumstances of the death of Ptolemy IV (still in his thirties) brought his six-year-old son, Ptolemy V Epiphanes (204-180), to the throne of Egypt. Antiochus took the opportunity of conflict over who was in charge to initiate the Fifth Syrian War (202-200), allied with Philip V of Macedon. IVPBBC

Daniel 11:14-16 NIV "In those times many will rise against the king of the South. Those who are violent among your own people will rebel in fulfillment of the vision, but without success. 15) Then the king of the North will come and build up siege ramps and will capture a fortified city. The forces of the South will be powerless to resist; even their best troops will not have the strength to stand. 16) The invader [Antiochus the Great] will do as he pleases; no one will be able to stand against him. He will establish himself in the Beautiful Land and will have the power to destroy it.

• He will establish himself in the Beautiful Land and will have the power to destroy it.
  The beautiful land = Jerusalem.

• • Antiochus III's occupation of Palestine. The Battle of Gaza in 201 gained Antiochus temporary control of Palestine, but he was pushed back again by Egyptian forces under the command of Scopas. In the next year, however, at the Battle of Panion (at one of the sources of the Jordan; the New Testament Caesarea Philippi, modern Banias), Antiochus defeated the Egyptians and took control of Palestine from them for the last time. At the same time, the Romans were getting a foothold in Greece in the Second Macedonian War. IVPBBC

At this point in time we have a member of the Seleucid family Antiochus III / aka Antiochus the Great, a Syrian (hold that idea loosely), standing at the Southern boundary of the Seleucid empire, what they are calling Palestine. We know it as Jerusalem.

Daniel 11:14 speaks of violent men. The book of 3 Maccabees records a visit of Ptolemy IV to Jerusalem after the Battle of Raphia in which he was treated very badly when he wished to enter the temple. There is a question concerning the historicity of the account. There were pro-Seleucid (led by Onias II, the high priest) and pro- Ptolemaic factions (from the powerful Tobiad family, competitors for the office of high priest) within Judea at this period. Sources do not provide enough information to determine which party might be alluded to in this verse.

• • Violent men. - The Hebrew word is per-eets' and means violent, that is, a tyrant: - destroyer, ravenous, robber. 
    Jeremiah 7:11 NASB "Has this house, which is called by My name, become a den of robbers in your sight? Behold, I, even I, have seen it," declares the LORD.

    Here the word per-eets' was translated as robber.

    Ezekiel 7:20-22 NASB 'They transformed the beauty of His ornaments into pride, and they made the images of their abominations and their detestable things with it; therefore I will make it an abhorrent thing to them. 21) 'I will give it into the hands of the foreigners as plunder and to the wicked of the earth as spoil, and they will profane it. 22) 'I will also turn My face from them, and they will profane My secret place; then robbers will enter and profane it.

    Once again the word per-eets' was translated as robber instead of violent

• “He will establish himself in the Beautiful Land and will have the power to destroy it.”

  The Hebrew word ‛āmaḏ carries a variety of meanings with a range emotions; such as: abide (behind), appoint, arise, cease, confirm, continue, dwell, be employed, endure, establish.

  The NASB states that he has destruction in his hand. I suppose that is another way of saying Jerusalem was at his mercy. The word for destruction is kâlâh and seems to be an adversarial word since completion; can be the absolute opposite of destruction.

Daniel 11:15 NASB "Then the king of the North will come, cast up a siege ramp and capture a well-fortified city; and the forces of the South will not stand their ground, not even their choicest troops, for there will be no strength to make a stand.

Antiochus III's occupation of Palestine. The Battle of Gaza in 201 gained Antiochus temporary control of Palestine, but in the next year at the Battle of Panion Antiochus defeated the Egyptians and took control of Palestine from them for the last time.

11:14 speaks of violent men and I believe that theme holds true when we consider, not only Antiochus III but the Antichrist persona that is coming. 

While the book of 3 Maccabees records a visit of Ptolemy IV to Jerusalem after the Battle of Raphia in which he was treated very badly when he wished to enter the temple. This is nothing in comparison to what we see in scripture.

Daniel 11:16 NASB "But he who comes against him will do as he pleases, and no one will be able to withstand him; he will also stay for a time in the Beautiful Land, with destruction in his hand.

As you saw in verse fifteen, there will be no strength to make a stand.

• “ But he who comes against him will do as he pleases, and no one will be able to withstand him;”
  Antiochus III – also known as Antiochus the Great, is a forerunner and interchangeable with the Antichrist that is coming.
• “he will also stay for a time in the Beautiful Land, with destruction in his hand.”
  The Revised Version translates the verse this way, “and he shall stand in the glorious land, and in his hand shall be destruction.”
  This is indicative of what will happen to Israel at the hand of Antichrist.