Armageddon – the valley of “excision”

(Above: A WWI German machine-gun crew. From a footnote to the work cited below: 'Joel iii. 14. . . . a threshing instrument, formed with revolving cylinders, armed with sharp pieces of iron. See Jahn Archæol. Bibl. § 64.')

From Canon (later Bishop) Wordsworth's Lectures on the Apocalypse (1849):

'What is meant by Armageddon?

'St. John refers us to the Hebrew tongue, and there the word Har signifies a Mountain; and it is rightly affirmed that Armageddon is a word formed by St. John to signify a defeat and slaughter, such as that of the Kings of Canaan at Megiddo, in the region of Galilee, wrought by a miraculous interposition of Almighty God, discomfiting the vast and terrible army of Sisera and his confederate Princes. . . . (pp. 447).

'It must also be observed, that King Josiah was defeated and mortally wounded at Megiddo [2 Chron. xxxv. 20.]; and though Josiah was a pious King, yet it must be remembered that, when at Megiddo, he was disobeying a divine command, given him by the Prophet Jeremiah. He was endeavouring to repel Pharaoh-Necho, who was marching towards the river Euphrates, to besiege Babylon . . .

'Thus Megiddo, or Mageddo, was a name, made ready for St. John, to express a sudden and mysterious defeat and slaughter of God's foes, and of the allies of Babylon.

'This explanation is satisfactory, as far as it goes; and it must be carried further.

'St. John, in the Apocalypse, expresses ideas by Hebrew terms, understood literally.

'Thus, for example, the word Jew is always used in the Apocalypse in a spiritual sense, founded on its Hebrew etymology, which indicates one who confesses and praises God — a true Christian.

'Another reference to Hebrew etymology is found in the word Abaddon, formed by St. John to describe the Angel of the bottomless pit; and derived from a Hebrew term, signifying perdition. . . .

'Observe, also, St. John here specially calls our attention to the Hebrew etymology, by saying that the place is called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.

'Armageddon is formed of two Hebrew words; the one signifying a Mountain, the other, a cutting to pieces; and thus it means the Mountain of excision, or of slaughter*.

[*From footnote: 'Lightfoot and Vitringa, who were the first of modern Interpreters that called attention to this etymology, do not seem to have been aware that they had been anticipated by Andreas and Arethas ad loc. (and in the Ancient Greek Catena, Cramer, p. 420,) and also by Ecumenius, ibid. p. 552, who deserve to be cited. Catena Cramer, p. 420. xvi. 16 . . .' ]

'When the Prophet Zechariah is speaking of the destruction of all nations that come against the City of God, he says that there will be a great mourning in the valley of Megiddon; and Megiddon is there translated by the Septuagint Interpreters, cut up, or destroyed.

'The word Armageddon, then, signifies a place of slaughter* [*From footnote: 'Lightfoot, Harmony N.T. on Rev. xvi. “The word Armageddon signifies a Mountain of men cut to pieces.”']; and it connects the judgments predicted in the Apocalypse with those foretold by the Hebrew Prophets.

'If we refer to the third chapter of the Prophet Joel, from the ninth verse to the end, we there see a sublime description of the gathering together of the foes of Christ, and of their final overthrow.

'Multitudes! Multitudes! exclaims the Prophet, in the valley of decision.

'The word here rendered decision is one which signifies threshing, bruising, cutting, and crushing* [*From footnote: 'Joel iii. 14. . . . a threshing instrument, formed with revolving cylinders, armed with sharp pieces of iron. See Jahn Archæol. Bibl. § 64.']; and the words rendered valley of decision are translated by the Septuagint, valley of judgment.

'It is observable, also, that God says by the Prophet Joel, in the same place, that He will gather all nations, and bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat. And again; Let the heathen come up to the Valley of Jehoshaphat, for there will I sit to judge all the heathen round about. [Joel iii. 12.]

'In the word Jehoshaphat there is an historical reference to a signal and miraculous slaughter of God's enemies in King Jehoshaphat's reign; just as in the word Megiddo there is an historical reference of the same kind.

'And, in both cases, there is something more.

'Megiddo means destruction; and Jehoshaphat signifies judgment of God.

'All nations cannot be gathered together to one valley, or to one mountain, on earth.

'Hence it is rightly concluded, that the Valley of Jehoshaphat here mentioned is a general term for a signal execution of God's Judgment on all His enemies throughout the world.

'In a word, the gathering together of the nations to the Valley of Jehoshaphat, is the same as the gathering together to Armageddon.' (pp. 448-452).

* * * * * * *

Envoi:

From John S Fox's A Flood of Light Upon the Book of Revelation (The Association of the Covenant People, Burnaby, B.C., Canada; circa late 1940s) :

“ARMAGEDDON” AS A EUROPEAN

CONFLAGRATION

'In the Book of Revelation the name “Babylon” . . . certainly does not refer to the old Far-Eastern city, but rather to the New Testament prophetical Papal “Babylon”. That being so, why do prophetic interpreters claim that the reference here to “Ar-Megiddo” (if indeed it refers to “Megiddo” at all: see below) should refer to the Eastern or Palestinian Megiddo, when the whole context of the drama in which it is named occurs within the Papal regime of WESTERN EUROPE!

'There does not seem to be any reference to “Megiddo” at all in this Scripture, the word “Armageddon” being divisible into three Hebrew words; not two as usually suggested. Here the word “Arma” signifies “bare grain”: “Gai” signifies a “valley”: and “Don” signifies “judgment”.

'The composite word Armageddon thus depicts the fact that God's time had come to “thresh Babylon” (See Jer. 51. 33) in the “Valley of Jehoshaphat” which means the Valley where “Jehovah judges”, the name Jehoshaphat meaning “Jehovah judges”.' (pp. 114-115).

Armageddon: “The great wine-press” of Rev. 14:19

A KEY

TO THE

SYMBOLICAL LANGUAGE

OF

SCRIPTURE,

BY WHICH NUMEROUS PASSAGES ARE

EXPLAINED AND ILLUSTRATED.

