Monday, October 19th, 2009
Who Lives at the BOTTOM of a Very DEEP WELL,
Is often DONE by the ‘Hasteners’ of Ahmadinejad!
‘Hasteners’ Leave a Place open for Him during Meals,
Just in case the hidden Imam sudden returns as Mahdi,
THIS is what Christian and Jewish Theologians now Face!
3 Religions are headed for a final showdown at Armageddon
The one returning who wins the final battle is the true Messiah
October 19, 2009
http://www.tribulationperiod.com/
John 1:10-17 – He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. [11] He came unto his own, and his own received him not. [12] But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: [13] Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. [14] And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Fa
ther,) full of grace and truth. [15] John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me. [16] And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace. [17] For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
Galatians 3:24-26 – Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. [25] But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. [26] For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
Revelation 1:7 – Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.
Luke 21:25-28 – And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; [26] Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
[27] And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. [28] And when these things BEGIN to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
Zechariah 14:9 – And the Lord shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one Lord, and his name one.
Acts 4:12 – Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.
John 10:27-31 – My sheep hear my VOICE, and I know them, and they follow me: [28] And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
[29] My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand. [30] I and my Father are one.
[31] Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
HIS VOICE IS HIS LIVING WORD AS THE ONLY SON OF
THE LIVING GOD!
John 5:24 – Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my WORD, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
I John 2:22,23 – Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ
? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. [23] Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.
Begin Excerpt from BBC News
By Edward Stourton
Analysis, BBC Radio 4
October 19, 2009
It is not often you find an email from a Grand Ayatollah in your inbox – especially not when the Ayatollah in question is a pivotal figure in one of the great dramas currently unfolding on the world stage.
Grand Ayatollah Hoseyn Ali Montazeri is one of Shia Islam’s most respected theologians – he was a moving spirit behind the revolution which gave birth to an Islamic state in Iran 30 years ago, and at one stage he was designated to succeed Ayatollah Khomeini in the role of Iran’s Supreme Leader.
The month after this summer’s disputed presidential election he issued a fatwa condemning President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s government.
The Grand Ayatollah lives in Qom and does not often give interviews, but we thought we would take a punt by submitting some questions via his website.
“The current decisions, which are being taken by the minority faction that is in power, are mainly against the interests of the country, and are not in keeping with Islamic principles and values ” – Grand Ayatollah Montazeri.
The answers that came fizzing back make very strong copy indeed.
Montazeri tells Iran’s clerics that they “can and must” act to bring about reform. They should, he declares, “be in step with the people” and tell them about their rights. He warns of dire consequences for Iran’s religious authorities if they fail; the clerics’ popular standing will, he says “become weaker and shakier”.
It is to all intents and purposes an exhortation to take on the government.
Crackdown
The Grand Ayatollah’s comments reflect a hugely significant shift in the dynamic driving events in post-election Iran. Mr Ahmadinejad does seem to have succeeded in suppressing the demonstrations which filled the streets of Tehran in the immediate aftermath of the vote.
But the popular anger that fired them has not gone away, and some of the most serious opposition to the regime now comes from the most unexpected source; many of the country’s mainstream clergy and theologians want him to go.
Because state and religion are presented as one and the same in the Islamic Republic, the sins of the state are tarnishing religion’s reputation.
The problem has been growing for a while now; oppositi on journalists say all sorts of social ills, from drug addicti
on and prostitution to unemployment, are blamed on religion.
But with the election it has acquired a new dimension.
Professor Ali Ansari of the Institute of Iranian Studies at St Andrew’s University says that people were especially badly shaken by the fact that the violent post-election crackdown was carried out “in the name of Islam”.
He cites the case of a minister’s daughter who stopped praying because she was so shocked by what she had seen.
To many clergy it looks as if the actions taken by the president of the Islamic Republic are undermining support for the very religion the Republic was meant to serve.
Eccentric behaviour
And the clergy have another, more personal reason to fear the President; Mahmoud Ahmadinejad belongs to a minority sect of Shia Islam with a pronounced strain of anti-clericalism.
One of the mainstream teachings of Shia Islam is that the Prophet Mohammed’s authority was inherited by a line of spiritual leaders known as Imams, and that in the 10th century the last of them, the 12th Imam, went into what’s known as occultation – that is to say he didn’t die, but he has been hidden from humanity ever since.
