The Battle of Armageddon

by Mike Willis
Truth Magazine XXII: 13, pp. 211-212, March 30, 1978
Truth Magazine XXII: 14, pp. 227-229, April 6, 1978
Truth Magazine XXII: 15, pp. 243-245, April 13, 1978
Truth Magazine XXII: 16, pp. 259-260, April 20, 1978

In recent years, the premillennial controversy has raged once again. Practically every time that an attempt is made to re-establish the nation of Israel, men begin to think that the time of the end is near. Consequently, they speculate concerning Bible prophecies in the light of the current events which they read in the daily newspaper. Since 1948 when Israel was once again established as a nation, the religious market has literally been flooded with materials proclaiming the theories of premillennialism.

The terminology of premillennialism has become well-known. We have seen bumper stickers mentioning rapture. Radio evangelists have discussed pre- and post-tribulation theories to such an extent that practically everyone is acquainted with the seven-year tribulation period. Another term of premillennial importance is the term "Battle of Armageddon." Almost every preacher has been asked on one or more occasions, "What is the battle of Armageddon?" I would like to try to answer some of the questions that people are asking about the battle of Armageddon. Certainly, the term is a Bible term, although it is only used in Revelation 16:16. From the amount of discussion it receives, one could get the idea that it is mentioned on every page of the Bible.

However, before discussing the biblical meaning and usage of the word "armageddon," let me be sure that you understand how premillennialists are using the term. In order to do this, I must briefly summarize the main points of premillennialism according to the pretribulation rapture point of view.

The Battle of Armageddon According to Premillennialists

Let me begin by relating the series of events that surround the battle of Armageddon according to this viewpoint. We are presently living in what is termed the "church age." Premillennialism teaches that Jesus came to this world to establish His eternal kingdom. However, when the Jews rejected Him and had Him crucified, a second plan was inaugurated which postponed the establishment of His kingdom. In the meantime, the "church age" occurs. At the end of this church age, Jesus is supposed to come again and take His saints quietly from the earth. Saints are supposed to mysteriously disappear from the earth at the rapture. The rest of the population on this earth will continue life as it is at the present.

The rapture will be followed by a seven-year period of tribulation. This period is designed to prepare the nation of Israel to receive her Messiah. A remnant of the Jews will believe the gospel and serve as evangelists to try to persuade the rest of the Jews to accept the gospel of Jesus Christ. Some Gentiles will also turn to the Lord during this period.

During this period a personal Antichrist will arise, be popularly received as a ruler over Europe, and oppose the work of Jesus Christ. The forces of the Antichrist and Jesus Christ are destined for a great final conflict called the Battle of Armageddon. After Jesus victoriously defeats Satan, He will establish His kingdom on the earth and reign over it for one thousand glorious years.

The participants in this battle are already revealed, according to those who accept premillennialism. Four world powers will enter the fray.

1. Europe. The first great world power will be Europe. This Europe will be different from the independent nations which presently are known as Europe. The independent nations of Europe will form the ten-state United States of Europe. Premillennialists generally interpret the Common Market which is presently developed in Europe to be the first step toward the United States of Europe. This ten-state confederacy will be under the leadership of one man who is the Antichrist. Premillennialists identify this new United States of Europe as the Roman Empire prophesied in Daniel 2 and 7.
2. The Russian Confederacy. This is the second great world power that will participate in the Battle of Armageddon. Russia is identified as "Gog, of the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal" (Ezekiel 38:1-3). Her allies will be Persia, Cush, Put, Gomer, and Togarmah (Ezekiel 38:6,9,15,22; 39:4) which are identified as Iraq, Iran, Ethiopia, North Africa, Germany, Armenia, etc.
3. Egypt: the King of the South. The third great power in the Battle of Armageddon will be Egypt. Premillennialists understand Daniel 11 discusses the Battle of Armageddon and identify the king of the south with Egypt.
4. China: the Eastern power. Elsewhere in Daniel 11, a power from the East (Daniel 11:44) is mentioned. Premillennialists generally understand this to refer to China today, although premillennialists of the World War II era dogmatically asserted that this eastern power was Japan.