FOUNDED ON

THE SYMBOLICAL DICTIONARY OF DAUBUZ,

WITH ADDITIONS FROM

VITRINGA, EWALDUS, AND OTHERS.

BY

THOMAS WEMYSS,

AUTHOR OF “BIBLICAL GLEANINGS,” &c.

EDINBURGH:

THOMAS CLARK, 38. GEORGE STREET;

LONDON, HAMILTON AND ADAMS.

MDCCCXXXV.

[1835]

'WINE-PRESS, among the Israelites, was like a threshing-floor; and therefore we read that Gideon was threshing in one of them, Judges vi. 11. . . .

'The form of it seems to have been this: suppose a bank of earth raised in a convenient circumference, or else a floor sunk below the surface of the ground about it, that the grapes and juice may be kept in: then on one side a pit was sunk much lower than the floor, to place the vats to receive the new pressed juice falling into them. This floor was the wine-press. Hence we may easily understand why our Saviour expresses the making of a wine-press by digging; as also Isaiah in ch. v.

'The meaning of the symbol is very easy. The Indian Oneirocritic, in ch. 196, explains it of great conquest, and, by consequence, much slaughter. It is so used in Isa. lxiii. 3,

“I have trodden the wine-press alone,

And of the people there was none with me.

And I trod them in mine anger,

And I trampled them in mine indignation,

And their life-blood was sprinkled upon my garments,

And I have stained all mine apparel.”

'And in Lam. i. 15, the destruction of Judah is represented under this type:

“Jehovah hath trodden down all my valiant ones in the midst of me;

He hath called an assembly against me, to crush my young men;

Jehovah hath trodden the virgin, the daughter of Judah, as in a wine-press.”

'And the symbol is extremely proper. The pressure of the grapes till their blood comes out, as their juice is called in Deut. xxxii. 14, aptly representing great pressure or affliction, and effusion of blood

Rev. xiv. 19, “The great wine-press of the wrath of God.”

'To tread a wine-press, as before remarked, is a prophetic description of destruction. The images in this vision are very strong and expressive. The largest wine-presses were used to be in some places out of the city. So in ver. 20, “The wine-press was trodden without the city,” and seems to intimate the great numbers that shall be involved in this general destruction. This judgment seems still to be future. No past period or event appears exactly applicable to it. It must be therefore left to time more fully to explain it.'

(pp. 487-488)

“Observations on the Unfulfilled Prophecies of Scripture” (1835)

Ensign of the Honourable East India Company, 1801

'It is a very general impression among the students of prophecy, as we have before noted, that we see at this present hour, in the decay of the Turkish power, that “drying up” of “the waters of the Euphrates,” which was to mark the pouring out of the sixth vial. The effect predicted is, “that the way of the kings from the east,” or “from the sun-risings,” may be prepared. Many conjectures are abroad respecting the “kings from the east.” Some imagine the restored Israelites are signified. There seems no analogy afforded by prophetical language, indeed, to fix the epithet directly and absolutely upon them; though, as the time is evidently drawing nigh, a way must be made for that first restoration, and even for that second, of which we have been treating.

'On this supposition, however, we cannot determine, whether the Israelites themselves are designated, or some powerful sovereigns of the eastern part of the world, who are to become the instruments of their restoration; and for whom, by the decay of the Turkish and Mahomedan powers, access to the Holy Land in this direction is to be afforded.

'And in this point of view, that extraordinary extension of the British empire in that part of Asia, in connection with what has been said respecting the “merchants of Tarshish and the lions thereof,” cannot but awaken many conjectures, as to what may be the designs of Providence in the raising up of this novel power in the east, through whose protection we see the foundations of an Apostolic Church already laid on the banks of the Ganges. However this may be in the secret counsels of God, the eyes of all expectants must be intensely fixed on this quarter of the globe, to mark for what future changes in the political state of the eastern nations, the way may have been prepared, by the present minishing and decay of the Turkish and Mahomedan powers.

'Others have supposed that by the kings of the east, or the kings that are from the risings of the sun, Christ and his risen saints – “The word of God and the armies of heaven which follow him,” are denoted. To this it has been objected, indeed, that the minishing or decay of an earthly power can remove no obstacle that stood in the way of these. And the weight of this objection we must acknowledge. But we cannot exactly determine with what latitude the prophetic language, “that the way of the kings from the east may be prepared,” is to be understood. It is not impossible, that “the way prepared” may denote an opening to the production of such an arrangement of affairs, and of such a relative position of the nations upon earth, that the Son of Man, with the saints of the Most High, may come and take the kingdom, in the way and circumstances which have been ordained and predestinated of God.

'Respecting the approach of Zion's Deliverer, there does, indeed, seem to be some allusion in Scripture to a progress from the east. I cannot think that prophecy in the forty-first of Isaiah, respects either Abraham or Cyrus:

“Who hath raised up the just one from the east, Hath called him to his feet?

Hath given up nations before him, Hath subdued kings?

Hath rendered his sword as a column of dust, And as the driven stubble his bow?

He pursued them, he went on prosperously, He touched not the road with his feet.”*

[Footnote: * '“The road with his feet he seemed not to measure.” — Bp. Stock. Compare Jeremiah xxxii. 24.']

'And again, verse the twenty-fifth:

“I have raised him up from the north, and he shall come, From the rising of the sun shall he invoke my name;

And he shall trample princes like mortar, And as the potter treadeth the clay.”

'If this, however, is the true application of the prophecy, we must look for the fulfilment, not at the first restoration of the Jews, but at the great day of the Lord, which we shall come afterwards to consider: and we must say, “the way,” indeed, is being “prepared,” by the drying up of the waters of the Euphrates, but those, who walk in the way, appear not as yet. Nor is it impossible, that, as in other prophecies, there may be observed in this, first an inceptive, and afterwards an ultimate and more full accomplishment. In the predicted scenes of that great day, we may be able to trace, perhaps, not only the Mighty God “riding upon the heavens” “as of old,” or “from the east,” to the help of his people; but some parts of Israel miraculously conducted by the Divine presence in the same direction towards restored and rescued Jerusalem. This must be the subject of future inquiry.'