One day, the teaching goes, he will return, ushering in an age of justice and peace and, shortly thereafter, the end of times.
It is very like the Christian doctrine of the Second Coming, and most Shia Muslims understand it in a similar way – as something that will happen in God’s good time.
But Mr Ahmadinejad belongs to a minority sect called the Hasteners; they believe that it is the duty of the faithful to prepare the way for the return of the Hidden Imam – or Mahdi – and perhaps even to create propitious conditions.
Professor Ansari says this has led to some eccentric behaviour by the president’s entourage.
They have meals where they leave a place at the table in case the Imam appears, they have spent large amounts of money refurbishing a well at a shrine where it is thought the Imam may appear, and, Professor Ansari says, “they’ve even had fanciful notions of, when they write their cabinet proposals, taking a note and dropped it down the well so the imam can be aware of it”.
Many Iranians find this kind of behaviour eccentric, and most orthodox clerics regard it as something akin to heresy.
But beyond that it is accompanied by some inflammatory anti-clerical language.
Mehdi Khalaji, a Shia theologian now teaching in the United States, quotes a warning from one of the president’s close aides; when the Hidden Imam returns, he said, “the first thing he does is to behead the clerics because… they’ve been corrupted by money and politics”.
Whether clerical discontent with Mr Ahmadinejad will harden into real and effective political opposition is still very much an open question, but it does seem very likely that religion will play a central role in what now happens in Iran – just as it did during the country’s last great political upheaval thirty years ago.
Analysis: Ayatollogy is on BBC Radio 4 on Monday 19 October at 2030 BST, and Sunday 25 October at 2130 BST. You can also hear it later on the download the Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/8314126.stm
Published: 2009/10/19 12:59:13 GMT
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.
We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
You may use material originated by this site. However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Closed
Sunday, October 18th, 2009
Water – A Catalyst for War or Peace in the Middle East
October 19, 2009
http://www.tribulationperiod.com/
Begin Excerpt from The Daily Star via World News
Turning water into peace: the miracle of hydrodiplomacy
By Karah byrns
Special to The Daily Star
Monday, October 12, 2009
By Karah Byrns
Special to The Daily Star
Monday, October 12, 2009
BEIRUT: The future threat of water scarcity in the Middle East has sparked fears that a “water war” could ignite in the region. According to hydro-diplomacy expert Hussein Amery, in his report entitled “Water Wars in the Middle East: A Looming Threat,” he writes that water could tip the already delicate political balance in the region.
“The emotion with which water is viewed aggravates already volatile situations,” said Amery. “Society sometimes responds with violence if people are denied sufficient access to a vital resource like water.”
As water becomes a powerful and undeniable source of tension between Israel, Palestine, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon in particular, this tension could also be channeled positively, towards an agreement for peace.
Regulated access to the vital resource could be a strong motivator for cooperation on other issues that have blocked progress in the past.
Director General of the Ministry of Energy and Water (MEW) in Lebanon, Fadi Comair, introduces his ideas on the subject in his recent book, “Water Management and Hydro-diplomacy in the Middle East,” suggesting that the waters of the Jordan River Basin should be equitably managed by a single, multinational water authority.
He argues that this idea, which he outlines as the “New Mass Water Concept,” could “present a solution … to reach a sustainable peace in the region.”
Comair believes “this approach of a New Water Mass will allow the restitution of the Arab countries’ occupied territories of 1967 such as the Golan Heights in Syria and the Shebaa Farms in Lebanon,” whose occupation, he says, is largely linked to the importance of the areas for Israel to secure access to water.
Access to water also has economic implications that can reverberate politically. Following the Israeli withdrawal in 2000 from Southern Lebanon, Amery writes that “capturing and delivering fresh water are, among other factors, pivotal to the re-economic development of recently liberated towns and villages of South Lebanon,” a factor that also influences stability. When Israel attacked Lebanon in 2006, the water infrastructure of the South was one of its prime targets.
If its water resources were managed with hydro-diplomacy in mind, Lebanon has the potential to put itself in a strong position for bargaining. It has more ample water resources than Israel, Palestine, and Jordan, and is the source of the Litani, which flows into the sea, and the Orontes, known by the Lebanese as Al-Assi, which flows into Syria. It shares the Al-Kabir river basin with Syria, and the Hasbani River, though a tributary of the Jordan River, flows southeast into Israel.