When the conflict begins, the battle will occur like this: Egypt will initiate a conflict with Israel. Because of the present tensions in the Middle East, premillennialists are convinced that this could happen at any time. At the same time that this occurs, Russia will invade the Near East pushing its conquests all the way to Egypt whom she will also defeat. The reason that Russia enters this war is her need for crude oil. Having defeated these countries, Russia will hear rumors from the East (China) and from the North (Europe under the Antichrist). At that time she will return to Israel to defend her newly conquered area at Megiddo. Through some sort of nuclear holocaust, Russia will be defeated leaving a "power vacuum" in Israel which the Antichrist will quickly fill. Europe under the Antichrist will engage in battle with the East and then against the Jews.

At this point, Christ's second coming will occur. He will enter into a physical battle with the army of Satan under the leadership of the Antichrist and summarily defeat it. Having defeated His enemies, He will establish His kingdom and reign for one thousand years over the nations of this world from the city of Jerusalem. The temple will be rebuilt and animal sacrifices will be reinstituted. The glorious reign of Christ will begin.

It seems that a comment about the imminence of these events needs to be injected. Premillennialists have always expected the Battle of Armageddon to occur at "just any time." In 1924, William Edward Biederwolf wrote,

"In keeping with the interpretation which makes the word descriptive of a characteristic (great slaughter) rather than a definite place, there are those who think the last world war lust closed (World War I - mw) was Indeed the very battle of Armageddon, and that therefore, as John Robertson says, `The Second Advent of our Lord is now by Prophetical schedule due, and may at the next tick of the watch in your pocket be seen In the sky"' (The Millennium Bible, pp. 662-663).

The usefulness of such a theory to the evangelism process is readily perceived. Whether used intentionally or unintentionally, the premillennial theory is used to scare people into obeying the gospel because the end time is right around the corner.

Having a grasp of the premillennial theory of the Battle of Armageddon, you are somewhat better prepared to tell whether or not this is in harmony with the Bible. Does God's word foretell the coming of such a great, physical conflict between Christ and a personal Antichrist? Can we see the signs which precede this conflict through the reading of our daily newspapers? These and other questions must be answered by going back to the Bible to see what it says about the Battle of Armageddon in particular and premillennialism in general.

Literal Interpretation of Prophecy

Understanding the premillennial idea of the events to transpire at the end of this time, perhaps you are wondering why premillennialists and amillennialists differ so much from each other in their concept of what is to happen at the end of this period of time. Both amillennialists and premillennialists are agreed that the problem centers around whether to interpret the prophecies literally, as these quotations show:

"No question facing the student of Eschatology Is more important than the question of the method to be employed in the interpretation of the prophetic Scriptures. The adoption of different methods of interpretation has produced various eschatological positions and accounts for the divergent views within a system that confront the student of prophecy. The basic differences between the premillennial and amillennial schools and between the pre-tribulation and post-tribulation rapturists are hermeneutical, arising from the adoption of divergent and irreconcilable methods of interpretation" (J. Dwight Pentecost, Things To Come, p. 1 as quoted by Rodney Miller in The Lion and the Lamb on Planet Earth, p. 17).

"One of the most marked features of Premillennialism in all its forms is the emphasis which it places on the literal Interpretation of Scripture. It Is the insistent claim of its advocates that only when interpreted literally is the Bible interpreted truly, and they denounce as `spiritualizers' or 'allegorizers' those who do not interpret the Bible with the same degree of literalness as they do. None have made this charge more pointedly than the Dispensationalists. The question of literal versus figurative interpretation is, therefore, one which has to be faced at the very outset" (Oswald T. Allis, Prophecy and the Church, pp. 16-17).

Premillennialists adhere to a very literal interpretation of the Bible prophecies. They are convinced that Bible prophecies can only be properly understood when understood literally.

"Remember this also: The prophecy that hen been fulfilled, has been fulfilled literally. More than half of the predictive prophecies concerning Christ are as yet unfulfilled. As the fulfilled prophecies were fulfilled literally ...so the unfulfilled prophecies will be fulfilled literally!" (Salem Kirban, Guide to Survival, p. 14).

