“That FALSE Prophet” GETS ANOTHER ONE WRONG

 

“THAT FALSE PROPHET” GETS ANOTHER ONE WRONG

Gerald Flurry of the Philadelphia Church of God, has said that Iran is the biblical King of the South. 

The military destruction of Iran in the past week or so, proves that this is just another one of his FALSE prophecies.

1. What Gerald Flurry has taught

Gerald Flurry, leader of the Philadelphia Church of God, has taught since the early 1990s that Iran (leading radical Islam) is the biblical “King of the South” in Daniel 11:40. 

His teaching generally claims:

• The King of the South = Iran leading an Islamic bloc
• The King of the North = a future European power (often described as a German-led revival of the Holy Roman Empire)
• At the “time of the end”, the King of the South will “push” at this European power before being conquered. 

This interpretation is central to his prophetic framework and has been repeated for decades.

2. Current events: Iran under massive military attack

In late February–early March 2026, a major war began when the United States and Israel launched large-scale attacks on Iran targeting government and military infrastructure. 

Reported developments include:

• Hundreds of Iranian targets hit in a sustained bombing campaign. 
• Top Iranian leaders, including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, reportedly killed in the strikes. 
• The death toll in Iran has surpassed 1,000 people as strikes continue. 
• The conflict began 28 February 2026 and has expanded rapidly with missile exchanges and ongoing attacks. 

Some reports describe Iran as being “pummeled by airstrikes” while still launching retaliatory missiles. 

3. Why this challenges Flurry’s prophecy

If Flurry’s interpretation were correct, several expectations would follow from Daniel 11:

Daniel 11:40 (summary)

• The King of the South “pushes” first at the King of the North.
• Then the King of the North responds with overwhelming force.

However, the present conflict appears different in several ways:

Observed events (2026 war):

• Iran was attacked first by outside powers, not initiating a prophetic “push.”
• The attackers are the United States and Israel, not a European empire.
• Iran’s leadership and infrastructure are being heavily damaged early in the conflict.

Because of these differences, this contradicts the specific scenario predicted by the FALSE prophet, Flurry.

4. The broader issue critics raise

Flurry’s identification of Iran as the King of the South has been repeated for over 30 years. 

If Iran:

• collapses politically or militarily, or
• fails to lead the prophesied Middle-East coalition,

then the interpretation would represent another failed prophetic prediction.

The biblical standard:

Deuteronomy 18:22

“When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken.”

✅ Summary

• Gerald Flurry has long taught that Iran is the biblical “King of the South.”
• A major war in early 2026 has severely damaged Iran’s leadership and military infrastructure.
• These events contradict the prophetic scenario he predicted, and therefore it is another failed prophecy.

————————————

Here are several well-known prophetic claims made by Gerald Flurry to look at when evaluating his prophetic record.

Major Prophetic Claims vs What Happened

1. “That Prophet” claim

Flurry has taught that he is the end-time figure referred to as “that prophet” in passages such as John 1:21 and Deuteronomy 18.

Claim

• A modern prophetic leader would arise to guide God’s people before the end.

Criticism

• The New Testament identifies “that prophet” with Jesus Christ (Acts 3:22–23).
• That role is self-exalting and unscriptural.

2. Iran = “King of the South”

Flurry has repeatedly taught that Iran leads the prophetic King of the South of Daniel 11.

Claim

• Iran will lead a powerful Islamic bloc that will push against the King of the North.

Current criticism

• Iran has been heavily weakened militarily in the recent conflict.
• The prophecy scenario (Iran initiating a major push) has not unfolded as predicted.

3. “Malachi’s Message” prophecy

Flurry wrote Malachi’s Message claiming it was a revelation from God explaining church prophecy.

Claim

• The book explains the fall of the Worldwide Church of God after the death of Herbert W Armstrong.
• It claims Flurry was raised up to restore the truth.

Criticism

• It contains interpretations presented as divine revelation, which places his teachings beyond question.

4. Prophetic interpretation of world events

Flurry has repeatedly tied specific modern events to prophecy timelines.

Examples critics mention:

• Predictions of imminent prophetic fulfillments that did not occur when expected
• Repeated claims that certain geopolitical developments were direct prophetic fulfillments

The interpretations shift over time when events unfold differently.

