The Gog-Magog Scenario By Doug Krieger

THE GOG-MAGOG SCENARIO

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Part 1—“The Eschatological Conflict”

Jihad is Worship
Tectonic Plates between the West and Islam
Eschatological Schools of Interpretation: Confronting the “Brethren”
Is the Futurity of Daniel’s 70th Week a Roman Catholic Plot?

Part 2—The Rise of Gog: Islamism Unleashed . . .

Syrian Update
U.S. Strategic Policy in the Region
Surrounding Gog and Magog (Including Syria)
Enough to Drive You Crazy . . . from Russia with Love!
Enter the Turks
Turkey and Israel
Turkey, Iran and Syria “So Happy Together”
Iraq Chimes In
Persia . . . Gomer . . . The House of Togarmah

Part 3—The Rise of Gog: Identifying Gog, Persian Update

Summary (“The Gog-Magog Scenario”) and Introduction
Gog and Magog . . . Their Identity

Part 4—Gog’s Opposition: The Antichrist

The Foci of Gog-Magog: Israel and the USA
Antichrist does not attack Israel
From Gog to the Coming of Messiah
Confirming our Thesis of Antichrist in Daniel 11:36:45
U.S. Building Forts on Iraq Border

Part 5—King of the North: Turkey and Iran (Magog)

The Face of Satan
Unity of the Muslim Ranks and Its Awakening
Persia and Other Peoples – Watch Egypt!
Chart of Ancient Tribal Designations to Modern States

Part 6—King of the South: Egypt, Sudan & Libya

Vs. “The Willful King”

“Damascus Shall be a Ruinous Heap”
The “Spoil” of the Willful King (King of Tyre)
Give them Liberty or give them Death!

THE

GOG-MAGOG SCENARIO

Doug Krieger

Introduction

Plans are afoot for “Total War” in the Middle East! Iran’s nuclear facilities—hell-bent on producing another “Islamic Bomb”—are rattling Washington’s cage and driving Israel nuts. Iran and Syria this past year signed a “defense pact” to tell Washington it’s “enough already” and by signing the pact raised the stakes; now, “an attack on Iran is an attack on Syria and visa versa.” Now, Turkey has gotten into the fray by exchanging “economic and security” accords with both Syria and Iran and has told Iran that all three of them (Turkey, Iran and Syria) could “wage war” if needed to stop the Kurds (which really sets well with Iraq’s immediate confusion). And, Turkey told the USA’s involved in “terrorist acts” just like Israel! Meanwhile the US is building upwards of 35 “forts” along the Syrian-Iraqi border!

Gog is on the rise . . . the “Road to Damascus” is being paved with new alliances. Iran’s Defense Minister held a “war counsel” with Lebanon/Syria’s Hezbollah’s leadership to “plot and plan” against the Zionist enemy. Iraq’s defense minister just told the press that “Iran is our greatest enemy!” Syria’s President Assad just cut a deal with Moscow for a $20M “illegal” missile deal (January 2005) that will be all that Bush and Israel can handle! So, the Administration is threatening “sanctions” against Russia!

Under Secretary of State Armitage in mid-January (2005) told Syria to “lay off” with supporting international terrorism and stop the funding and training of insurgents now numbering upwards of 30,000 in Iraq. Meanwhile 70+ “terrorist acts” are being committed DAILY in Iraq against coalition forces; and US casualties soaring to around 1,400 dead.

This thing’s unraveling . . . what does the Bible say about it? Answer: One whole bunch! This series of articles is a MUST READ to stay on top of this . . . to know what’s coming down and when and what to do about it. Life may be going on as “normal” (“as in the days of Noah”) but we’ve got news for you . . . THAT’S A MYTH—just ask the G.I.’s in the Persian Gulf!

Yeah, we’re aware that certain folks think this is all hogwash and that we’re, like Bush, living in Armageddonland—fantasizing the nightmare. No, we’re here as watchmen on the wall to warn, to encourage, to strengthen the Church in her most critical hour. God hasn’t left us adrift . . . He’s told us beforehand how this plays out. It’s time to become aware of the “times and the seasons” and to wake up and get involved, and get right with the Lord! There are issues here that we all must address, understand, and certainly . . . “lead many to righteousness.”

We commend this series to the Lord and to His people and to a world that is spiraling out of control . . . don’t let this hour pass without getting involved in the unsealing of the end of days . . . Why? Because you’re in it!

GOG-MAGOG SCENARIO

Part 1—“The Eschatological Conflict”

Ezekiel 38:1-6 “The word of the Lord came to me; Son of man, set your face against Gog, of the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal; prophesy against him and say: ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: I am against you, O Gog, chief prince of Meshech and Tubal. I will turn you around, put hooks in your jaws and bring you out with your whole army - your horsemen fully armed, and a great horde with large and small shields, all of them brandishing their swords. Persia, Cush and Put will be with them, all with shields and helmets, also Gomer with all its troops, and Beth Togarmah from the far north with all its troops - the many nations with you.’”

What we are witnessing in the Middle East today, is, in sum and substance, a disturbing “Clash of Civilizations” sparked not solely by “spoil” but by spiritual forces beyond the grasp of the secular mind. A Crusader mentality has and will continue to take hold upon the leadership of the West; and, that imagery is all the more exacerbated by Islamicists who cannot and will not see the conflict in any other context.

“The United States and Great Britain are currently engaged in the Tenth Crusade, an effort to assert control over the Middle East. This crusade began in 1983, when Ronald Reagan sent troops into Lebanon to prop up a Western-leaning government after Israel had invaded the country. Up till then the United States had not been the target of car bombings and the like. But within months the Marine barracks in Beirut were bombed, killing hundreds, and the United States has since been lumped in with earlier Crusaders as an aggressor deserving of counterattack. What is the source of such a conflict? Although some see it as a struggle for control of oil, that is only the latest wrinkle of a conflict deeply seated in the psyches of all concerned. It is the spiritual aspects, not the economic, that hold the key.” (The Tenth Crusade, Dennis O’Brien)

JIHAD IS WORSHIP

Why this passion and ultimate suicidal effort to oust the West from “Islamic lands?” There is far more going on here than meets the secular eye . . . and, in a word, the highest form of worship within Islam—pure worship—is HOLY WAR! Especially, against the infidels, the exploiters of wealth and Islamic culture!