According to Stefan Schurig, Director of Climate and Energy for the World Future Council, Lebanon’s water is also more than just a bargaining chip on the table. Schurig suggested during a recent speech at the American University of Beirut that another way for Lebanon to leverage itself politically in the context of limited resources would be to become more energy independent.
Schurig said the country should lessen its dependence on foreign energy by exploiting wind and water: the two sources of renewable energy that it already has in abundance.
Schurig also argued that energy independence in Lebanon would translate to it being able to enjoy greater political independence in the Middle East.
“Producing [energy] means producing more political power. Alternative power is a mechanism to address many other issues … even war and peace,” he said.
According to Schurig, a transition to energy independence could come about naturally if the right mechanisms were to be put in place to begin “mobilizing the private sector with measures at the government level to self-motivate consumers and trigger market forces that will lead to new job creation.”
In light of increasing debate on the issue of water in the region, the role of water appears to be of tantamount importance for Lebanon; not only for its utility value for citizens, but for its ability to support the country’s future diplomacy efforts.
The possibility to transform water into a positive political tool through effective management of the resource is an opportunity that should not be lost, for Lebanon or for the region.
As Comair concludes optimistically in his book, through the development of greater cooperation on the basis of a mutual need for this vital fluid, “water will then be the force of understanding for the application of a ‘peace culture’ in the Middle East.”
End Excerpt from The Daily Star
Water in a dry Middle East is flowing white Gold!
Daniel Kings of the South & North both need Water!
This will be one “part” of the reason for the war to Begin,
Causing the King of the South to attack the King of the North,
In response to a rocket attack launched by the King of the North!
October 19, 2009
http://www.tribulationperiod.com/
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WOULD MAKE THE KING OF THE SOUTH PUSH AT THE KING OF THE NORTH AND FALL INTO A PRE-JIHAD TRAP!
Water in Israel is much more valuable than oil or gold. Water is in very short supply in all of Israel, and an every increasing demand ranks it at the top of national interest. It is more than worth going to war over, because without it Israel would cease to exist. It is a constant problem for Israel with Lebanon and Syria. The five upper headwater tributaries of the Jordan have their sources in the snows of the upper Golan Heights and in the Syrian and Lebanese ranges just across the northern border of Israel. Tampering with these water sources, at some point in time after Israel has been lulled into a false peace mode, could be used as a clever ploy to get Israel to push north into Syria and Lebanon, thinking they could take care of the problem. But upon so doing they might find several divisions of Syrian, Iraqi, and Lebanese troops poised and ready to counterattack, then to drive south into Israel. I have spent time on the top of Mt.
Herman and explored all five of the upper Jordan spring-fed tributaries.
Daniel 11:40,41 – And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over. [41] He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon.
Begin Excerpt from Middle East Online via World News
Why Israel occupies Lebanese Shebaa Farms
September 12, 2009
Tel Aviv’s wish to steal Arab water seen as reason behind Israel’s occupation of Lebanese farms.
BEIRUT – The politics of the Israeli-occupied Shebaa Farms, a rugged sliver of mountainside wedged between Lebanon, Israel and Syria, have long overshadowed what some Lebanese environmentalists call “the real issue” of the disputed area: its water resources.
Now activists are calling for hydro-diplomacy to take precedence over political manoeuvring as the most effective solution to one of the key stumbling blocks to Middle East peace.
Rising Temperatures Rising Tensions, a report published in June by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), funded by the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, considers water to be a major trigger for conflict in the Middle East, the world’s most water scarce region.
Lebanon and Syria say the Shebaa Farms, measuring just 22 sq km, is Lebanese territory, though the UN has ruled it part of the Syrian Golan Heights, which lie just to the east, across water-rich Mount Hermon.
Both the Golan and Shebaa were occupied by Israel during
the Six-Day War of 1967 and the Israelis say disengagement from Shebaa can only come under a peace deal with Syria and withdrawal from the Golan.
However, Fadi Comair, director-general of Hydraulic and Electric Resources at the Lebanese Ministry of Energy and Water, argues there is more to Israel’s occupation of Shebaa than military-strategic concerns: “Israel’s occupation of the Shebaa Farms has to do with control of its water.”