Biblical Test of a Prophet

Scripture gives a very direct standard.

Deuteronomy 18:20–22

“When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken.”

Jeremiah 23:21

“I have not sent these prophets, yet they ran.”

Simple Evaluation Flow

You could summarize it like this:

Claimed Prophet → Makes Specific Predictions → Events Occur → Test With Scripture

If the prediction fails:

Result → Not a prophet sent by God

✅ Graphic idea you could share

Title:
“Biblical Test of a Prophet”

Left side:

• Claim: Iran = King of the South
• Claim: “That Prophet” role
• Claim: Special revelation

Right side:

• Test: Deuteronomy 18:22
• If prediction fails → False prophet

Bottom scripture:

“If the thing follow not… the LORD hath not spoken it.”

PLEASE, Stop With The Long Hair

Yeshua looked like a typical Jewish man of his day. 
He wore short hair and a short beard as was the custom in those days. He did not stand out in the crowd.

This study stays strictly with Scripture and first-century history. 
The picture we get is very different from much later European art.

1. The Bible gives no physical description of “Jesus”, 
Yeshua Hamashiach 

The New Testament never describes His height, build, eye color, or hair length. That silence itself is meaningful. If He had looked strikingly unusual, it likely would have been mentioned.

Isaiah’s prophecy about the Messiah says:

“He has no form nor comeliness… there is no beauty that we should desire Him.” — Book of Isaiah 53:2

That suggests He did not have a distinctive or attention-drawing appearance.

2. He did not stand out in a crowd

When Yeshua was arrested, Judas had to identify Him with a kiss (Matthew 26:48–49). If Yeshua had unusually long hair, unusual clothing, or a distinctive appearance, this signal would not have been necessary.

The arrest scene in the Gospel of Matthew shows He blended in visually with His disciples.

That strongly implies:

• He dressed like other Jewish men.
• He looked like a typical Galilean Jew of His day.
• Nothing about His appearance made Him immediately identifiable.

3. First-century Jewish male appearance

Archaeology, Roman descriptions, Jewish sources, and artwork from the region indicate that Jewish men in Judea and Galilee typically:

• Wore short to medium-length hair (not flowing shoulder-length hair).
• Wore trimmed beards (beards were customary under the Law).
• Wore simple tunics with outer garments (mantles).
• Did not adopt Roman elite grooming styles.

The Law prohibited shaving the beard off completely (Leviticus 19:27), but it did not require long hair.

4. Paul’s statement about hair length

In First Epistle to the Corinthians 11:14, Paul writes:

“Does not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?”

Paul was a Pharisaic Jew trained under Gamaliel (Acts 22:3). His cultural reference reflects Jewish norms of the time.

If long hair on men was considered shameful in that culture, it would be very unlikely that Yeshua—who lived a sinless life and kept the Law perfectly—would have worn His hair in a way considered dishonorable.

5. Nazirite? No.

Some assume Yeshua had long hair because He was “a Nazarene.” But that refers to being from Nazareth — not a Nazirite vow.

The Nazirite vow (Numbers 6) required:

• No cutting of hair
• No wine
• No contact with dead bodies

Yeshua:

• Drank wine (Matthew 11:19)
• Touched the dead (e.g., raising Jairus’ daughter)

So He was not a Nazirite and had no reason to wear uncut hair.

6. Early artistic depictions

The earliest surviving Christian art (2nd–3rd century, in Roman catacombs) portrays Yeshua with:

• Short hair
• A short beard or sometimes clean-shaven
• Typical Mediterranean features

The long-haired European depiction developed centuries later in Byzantine and medieval art.

7. Conclusion

Biblically and historically:

• Yeshua had no striking physical beauty or unusual appearance (Isaiah 53:2).
• He blended into crowds (Judas had to identify Him).
• Jewish custom favored short to moderate hair with a trimmed beard.
• Long hair on men was culturally viewed as shameful (1 Corinthians 11:14).
• He was not under a Nazirite vow.

Putting it together, the most reasonable conclusion is:

Yeshua looked like a typical first-century Jewish man of Galilee — short hair, short beard, ordinary clothing — and did not physically stand out in a crowd.