From: Observations on the Unfulfilled Prophecies of Scripture, which are yet to have their Accomplishment before the coming of the Lord in Glory, or at the Establishment of His Everlasting Kingdom; by the Rev. John Fry, B.A., Rector of Desford, in Leicestershire; published, London: James Duncan, Paternoster Row, 1835; pp. 37-40.

“History the Interpreter of Prophecy” (1799)

Union Flag 1606-1800

HISTORY

THE

INTERPRETER OF PROPHECY,

OR,

A V I E W

OF

SCRIPTURAL PROPHECIES

AND THEIR ACCOMPLISHMENT

IN THE

PAST AND PRESENT

OCCURRENCES OF THE WORLD;

WITH

CONJECTURES RESPECTING THEIR FUTURE

COMPLETION.

_______________________

BY HENRY KETT, B.D.

FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE, OXFORD, AND ONE

OF HIS MAJESTY'S PREACHERS AT WHITEHALL.

________________________

IN THREE VOLUMES.

VOL. III.

OXFORD;

Printed for Messrs. HANWELL and PARKER; and J.COOKE;

And sold by C.and J.RIVINGTON, St. Paul's Church-Yard;

ROBSON, Bond-Street; EGERTON, Whitehall;

CADELL and DAVIES, Strand; and HAT-

CHARD, Piccadilly, London.

MDCCXCIX.

[1799]

In his 1799 work, Henry Kett writes the following concerning, 'the re-instatement of the Jews in their own land'; and Britain's possible involvement as the nation to facilitate that long-prophesied, restoration:

'“Who are these that fly as a cloud, and as the doves to their windows? Surely the isles shall wait for me, and the ships of Tarsish first, to bring thy sons from far, their silver, and their gold with them; unto the name of the Lord thy God, and to the Holy One of Israel, because he hath glorified thee. And the sons of strangers shall build up thy walls, and their kings shall minister unto thee.” Isaiah lx.

'Is it an improbable conjecture, that the British isles so highly favoured by the establishment of the Church of Christ, and hitherto by signal marks of Divine protection in the midst of surrounding dangers and temptations, should be brought, by a merciful share of general calamity, “to see the things that belong to their peace,” and continue to wait with faith and hope, for the accomplishment of the good promises of God? and that this maritime, commercial, Protestant kingdom should take the lead in executing the Divine will on such an occasion?' (pp. 229-230).

“The Kings of the East” . . . & Armageddon

(The title-page above is that of the second and enlarged edition of The Kings of the East published in 1849; the quotes below - from a post originaly submitted on the Mail on Sunday journalist Peter Hitchens' blog - are taken from the first edition of The Kings of the East, published 1842).

In a post on this [Peter Hitchens'] blog (15 April 2008 at 12:15 AM) on the thread, 'The Gathering Storm' (in the Archives for April 2008), I wrote that I thought that the British Empire was the power that was symbolically prefigured under the symbol of the 'kings of the east' (or, to give another translation: 'the kings from the rising of the sun'); as the 'sun' in the Revelation is used to indicate a power in the ascendancy – in this instance the 'sun' of the British Imperial interest rising over the long-held Turkish lands.

Since then I've come into possession of a most remarkable book written three-quarters of a century before the so-called, 'Balfour Declaration' of November 1917. From its title page I reproduce the following:

“THE KINGS OF THE EAST;”

AN

EXPOSITION OF THE PROPHECIES

DETERMINING,

FROM SCRIPTURE AND FROM HISTORY,

THE POWER

FOR WHOM THE MYSTICAL EUPHRATES

IS BEING “DRIED UP;”

WITH AN EXPLANATION

OF CERTAIN OTHER PROPHECIES CONCERNING

THE RESTORATION OF ISRAEL.

[By Edward Heycock, Esq., Bombay]

PUBLISHED BY R.B. SEELEY AND W. BURNSIDE

AND SOLD BY L. AND G. SEELEY,

FLEET STREET, LONDON.

MDCCCXLII

[1842]

After first determining from biblical prophecy that, 'the Mahommedans were to possess the East'; and from history that, 'India [was] the most eastern Mahammedan empire'; the Author of the work went on to exposit from Scripture that Britain was foreordained to rule over India – the eastern-most part of the 'Mahommedan empire'; and concerning the then status of Turkey, he writes: 'The way is [at the moment] only being prepared; the Turkish empire is not yet dried up.' But looking forwards in time towards Britain's future destiny as a latter-day Cyrus, as revealed in the ancient prophecies – he wrote: 'How, or when, the British will issue this proclamation for the restoration of Israel is uncertain.'

Before returning back again later to Edward Heycock's work, to see the pivotal role that he envisioned Britain would fulfil in the great conflict to arise, it seems necessary to remark, that – like the prophecies concerning the Messiah in His two roles: First as the suffering servant, 'The Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world' (John 1:29); and Second in His Glory as, 'the Lion of the tribe of Juda' (Revelation 5:5) – that the differing Messianic prophecies have been compared to two peaks of the same great mountain separated by the gulf of time. And so in a sense 'Armageddon' (which some term, 'mountain of destruction'. Hebrew Har (Ar) = mountain) should not be seen as a single great conflict at the end of time.

Or as Peter Hitchens remarked on the thread, 'Was World War Two just as pointless and self-defeating as Iraq . . .' (Again, in the Archives for April 2008) :

'The First and Second World Wars, as [Patrick] Buchanan says [in his book, Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War], are really one [great] conflict.'