“In its literal sense jihad in Arabic simply means struggle - striving to one’s utmost to further a worthy cause. There is a difference, however between the word, struggle and jihad. The word struggle does not connote the sense of reward or worship in the religious sense of the word. But when the word jihad became a part of Islamic terminology, the sense of reward or worship came to be associated with it, that is to say, if struggle is struggle in the simple sense of word, jihad means a struggle which is an act of worship, the engagement of which earns reward to the person concerned. As the Quran says: Strive for the cause of God as you ought to strive.” (22:78) (Understanding Jihad, By Farida Khanam, 4 July 2000)

TECTONIC PLATES BETWEEN THE WEST AND ISLAM

“It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future.” (Professor Samuel Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations, 1993, P.22)

There’s little room for discussion, dialogue, moderation, temperance, diplomacy and the like, when two tectonic plates—ratcheted to their maximum strain—demand RELIEF!

“The central notions of dualism between Good and Evil, Salvation through an Expected Messiah, and the Final Battle between St. Michael and Satan animate these world religions (i.e., Judaism, Christianity and Islam) and their devotees. Pragmatism, reason, and common sense have little place in these primitive Semitic world views. All conflict is interpreted as part of a cosmic struggle between Good and Evil and there is no room for compromise or tolerance. Our American Evangelicals and Neo-Conservatives have bought into these delusions as much as Islamicists and if left unshackled will lead us all to world conflagration.” (Understanding the Middle East: the Enemy of My Enemy May Be My Enemy, Norman Ravitch)

And, where will all this lead? Only a fool would assume that somehow the West, with its Israeli ally (now that both are the brunt of terror) have any designs on pulling up their tents from the cradle of civilization, or ultimately, from the Beautiful Land (“He will also enter the Beautiful Land, and many countries will fall . . . he will gain control over the hidden treasures of gold and silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt; and Libyans and Ethiopians will follow at his heels . . . he will pitch the tents of his royal pavilion between the seas and the beautiful Holy Mountain” (Daniel 11:41-43, 45).); nor will Islam reinvent itself!

In our last series on “The Road to Damascus” we highlighted Scripture and contemporary geopolitical realities regarding Syria’s role in the Middle East and her complicity regarding her harboring a network of terrorist organizations—while funneling “insurgents” and funds into Iraq—these articles will act as a follow-up to that original subject, as well as draw peculiar attention upon the Biblical and contemporary realities taking place in those nations to Israel’s immediate north (including Syrian updates), and south—while initially elucidating the “eschatological battles” being waged within the ranks of Christendom over these issues.

We’ll identify the massive alliance of nations under Gog’s leadership in light of the research from antiquity, contemporary theories, and finally make conclusions to their geographic locations. The “theological stakes are high!”

ESCHATOLOGICAL SCHOOLS OF INTERPRETATION . . . . . Confronting the “Brethren”

Those of us who maintain a “Futurist” position in our eschatology (e.g., there will be a future Antichrist who will be fully engaged in the aforementioned Gog/Magog War (Daniel 11:40-45) affirm that Antichrist will head up, what we interpret to be the final manifestation of absolute Gentile World Power as depicted in the Image seen in Daniel—i.e., that final empire which mirrors Rome’s Empire (now revived), comprising economic and political hegemony, supported by apostate religion (i.e., the Christian religion)—is irrefutably none other than the present leadership of the West: The USA. That is precisely why we feel what we are discussing is absolutely relevant and of the highest priority for God’s people to hear and for the world “out there” to know!

Luther nailing his 95 thesis to the church door at Wittenburg On the other hand, we are keenly aware that “Historicists and Preterists” eschatological schemes deride our conclusions. Why? Because, though they are dear brothers and sisters in the Lord, they, nevertheless, have formulated a system of hermeneutics which, at their extreme, terminate all Bible prophecy (as the Preterists do) to have concluded by the end of the First Century and most likely at the destruction of the Jewish Temple, under Titus, in 70 A.D. Whereas, the Historicist “advances” beyond 70 A.D. and attempts to interpret historical events of the last two thousand years with the book of Revelation and other Bible prophecies (e.g., Napoleon’s seizure of Papal lands, even the incarceration of Pope Leo VII, in 1809 as the one “wounded by the sword and lived” of Revelation 13:14; thus, marking the end of the 1,260 days). Preterists and Historicists have outstanding evangelical leadership within their ranks; after all, Martin Luther’s “breakthrough” took place when he saw the Papacy as the Antichrist!

Many of the Historicist’s interpretations are “out there” . . . though well-intentioned, they, nevertheless, are sometimes so farfetched that despite their “Biblical applications” to history (e.g., trying to make sense of the Papacy and the martyrdom of countless Christians under Rome’s Inquisition, while bringing comfort to the brethren), they appear awkward and even laughable; to wit:

“The Thunders of the Vatican

At the epoch belonging to the Vision, the thunders well-known throughout Christendom, and acknowledged as having authority, were those that proceeded from the Seven-hilled, City of Rome, the Papal Thunders, the Thunders of the Vatican. In reference to them these expressions occur continually in the histories of those times.

There is no need to relate how, very shortly after the publication, of the Theses (i.e., Luther’s 95 Theses), the Papal Thunders of intimidation began to make their voices heard against them.” (Exegesis of Revelation 10:4 regarding the “Seven Thunders” The Reformation in Revelation by Reverend E.P. Cachemaille M.A. Caius College, Cambridge)

The simple truth be known . . . both (Historicism and Preterism) accord little if any relevance to contemporary Israel and even deride her materiality as a “secular outrage” or an eschatological imposter and as a “Scriptural imposition/fabrication!” Heralding Israel’s rebirth is NOT exciting at all to these dear brethren! “Messianic Scenarios” bear them no interest!

Furthermore, the fixation of the early Protestants and their progenitors upon the Holy See of Rome as the embodiment of all that is Antichrist precludes any and all personifications of a future embodiment of that Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition in whom the Abomination of Desolation shall reveal his true purpose! Differences of opinion are so extreme between the Historicist and the Futurist (the Antichrist is yet future) that only one can be correct; to wit, Ralph Woodrow’s pronouncement:

“What differences exist here! One says the 70th week is future; the other says it is fulfilled! One says there is a huge gap between the 69th and the 70th weeks; the other requires no gap. One says the 70th week pertains to Antichrist; the other to Jesus Christ! In view of such glaring differences, both of these interpretations simply cannot be correct.”