"These men used what may be called the golden rule of interpretation which the Biblical record of fulfilled prophecy indicates is correct:

'When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise.'

This is the method which this writer has diligently sought to follow" (Hal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth, p. 40).

Although premillennialists take great pleasure in the fact that they are about the only ones who try to take the prophecies literally, their literalism is the source of many of their problems.

God never intended that every prophecy of the Scripture be interpreted literally. He did not always speak literally when He foretold the coming of the kingdom of God and the Christ. One needs only to study a few of the fulfilled Old Testament prophecies to know that this is so. For example, Isaiah 40:3-5 prophesied,

"The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God. Every valley shall be exalted. and every mountain and hill shall be made low: and crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain: And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it."

This passage is quoted in Luke 3:4-6 and applied to the ministry of John the Baptist. It is a fulfilled prophecy, but was it fulfilled literally? Did John literally prepare a highway for Christ to walk upon during His ministry? Did He literally lower every hill and raise every valley in order to make a smooth, straight road for our Lord? Of course not! Yet, if we are going to demand that prophecy be literally interpreted, this is what the ministry of John would have demanded.

Another prophecy in the Old Testament that concerns itself with the kingdom of the Lord is Ezekiel 37:24-26. Ezekiel wrote,

"And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them. And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children and their children's children for ever: and my servant David shall be their prince for ever. Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore."

Premillennialists quote this passage to state that the land of Palestine will be restored to Israel during the millennium. To interpret this in any way other than literally is to abuse the scriptures, according to them. Yet, one point of premillennialism which is quite obvious is the idea that Jesus Christ will be the ruling monarch during the millennium. However, if we interpret this prophecy literally and consistently, Ezekiel is understood to say that the ruling monarch will be David. David must be raised from the dead in order to literally sit on his throne in Jerusalem for this prophecy to be literally fulfilled. Yet, the premillennialists who say that prophecy must be interpreted literally do not want this part of this prophecy to be interpreted literally.

Hence, I charge that premillennialists do not consistently follow their rule of literally interpreting Bible prophecy. To demonstrate just how much liberty premillennialists take in the interpretation of the Bible prophecy, I would like to give their interpretation of some verses. Remember, the premillennialists are the ones who are telling us that Bible prophecy must be interpreted literally. Revelation 9:17-19 reads as follows:

"And thus I saw the horses in the vision, and them that sat on them, having breastplates of fire, and of jacinth, and brimstone: and the heads of the horses were as the heads of lions; and out of their mouths issued fire and smoke and brimstone. By these three was the third part of men killed, by the fire, and by the smoke, and by the brimstone, which issued out of their mouths. For their power is in their mouth, and in their tails: for their tails were like unto serpents, and had heads, and with them they do hurt."

Here is one premillennialists' interpretation of this passage; note how much he has departed from a literal interpretation of this prophecy:

"I am today inclined to think that they are a human army with weapons and gas masks. They are either an organized army or a spontaneous army, such as 200 million communists taking to arms suddenly in various parts of Asia ....Perhaps the army that the world will face is one of a massive invasion of tanks equipped with flame throwers. It may, however, be a dispersant of nerve gas or some biological warfare" (Salem Urban, Revelation Visualized, pp. 204, 207).

The popular writer, Hal Lindsey, takes similar liberties with the text even though he castigates those who do not literally interpret Bible prophecy. He wrote,

"The thought may have occurred to you that this Is strikingly similar to the phenomena associated with thermonuclear warfare. In fact, many Bible expositors believe that this is an accurate first-century description of a twentieth-century thermonuclear war" (Had Lindsey The Late Great Planet Earth, p. 71 ).

In Otis Gatewood's review of Lindsey's book, he appropriately pointed out this inconsistency of the literal interpretation of Bible prophecy.

"Mr. Lindsey would have us believe that Ezekiel 37, 38, 39 refer to the invasion of Palestine by Russia in the last times (pp. 59-71). But the literal interpretation of Ezekiel 37, 38, 39 declares that the weapons of Gog and Magog are swords, shields, helmets, horses, bucklers (Ezekiel 38:41, bows, arrows, hand staves, and spears (Ezekiel 39:9). Can't you just see Russia, who is now equipped with all the latest jets, atomic bombs, tanks, etc., returning to the use of swords, hand staves, spears, etc. when they invade Israel? How long would they last, with such weapons, against Israel's modern weaponry?" (Otis Gatewood, Book Review of The Late Great Planet Earth, p. 5).

