Spinning Out of Control :: By Matt Ward

Many today believe that the Middle East stands on the very brink of all-out war: that huge regional chaos is just around the corner.

At present, the only real certainty in the Middle East is that nobody actually wants all-out war. Certainly, Donald Trump, coming into a re-election season, would at all costs wish to avoid the quagmire of another Middle Eastern conflict, one that would inevitably drag the United States back into a full military commitment from which it has only just managed to extricate itself.

Iran, despite bellicose rhetoric to the contrary, also does not want any kind of a region-wide confrontation with the United States or, indeed, Israel. Iran knows well that it would not win either of those wars.

Israel, for her part, seems to be more than happy maintaining the status quo, confining military operations to limited and controllable single-strike missions into Syria, Gaza and Lebanon, against a range of non-state proxy groups.

Yet, Israel is also desperate to avoid a region-wide war for one other reason. Israel knows that in the next major war it will be bombarded by many thousands of rockets from the northern, southern and eastern fronts, all at once. Despite Israel’s recent successes in nullifying this rocket threat, in the next significant war, there is every prospect Israel will be completely swamped by the sheer weight of rockets that will be fired at her.

Yet, despite each of these main Middle-East players not wanting war, the Middle East landscape has never looked more like war is coming. Indeed, I would even go so far as to say that the region has never looked more as if it is on the brink of an imminent all-out war in my lifetime.

In every direction one chooses, there are bubbling pressures, each of which is a potential trigger. Only recently, there was the unprecedented attacks on oil refineries in Saudi Arabia. Iran, no doubt indirectly responsible for these attacks, is actively goading the United States into a limited military confrontation that could easily get out of hand and draw in all her regional allies and enemies, quickly spiraling out of control.

Equally, any one of a number of Israeli operations against Iranian hubs of power in Syria, and now in Iraq, could also provide the spark triggering an escalation into major, region-wide war.

Any confrontation or bloodletting in any of these areas will have a ripple effect upon the entire Middle East that could see it descending into chaos. One of the main, and most misunderstood, reasons why the Middle East is more volatile today than it has been in the past is because of the sheer number of proxy wars taking place there right now.

Take, for example, the current war in Yemen, between the Houthis and the Yemeni government. On the surface, it is a simple conflict between two relatively unimportant regional actors. However, this war is in fact a proxy war where Saudi – Iranian rivalry has come to a direct head.

It is on Yemeni battlefields that Saudi Arabia has finally chosen to confront Iran, and neither side at this point looks to be backing down. This war stopped being about merely the Houthis and the Yemen government long ago. Now it is morphing into no less than a confrontation between two competing ideologies, between Sunni and Shia Islam.

Syria is another fine example of this. On the surface, it would appear to be a brutal and bloody internal civil war, essentially between pro and anti-Assad forces. However, like Yemen, this war has become much more than that now. It is the epicenter of a confrontation between major world powers, and every one of them have deeply entrenched interests in Syria that prevent them from backing down or giving an inch.

Indeed, when one spends any serious time considering Syria, the only conclusion one can draw is that it would be truly remarkable if all-out war did not come from here. Interesting, and more than a little frightening, this is just the scenario that Isaiah describes in his Burden of Damascus prophecy. The house of Israel suddenly attacked, from Syria, provoking a reaction that can only be a nuclear retaliation, and thus Damascus, the oldest continually inhabited city on Earth, is reduced overnight into a heap of ruins. This could happen today or it could happen tomorrow.

This volatility in the Middle East is unlikely to change any time soon either because a number of huge power bloc confrontations upholds the current situation. It is these vast power blocs, similar to those that existed in pre-First World War Europe, that are fueling the chaos in the Middle East. Firstly, there is Israel, backed by America, against all her many regional enemies. Currently, these enemies consist of Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas and Syria. This power struggle is manifesting itself in sporadic violence between Israel and the West Bank and Gaza.

However, there are other competing power blocs in the Middle East too. Iran is actively engaged all over the region against Saudi Arabia, mainly through the proxy war both sides are fighting in Yemen, but also in Iraq and elsewhere.

Add to this mix Turkey and their ongoing, burgeoning offensive against the Kurds – and remember that Russia has very fixed commitments now in the Middle East too – and it is not hard to see how things could quickly spiral out of control.

Skeptics, though, would argue that the Middle East has always been this dysfunctional and volatile. However, this time is different. The dynamics of this present-day Middle East are different from any that have come before it, for three main reasons.

China, for the first time ever, is now very much present in the Middle East in a way it has never been before. Russia, that generation-old nemesis of NATO, is resurgent, and its influence over the region cannot be overestimated or overemphasized.