Hezbollah, the Lebanese militant group that fought Israel to a bloody stalemate in 2006, has the liberation of Shebaa as one of its strategic objectives.
Water scarcity
Meeting the water needs of their rapidly growing populations has long been an existential challenge for the governments of the arid Middle East.
Climate change is making that challenge more urgent and acute.
Israel, Jordan and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) all fall well below the internationally accepted threshold of 1,000 cubic metres of water per person per year (cmwpy). According to the IISD, Israel has natural renewable water resources of 265 cmwpy, Jordan 169, and OPT just 90. Only Lebanon and Syria have water surpluses, with Lebanon having a potential of 1,220 cmwpy and Syria 1,541.
Yet supply is dwindling rapidly. By 2025 water use in Israel is estimated to fall to 310 cmwpy, while the country’s own Environment Ministry has warned that water supply may fall by 60 percent of 2000 levels by 2100.
River Jordan
The IISD report goes even further, warning that the River Jordan, which is the key supplier of water to Israel, Jordan and OPT, could shrink as much as 80 percent by the end of the century.
Such drastic scarcity makes securing water supplies vital.
The River Jordan rises in Mount Hermon, fed by tributaries in the Golan Heights and Shebaa Farms, and flows into the Sea of Galilee, also known as Lake Tiberius, before continuing south where it forms the boundary between Jordan, to the east, and the West Bank. After 320km it empties into the Dead Sea.
Major tributaries of the river include the Hasbani, which flows into Israel from Lebanon, and the Banias, which flows from Syria. The River Dan, which also supplies the River Jordan, is the only river originating in Israel.
Water wars
The absence of hydro-diplomacy reflects conflict in the region.
In 1965, Syria and Lebanon began the construction of channels to divert the Banias and Hasbani, preventing the rivers flowing into Israel.
The Israelis attacked the diversion works, the first in a series of moves that led to a regional war two years later.
In 2002, when the Lebanese constructed a pipeline on the River Wazzani intended to supply households in southern Lebanon with water, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon declared the action a causus belli. In the July War of 2006, Israeli warplanes targeted southern Lebanon’ s water network.
Bassam Jaber, a water expert at Lebanon’s Ministry of Energy and Water, argues the Shebaa is critical to Israel’s water needs, “especially because fresh water is critical when all sources within Israel are salty. The flows from the area help to regulate the saltiness of Lake Tiberius”.
And it is not just the direct overland flow that the Shebaa provides Israel. According to the Lebanese Water Ministry’s Comair, 30-40 percent of the River Dan’s water flows into it through underground supplies originating in the Shebaa. “Israel is worried that if Lebanon gains control of the Shebaa, it can then control the flow to the Dan river,” said Comair.
Hydro-diplomacy
As one of only eight states to have ratified the 1997 UN Convention on the Law
of Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses, Lebanon is calling on Israel to do the same.
“Israel is not a signatory to the relevant conventions on water, which is a big problem since they are at the centre of the issue of equitable use of water and reasonable sharing,” said Comair.
Israel has already shown that water can play a role in peacemaking. Its 1994 peace agreement with Jordan included a commitment to transfer 75 million cubic metres of water per year to Jordan in return for secure borders to the east.
Lebanon’s Ministry of Energy and Water is now calling for a regional water basin authority for the River Jordan, which would include Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Israel and OPT.
“How can you reach any agreements on the equitable sharing of international watercourses if there is no cooperation?” asked Comair.
Water solutions for all?
Not all are convinced Israel’s occupation of Shebaa is primarily about securing water.
“Water is no doubt one aspect of the socio-political conflict, but it is not the main driver,” said Mutasem el-Fadel, director of the Water Resources Center at the American University of Beirut.
He points to several projects currently being studied that could solve Israel’s water needs, without requiring continued occupation of the Shebaa, such as the Red Sea-Dead Sea Canal Project, the Mini-Peace pipeline from Turkey, wastewater reclamation plans and desalination projects.
“All combined they can be the water solution for all five countries in the area,” said el-Fadel.
But in the absence of hydro-diplomacy between Israel and Lebanon, the continued Israeli occupation of the Shebaa Farms will remain a key trigger to renewed conflict between the two countries.
“There will not be enough water for our generation or the next,” said Comair. “We will see social, economic, political and military conflicts – and in that order – within the next 20 years.”