The following is taken from a book that was written whilst the First World War was still raging – but prior to the October Revolution of 1917 – that would first shake Russia before sending its shock waves throughout the world:

'In Rev. xvi. 18, the seventh angel . . . [pours] out his vial [into the air], which is followed by “voices, and thunders, and lightnings, and there was a great earthquake such as was not since men were upon the earth.” That earthquake is here shown to be unprecedented. It refers to an unprecedented time of trouble. An earthquake in the book of Revelation always means some great political, or religious, upheaval. . . . 'Have we not an instance in the present war? It is the greatest in history. It has characteristics which cannot possibly have been experienced in the past. In the passions let loose, the spirit of hatred which is at work, we have repetitions of former wars, but the instruments used for slaughter, the millions employed in mortal combat, the present war is absolutely unprecedented, so that already we have a political earthquake such as was not since man was upon the earth. But we are only at the beginning, and we may expect that what is yet to be will be far greater than anything that has yet happened. “A time of trouble,” says Daniel, “such as never was.” “Great tribulation,” says our Lord, “such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.” But the present is only the preliminary shock of that which is to come, The worst is yet future, and will eclipse in horror all the trouble of to-day. . . . [pp. 219-220]

'In the last lecture I referred to the interpretation given by some exponents that the “king of the north” refers to Russia and “the king of the south” to Egypt, or rather to the Power that controls Egypt, namely, England, and at the “time of the end,” or the closing epoch of this dispensation, these two powers – Russia and the British Empire – will be in conflict regarding the “glorious land,” or Palestine. If this interpretation proves to be correct, there must come a temporary peace in the present war in order to enable events so to adjust themselves to turn Russia, our present ally, into our chief foe . . . Some, however, hold that Germany is the NORTHERN POWER signified. If that be so, the present war may merge without interruption into the final great conflict . . .' [Emphasis added.]

(Taken from: Light from the Book of Daniel: On History Past, Present, and Future. A Course of Twelve Lectures delivered in the Central Hall, Westminster, 1915-16. By Augusta Cook; London: Robert Banks & Son, Racquet Court, Fleet Street, E.C., 1916).

On the previously mentioned thread from 2008, Peter Hitchens wrote: 'It makes me feel like a traitor to write this ['Was World War Two just as pointless and self-defeating as Iraq . . .']. [For] the Second World War was my religion for most of my life. Brave, alone, bombed, defiant, we, the British, had won it on our own against the most evil and powerful enemy imaginable [those were my former thoughts].'

From the dark days of the 1940s back to the 1840s, and (as I previously mentioned) a return to Edward Heycock's aforementioned work – to see what he saw as Britain's destined role in that coming great conflict:

'Can any description be imagined more awfully sublime than this which the pen of inspiration has given this dreadful conflict? All nature, animate and inanimate, is represented as trembling . . . whilst every feathered fowl, and every beast of prey, is summoned to assemble at the ensanguined battlefield . . .

'This is the day for which Britain is strengthened, and prepared as an instrument to be employed by the hands of the Almighty. Not only is she being prepared with physical means, but also with moral courage to undertake, if needful, single-handed the defence . . . against this powerful coalition. Of the British it is said, “The isles shall WAIT UPON ME, AND ON MINE ARM SHALL THEY TRUST.” Isaiah li. 5. And it is promised that, “They THAT WAIT UPON THE LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run and not weary, and they shall walk and not faint.” Isaiah xl. 31.' (The Kings of the East, 1842 [pp. 294]).

General Sir William Dobbie, Governor of Malta during the dark days of that Island's great Second World War siege, would later write the following on that great conflict:

'The summer of 1940 was a time of crisis for the British Empire, and indeed for the whole world. Disaster had come to our expeditionary force in France, and although most of the personnel were saved, we lost nearly all our equipment, and our Army ceased to exist (for the time being) as an effective instrument of war. The French nation, our ally at that time, was brought to its knees, and forced out of the war. The British Empire then stood entirely alone, and faced the victorious might of Germany and her satellites. The heart of the Empire, Great Britain, was exposed to a full-scale attack by sea and air from the near-by bases in France and Belgium, recently acquired by the Germans, and the forces available for the defence of the country were ludicrously inadequate. It was at this time that Italy, the chief satellite of Germany, and till then theoretically neutral, or at any rate nonbelligerent, decided to throw in her lot unreservedly with Germany, and declared war against us. . . .

'The situation in Malta, moreover, was a replica, in miniature, of the general situation in Great Britain. The isolation, the formidable strength of the enemy's forces, the proximity of bases from which his attacks could be launched, the unbelievable paucity of our defensive resources, the great civilian population exposed to a ruthless enemy, the dependence on seaborne supplies and the expectation of attack in overwhelming strength – all these things and many others went to make up the defence problem of Malta, as they did the similar problem in Great Britain on a vaster scale. . . . [pp. 9-11]

'[It was] obvious to us that our human resources were woefully inadequate, and many of us were constrained to turn our eyes to “the hills, from whence cometh my help.” . . . God's Word was a great stand-by to me, and doubtless to many others, too, at this time. In it I read how God had helped His people in old times when they were faced with situations similar to that confronting us. And God reminded us that although outward circumstances have changed since those days in many ways, and although the problem might be enunciated in different words, yet God, the solver of problems, does not change. He is the same today as He has ever been, and “His hand is not shortened, that it cannot save.” The difficulty is likely to rest with us, either that we do not exercise the simple faith which lays hold on that power or that our iniquities separate between us and God, so that He cannot use it on our behalf. Many persons in Malta, both in responsible and other positions, did, I think, realize our need of His help, and were prepared to ask Him to give it us. By no other means could we be sure of holding this vital outpost of the Empire, and so we turned to Him who alone is the Giver of victory. . . .

'I humbly believe that God, in His mercy, answered the prayers offered to Him in this way, and in the two years and more of the siege which followed His help was very obvious and very real.