Woodrow then proceeds to argue the case for historicists wherein he concludes that, although the precise use of the year/day matters up to the “anointing of Messiah” at the Baptism of John (483 years + 3 ½ years of the Lord’s earthly ministry for a total of 486 ½ years), the next 3 ½ years (after Jesus “breaks THE covenant” with the Jews in the “midst of the week” leaving the last 3 ½ years of Daniel’s 70^th Week immediately following his crucifixion) terminates “somewhere around” the gospel’s entry to the Gentiles with Cornelius (another example of the “give or take” method of the historicists). Consequently, the 70^th Week has already been fulfilled . . . all of it! There is no gap between the 69^th and the 70^th Week of Daniel; it’s “consecutive” and that’s HISTORY; we’re over and done with it!

We will go into more detail concerning the futurity of Daniel’s 70^th Week, it’s implications for Christians and Jews, and the Gentile World Powers; as well as the reasons why many well-meaning brethren refuse to come to terms with the futurity of Daniel’s 70^th Week. Suffice it to say we affirm that the Antichrist is yet to come. However, in saying this, we do not conclude that the “spirit of antichrist has gone out into the world” even now, as it has in past times (I John 2:18).

Also, that he (i.e., Antichrist) will “confirm a defense pact” (Daniel 9:27; Isaiah 28:15, 18) with the nation of Israel at or near the commencement of the, yet future, Gog/Magog War of Ezekiel 38 and 39. Most Historicists who know of Sir Robert Anderson’s “The Coming Prince,” are “outraged” or in “denial” over his conclusions and chronologies. How could the former head of Scotland Yard forecast a future Antichrist based on a yet future 70^th Week of Daniel? How dare he dislocate Daniel’s 70^th Week from the initial 69 Weeks? This is either a Jewish conspiracy or Catholic cover-up! This is all the more confirmed by Sir Anderson’s amazing statements which “prophetically insisted” that Israel’s immediate ingathering was a foregone “prophetical conclusion” regardless of their persistent dispersions and Ottoman’s Empire; to wit:

“Judah’s promises, on the contrary, imply that blessing will reach the Jew as a Jew, not only recognizing his national position, but confirming him therein . . . it may be asked, does not the dispensation (of Grace) run its course until the return of Christ to earth? How then can Jews be found at His coming in a place of blessing nationally (Sir Anderson’s emphasis), akin to that which they held in a bygone age? All will admit that Scripture seems to teach that such will be the case ([4] In proof of this, appeal may be made to these very prophecies of Daniel; and later prophecies testify to it still more plainly, notably the book of Zechariah.)

And further . . .

“But Israel’s history has yet to be completed; and when that nation comes again upon the scene, the element of miraculous interpositions will mark once more the course of events on earth. On the other hand, the analogy of the past would lead us to expect a merging of the one dispensation in the other, rather than an abrupt transition; and the question is one of peculiar interest on general grounds, whether passing events are not tending towards this very consummation, THE RESTORATION OF THE JEWS TO PALESTINE.” (cir. 1895) (My emphasis)

One final incitement for the Historicist and the Preterist among us:

“Then again, the return of the Jews to Palestine is one of the strangest facts of the day. There is scarcely a country in the world that does not offer more attractions to the settler, be he agriculturist or trader; and yet, since The Coming Prince was written, more Jews have migrated to the land of their fathers than returned with Ezra when the decree of Cyrus brought the servitude to a close. But yesterday the prophecy that Jerusalem should be inhabited “as towns without walls” seemed to belong to a future far remote. The houses beyond the gates were few in number, and no one ventured abroad there after nightfall. Today the existence of a large and growing Jewish town outside the walls is a fact within the knowledge of every tourist, and year by year the immigration and the building still go on. (Sir Robert Anderson, The Coming Prince, Chapters 12 and 13, initial; and final quote from Appendix 3, another edition of the same text)

IS THE FUTURITY OF DANIEL’S 70^TH WEEK, A ROMAN CATHOLIC PLOT?

Maybe you haven’t heard that Daniel’s 70^th Week, as yet future, was really a Roman Catholic plot concocted by Jesuits!

Dean Henry Alford (Protestant) and the Catholic writer, G.S. Hitchcock, concur on Futurism’s tenants, and perhaps, even its origins:

“The Futurist School, founded by the Jesuit Ribera in 1591, looks for Antichrist, Babylon, and a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem, at the end of the Christian dispensation. The Preterist School, founded by the Jesuit Alcasar in 1614, explains the Revelation by the Fall of Jerusalem, or by the fall of Pagan Rome in 410 A.D.” (G.S. Hitchcock, The Beasts and the Little Horn, p. 7).

Dean Henry Alford (Protestant), in the “Prolegomena” to his Greek Testament, declares:

“The founder of this [Futurist] in modern times…appears to have been the Jesuit Ribera, about A.D. 1580.” (Henry Alford, The New Testament for English Readers, vol. 2, part 2, p. 351 [bottom numbering].)

“The Preterist view found no favor, and was hardly so much as thought of, in the times of primitive Christianity…. The View is said to have been first promulgated in anything like completeness by the Jesuit Alcasar . . . in 1614.” (Ibid, pp. 348, 349 [bottom numbering].) (Note: Francisco Ribera—1537-1591; Luis de Alcasar—1554-1613)

How this Catholic plot was concocted when, in point of fact, the Futurity of Daniel’s 70^th Week was held by the early Church Fathers (thank God for the Orthodox), some of whom were absolutely emphatic . . . take Hippolytus, bishop and martyr of the faith, in his Treatise of Christ and Antichrist written in the 2d Century:

“§43. With respect, then, to the particular judgment in the torments that are to come upon it in the last times by the hand of the tyrants who shall arise then, the clearest statement has been given in these passages. But it becomes us further diligently to examine and set forth the period at which these things shall come to pass, and how the little horn shall spring up in their midst. For when the legs of iron have issued in the feet and toes, according to the similitude of the image and that of the terrible beast, as has been shown in the above, (then shall be the time) when the iron and the clay shall be mingled together. Now Daniel will set forth this subject to us. For he says, “And one week will make a covenant with many, and it shall be that in the midst (half) of the week my sacrifice and oblation shall cease." By one week, therefore, he meant the last week which is to be at the end of the whole world of which week the two prophets Enoch and Elias will take up the half. For they will preach 1,260 days clothed in sackcloth, proclaiming repentance to the people and to all the nations.” (my emphasis throughout)

Apparently, Hippolytus is part of the Roman Catholic plot! Is there any wonder then, that the Historicists are a bit enraged (to say the least) when Sir Anderson sums up their pathetic insertions into the historical drama:

“The historical interpreters of prophecy have grasped a principle the importance of which is abundantly proved by the striking parallelisms between the visions of the Apocalypse and the events of the history of Christendom. But not content with this, they have on the one hand brought discredit on prophetic study by wild and arrogant predictions about the end of the world, and on the other, they have reduced their principle of interpretation to a system, and then degraded it to a hobby. The result is fortunate in this respect, that the evil cannot fail to cure itself, and the time cannot be far distant when the ‘continuous historical interpretation,’ in the form and manner in which its champions have propounded it, will be regarded as a vagary of the past” (Sir Anderson’s, The Coming Prince, Note C, Appendix 2).