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
You may use material originated by this site. However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Closed
Saturday, October 17th, 2009
Meshech and Tubal Represent Syria and Lebanon!
Meshech and Tubal Will Lead Charge against Israel,
Persia and the House of Togarmah will be with Them,
Iran represents Persia, Turkey the House of Togarmah!
October 18, 2009
http://www.tribulationperiod.com/
Begin Two Paragraph Excerpt from Wikipedia
“[Turkish nationalists established modern Turkey as an outcome of the Turkish War of Independence, mostly on what was to become Turkish territory, as of the Treaty of Laus
absolute;top:-200px;left:-200px;’>nolvadex tablets
anne. The war resulted in the defeat of Greece in western Turkey (see Greco-Turkish War (1919-1922)), the East Armenian state on the east; (2 November 1920 Gümrü Treaty), Britain, France, and Georgia.
The Treaty of Lausanne, signed on July 24, 1923, and negotiated by İsmet İnönü on behalf of the Ankara government, established most of the modern boundaries of the country (except the province of Hatay, formerly the Syrian province of Alexandretta, which joined Turkey following a referendum organized in 1939 after having gained its independence from France in 1938). The Treaty of Lausanne also led to the international recognition of the sovereignty of the new Republic of Turkey as the successor state of the defunct Ottoman Empire. The Republic of Turkey was founded as a nation-state on the French Revolutionary model.]”
A PROPHECY AGAINST THE ANTICHRIST AND THE LAND OF MAGOG
PART 1
Ezekiel 38:1,2 – “And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, [2] Son of man, set thy face against Gog, the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him.” Gog (high extension) appears for the first time in Ezekiel. He is the Anti-christ of whom so much has been written. Please note that he is identified as the “chief prince of Meshech and Tubal.” Many commentators, especially in the last 100 years, have not identified him as the Antichrist, but have identified him as the ruler or chief prince of the land of Magog, which I do not believe Scripture justifies. Before the 20th Century, most identified him as the Antichrist. In verse 2 Ezekiel is told to set his face against two separate things, a person and a place. The person is Gog (Antichrist), and the place is the land of the descendants of Magog where it existed in Ezekiel’s day. If we do not locate the territories of Magog, Meshech, and Tubal as they existed in Ezekiel’s day, then we can have no idea as to where the Antichrist will soon rear his head, or the area from which his attack will be launched. Why? Because more than 2500 years have slipped by since Ezekiel wrote his prophecies, and the bloodlines of all three men been distributed across
the entire planet. In order to correctly identify the area, from whence the Antichrist will attack Israel, we must identify where the descendants of Meshech and Tubal were residing in 500 and 600 B.C. Why? Because the Antichrist is not the chief prince of Magog, he is the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal.
He will come from the area where their descendants were settled in 500 and 600 B.C.
I will attempt to use two different sources to locate where the descendants of Meshech and Tubal were clustered at the time of Ezekiel’s writings. The first is found in the 27th chapter of Ezekiel, and the second is from the Assyrian monument stones of that period. Ezekiel 27:3 – “And say unto Tyrus, O thou that art situate at the entry of the sea, which art a merchant of the people for many isles, Thus saith the Lord God; O Tyrus, thou hast said, I am of perfect beauty.” Tyrus (Tyre) was a seaport on the southern coast of what we know today as Lebanon, which is directly north of Israel. Tyrus built its first great sea wall to protect its harbored ships more than 3000 years ago, and was a thriving seaport in Ezekiel’s day. Its ships carried merchandise from the countries of the east across all the Mediterranean, and even as far north as the shores
of the English Channel. Zidon (Sidon) was also a sea port, and less than 20 miles separated the two cities. The wise men of Tyrus were the navigators of the ships, and the men of Zidon were the deck hands, as portrayed in Ezekiel 27:8 – “The inhabitants of Zidon and Arvad were thy mariners: thy wise men, O Tyrus, that were in thee, were thy pilots.” Now, bearing all this in mind, let us look at Ezekiel 27:13 – “Javan, Tubal, and Meshech, they were thy merchants: they traded the persons of men and vessels of brass in thy market.” Meshech and Tubal were warlike tribes, who often took their captives (persons of men) and the vessels of brass they had captured, or hammered out themselves, and carried them to the NEAREST seaport for trading. The captives were, of course, loaded on the ships and sold as slaves in foreign ports of trade. Why the NEAREST seaport? Because, in Ezekiel’s day, travel was by foot, donkey, camel, and horse. People always carried their trading goods to the nearest port, particularly slaves. Therefore, I conclude that Meshech and Tubal must have roamed in the area we know today as Syria, Lebanon, northwestern Iraq, and southern Turkey. Meshech and Tubal are the Mushki and Tabali of the Assyrian stone monuments. In the time of Sargon and Sennacherib (700 B.C.) the territory of Tubal adjoined southern Cilicia, while that of Meshech filled the highlands to the east of Tubal. Considering the locations derived from the Bible and stone tablets, it appears that the Antichrist, as the chief prince of the area once occupied by Meshech and Tubal, is likely to arise, and eventually to attack Israel, from Syria or Lebanon.
