Monday, September 15, 2008

End times thoughts

I finished reading the book of Daniel last weekend, and one striking thing is his description of repeated wars between the "king of the north" and the "king of the south." As far as I know, the king of the north could be said to refer to leaders in Russia or Turkey, and a king of the south could refer to leaders in Arabia or possibly somewhere in Africa, and they'd be fighting wars centered around Jerusalem.

Now I realize that not all of my readers are dispensationalists like myself, but bear with me here a minute. If indeed Daniel refers to future events (I can't point to past events that Daniel could have been pointing to), then the events of which he writes require a king of massive power in Arabia or Africa that has not yet arisen. There is some "geopolitics" to come, I would think.

Moreover, what we have here is kings from two of the world's great oil producing regions waging repeated wars in possibly the third great oil producing region of the world. Put gently, the end times are not going to be a good time if you need to buy gas to get to work.

I'd recommend getting a good bicycle, or getting saved, or both.


Gabrielle Eden said...

funny! Get a good bike, get saved, or both! I am a dispensationalist too!

pentamom said...

FWIW, a non-futuristic interpretation of Daniel identifies the events prophesied as the rise, fall, and aftermath of the Macedonian Empire, roughly from the time of Alexander's conquest of Persia, through the last century BC., when Jerusalem was trampled by warring Hellenistic rulers (see Maccabee, The Brothers.)

Nonetheless, getting saved is ALWAYS the recommended course of action. It even happens to Presbyterians. :-)

pentamom said...

Trampled by warring Hellenes and eventually conquered by Rome, of course.