I can't support Chad Schafer's theory about Egypt

I talked about his World in Bondage to Egypt book once already.

Now personally I like Chad Schafer, we're friends on Facebook, some of what I say here will come off harsher then I intend.   It's just his theory I intend to be harsh on.

I like that he's drawing attention to often overlooked Eschatological significance of Egypt.  And I think he's onto something talking about the Arch of Titus.  The problem is how he brings those things together.

[[Update July 2018: I still disagree the theory but I now feel I was way to harsh in this Post.]]




I have been since early 2016 dedicating much of this Blog to arguing that the Land of Egypt will be important to the End Times.  So it frustrates me that the only other person talking about Egypt having an End Times role, also wants to make what Egypt refers to meaningless.

It'd be one thing if he wanted to claim one specific modern Nation other then Egypt has become the Heir of Ancient Egypt.  I have my England and Egypt post, and may in the near future propose a theory about connecting Japan to Egypt.  (But I still think ultimately the End Times role of Egypt is on The Nile.)  However simply saying Egypt is everywhere now makes the whole thing meaningless.  Israel and Babylon have spiritual senses beyond specific lands, but my view of Bible Prophecy has always been predicated on arguing those spiritual systems will return to their original Homeland.

The Arch of Titus is Roman architecture, so therefore it being copied by Modern European nations is further evidence of the doctrine that they are a Revived Roman Empire.  (And the soaring Eagle imagery on it further evidence of Edom being Rome because of Jeremiah 49:16 and Obadiah 3)  Saying it's a symbol of Egypt just because Titus did things in Egypt is basically torturing the text to make it say anything.  Titus' Arch wasn't even the first Roman Arch of that design.

I also think it's interesting that the Roman Emperors basically took over the Pharonic worship in Egypt.  But they did that because they ruled Egypt, it does not lessen the importance of the Land of Egypt.

Schafer talks about how Josephus recorded Titus stopping at Egypt as he was taking his Jewish captives to Rome.  What does is show that the prophecy of returning to Egypt was literally fulfilled.  Llater in War of the Jews Josephus records more Jews coming to Egypt after Masada fell, specifically the surviving Sicarii, and that is why the next Jewish Rebellion against Rome, The Kitos War, starting in Egypt and Cyrene.  So likewise if there is another fulfillment of this Prophesied return o Egypt, it will be just as literal.

Schafer has also talked about an apparent contradiction between Hosea 9 and Hosea 11, one saying Israel will return to Egypt, and another saying they won't return to the Land of Egypt.  And saying this backs up his theory.  There are lots of potential answer to that riddle.

On Facebook, Chad and his followers have been expressing to me an opinion that I can't call his theory wrong if I haven't read his entire book. That attitude will only make me further distrust you.

If the information you give away promoting the book, in places like your interviews with Rob Skiba, don't hold up under scurrility, or fail to be compelling.  Then the Book isn't worth buying, that's how marketing works.  If the starting premises don't at least convince me of the theory being plausible, then none of the little filler details of the Book will either.

I don't have the money to buy a full book on every theory I consider wrong and dangerous.  (The Book is Free on Kindle Unlimited, but having Unlimited costs money, and I don't want to give Amazon money right now with how their Strike service angers me).

And frankly telling me I can't fully understand your theory without that esoteric information, puts you dangerously close to Cult territory in my view.

You see there is a reason I haven't attempted to write a book out of any of the sensational theories I've advocated on this blog.  I'm trying to very clearly not be like Jonathon Cahn or Mark Blitz.  I certainly could use the money I could make off writing books.  But I'm basing the credibility of my work on my not trying to make money off of them.

Chris White did write and sell books, but he went about it the right way.

I'm not trying to say Chad Schafer is a Fraud.  I think he has made some useful observations.  But I find his conclusions counterproductive to what is really important about those observations.