'At about the same time, I was greatly encouraged by a telegram I received from the chief of the Imperial General Staff, General Sir Edmund Ironside (later, Field-Marshal Lord Ironside). It showed me that others in high places at home were thinking along the same lines as we were in Malta. The telegram, which was addressed to me personally, contained the reference “Deuteronomy, chapter 3, verse 22.” I looked up the reference in my Bible, and I read: “Ye shall not fear them: for the Lord your God he shall fight for you”. This was a very welcome and timely reminder of a great and well-proved truth, and, coming as it did from a person in his position, and being addressed to one in mine, in view of the special circumstances of the time, it meant much to us.

'I have said that the help which God gave was very obvious and real. The same help was noticed at the time of the withdrawal from Dunkirk, and during the “Battle of Britain.” It certainly was so in the “Battle of Malta.” During the two years which followed the declaration of war by Italy, God's protecting hand was so much in evidence that people were noticing it and remarking about it. On a number of occasions officers have come to me and said quite spontaneously: “Do you know, sir, I think that Someone up there (pointing upwards) has been helping us today.” I no doubt replied, “Yes, I think so, too,” and I may have added, “You may remember we asked Him to help us, and today we have been watching Him doing it.” Such a conversation took place not once nor twice, but a number of times.' [pp. 107-109]

(From: A Very Present Help: A Testimony to the Faithfulness of God, By Lt-General Sir William Dobbie, GCMG, KCB, DSO; Third Edition, Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan; circa 1946).

Nigel Jones in a review of the historian Andrew Roberts' latest book, The Storm of War: A New History of the Second World War, (Sunday Telegraph, 'Seven' magazine, 26/07/09) writes:

'But in the end, as even the super patriotic Roberts recognises, it was not British sang-froid, or evacuations like Dunkirk – no matter how miraculous – that turned the tables of Hitler's war, but the vast manpower, limitless resources and dogged determination of Soviet Russia.'

The quote I give below is taken from the Daily Telegraph, February 25th, 1942:

'By all military logic, the stripped B.E.F. should have been destroyed on the Dunkirk beaches. Then a Britain without defences should, in July 1940, have been occupied by overwhelming German numbers from land and sea if Hitler had not been mysteriously blind to his unparalleled opportunity of ending the war. . . .[Again], we could never have hoped (as we now realize) to cope with the German Juggernaut if it had not been gratuitously thrown into the melting-pot of Russia. . . . The Power behind events . . . has “covered us in the day of battle.”'

'But I will remove far off from you the NORTHERN ARMY, and will drive him into a land barren and desolate, with his face toward the east sea, and his hinder part toward the utmost sea, and his stink shall come up, and his ill savour shall come up, because he hath done great things.' (Joel 2:20).

______________________

ADDENDUM:

From The Kings of the East, 1842

'Britain has been raised up to her present powerful state for the purpose of executing God's righteous judgments upon his enemies, we cannot escape from the conviction “that the hour of His judgment is come,” and that our nation will speedily be involved in wars, which shall terminate to the glory of God, and the overthrow of his enemies.' (pp. 72)

'As Britain is expressly prepared for . . . [this] work, and receives her commission from the Almighty to march under the banner of the Most High, whilst executing together with Him his righteous judgments, we of this highly-favoured land may rejoice in our privileges, and contemplate the coming contest, the gathering storm and mighty conflict, not only without fear, but with full assurance of victory. Let us only wait upon God, and trust on his arm, as it is promised: “The isles shall wait upon me, and on mine arm shall they trust.” Isaiah li. 5. Then shall it be seen in the hour of trial that “they that have waited upon the Lord, shall have renewed their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; they shall walk, and not faint.” Isa. xl. 31.' (pp. 339-340)

________

ENVOI

'How consolatory this view of the prophecies, supported as it is by the word of God. The British Christian may hear of wars and rumours of wars, rejoicing when he beholds the rising storm, for the Saviour is with him in the ship and will speedily rebuke the winds, and there shall be a great calm.' (ibid. pp. 340)

- DUNKIRK 1940 -

Empire of the Sun

(Above: colour plate displaying flags of the British Empire – taken from Our Flags and Their Significance; by K. C. Byrde; Bristol British-Israel Association, 1920).

From The London Express of February, 1902:

A BRITISH EMPIRE FLAG

_________

A Design Is Preparing for a New Ensign

to Give the Colonies

Representation.

An empire flag!

At last an ensign which shall adequately represent Great Britain both at home and beyond seas seems assured.

The Express is able to announce that the King has received with favour the suggestion that a new flag was needed to keep pace with the growing empire, and that a finished design for the same will be submitted to his Majesty next week.

Mr. C. D. Bennett, the cousin of a distinguished Colonial Governor, and himself well known in several of the colonies, has been intrusted with the responsibility of preparing this design.

Mr. Bennett has had many difficulties to contend with in evolving a harmonious and artistic design, which should fittingly express British sovereignty.

He has succeeded, however, in giving our colonial possessions full representation, without sacrificing the chief feature of the old flag – the Cross of St. George – which is in itself a familiar emblem of England's power in every quarter of the globe.

The following is a description of the new empire flag, as given officially to The Express:

On an absolutely white ground is embroidered a golden sun – typical of a race on whose dominions the sun never sets – shining on a large red Cross of St. George, representing, of course, the empire at home. In the left-hand corner is an imperial crown, the sign of one great empire, embracing all creeds, tolerating all beliefs, but under one great imperial idea.

Underneath the crown, on a blue scroll is inscribed the Latin rendering of the motto, “The empire on which the sun never sets,” which is the proudest boast of every Englishman:

“Imperium cui nullus Solis occasus.”

In the right-hand top corner of the flag will be placed the particular device representative of the empire beyond the sea. For instance, the flag to be used in India will contain the Star of India in the right-hand top corner.

The flag as used in Australia will contain instead the device of the new Commonwealth, while the Canadian and other Colonial Governments will add to the design their own badge, for use on all “empire flags” in that particular part of the world.