Thus, having said all of the above . . . delineating the “food fights” among the eschatological schemes within Christendom . . . allow me to dispense with this fray and proceed to the undeniable consequence of Israel’s plight; and of Islam’s irreconcilable difference with the West and what they consider to be the “Puppet of the USA” viz., Israel. Yet, ere we pass from this eschatological imbroglio, let me add a poignant thought: Unless Christians confront the Futurity of Daniel’s 70^th Week head-on . . . they will continue to labor under a grand delusion that today’s geopolitical realities are, at best, happenchance, irrelevant and disengaging. Their participation in the greatest hour of human history—history for which they desperately attempt to interpret—will pass them by in ignorance and unbelief. But all those aforementioned “eschatological conflicts” are about to be rendered mute, as the forces of Gog and Magog, and the Syria Card are about to fall!

The World as Known to the Hebrews (map)

GOG-MAGOG SCENARIO

Part 2—The Rise of Gog: Islamism Unleashed . . .

Alliances Form

Having dealt with some of the theological issues facing eschatologists amongst the various forms of Christendom who consider such of great importance in so far as one’s weltanschauung (worldview; e.g., Historicism, Preterism, and Futurism), we now press on into the polarizing world of geopolitical analysis (for the time being keeping our Biblical insight and imperatives on the ready). We do this because we are exhorted in Holy Writ to “speak the words of this prophecy” with clarity and without compromise (Revelation 10:11 . . . “You must prophecy again about many peoples, nations, tongues, and kings”). Simultaneously, and hopefully, as Issachar, “who had understanding of the times, to know what Israel ought to do” (I Chronicles 12:32a).

SYRIAN UPDATE

Our last update on the ultimate dropping of the “Syrian Card” on our Road to Damascus left us pondering Syria’s precarious involvement in funding and harboring a network of terrorists (a.k.a. “freedom fighters”) and Iraqi-bound and funded “insurgents” (a.k.a. “terrorists”). Why precarious? Well, just so happens that the USA and Israel “surround” these Islamic socialists and have for better or worse orchestrated a policy of isolation.

Neocons have been talking about Syria’s demise within the context of “democratizing” and “reconfiguration” of the Middle East (ridding it once and for all of international terrorism, and making it “safe for democracy”) (Please see Frank Reilly’s “Straight from the Horse’s Mouth,” regarding Vice President Dick Cheney’s “The Project for a New American Century,” 1992) for an eye opener on why we’ve concluded that the White Horse of the Apocalypse having a field day across the planet!

Isaiah 17 and 18 provided an eschatological picture of Syria’s demise at the hands of a “smooth-skinned, tall, fearsomely-treading down, and terrible people from beyond the immediate environs of the Middle East (reached by sea); a NATION powerful, whose land the rivers divide, and a land once surveyed and a people whose original peoples were subjugated . . . . Guess who? (Isaiah 18:2-3, 7).

Now comes this most recent word on the “Syrian Front” . . . . (and we will be obliged to tie this into Turkey’s “whereabouts” in all this):

“Maj. Gen. Mohammed Abdullah al-Shahwani told the daily newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat that the men, who are well-organized and trained (i.e., “the insurgents”), include former Baath party members, Islamic militant groups and unemployed former army members. ‘We officially call them terrorists,’ he told the London-based newspaper. ‘They are between 20,000 and 30,000 armed men operating all over Iraq, mainly in the Sunni (central section of Iraq) areas where they receive moral support from about 200,000 people.’

“He said the insurgents receive financial support from former leading Baathist Mohammed Younis al-Ahmed and Sabaawi al-Hassan, a half brother of deposed Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. Al-Ahmed and al-Hassan are in Syria and easily moving in and out of Iraq, al-Shahwani said. Saddam’s former deputy, Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, also is working with insurgents, he said.” (AP, 01/05/05).

Now, as the plot continues to thicken for the build up towards Damascus (pick your road through Mt. Hermon or up the Levant and down into Syria), remember, President Bush has warned Syria about “meddling” in Iraq’s internal affairs (Translation please: “Don’t mess with Texas.”). That goes for Iran too!

US STRATEGIC POLICY IN THE REGION

To understand the immensity of US involvement in the Middle East—notwithstanding the inane thought to dislodge the US Imperialist form the Levant . . . there is no way that the US (dragging her allies along for the ride) has any intention of disengagement from the burgeoning conflict. Anthony Cordesman, back in October, 2002 resoundingly clarified the strategic escalation as fait accompli:

“The punch line is simple. When we talk about Iraq, the Middle East, the Gulf, our strategic interests, and the world’s economy, the fact is that all of our projections of energy supply indicate that we will be dependent on the world’s key source of oil exports for decades to come. We can’t make this going away with fantasies about other energy resources, by political discussions of domestic energy policy that ignore the realities of what such polices can or cannot hope to accomplish, or by exaggerating the role of smaller oil powers. We have one vital strategic interest in the Middle East: energy exports. Barring a technological miracle, that dependence will continue for decades. Our capabilities-based strategy will have to deal with the reality of planning and being ready for a major regional contingency in the Middle East for at least another two decades.”

And, just in case that Syria’s Bashar al-Assad is not listening, Anthony’s presentation to this group of Arab interests entombed, PRIOR TO THE INVASION OF IRAQ, let alone the “evolution in military affairs” (A slight “veiled allusion beyond urban warfare anticipated in Iraq and found “elsewhere” in the region?) how all this will come about:

“Moreover, we are critically dependent on “globalism” (get used to it, my comment) in terms of the ability of other nations to buy our exports and invest in our economy. Not only must we compete for oil imports at market prices in a world market – an issue that makes where our oil imports come from in any given period largely irrelevant. Our vital strategic interests depend on the global availability of oil at moderate prices, not on our own imports.

“We are not ‘preempting’ an imminent threat of attack from Iraq, we are carrying out a systematic campaign to deal with a long-standing proximate threat whose weapons of mass destruction may reach an unacceptable level of capability at a time we cannot predict with any precision. The issue is not, therefore, one of whether we preempt in the normal sense, but a very different issue of defining the conditions under which a slow and systematic process of proliferation is so threatening that we should take preventive military action.”