Yet, significant though these two pivotal factors are, by themselves they are no harbinger of war shortly ahead. What does create that harbinger is the relative decline of the United States, both in a general foreign policy sense, and in its “boots on the ground” influence in the region.

There is a sense in the Middle East that the old rules simply do not apply any longer. There is a belief that what might once have been out of bounds is now very much up for grabs, and that if these state and non-state actors don’t rush in and take what they perceive to be the new spoils, that opportunity may be lost to them forever. All of this reinforced by the obvious desire of the United States to disengage from all Middle Eastern military commitments.

In the past, there were known certainties in the Middle East that everyone counted on, all underpinned by one thing: the unyielding presence of the United States. Now that cannot be taken for granted, and the impact of this on the Middle East has been the removal of the restraint that once curtailed nations like Iran, and also transnational actors, from acting too rashly or foolishly.

Any future war between nation-states in the Middle East will easily spill across borders and quickly draw in a host of other nations. The paradox for America is that even despite Trump’s obvious efforts to disengage from the region, any conflict between any of these nations would see the United States inevitably drawn back in to the region, and a situation that Donald Trump has spent the last four years trying to escape from will repeat itself.

The Middle East, at present, seems to be spinning out of control. When war does finally come, as it will, it is also looking more and more likely that Israel will stand in this war all alone.

wardmatt1977@gmail.com

 

Pretribulation Rapture Signpost #7: Restrainer :: By Jonathan Brentner

As we saw in our last signpost, the false report informing the Thessalonians that the day of the Lord had already begun put the new believers there in a state of severe panic (see signpost #6). In response, Paul assured them this was not the case and provided evidence to back up his assertion.

This brings us to the next word on our signposts: “Restrainer.” Why is this word so significant? A key event at the start of the tribulation, the revealing of the antichrist, cannot happen until God removes this “restrainer” who is currently holding back his unveiling to the world.

In 2 Thessalonians 2:3 Paul writes, “Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction.” The apostle later identifies the “restrainer” as the one preventing the revealing of this “man of lawlessness,” the antichrist (2:7-8).

The Identity of the “restrainer” is the key to understanding the events of 2 Thessalonians 2:3 that tell us the day of the Lord has not yet begun, starting with the departure.

The Departure

As I explained in a previous post, the word “rebellion” in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 can either refer to a physical departure or that of leaving the true biblical faith. As Dr. Andy Woods explains in his book, The Falling Away, the Greek word “apostasia simply means to ‘to stand away from’ or ‘to depart.’ Only by examining how this word is used in its immediate context will determine what the departure is from, whether it be a spiritual or physical departure.”[i]

The context of 2 Thessalonians 2:3 strongly favors a physical departure versus that of spiritual apostasy. The rapture is the main subject of both books that Paul wrote to the Thessalonians, and Paul refers to it just two verses earlier (2:1). When the Thessalonians saw the word apostasia in this verse, they would have more readily assumed a physical departure, the rapture, versus that of a spiritual rebellion.

The definite article in front of apostasia tells us Paul has a definite event in mind, one that his readers would know based upon Paul’s previous teachings. However, Paul never mentions a spiritual apostasy in either of his epistles to the Thessalonians and offers no additional clarifying information that would enable his readers to identify that this departure as being spiritually related. The only departure of which his readers would recognize is that of the rapture.

From Thessalonians’ point of view, they had no other perspective from which to view the “departure” other than as a physical one.

I know many of you will disagree with me on this point, and I have no problem with that. Until recently, I also advocated the spiritual apostasy interpretation in 2:3. However, my study during the past several months has caused me to regard the departure of 2 Thessalonians 2:3 as the rapture, a physical departure. I base my conclusion on the points I make above and in my previous article on the matter.

The Identity of the Restrainer

Over the years, various Bible commentators have identified the restrainer as the Roman Empire, an assortment of other human governments, the preaching of the gospel, and Michael, the archangel. The problem with all of these ideas is they do not have the strength to restrain such a force backed by the power of Satan and his demonic host, which seek to bring the antichrist to power.

Edmond Hiebert, in his commentary on 2 Thessalonians, sums up the need for the Restrainer to have divine power:

  • “Our identification of the Restrainer must ultimately be determined by the question, What person is able to hold back the efforts of Satan? To effectively counteract and restrain the personal activities of Satan demands a person, and one that is more than human. Only a supernatural person can truly frustrate the supernatural workings of Satan. This would at once rule out human agencies as well as all evil supernatural agents. Only a superhuman Restrainer can do the work.” [ii]

Since Satan will empower this lawless one, the Restrainer must possess divine power. The demonic forces currently seeking to promote the devil’s kingdom are causing trouble and promoting their evil agenda throughout the world. It stands to reason that the Holy Spirit’s universal presence is required to hold back the full revelation of the future leader of this regime, the antichrist.