This design has been warmly commended by several persons high in authority to whom it has been exhibited. It now remains for his Majesty to place the final seal of approval.

Mr. Bennett has notified the King that the design awaits his Majesty's pleasure, and it will probably be exhibited to him next week. Should it be approved by his Majesty, the new design will become “official” without delay.

To the King himself is due this idea. His Majesty has realized that the present national emblem does not fully express the dignity and importance of the empire.

When the Prince and Princess of Wales started on their tour, nearly a year ago, they were especially instructed to carefully note every shade of colonial opinion on the subject – whether a new flag was desired and what each colony expected.

Everywhere the answer was the same: “Give us a new flag.” When the popular verdict was reported to the King, his Majesty at once signified a desire to have a proper design prepared.

After weeks of toil the design is ready, which many people believe will eventually be flying at the mastheads of our warships and over British possessions at home and abroad.

“The kings from the rising of the sun”

(The post below dates back to April 2008 where it was first submitted on the blog of the Mail on Sunday's journalist Peter Hitchens - on his blog thread dealing with the Second World War entitled, The Gathering Storm. I reproduce it below in its entirety with a few minor corrections).

In 1942 Churchill remarked that he had not become “the King's First Minister in order to preside over the liquidation of the British Empire.”

Perversely, while the ending of the First World War saw the dissolution of the the empires of the defeated Central Powers of Germany, Austria-Hungary and Turkey; the ending of the Second World War would ring in the death knell of the victorious British Empire.

At the expense of the defeated Central Powers, the First World War saw the British Empire make its last great imperial acquisitions. But the former age of empire-building had in fact come to a close – all of the newly won territories captured by the Allies were to be held in “trust” as “Mandates”, under the auspices of the, then, newly formed League of Nations.

When it came to sharing-out the spoils of that first, great conflict of the 20th century, Great Britain and her Empire were in a position to take the “lion's share”. From the defeated German empire, fell the following spoils:

German East Africa (modern-day Tanzania – excluding Zanzibar): vast majority to Great Britain (the remainder to Belgium). Togoland: jointly divided between Great Britain and France. German West Africa (Cameroons): two thin strips to Great Britain (majority to France). German South-West Africa (modern-day Namibia): to the Union of South Africa. German (north-eastern) New Guinea: to the Commonwealth of Australia. German (western) Samoa: to the Dominion of New Zealand.

But it was in – what was then termed the “Near East” – the modern-day Middle East, that the most far-reaching repercussions would be felt. In 1882 Great Britain had occupied Egypt (though it was still nominally under Ottoman suzerainty). In 1914, with the start of the First World War, Egypt was declared a British Protectorate – as was the Ottoman province of Kuwait to the east; and in 1915 with the entry of Turkey into the war on the side of the Central Powers, the former Ottoman held island of Cyprus (leased and administered by Great Britain since 1878) was also declared a British Protectorate.

By the war's end the British Empire had acquired for herself a swathe of territory captured from the defeated Ottoman empire (and now held by her under the proviso of the newly formed League of Nations): stretching from Palestine (which originally included Transjordan), on the Mediterranean seaboard; on through the vast, oil-rich deserts of Iraq, to the shores of the Persian Gulf in the east. And incorporated within the League of Nations' remit for British Mandate Palestine was the proviso to establish within that land a “Jewish National Home”, as had been first echoed by the so-called Balfour Declaration of November 1917...

In the explanatory notes of our family's nineteenth century Bible (which does not contain the year of its publication – but is inscribed with the year 1866 in a hand-written presentation), is the following note concerning Revelation 16:12 – and the final exhaustion of the Ottoman empire:

“The Euphrates is here used for 'the empire founded by the Euphratean horsemen [the Turks] of the sixth trumpet,' and the drying up of its waters 'to imply the exhaustion of all the political sources of wealth and power which contribute to the strength and greatness of . . . [that] empire . . .'”.

In Isaiah 8:7, God compares the conquests of the Assyrian empire to a river in flood: “Now therefore, behold, the Lord bringeth up upon them the waters of the river, strong and many, even the king of Assyria, and all his glory: and he shall come up over all his channels, and go over all his banks.”

In Revelation 16:12, the same imagery is used – but in reverse – to show the drying up of an empire. Sir Isaac Newton (1642-1727) wrote the following concerning this interpretation:

“Analogous to the loosing of these [four] Angels [of the sixth Trumpet (Revelation 9:13-21) – being the second, and Turkish phase of Islam's conquests] is the drying up of the waters of [the] Euphrates in the sixt[h] Vial. For these two actions must correspond because the beginnings of this Trumpet & Vial which are contemporary. Now by the waters of this river we are to understand the people situate upon it . . . that is, the Turkish Sultanies. And by the pouring [out of] a Vial upon this River the inflicting of some great calamity upon that people: such as was the Tattarian invasion. And by the consequent drying up [of] the waters thereof the wasting of the power & dominion of that people . . . that is, the [final] dissolution of the Turkish Sultanies by that invasion.” (Untitled Treatise on Revelation by Isaac Newton. Source: Yahuda Ms. 1.8, Jewish National and University Library, Jerusalem. From online transcript on the University of Sussex's “The Newton Project”).

Richard Lattimore, who was for many years Professor of Greek at Bryn Mawr, made a translation of the Revelation in the 1960s. In the Preface to a reprint of his translation he remarks:

“It was while I was teaching various Greek texts to beginning students that I was struck by the natural ease with which Revelation turned itself into English. . . . [In my translation] I have held throughout to the principle of keeping as close to the Greek as possible, not only for sense and for individual words, but in the belief that fidelity to the original word order and syntax may yield an English prose that to some extent reflects the style of the original.” (From, The Four Gospels and the Revelation: Newly translated from the Greek by Richard Lattimore, Hutchinsons of London, 1980).

Richard Lattimore translates Revelation 16:12 thus:

“And the sixth [angel] poured out his bowl upon the great river Euphrates; and its water was dried, so as to make ready the way of the kings from the rising of the sun.”