Had enough yet?

“We are not skipping a generation to adopt new tactics and technologies and implement the revolution in military affairs. In fact, we face yet another near term major regional conflict where we must rely on evolving platforms, weapons, and C4I/SR/BM systems—most of which were used in some form in the previous Gulf War.

“We may talk about “netcentric warfare,” but the reality will still be limited by issues like “bandwidth,” the low density of key sensor platforms, communications equipment and problems, intelligence processing and a host of long-standing problems that Afghanistan showed all too clearly still limits our operations. Moreover, we have no convincing mid to long-term architecture that can even define our specific procurement and system goals. At best, we are conducting an ‘evolution in military affairs’ on the basis of constant improvisation and dialectics. (Anthony Cordesman, Center for Strategic and International Studies, October 2002, Draft)

Now, that doesn’t sound like the USA is planning on folding its tents and stilling away into the Arabian night somewhere, does it?

SURROUNDING GOG AND MAGOG (Incl. Syria)

Although we have not gone into (later we will) a full identification of Gog’s entourage, let us note the build up of US Forces in the region—this in light of Deputy Secretary of State, Richard Armitage, New Year’s “encouragement” of Syria to police her borders (Translation Please: Stop or we’re coming your way!). Oh, and “flat get out of Lebanon, while you’re at it!”

Indeed, the pre-positioned US Military forces scattered throughout the region . . . ready to pounce upon Syria’s disingenuous behavioral patterns of promoting international terrorism through harboring, training and facilitating mayhem throughout the region—a rather determined endeavor to maintain “Islamic integrity” in the region, one could surmise—bespeak of Cordesman’s original “Strategic Plan” for the region.

Take, for example, this brilliant idea of moving a US “Peace Keeping Force” to join the Brits and other US “sensing devices” already on Cyprus (for starters). Or we could, now that Eastern Europe’s in the bag, try encircling Turkey (hardly an “ally” for overflights during the initial Crusade into Iraq; and also a cause for “deep concern” . . . we’ll get into this later) by setting up four or five bases in Bulgaria (really, not a bad idea thinks NATO’s top commander in Europe, U.S. Marine Corps Gen. James Jones). Well, that’s on top of our new bases in Romania:

“‘This was not a planned deployment,’ said Air Force 1st Lt. Chris Watts, a public affairs officer. The Romanian base became a last-minute substitute after Turkey denied basing rights to American troops invading Iraq through the north. That decision ‘changed a lot of things,’ said Watts. The number of Americans in the Constanta area fluctuates between 1,000 and 3,000 people. There are 500 support airmen, plus up to 2,000 troops who are part of the Joint Special Operations Task Force, which monitors air operations in Northern Iraq and provides airlift to troops.

Then, again, take a gander at the gazillion American bases scattered throughout the world (http://www.globemaster.de/regbases.html or http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/pentagon/maps/9.html) wherein the 2.4 million USA Armed Forces have the capability of projecting upwards of 75% of its forces “outside” her immediate borders—juxtaposed to Europe’s 2.3 million of which only 2/3% can transverse their given countries!

Wouldn’t you know it; Islam’s beginning to wonder what’s up here:

“U.S. military installations in the region extend from Turkey (or once did) to near the Chinese border, and from former Soviet republics in the north to the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean. The facilities surround Iran; are situated in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, and are close to Syria and Lebanon. Several were created to address the confrontation with Iraq, and continue to support operations there.

“‘No one could have anticipated in the summer of 2001 that the United States would be basing forces at Karshi Khanabad, Uzbekistan, (let alone Tajikistan, Turkmenistan) or conducting a major military operation in Afghanistan,’ Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz told Congress last year.

“Experts fear the ubiquity of U.S. forces may fuel belief in radical Islamic claims that America is bent on controlling the oil and politics of the Islamic world. A poll that the nonpartisan Pew Research Center conducted in Muslim nations in the region found significant portions of their populations believed just that.

(http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunherald/news/politics/8258973.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp)

Now, from whence cometh that notion? Oh, well, the Orthodox Georgians can help too; in fact, let’s just make the US Military presence in Georgia PERMANENT! Did someone say encircle?

It just gets a whole lot better . . . like, what is going on here anyway? Are we looking for a MASSIVE BUILDUP of forces in the region? Listen to this and ponder the “ubiquity” of US forces in the region:

“After the first Gulf War, large military bases were left behind in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, and basing rights were established in the Gulf States of Bahrain, Qatar, Oman, and United Arab Emirates. One prize from the otherwise humiliating Somalia adventure was the acquisition of basing rights across the Red Sea in Yemen’s Port of Aden, where the U.S.S. Cole made its home port. Operations in Yugoslavia resulted in even more bases in Hungary, Albania, Bosnia, Macedonia, and Kosovo. In order to conduct the war in Afghanistan, the Bush administration required new bases in Afghanistan herself, as well as various basing rights in Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan. According to Campbell’s CSIS study, these ‘new US bases in Central Asia, established to assist the Afghan campaign, may end up serving longer term aims, such as prosecuting the war on terrorism or, perhaps, checking a rising China.’”

“Although there may never have been a plan to establish permanent military bases in Iraq herself, the neocons have known all along that until Iraq is stabilized—which may still take a long time—all the lily pads in the Persian Gulf region are in danger.

“There need not be a major conflict for new bases to be established. As part of the War on Drugs’ Plan Colombia, a number of bases were established within and around Colombia in the 1990’s. This included forward bases in Honduras, Ecuador, Curacao, Peru, and Brazil. During Operation Enduring Freedom, the Philippines were reoccupied only a few years after U.S. withdrawal. Even Poland and some Black Sea ports (Romania and now Bulgaria and Cyprus, as well as Greece and Italy) saw the establishment of new bases last year to help with the most recent Iraq conflict.

“Apart from a pretty wide gap in Africa and another across mainland East Asia, the U.S. military now has forces deployed throughout the arc of instability. China will likely remain a problem for years to come, but, as far as Africa is concerned, the Wall Street Journal reported in June that the United States plans to create bases from Djibouti, on the Red Sea, across North Africa to Morocco, on the Atlantic.” (Sean Moir, Valley Forge, PA, Chronicles Magazine)

Sometimes the best defense is a good offense. That’s why the US is complaining to high heaven that Russia is violating an unsigned agreement!

