It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: GBP/JPY
No, Scripture tells us all about the army.it says who will stay out...Saudi and two more....
originally posted by: JON666
a reply to: DISRAELI
Question is America included in all nation coming up against Jerusalem?
originally posted by: SimpleIdea
The attack of the Gog of Magog in Ezekiel 38 leads up to Armageddon. Unlike what many claim, that it is instigated by God, it is actually instigated by evil-minded people, being lead by demonic expressions. Satan himself is at the lead against this assault on Jehovah's people earth-wide.
originally posted by: DISRAELI
The full title of this theme ought to be “Things that won’t happen in the end-times”.
I’m referring to those anticipated events, featuring in speculations about the end-times, which are based on misinterpretations of what the Bible says.
In this case, I’m looking at Armageddon as a physical battle between human armies.
This expectation is based on a partly literal and partly imaginative reading of the prophecy in which the armies of the kings of the world gather for battle at Armageddon (Revelation ch16 v16).
So any critique needs to be based on a better understanding of the nature of this battle.
This is the New Testament version of the “Last Battle” form of prophecy, found in several places in the Old Testament. The last battle in Old Testament prophecy
The closest model is in Joel, where “all the nations” come together for an armed rendezvous in the valley of Jehoshaphat, so that God can judge them (Joel ch3 vv11-16).
And again in Zechariah, God will bring “all the nations against Jerusalem to battle” (Zechariah ch14 vv1-5).
Once they have been gathered, God defeats them himself.
So this is not a battle between human armies, but a battle between God and the world in general.
The name points us towards the battle of Megiddo (2 Kings ch23 v29), in which God’s champion Josiah was overwhelmed and killed by the armies of Egypt.
This tells us that the function of Armageddon is to reverse the result of Megiddo. God’s provisional defeat is to be wiped out by a final victory.
Considering the account in Revelation, we should notice that NO battle takes place in ch16. If you think there is a battle, then look again. They gather for battle but they don’t fight.
All the kings’ horses and all the kings’ men are left milling around on the potential field of battle for the next two and a half chapters waiting for something to happen. Meanwhile John is announcing and rejoicing over the fall of Babylon.
After that interval, the figure of the Word of God descends from heaven, accompanied by the armies of heaven, and THAT is the battle (ch19 vv11-16)
But this needs to be understood as an image of the Return of Christ, the arrival of the Son of Man, as depicted in the gospels.
We are told that he arrives “on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory” (Matthew ch24 v30).
In short, he comes armed with all the power of God.
On first principles, we should assume that the direct power of God necessarily overrides all human power.
Therefore I do not see that any physical battle could possibly take place on such an occasion.
No man would be able to lift a weapon, no man would be able to move a muscle, no man would be able to exercise an independent will.
The arrival of Christ “in power” would be an instant victory, “in the twinkling of an eye”, making physical fighting redundant.
But what about the graphic picture of the piles of corpses?
That is a metaphor borrowed from Ezekiel ch39.
The function of these metaphors is to present a visual demonstration of the concept “complete and final victory”.
The reality behind the picture would be that the Return of Christ, in itself, is God’s victory, the battle of Armageddon and the fulfilment of the prophecy.
originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: one4all
You're not taking account of the fact that the drama is given a happy ending. Not disaster, but near-disaster follwed by triumph.
But what about the graphic picture of the piles of corpses?
That is a metaphor borrowed from Ezekiel ch39.
The function of these metaphors is to present a visual demonstration of the concept “complete and final victory”.
The reality behind the picture would be that the Return of Christ, in itself, is God’s victory, the battle of Armageddon and the fulfilment of the prophecy.
And yes, I do see the seals, trumpets and bowls as being for John's benefit and the readers' benefit, marking off different stages within the vision, and not things the world in general should be expecting to see or hear in the future.
As for Matthew ch24 v7, that is not Armageddon. As you will see from the next two verses, that all comes at the beginning of the great tribulation. We are talking about the event that brings the tribulation to an end - that is, vv29-31 N.B. Matthew ch 24 vv29-31 describe the return of Christ, as in Revelation ch19, but without any battle.
originally posted by: Deetermined
"And yes, I do see the seals, trumpets and bowls as being for John's benefit and the readers' benefit, marking off different stages within the vision, and not things the world in general should be expecting to see or hear in the future"
What?! What you're really saying is that you have absolutely no idea what it means.
You think that when kingdoms start rising up against each other that it's only going to happen during the BEGINNING of the tribulation and won't still be going on when Jesus Christ finally arrives on the scene? The reason Jesus steps in is because it will get out of control. The Bible describes how everything is going to get worse before Jesus saves the day, but by then, everything as we know it on earth DOES come to an END...ie Armageddon.
Whereas, if you study carefully the whole sequence of Revelation, as I have done, it is clear that Armageddon comes at the very END of the tribulation, which has been going on through the previous chapters.