I think that you can see that premillennialists interpret Bible prophecy in ways other than literally. Whereas they claim that Bible prophecy must be interpreted literally, they find a way to make figurative what they want to be interpreted figuratively. Their insistence upon the literal interpretation of prophecy is weakened by their own treatment of prophecy.

The sad part of the whole system of interpretation followed by the premillennialists is that it denies the inspired apostles' claim that certain Bible prophecies have been fulfilled. For example, in Acts 13:33, Paul quoted from Psalms 2 stating that it has already been fulfilled in Jesus Christ's death, burial and resurrection. Yet, premillennialists consistently state that this prophecy has yet to be fulfilled in connection with their idea of the Battle of Armageddon. This convicts the apostles as being false interpreters of Bible prophecy, thus assaulting the doctrine of the inspiration of the scriptures. A similar case appears in Acts 2:30-33 where Peter said that Psalms 132:11 had already been fulfilled although premillennialists consistently teach that its fulfillment lies in the future.

At this point, the charge must be made that premillennialism is a system of infidelity because it denies the apostolic interpretation of Bible prophecy which interpretation was given under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Let us consider some of the other consequences which result from the adoption of premillennialism.

Consequences of Premillennialism

The Battle of Armageddon as viewed by premillennialists cannot be considered outside the scope of the doctrine of premillennialism. What we are dealing with is not just simply a mistaken understanding of one verse of scripture in which a group of people has overly literalized what the Bible says. Rather, we are dealing with a system of interpretation of Bible prophecy which has very serious ramifications for many Bible doctrines. Hence, we must look at the premillennial interpretation of the Battle of Armageddon in the total context of premillennialism.

The doctrine of premillennialism, as I said earlier, states that Christ has not yet set up His kingdom. Rather, when the Jews rejected Jesus and demanded that Pilate crucify Him, Jesus postponed the establishment of His kingdom, according to premillennialism. The kingdom is to be established at the second coming of Jesus at which time Jesus is supposed to reign for a thousand years on this earth. If this doctrine is true, the following consequences logically follow:

Christ is dethroned

The scriptures teach that Jesus is presently king over His kingdom. He is presently described as "the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords" (I Timothy 6:15). All authority has already been given to Him (Matthew 28:18); hence, God has put all things in subjection under Jesus' feet (Ephesians 1:22). He is the lawgiver of His kingdom (James 4:12). He is presently reigning over His kingdom and will continue to reign until the last enemy, death, is destroyed at which time He will deliver the kingdom back to God (I Corinthians 15:24).

By denying that the kingdom is presently in existence, premillennialism denies that Jesus is presently king. A man cannot be a king without a kingdom. Hence, the denial that the kingdom is presently in existence dethrones Jesus as the King of kings and Lord of lords.

Makes Jesus a failure

A second consequence of premillennialism is that it makes Jesus a failure. When Jesus stood before Pilate, the Roman procurator asked, "So You are a king?" (John 18:37). Jesus replied, "You say correctly that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth." Notice that Jesus said that He came into this world to be a king. If Jesus came for this purpose and was not able to accomplish this, for whatever reason (premillennialists say that He did not become a king because the Jews rejected Him), He was a failure. Hence, premillennialism makes Jesus a failure.

Breaks the promises of God

In Psalms 2, God declared that He knew that the nations would do what they could to thwart the Messiah from accomplishing His purposes for being on this earth. The psalm states, "Why are the nations in an uproar, and the peoples devising a vain thing? The kings of the earth take their stand, and the rulers take counsel together against the Lord and against His Anointed: Let us tear their fetters apart and cast away their cords from us" (Psalms 2:1-3). Yet, God promised that the plotting of the wicked would be unable to keep Him from setting His Anointed as king on His holy hill. "He who sits in the heavens laughs, the Lord scoffs at them. Then He will speak to them in His anger and terrify them in His fury: but as for Me, I have installed My King upon Zion, My holy mountain" (Psalms 2:46). Hence, God prophesied that the plans of the wicked could not keep Him from accomplishing His purposes. But, according to premillennialism, the plans of the wicked were successful in keeping the Lord from making Jesus king over His kingdom. Hence, premillennialism leads to the conclusion that God broke His promises.