On January 12, Kommersant (Russian Publication) reported that Russian-Israeli relations were on the rocks. Why? Well, Syria’s young President, Bashar al-Assad, is scheduled to meet with Vladimir Putin to discuss deliveries of the Igla shoulder-held anti-aircraft missiles worth $20 million. The deal will be signed in St. Petersburg on January 24-28, 2005. Again, wouldn’t you know it . . . here we were trying to get an agreement with the Ruskies to stop this kind of stuff and then, of all things, before we could cut our deal with the Vladimir, he goes off and pulls this!

“At the same time as Russian Defense Minister Sergey Ivanov was holding talks with US Secretary of State Colin Powell, US State Department spokesman Richard Boucher was meeting with journalists. ‘The US policy on this is very clear. We’re against the sale of weaponry to Syria, against the sale of lethal military equipment to Syria, which is a state sponsor of terrorism,’ Mr. Boucher said icily. ‘The Russians know about our views.’ Without elaborating, he spoke of some kind of specific deal, abstractly threatening Russia with sanctions: ‘The practice of imposing sanctions exists under US law. And we will have to consider it, if such a deal takes place.’”

“As the Israeli press has reported, this is not the first such request. According to Israeli media information, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon sent a message to President Putin several months ago saying that Russia was breaking promises given to Israel and endangering the Jewish state. According to Israeli sources, the Russian side tried to calm Israel, explaining that Syria would not be getting Igla shoulder-held systems but rather vehicle-mounted units that were much more difficult to convey secretly to terrorists. However, the Israelis were not satisfied with these promises: Iglas are easily dismounted from vehicles and once again turned into portable units.” (January 17, 2005 Kommersant, Russia’s First Independent Daily . . .Dmitry Sidorov, Washington; Grigory Asmolov, Jerusalem; Mikhail Zygar, Konstantin Lantratov provided information for this article. Note: A full breakdown on Syria’s missile capabilities are provided at the Kommersant site).

Meanwhile, Hamas (radical arm of Palestinian “resistance”) simply refuses to go along with the new cease fire proposed by newly elected Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. Coupled with the myriad of suicide bombs is Israel’s recent spat with Hezbollah (a.k.a. “The Party of God” and the Syrian connection)—all helping to keep the pot boiling.

Ever since the Turks, under Prime Minister Recept Tayyip Erdogan’s “Justice and Development Party” (Turkish: Adalet ve Kalkinma Partisi or AKP . . . a “moderate” Islamic party which emerged from the demise of the staunchly Islamist Welfare Party after the Turkish military broke it up in 2000) refused USA overflights during the Iraqi incursion, things have gone terribly bad between the two (i.e., the USA and Turkey).

Of course, this spat is amplified by the “Kurdish Question” afflicting not only Turkey, but Syria and Iran (let alone Iraq).

In late 2004 PM Erdogan signed a free-tree accord with former enemy Syria—making an unprecedented and landmark two-day visit to Damascus.

“‘We are in agreement. We want a comprehensive cooperation in the region,’ said the Syrian premier, adding that Erdogan had also agreed to increase the flow of water into Syria . . . a ‘new era’ in relations began when Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad visited Turkey in January (2004) on the first such visit by a Syrian head of state . . . Turkey has pushed for closer relations with Syria since the US-led invasion of Iraq, despite warnings from Washington to limit its cooperation with Damascus . . . Turkey and Syria have since the March 2003 invasion of neighboring Iraq signed a series of economic and security agreements, including one to jointly combat crime and terrorism (Kurds?).

“The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, war-torn Iraq and the Kurdish question also figured in the Otri (Syrian)/Erdogan talks.” (Burak Akinci, “Newly found friendship between Turkey and Syria,” November 23, 2004, Middle East Online)

Furthermore, Turkey and Syria issued (01/04) a joint warning over moves that could damage the “territorial integrity” of Iraq. Also, ever since Syria turned over Abd Allah Ocalan and his Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), who’d been waging a bitter separatist campaign against the Turkish government, tensions between Syrian and Turkey measurably improved.

“But today the situation is far different (i.e., the relationship between the USA and Turkey). On May 20, 2004, for example, Turkey's prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan accused both Israel and the United States of ‘state terror.’ The pro-AKP press was vociferous in its anti-American tone, especially after the start of the war. Columnist Ahmet Taşgetiren, for example, wrote in Yeni Şafak that, the ‘administration that President Bush shares with the neo-cons has created a logic of use of force which brings shame to its nation just as Hitler's.’ The Iraq war also added fuel to the Islamist fire in Turkey. Both the pro-AKP Yeni Şafak and the once-marginal Vakit—which opposes the AKP only in its pro-EU agenda—have moved into the mainstream with conspiracy theories to explain how the Iraq campaign is a U.S.-Jewish-Israeli attempt to dominate the Middle East. (Soner Cagaptay, “Where Goes the U.S. Turkish Relationship? The Middle East Forum, Fall 2004, Vol. XI)

Cagaptay emphasizes that the anti-Americanism in Turkish society is found, not only in the Islamist camp, but in virtually all segments of the population with Turkish newspapers “awash with theories attributing all problems in the Middle East to the United States.”

When Turkey blocked overflights and opening up a two-front war in Iraq by the US-led coalition, it automatically threw the US into the arms of the Iraqi Kurdish militias (who now demand a reward for their efforts to secure Northern Iraq . . . and, Americans seem obliged). Is it any wonder that the once pro-American Turkish military now suspects that the USA, as a result of fostering a “Kurdish proto-state in Iraq,” believe the US had an “Independent Kurdistan” in mind from the beginning?

The Kurdish populations of the region (outlined in black) are sizeable (Turkey: 12 million; Iran: 7 million; Iraq: 5 million; Syria: Less than 2 million); so, 25+ million constitutes a horrendous problem for these nations!

Once considered a positive “working relationship” between Turkey and Israel (e.g., military exchanges, trade, etc.), that relationship has all but unraveled, given the current rhetoric coming out of Ankara. When Israel targeted killing Hamas leaders (who were targeting Israelis), PM Erdoğan referred to the killings (viz., Hamas leader Sheikh Yassin) as a ‘terrorist act.’ The daily Yeni Şafak labeled Yassin’s assassination ‘Israeli Terrorism.’

The fact that Islamicists in Turkey are clamoring for closer ties with Iran and the Arab Middle East, doesn’t bode well for either Washington or Israel.

The prospect for such an alliance (given their mutual concerns in opposition to an independent Kurdish state, and their animosities towards the USA for a whole variety of reasons) is a thought postulated by some pundits in the region.

For one, Syria and Iran have already formed a military alliance. Iran’s stunning reversal not to conclude such “military agreements” took place at the close of February, 2004. The “defense pact” was signed in Damascus committing Iran to Syria’s defense against “the Zionist entity” (a.k.a. “Israel). Syria had encouraged the military ties.

