Oh my!!
Daniel 12:1 "At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise. There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then. But at that time your people--everyone whose name is found written in the book--will be delivered.
Michael is indeed the guardian of Israel and will protect them during the tribulation.
CynicalBear:
Another Church History scholar,Henry Chadwick in his The Early Church [Pengiun Books, Revised Edition, 1993] writes that Peter and Pauls relationship was ambigous and their disagreement recorded in Galatians must have been exceptional. Regardless, in death they were united in tha both were killed during the reign of Nero, although we have no definitive record of how long Peter was in Rome. In the footnote on page 18 of this version, Professor Chadwick comes to the same conclusion as Philip Schaff in that Peter’s martyrdom taking place in Rome is “Highly Probable” given the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians and Ignatius Letter to the Romans and consistent testimoney of 2nd Century Fathers and the fact that a monument dating 160AD to Peters memory was built. Now, Prof. Chadwick does state that Peter being in Rome for 25 years is 3rd century legend so this statement by Prof Chadwick and his scholarship is consisent with Prof. Philip Schaff’s view that both Peter and Paul were killed in Rome and suggest that Peter did not arrive in Rome until after Paul’s Letter to the Church at Rome written most likely between 56-58AD.
Jaroslav Pelikan in his the Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine Volume 1: The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100-600AD) writes (p.354) that Rome was where both Peter and Paul were buried and this had given the CHurch of Rome a unique eminence as early as the time of Tertullian...The Churches of the East owed a special allegiance to Rome...by hailing the authority of Leo, the fathers of Chalcedon gave witness to the orthodoxy of Rome. One See after another had capitulated in this or that controversy..Rome had a special position. The Bishop of Rome had the right by his own authority to annul the acts of a synod.
Now, Prof. Pelikan was a Lutheran when he wrote this, he eventuall became Orthodox because of his Eastern European Heritage but always longed for reunion between the TWO historic Apostolic Churches. Nevertheless, his scholarship is excellent and his conclusions are the same as Schaff and Chadwicks, that is Peter was in Rome. In addition, it is interesting about his statments regarding the eminence of the Church of Rome and the rights of the Bishop of Rome, by his own authority, could annul a Synod. This is only possible in the context that the Church of Rome based on Apostolic Succession draws that authority due to the fact that “both” Peter and Paul were killed in Rome.