Convicts the apostles as being false interpreters of prophecy

Some of the very prophecies which premillennialists interpret as to be fulfilled in the future are quoted by the apostles and said to be presently fulfilled. For example, Paul quoted the second Psalm in Acts 13:33 and stated that it was already fulfilled. Premillennialists deny that it has been fulfilled. The result of premillennialism, therefore, is that it makes false interpreters of prophecy out of men who claimed to be interpreting prophecy under the influence of the Holy Spirit.

Removes Christ from His priesthood

The scriptures describe Jesus as our great High Priest who is presently making intercession for us (Hebrews 4:14). His priesthood is of the order of Melchizedek and not like the Levitical priesthood. When Zechariah foretold the priesthood of Jesus Christ, he said, "Behold, a man whose name is Branch, for He will branch out from where He is; and He will build the temple of the Lord. Yes, it is He who will build the temple of the Lord, and He who will bear the honor and sit and rule on His throne. Thus, He will be a priest on His throne, and the counsel of peace will be between the two offices" (Hebrews 6:12-13). Notice that Zechariah foretold that the priesthood and kingship of the Lord would be contemporaneous. Jesus would be a priest on His throne. Premillennialism, however, denies that Jesus is presently on His throne. The conclusion which logically follows is that He is not exercising the office of a priest if He is not exercising the office of a king because the two go together.

Postpones the last days

In Daniel's prophecy of the establishment of the kingdom, he foretold that the kingdom would be established during the days of the fourth kingdom, namely, the Roman empire (Dan. 2:44). The events of the establishment of the kingdom were to take place in the last days. On the day of Pentecost following the resurrection of Jesus, Peter quoted Joel's prophecy of the "last days" and stated that what happened on that day was the fulfillment of Joel's prophecy of the last days (Acts 2:16-17). Hence, Peter believed that he lived during the "last days." The writer of Hebrews identified the "last days" as the days during which God speaks to man through His Son (1:1-2). Yet, premillennialism states that the last days have not yet come because the kingdom has not yet been established. Hence, it denies the inspired interpretation of Joel's prophecy by postponing the last days.

Provides for days after the "last day"

Jesus stated that the resurrection of man would occur on the "last day;" He said, "No one comes to Me, unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day" (John 6:44). Notice that Jesus identified the day of the resurrection from the dead as the "last day." Yet, premillennialism states that there will be at least 365,000 days after the day of resurrection. At the second coming of Jesus, the dead are to be raised. Then, Jesus is to reign on this earth for one thousand years. Hence, there are to be 365,000 days after the "last day" according to the doctrine of premillennialism.

Alters the nature of the kingdom

Premillennialism significantly alters the nature of the kingdom of God by making the same mistake that the first-century Jews made with reference to its nature. The first-century Jews expected Jesus to establish a physical kingdom in Jerusalem that would conquer all other earthly kingdoms. Jesus repeatedly had to teach them that the kingdom which He planned to establish was of an altogether different nature. Hence, He said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting, that I might not be delivered up to the Jews; but as it is. My kingdom is not of this realm" (John 18:36). Yet premillennialism wants to make Jesus' kingdom of this realm. Again, He said, "The kingdom of God cometh not: with observation: neither shall they say, Lo here! or, le, there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is with you" (Luke 17:20-21). Yet premillennialism believes in the establishment of a kingdom that comes with observation. Premillennialists believe in the establishment of a physical, earthly kingdom. Jesus, however, never wanted to establish that kind of kingdom. He established a spiritual kingdom, the church. Premillennialists pervert the nature of the kingdom.

Contradicts the passages which speak of the kingdom in existence

There are several passages that speak of the kingdom being in existence. Paul stated that the Colossian brethren had been transferred into the kingdom of God's Son (Colossians 1:13-14). John said that he was a partaker in the sufferings of the kingdom (Revelation 1:9). Other passages allude to the kingdom as being in existence as well.