Jesus, in John 16:7-11, stated that one of the functions of the Holy Spirit in the world is to restrain evil. Since Pentecost, the Holy Spirit’s unique indwelling presence in believers has held back the full revelation of this man of lawlessness. This will continue until the rapture, when the Spirit’s special operation in the world through the church comes to an end.

Another argument in favor of identifying the restrainer as the Holy Spirit comes from Paul’s reference to the Restrainer with both masculine and neuter pronouns in 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7. Dr. Robert Thomas explains how this uniquely identifies Restrainer as the Holy Spirit:

  • “To one familiar with the Lord Jesus’ Upper Room Discourse, as Paul undoubtedly was, fluctuation between neuter and masculine recalls how the Holy Spirit is spoken of. Either gender is appropriate, depending on whether the speaker (or writer) thinks of natural agreement (masc. because of the Spirit’s personality) or grammatical (neuter because of the noun pneuma; (see John 14:26; 15:26; 16:13, 14).” [iii]

Furthermore, if the departure of 2 Thessalonians 2:3 is the rapture, this forms a strong parallel with 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7, “And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. Only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way.” This signifies that in both passages the rapture removes the Restrainer who now prevents the unveiling of the antichrist. It’s the Holy Spirit’s unique presence on the earth via the church that now restricts the activity of the coming lawless one.

The identification of the Restrainer as the Holy Spirit adds considerable strength to our case for the pretribulation rapture since it signifies that believers will not know the identity of the antichrist before the rapture.

What Does this Tell Us?

Even if we do not identify the departure as the rapture, 2 Thessalonians 2 adds considerable support to a pretribulation rapture. If we equate the departure in this chapter with the rapture, then the rapture must occur before the tribulation.

Let’s look at what this tells us:

First, identifying the Restrainer as the Holy Spirit signifies that we as believers will be with Jesus in heaven before the unveiling of the antichrist to the world.

We know the work of this future lawless one kicks off the seven-year tribulation. Daniel 9:26-27 tells us that the remaining prophetic “week” of years for Israel begins with the antichrist making a covenant of peace “with many” that will no doubt include Israel. When this happens, those who know prophetic Scripture would not fail to recognize the identity of the antichrist provided they remain on the earth.

The rapture must thus occur before the singing of the peace accord that will initiate the seven-year tribulation. Otherwise, many in the church would know the identity of the antichrist.

Taken together with previous signposts, the identification of the Restrainer as the Holy Spirit adds much credibility to placing the rapture before the tribulation.

Second, if the departure of 2 Thessalonians 2:3 is indeed the rapture, this not only places it ahead of the appearing of the antichrist, but before the start of the day of the Lord with its sudden destruction. If this is the case, how can the rapture occur anywhere else but before the start of tribulation? It cannot!

In summary, Paul tells his beleaguered readers that the day of the Lord has not yet begun because they remained earthbound and because of the restraining work of the Holy Spirit continuing to block the revealing of the antichrist.

Regardless of how one interprets the “departure” of 2 Thessalonians 2:3, Paul’s words in the rest of the chapter verify his previous promise to the Thessalonians and to us that we will not experience the wrath of the day of the Lord since we will be with Jesus before the unveiling of the antichrist to the world.

Can you see how the evidence for a pretribulation rapture builds with each signpost? Can you see how each piece to the puzzle confirms that the rapture will happen before the sudden destruction that will mark the beginning of the day of the Lord?

We have a few more signposts to go, and then we will put it all together.

Since we live in a day where so many pastors, writers, and teachers either deny the whole concept of the rapture or believe the church will go through the tribulation, it’s exceedingly important that we understand all the pieces of the biblical evidence that supports a pretribulation rapture.

Jonathan Brentner

Website: Our Journey Home

Please consider signing up for my newsletter on my website. Thanks!

E-mail: Jonathanbrentner@yahoo.com

[i] Andy Woods, The Falling Away – Spiritual Departure or Physical Rapture? (Taos, NM, Dispensational Publishing House, Inc., 2018), p. 19.

[ii] Hiebert, D Edmond, The Thessalonian Epistles (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 313.

[iii] Thomas, p. 324. Also referenced by Dr. Thomas in regard to this is: Robertson, Archibald T., A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1934), pp 208-9.