“Sources in Tehran say the Iranians were at first reluctant to commit to a course that could make war with Israel almost inevitable. All changed sometime last November when Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Iranian ‘Supreme Guide,’ decided that the only way to deal with the perceived threat from America was to raise the cost of any attempt by Washington to implement further ‘regime changes’ in the Middle East.” (“AN AXIS RESURGENT—Regimes in Iran, Syria forge new ties,” by Amir Taheri, New York Post February 28, 2004).

Now, we’re talking about a formidable arrangement. The Iranians have for years supported Syrian-Lebanese based Hezbollah and their war against Israel. Iran’s defense minister, Rear Admiral Ali Shamkhani (who signed the pact with his Syrian counterpart, Lt. Gen. Mustafa Tlas) said the “defense pact” extends to Lebanon! Consequently, off to Beirut went Shamkhani where he presided over a “war council” wherein “the entire political and military leadership of Hezbollah” was in attendance. Topic: “Closer coordination between Hezbollah and Palestinian militant groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad, both of whom are backed by Iran.”

It must be understood that the “defense pact” is superimposed over an already existing Iranian military presence in Lebanon and Syria.

“The Iranian military mission in Damascus consists of over 500 officers and experts in weaponry and military intelligence. The Corps of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard has a contingent of 1,200 men in Lebanon on missions including training, deployment and maintenance of certain categories of weapons, and military intelligence.” (An Axis Resurgent)

Basically, what Syrian did was to “formalize” an already existing arrangement that Iran had with these organizations and broadened it to include Damascus; however, the “depth” of the current military pact is astounding, especially when Iran’s defense minister Shamkhani said, “Iran, in turn, must be regarded as Syria’s geo-strategic depth.”

Thus, we have the cozy relationship between Syria and Iran, and between Turkey and Syria, now how about Turkey and Iran?

“The thought is very attractive (such a threefold alliance) and dates back a long way. Should it be actualized then it could have major and strategic effects both regionally and internationally. In fact, it could have repercussions similar to the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, the Islamic Revolution in Iran, the Arab nationalist movement of the 1950s and Ataturk’s revolution at the start of the last century.” (Istanbul Ortadogu (Ankara Edition) 26 Jul 04, p. 6).

This Turko-Farsi-Arab triumvirate has but one thing in mind: To stop the USA-Israeli Axis from “democratizing” them!

“Everybody knows that the reason for the attack on Iraq was that the American administration sees this place as the start point for changing the region and the world . . . and the material at the head of every tense and delicate development: oil!” (Ozbir)

Now, how did they figure that out? Shortly after Ozbir’s article (January 27, 2004), PM Erdogan headed for Iran:

“Its timing is interesting because it is taking place just at a time when Turkey’s relations with Israel are cooling, particularly as a result of harsh criticism by Tayyip Erdogan himself, and when the animosity between Israel and Iran has become more intense.” (Cengiz Candar, “Where To With Iran? And How Far?” 27 Jul 04, Istanbul Ortadogu (Ankara Edition).

“We could wage war together, with a force in which Syria would also participate, against the efforts to establish an independent Kurdish state in our region.”

Well, how about Iraq’s Interim Administration, where do they fit in, now that the USA a strides the banks of the Tigris? Behold the prophetic words of Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari (himself a Kurd!) at a regional meeting held in Cairo:

“Instability in Iraq will not remain in Iraq, but will spread into the surrounding areas” (and without providing names, pointed to Syria and Iran as being responsible for the instability in Iraq).

Zebari’s charges against both Iran and Syria for fomenting violence and undercutting Iraqi efforts at “democracy” are well known:

“Iran is Iraq’s number one enemy . . . supporting terrorism and sending enemies to Iraq . . . a good many people who had fought in Afghanistan have been captured in Iraq, and these individuals have confessed that they received assistance from the Iranian security forces.” (Candar)

The Gog-Magog conflagration prophesied in Ezekiel 38 and 39 in light of all that has been said, presents an utterly astounding picture (which we will see in depth in our next article) of what we are witnessing this very moment in these aforementioned “realignments” and geo-political reconfigurations.

Ezekiel 38:1-6 “The word of the Lord came to me; Son of man, set your face against Gog, of the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal; prophesy against him and say: ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: I am against you, O Gog, chief prince of Meshech and Tubal. I will turn you around, put hooks in your jaws and bring you out with your whole army - your horsemen fully armed, and a great horde with large and small shields, all of them brandishing their swords. Persia, Cush and Put will be with them, all with shields and helmets, also Gomer with all its troops, and Beth Togarmah from the far north with all its troops - the many nations with you.’”

It is exceedingly accurate to assume that both Gomer and Togarmah are ancient tribes and peoples within the modern state of Turkey. The coalition of forces mentioned in Ezekiel 38:6 include Gomer, the first son of Japheth. The “Gomerites” were considered the ancient Cimmerians who were expelled from the southern steppes of Russia around 700 B.C. into what is today’s Turkey. “Togarmah” (the third son of Gomer) was in Ezekiel’s day a city in the region of Cappodocia (Turkey) and was known by various names (Tagarma, Takarama, Tegarma, Til-garimmu).

To the chagrin, dismay, and a whole lot of doomsday consternation on the part of both Christian and “secularists,” those of us within the “futurist” camp of the Church are endlessly assailed for perpetuating myth and hyping Armageddon scenarios ad infinitum, ad nausea!

Some go so far as to say we’re “aiding and abetting” none other than President George W. Bush in his evangelical “Armageddon” mindset (akin to that of Ronald Reagan’s). Some are amused at our persistence to fit every possible event on the planet into the “beginning of sorrows” scenario and, ipso facto, enflaming the simpletons “out there” that it’s all comin’ down . . . so go ahead, “You’re not hurting me; just makin’ a fool out of yourself!”

Not so with a goodly number of “secularists” who view us as part and parcel of a vast right wing conspiracy or a bunch of crazies akin to a deviant strain of apocalyptic insanity just when the planet’s careening out of control (like we really need this now) here comes another anarchist!

Then we have our beloved Protestant Historicists who are convinced that we’ve somehow missed the whole point and have purposefully or unwittingly swallowed the whole Jesuit enchilada that the Papacy is NOT the Antichrist and are chasing “eschatological rainbows” . . . or, worse yet, that we’re involved in an insidious Zionist conspiracy, ultimately designed to blow up the Dome of the Rock!