What has always seemed strange to me is that premillennialists teach the necessity of the new birth but deny the results which come from being born again. Jesus said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John 3:3). Yet, premillennialists teach that the born again are not in the kingdom of God. Why would a person hold out the hope of being in the kingdom of God if one was born again and then deny that those who are born again are in the kingdom of God? This makes absolutely no sense.

Confuses Christianity and Judaism

The premillennialists have such a warped view of the kingdom of God that they end up with Christianity intermingled with Judaism. All premillennialists await the re-establishment of the Jewish system of worship and the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem. Read this, Hal Lindsey wrote,

"There remains but one more event to completely set the stage for Israel's part in the last great act of her historical drama. This is to rebuild the ancient Temple of worship upon its old site" (The Late Great Planet Earth, p. 45).

"The Israelis will then be permitted to reinstitute the sacrifice and offering aspect of the law of Moses. This demands that the Temple be rebuilt, because according to the law of Moses, sacrifices can be offered only In the Temple at Jerusalem" (Ibid., p. 145).

This raises some serious questions about the premillennialists' concept of the sacrifice of Christ on the cross, the system of worship which He instituted, and His total ministry. Is the sacrifice of Christ insufficient? If not, why hope for the reinstitution of animal sacrifice? I think that you can see that Christianity and Judaism cannot be intermingled as premillennialism is guilty of doing.

Having rejected the premillennial viewpoint in its totality, I am also rejecting the premillennialist view of the Battle of Armageddon. Yet, the denial that the premillennial explanation of the Battle of Armageddon does not explain what the reference means. Hence, we need to explain the meaning of the Battle of Armageddon.

Its Biblical Significance

"And the sixth angel poured out his bowl upon the great river, the Euphrates; and its water was dried up, that the way might be prepared for the kings from the east. And I saw coming out of the mouth of the dragon and out of the mouth of the beast sad out of the mouth of the false prophet, three unclean spirits like frogs; for they are spirits of demons, performing signs, which go out to the kings of the whole world, to gather them together for the way of the great day of God, the Almighty. (Behold, I am coming like a thief. Blessed is the one who stays awake and keeps his garments, lest he walk about naked and men see his shame.) And they gathered them together to the place which to Hebrew is called Armageddon" (Revelation 16:12-16).

The passage quoted above contains the only mention of the word Armageddon in the Bible. Inasmuch as it is found in the Bible, it does have significance for those of us who are Christians. We cannot be content with only telling the world what the Battle of Armageddon is not; we need to tell the world the true meaning of the term.

The word Armageddon is derived from the Hebrew word har meghiddo which means "mountain of Megiddo." The allusion to Megiddo means very little to those who have little or no knowledge of the history of the Old Testament. Yet, to those who have a good background in Old Testament history, the area of Megiddo has significance for the many battles that were fought there. Deborah and Barak defeated Sisera and his host here (Judges 5:19). Saul and Jonathan fell near here in their battle against the Philistines (I Samuel 31:13). When Josiah went out against Pharoah-Necho, he was slain on the battlefields of Megiddo (II Kings 23:29; II Chronicles 35:22). Hence, John has chosen this battlefield to discuss the great conflict which will occur between Christ and the forces of Satan. The allusion is not so much to a literal, physical, or geographical location as to a great battlefield.

The usage of the word Armageddon is somewhat similar to the modern usage of Waterloo. Although few of us know the location of Waterloo, we have all heard about Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo. Hence, the word "Waterloo" has become symbolical of the place or time of a great defeat. The word "Armageddon" was of similar significance in John's time to those who were familiar with Old Testament history. It referred to the scene of a great conflict, regardless of where that conflict might be fought.

The Context of the Battle of Armageddon

The Battle of Armageddon cannot be understood without consideration of the context in which it is set in the book of Revelation. The book of Revelation was written by the exiled apostle John to the saints of the seven churches of Asia somewhere around 96 A.D. The book concerned itself with the things which were shortly to come to pass (Revelation 1:1-3). No interpretation of the book of Revelation or the Battle of Armageddon can have any significance unless it can be understood so as to have meaning to those first-century saints to whom the book was addressed.