For comparison, the Authorised (King James) Version translates the above passage so:

“And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared.”

Who then are these eastern kings – “the kings from the rising of the sun” ? In his book End Time Delusions, Steve Wohlberg makes the following observation: “Cyrus came from 'the east' to conquer ancient Babylon (see Isaiah 44:26-28; 46:11).” He also observes that, “the name 'Cyrus' [in Persian] means 'sun'.”

For an explanation of the apocalyptic imagery used in the Revelation, it is to the Old Testament that we must turn . . .

Between 606-604 BC, the Babylonian empire conquered Jerusalem and carried the Jews off captive to Babylon. In 539 BC, Cyrus the Great, the king of the Medes and Persians, conquered the ancient city of Babylon. And in the succession of “world” empires (which was given in an apocalyptic revelation to Daniel), the Babylonian empire was replaced (at its appointed time in the prophetic scheme) by that of Media-Persia.

In the British Museum is the ancient Cyrus Cylinder, which records Cyrus' conquest of Babylon. The river Euphrates ran through double doors into the ancient city of Babylon. Cyrus and his army had earlier dug trenches up-stream to divert the flow of the river. During the night of Belshazzar's drunken feast, the waters of the Euphrates were literally “dried up” and thus allowed Cyrus and his men access under the double doors, and into the city. The Babylonian empire had been, “weighed in the balances” and “found wanting”; that very night – the night of the “[hand]writing on the wall” - it was to be no more . . .

I am of the opinion that this eastern power, which in the Revelation is symbolised by the sun, is none other than that of the British Empire – it was the British Empire, which after the First World War took the “lion's share” of the former territories of the Ottoman empire from the Turks. But more importantly: it was the British Empire – like Cyrus' empire, two and a half millennia before – that would have a policy of allowing the Jews to return back to their ancient homeland.

I can think of a no more fitting symbol for the British Empire than that of the rising sun: for due to its vastness there was always a corner of the world, over which – from dawn to dusk each day a Union Flag – fluttering in the breeze, would be flying. During its heyday, the British Empire was truly, “an empire on which the sun never set . . .”

“The sun never set on the British Empire, Because the sun sets in the West, And the British Empire was in the East.” Anon.

It was Disraeli who bestowed upon Queen Victoria the title, Empress of India, and it was Disraeli who said that Britain was an ORIENTAL and not a EUROPEAN power. Lord Curzon remarked that, “As long as we rule India we are the greatest power in the world. If we lose it we shall drop straightaway to a third-rate power.”

The Oxford Dictionary of Current English gives the following definition:

“orient 1 . . . n (Orient) the East, the countries east of the Mediterranean, esp. E. Asia. [F f. L oriens . . . rising sunrise, east]”.

During the days of the British Raj, the Viceroy of India's flag was a Union Flag, in the centre of which, on the St George's cross, was superimposed “The Star of India”, surmounted by the Royal Crown. This, “Star of India” badge was a SUN-BURST in the centre of which was a five-pointed star, surrounded by a garter, bearing the motto: “Heaven's Light Our Guide”.

But does not the Revelation say “kings (plural) from the rising of the sun”? The capture of Palestine was a joint venture – which not only involved troops from Great Britain and her Indian Empire; but also troops from her far-flung, and more easterly dominions of Australia and New Zealand. The troops from these fledgeling dominions would play a major rôle in the conflict.

Also the following information is of interest: In 1619, Shah Abbas of Persia, granted the English East India Company a monopoly in Persia's silk trade and the Persian port of Bandar Abbas became the Company's headquarters in the region.

Due to instability in the region and Arab piracy, the East India Company, in 1763, moved its Persian headquarters from Bandar Abbas to the more secure port of Bushire. Here a British Resident was installed. The “British” presence in the region originated from her Indian Empire – for a while in the 19th century there were rival British legations in Teheran: one from HM Government in London; and the other from Britain's Indian Empire. Brian Lapping in his 1980s book End of Empire, (which was based on his Channel 4 TV series of the same name) included a chapter on the ending of “British rule” in Iran (Persia) – though nominally it wasn't even part of the British Empire, he felt that it warranted an inclusion due to the high level of British influence in the region.

In 1839, the East India Company extended its power still further, when – with 700 men, supported by a couple of Royal Navy sloops, Captain Stafford Haines of the Indian Navy annexed Aden to the Company's Bombay Presidency. This act made Aden the first imperial acquisition of Queen Victoria's reign.

In the May/June 2007 edition of Sword magazine (the successor magazine to Prophecy Today / Prophecy Today International), the Australian Kelvin Crombie – in the first part of an on-going article on “Britain's Destiny: Restorer of Israel?”, wrote:

“In . . . [the] ancient power play [of Cyrus' Persian empire allowing the Jews to return to their land] we see already the seeds of Britain's role several thousand years later – as the restorer of Israel. Three elements are present in this Persian connection: 1) the Land of Israel as strategic centre-point of the geo-political axis; 2) the Land of Israel as critical economic centre point and 3) the restoration of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel as a proxy group to fit in with the geo-political policy of an Empire.”