Finally, our Preterist brethren (Protestants and Catholics), who think all Biblical Prophecy within the book of Revelation was fulfilled somewhere around the destruction of the Herodian Temple under Rome’s Titus in 70 A.D., think we’re either deeply deceived, crackpots, and even theologically dangerous—especially in the age of the internet.

Well, accusations and delirium aside, we who affirm that the “Climax of the Ages” – including the return of the Jews to their ancient homeland (I know that grates a bunch of you out there) – is upon us. We simply cannot contemplate (given the immense importance that our Lord put on the close of this age prior to His Second Coming . . . Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21, and His statements within John’s book of Revelation . . . to say nothing of Paul, Peter, James, Jude, and a host of Hebrew Prophets who spoke of this time) that the Scriptures leave humankind hopelessly adrift, without addressing the most turbulent time in history! Neither can we fathom a God Who would not reveal and unseal those mysteries to His people within the framework of the entire Word of God—attesting by the “signs of the time” that these climactic events are upon us in absolute confirmation of His original deliveries regarding these “end of days.”

(1)

The Rise of Antichrist; the Revival of Western Empire (i.e., Rome); the onslaught of Apostasy afflicting the Church; the Ingathering of the Exiles (i.e., the Jews) to their ancient homeland; “The Beginning of Sorrows” concomitant with the Rise of Antichrist . . . . are upon us NOW! (Revelation 6; Matthew 24:3-8; Ezekiel 36-37; Luke 21:29-33)

(2) Economic and military “Globalism” is the manifestation of The King of Babylon’s Rule and Reign . . . it is the leadership of the West, the USA, whose “hegemonic” might encircles the globe as no other empire has since Rome (dwarfing the Imperial Power of antiquity)—this is a fulfillment of salient prophetical passages from Daniel and the Revelation, and confirmed by other Scriptures in both Testaments. That this Empire is both commercial and military, buttressed and welcoming support by the Apostate Church—and that is a “Great Deception!” (Daniel 8:23-26, 11:35-39, 11:40-45; Revelation 13, especially 13:4; and his economic hegemony in Revelation 18)

(a)

'The State of Israel is established,' said Ben-Gurion. This meeting is adjourned.' After 1,878 years in exile, it had taken 32 minutes for the Jewish nation to be declared reborn.

The ingathering of the Jews to Palestine (fate accompli) (throughout Scripture, esp. Ezekiel 36 and 37)

(b) The pre-positioning of the West’s Forces throughout the Middle East (fate accompli) (Daniel 11:40-45, Isaiah 18, among others)

(c) Syria (Damascus), the puppet government in Lebanon (Tyre); and the stronghold in Ephraim, as well as Biblical Gaza (i.e., the Palestinian Authority)—all three are prophesied, prior to the Gog-Magog conflagration, to be a “ruinous heap” (Syria; Isaiah 18); “destroyed and devoured” (Lebanon; Zechariah 9:3-4); or “fearful, very sorrowful, her expectations dried, its leadership perished, and shall not be inhabited and her pride will be cut off” (the Palestinian Authority; Zechariah 9:5-6) (These Scriptures must be taken in light of their continuity with the remainder of Zechariah 9:9 through chapter 14).

(d) The Gog-Magog Conflagration will take place either immediately preceding or after the infamous signing of “a defense pact” between Israel and Antichrist (Daniel 9:27, Isaiah 28:15 and 18); and furthermore, these “forces of Gog” (both those nations to Israel’s north and south) are clearly delineated in Ezekiel 38 and 39 wherein Israel is the target of their wrath; and that in Daniel 11:40-45 and Isaiah 17:12-14

and Isaiah 18:1-7 the Antichrist and his forces are the target of Gog’s wrath (the same conflagration, however). The outcome of this conflagration is determinant . . . the immediate rebuilding of the Jewish Temple and the reinstitution of the sacerdotal rites; with the forces of Gog destroyed (Ezekiel 38-39)

(e) The “Testimony of the Two Witnesses” (Israel and the Church, Revelation 11:3-6) will commence upon the signing of the aforementioned “Treaty with Death and Sheol” and a great world revival will ensue as prophesied in Revelation 14:14-16; simultaneously with the onslaught of the Four Horseman of the Revelation (Revelation 6:1-17). This is the first half of the 70^th Week of Daniel (although the “revival” extends into the 2^nd Half of Daniel’s 70^th Week (Revelation 11:3; Daniel 12:3)).

(f) “The Abomination of Desolation” (which could transpire within the context of a rebuilt Jewish Temple in Jerusalem) occurs in the “midst” of Daniel’s 70^th Week and is both “spiritual” (i.e., the incarnation of Satan into the body of Antichrist; transforming him into the “Man of Sin,” “the Lawless One,” and the Son of Perdition (among other titles)) wherein he becomes the BEAST (Daniel 9:27, 11:31, 36; 7:8, 25; Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14; II Thessalonians 2:3-12; Revelation 11:7; 12:9, 12, 17; 13:1-8; 17:8-13).

(g) The final 3 ½ days/years of Daniel’s 70^th Week will witness the beast who will “make war against them, overcome them, and kill them . . . (make) war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus” (Revelation 11:7; 12:17).

(h) The final 3 ½ days/years of Daniel’s 70^th Week is called in the Hebrew Scriptures, “The Time of Jacob’s Trouble” (Daniel 12:1) and “The Great Tribulation” in the New Testament (Revelation 7:14) . . . and after 3 ½ days/years the Rapture and the Resurrection of the Righteous will occur (Revelation 11:11-12; Daniel 12:2; I Thessalonians 4:12-18).

(i)

The “Wrath of the Lamb” will be poured out upon the earth and the ultimate, final campaign of Armageddon will take place (I Thessalonians 5:9-11; Revelation 18:4; Revelation 14:17-20; Revelation 11:14 and 18; Revelation 16:1-17).

(j) Within the “bowls of the wrath of God on the earth” will be the final judgment of Babylon the Great (Revelation 17, 18 and 19)—including Apostate Babylon (Rev. 17); Commercial Babylon (Rev. 18); and, Political Babylon (i.e., the King of Babylon) (Rev. 19).

(k) Simultaneously following the judgment upon Babylon the Great, will be the Second Coming of the Messiah, who shall reveal Himself in fullness to both Jew and Gentile, wherein “All Israel shall be saved/delivered” (Romans 11:26; Isaiah 59:20-21; Zechariah 12:10-13:7); this will usher in the “Messianic Era” known as the Millennium (Zechariah 14; Revelation 11:15, 20:4-6; Daniel 7:26-27). This is the “Messianic Scenario.”