21
since there was a nation even to that same time'. There can be
only one such time of trouble, and Daniel 12:1 must therefore
synchronise with the event spoken of in Matthew 24:21 and
Revelation 7:14.
If it be objected that this makes the hope before the Church of
the Thessalonians identical with the hope of Israel, we would
reply that this is not an objection, but actually the truth of the
matter. The hope of Israel was the only hope in view in Acts 1:6
and the hope of Israel was still in view in Acts 28:20. We have
seen that the Church at Rome was taught to abound in this very
hope, and we also find that all that is written concerning the
hope in 1 and 2 Thessalonians links it to this same hope of
Israel. Michael, according to Daniel 12, `stands for the people
of Israel'; and the coming of the Lord `with all His saints' is a
fulfilment of Zechariah 14:5. The `saints' here are angels, as a
comparison of Deuteronomy 33:2 and Psalm 68:17 will show.
The only other mention of the Archangel in the New
Testament is in Jude 9, and Jude speaks of the days immediately
preceding the dreadful Day of the Lord.
The whole of the prophetic passage in 2 Thessalonians 2 is
taken up with the teaching concerning the Beast and the False
Prophet. If the hope of the Thessalonian Church was the blessed
hope of the Mystery, why should the apostle spend so much time
describing a period that has nothing to do with this hope?
It may be necessary to say a word here on 2 Thessalonians
1:10. The translation `When He shall have come' is to be
preferred to the A.V. rendering, but there is no warrant for
teaching from this that the hope of the Church will have been