The saints in John's day were in the throes of horrible persecution. The Roman Emperor, in an effort to unify the Empire, demanded that every loyal citizen confess that he was "lord." The Roman Emperor was to be worshiped as divine. Although some Emperors treated this as exaggerated attempts to exalt the Emperor, Domitian delighted in being looked upon as divine and in being so worshiped. The Christian could not conscientiously worship the Emperor as divine; he knew but one Lord, Jesus Christ. To the Christian, such homage was idolatry and utter denial of faith in Christ. To the Romans, the refusal to worship the emperor was a sign of disloyalty to the State and an act of treason. A great conflict was inevitable.

Emperor worship was forced upon the Christians as a test of their loyalty to the State. Those who refused to worship the Emperor were persecuted. The forms of punishment were many. Some were put to death, some were exiled, some were tortured into a confession of the divinity of the emperor, some had their property confiscated, and some received combinations of these measures.

The book of Revelation was written to reassure Christians that God had not forgotten His saints and that the victory would ultimately belong to them. No doubt, some reached the conclusion that God did not care what was happening on the earth below. Yet, John wrote to reassure the Christians of the first century that God would not be defeated by Rome and its evil forces.

Beginning in chapter 12, John, as it were, lifts the curtain so that the Christians who were suffering the many forms of persecution at the hands of the Roman Empire might see what was going on behind the scene. What was happening was nothing less than a struggle between God and Satan. Beginning in chapter twelve, we read of the birth of Christ and Satan's unsuccessful attempts to defeat Him. When Satan saw that he could not defeat the Christ, he vented his anger against the church. Consequently, he turned his forces toward the destruction of the followers of Christ.

The things which Satan used against the disciples of Christ were as follows:

1. The First Beast (Revelation 13:1-10). The first beast represents political governments. The imagery is the composite picture of the four beasts mentioned in Daniel 7 in which text the four different beasts referred to four separate governments. Here the four beasts are put together to refer to political government in general which Satan uses to destroy saints.
2. The Second Beast (Revelation 13:11-18). This beast is identified as a false prophet or false religion. Satan uses false religions to destroy the children of God. There is little doubt that the specific form of false religion which is intended in this passage is the emperor worship to which I have already referred.
3. Babylon the Great, the Great Harlot. This refers to the city of Rome, the capital of the Roman empire.

As the scene unfolds, God and Satan assemble their forces for conflict. Satan gathered all of his forces together against God (Revelation 16:12-16). Then, the Bible tells the outcome of this great battle. Babylon the Great is destroyed (Revelation 16:17-18:24). The two beasts were destroyed (Revelation 19:17-21). And, finally, the Great Dragon, Satan himself, was defeated by God (Revelation 20:7-10). In the Battle of Armageddon, the great conflict between God and Satan, God was altogether victorious.

Hence, the Battle of Armageddon refers to the great conflict which occurs between the hosts of Satan and the hosts of God. Its meaning for those of the first century is quite clear: God will defeat the forces of Satan. Hence. to that saint which was suffering at the hands of Rome, the knowledge that the victory would ultimately belong to God would give him the necessary strength to endure the persecutions which he was suffering, even if they cost him his life. He knew that the ultimate victory belonged to God.

The Battle of Armageddon does not describe some literal, earthly conflict between Russia, Egypt, Europe, and China that might occur in the twentieth century. That would have had absolutely no meaning to the saints in the first century who were suffering at the hands of pagan Rome. This concept of the Battle of Armageddon is part and parcel of premillennialism, a system of interpretation of Bible prophecy which is a system of infidelity.

Rather, the Battle of Armageddon was a symbolical method of revealing God's ultimate victory over Satan. Hence, though Satan may rage and the earthly scene appears as though Satan was in control and God was completely defeated, the Christian knows that the ultimate victory belongs to God. In the conflict, the victor has already been decided. God will defeat Satan and completely destroy him in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone. That being the case, we who are Christians should never take sides with the Loser, Satan; we should always stand with the great Winner, Jesus Christ our Lord, the victor at the Battle of Armageddon.