Returning back to the “[hand]writing on the wall” of Daniel chapter 5: it has been pointed out by W Edmund Filmer in his book, Daniel's Predictions (Regency Press, London, 1979), that:

“'The inscription actually contains a string of weight names, viz mene, tekel and peres, with the meaning mina, shekel and half mina, the last named word being documented in the Mishna and other Jewish writings', peres signifying the half mina. Since a mina consisted of fifty shekels, a shekel of twenty gerahs, the total weight in gerahs signified by the writing was:

Mina (MENE) 1,000 gerahs; Mina (MENE) 1,000 gerahs; Shekel (TEKEL) 20 gerahs; Half-mina (PERES) 500 gerahs: Total 2,520 gerahs”

On the [Peter Hitchens' blog] thread “Gaza proves that any Middle East deal will fail” (in the Archives for March [2008 on that blog]); I posted some quotes from Dr H Grattan Guinness' 1886 book, Light for the Last Days, in which he was expectant that the year 1917 (AD) would mark the terminus of the 2,520 solar years or “seven times” (i.e. 7 x 360 years) of biblical prophecy concerning the treading down of Jerusalem. In the same post I also quoted the following words of Dr H Aldersmith, MB, FRCS, written during the closing years of the 19th century:

“One day, some slight trouble may light up a great European war, which in the end may see the fall of Turkey . . . and Great Britain in possession of Palestine. . . . If so, as students of the prophetical Word are agreed that, when the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled, and Jerusalem ceases to be trodden down [by the Turks]; we may expect it to [then] pass . . . into . . . [British] hands . . . this period may end about 1917 A.D. Time only will show . . .” (The Fulness of the Gentiles, 2nd edition, 1896).

In Revelation 16:13, following immediately on from the drying up of the Euphrates, three unclean spirits like frogs are mentioned which “go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of the great day of God Almighty. . . And he gathered them together into a place called . . . Armageddon.” (Revelation 16:14-16).

Each of the judgements in the Revelation are mirror images of those that fell upon the gods of ancient Egypt at the time of the Exodus.

In ancient Egypt the frog-headed goddess Hekt was regarded as a form of the goddess Hathor. Greek writers have preserved significant Egyptian lore regarding the frog. According to Horapollo (I, 25) the frog symbolised an imperfectly formed man. The Greeks accepted the view that the slime-coated frogs were half-formed – part of their bodies being still mud as they crawled about or squatted awkwardly. They believed that if the river dried up, the frog would be incomplete – half mud, half frog. Ælian (II, 56) mentions a shower of incomplete frogs.

“One day, some slight trouble may light up a great European war . . .”, so wrote Dr H Aldersmith, in 1896.

In “The War of the World” television series (Channel 4, 19th June, 2006; based on his book of the same name), the British historian, Professor Niall Ferguson remarked:

“The difficult thing to work out, is how an act of terrorism [the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand] in an obscure corner of 'Ruratania', could have such massive consequences? How exactly could the gunshots . . . have sparked-off the first of the century's two world wars? A conflict that all over the globe raged and claimed nearly 10 million lives. After all, assassinations were ten-a-penny in the early nineteen-hundreds. Terrorism was all the rage amongst extreme nationalists. Why did this one criminal act have such vast world shaking consequences?”

(“There was a great earthquake, such as was not since men were upon the earth, so mighty an earthquake, and so great.” Revelation 16:18).

Professor Ferguson continued: “The answer is that when the Archduke was shot, he was driving over one of the world's great fault lines; the fateful historic border between the west and the east – the Occident and the Orient. The trouble with geological fault lines is as the earth's tectonic plates grind uneasily against one another, they're where earthquakes happen. There in Sarajevo it was the geo-political tectonic plates – known as empires, that were shifting. Turkey's was giving way [drying up!]; Austria's was pushing forward; and so too was Russia's . . .”

“Once, Bosnia had been a part of the Ottoman empire . . . but in 1908 Austria had annexed Bosnia. When a Serb murdered their Archduke, the Austrians . . . demanded redress from Serbia and the Russians felt they could not afford to see Serbia humiliated. All the ingredients were thus in place for an imperial war between Austria and Russia over the balance of power in the Balkans.”

It was in the dried up left-overs of the Turkish empire, with its ethnic mix and its imperfectly formed borders – in which many Serbs dwelt across the border in Austria-Hungarian annexed Bosnia-Herzegovina, (remember, according to the lore preserved by Horapollo, the frog symbolised an imperfectly [or half] formed man [or nation]) – it was here, in this “cock-pit” of Europe, that tensions were running high; Borijove Jevtic, a Black Hand member, even went as far as stating that the very date of Franz Ferdinand's visit incensed him:

“How dared Franz Ferdinand, not only the representative of the oppressor but in his own person an arrogant tyrant, enter Sarajevo on that day? Such an entry was a studied insult. 28 June is the day on which the old Serbian kingdom was conquered by the Turks at the battle of Amselfelde in 1389. That was no day for Franz Ferdinand, the new oppressor, to venture to the very doors of Serbia for a display of the force of arms which kept us beneath his heel. Our decision was taken almost immediately. Death to the tyrant!”

It was in the Balkans – in the “dried up” left-overs of the Ottoman empire – that this volatile political and nationalist mix was ignited.

Writing after the fall of Jerusalem to British and Empire forces under the command of General Allenby, in December 1917 – but before the final close of the “Great War” of 1914-18 – M M'Intyre contemplated thus:

“Since the present world-war broke out, the question is sometimes asked, Are we in Armageddon now? It is possible that we are, but one cannot speak with decision on the point. Certainly, this war is like Armageddon in its extent . . . Russia has [now] abandoned us; and no one can foretell the future course of policy in that unhappy country. So far as we can see, there is nothing to hinder the war from undergoing fresh modifications, until it has assumed all the features of that dark struggle foretold in Scripture in such ominous terms. On the other hand, this [war] may be only the devastating prelude to still deadlier conflicts which will break out in the near future.” (The Starting Place of Glory, circa 1918).

And in Vol. VI of her “The Divine Calendar” series, Augusta Cook wrote the following prophetic words – a mere six years after the signing of the Armistice:

“The fifth volume of 'The Divine Calendar,' . . . was largely written while the Great War of 1914-18 was in progress. With that war, we entered the Era of Armageddon. We are still in that Era. To-day, we are not passing through a long period of peace: we are only in an Armistice – a lull before the greater storm.” (The Divine Calendar, Vol. VI: The Seven Golden Candlesticks, The Marshall Press, Ltd., 1924).

(“Star of India” flag image by Clay Moss from: “FOTW Flags Of The World Website” at http://flagspot.net/flags)