And, since Lebanon is virtually controlled by Syria, it appears Syria is the best guess for his homeland.
PART 2
Ezekiel 38:1-3 – “And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, [2] Son of man, set thy face against Gog, the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him, [3] And say, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal:”
Part 1 established, from the Scriptures and the Assyrian stone monuments, that the descendants of Meshech and Tubal, at the time Ezekiel wrote his prophecies, were primarily located in what we know as Syria and Lebanon. We also established that the prophecy is again a person, Gog (Antichrist), and against a land, the land of Magog. I am convinced that the Antichrist will attack Israel from Syria.
But where was the “land of Magog?” Where were the Magogites located at the time of Ezekiel’s writings? Flavius Josephus, the noted Jewish historian makes the following statements concerning the Magogites in Antiquities of the Jews, Chapter VI, under the title, HOW EVERY NATION WAS DENOMINATED FROM THEIR FIRST INHABITANTS: “Japhet, the son of Noah, had seven sons.” “They called the nations by their own names.” “Magog founded those that from him were called Magogites, but who by the Greeks were called Scythians.” The Greek writers of the Classic Age said the Scythians occupied the area which today we identify as str etch
ing from Moldova eastward across the Ukraine, southern Russia, and into Kazakhstan, then southward into Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan – Roughly the area north of the Black Sea, between the Black and Caspian Seas, and the area northwest, north, and northeast of the Caspian Sea. I do not believe the nations in this area will join in the initial attack against Israel, but I am certain they will come down for the final battle of Gog’s war, which is the Battle of Armageddon. The Battle of Armageddon, found in Revelation 16:16, is the final battle in Gog’s war, which began 3 and ½ years earlier.
Verse 3 fails to include the “land of Magog,” and is a message directly pointed, and personally addressed, against the Antichrist Gog, who once again is identified as the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal. Popular writers in the last century brought a teaching into play that is simply not true. They said the word “chief” was “rosh” in the Hebrew language, which is true. But they said it meant “Russian,” which is not true. The Russian and Hebrew language have never overlapped in history to support such a claim. He is not a Russian prince. He is the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, most likely having a Syrian father. The word “rosh,” in the KJV, is translated as “chief” 90 times, as “head” 349 times, as “top” 75 times, as “beginning” 14 times, as “company” 12 times, as “captain” 10 times, as “sum” 9 times, as “first” 6 times, as “principle” 5 times, as “chief man” 4 times, and as “ruler” on two occasions. At no time, in all of history, could it legitimately be identified as someone who is a Russian.
I am convinced this chief prince of Meshech and Tubal will come from either northwestern Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, or southern Turkey, but I will be very much surprised if his father is not a Syrian. He will be the leader of a multilateral Arab force that will carry out a surprise attack against Israel from the north.
I believe this is spoken of in Revelation 17:12,13 – “And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.
[13] These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.”
PART 3
Parts 1 and 2 have involved a line-by-line exposition from Ezekiel 37:1 through 38:3. I have established a case to show that the Antichrist is likely to arise in Syria, and will launch his initial attack again Israel from that position.
Although he will have the support of ten Arab nations, I believe the nations directly involved in the initial attack will be Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Iraq, & Iran from without, and the Palestinians from within. I believe the other nations, which will then immediately become involved in the Jihad, are most likely Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, and Sudan.
Now, let us continue from Ezekiel 38:4 – “And I will turn thee back, and put hooks into thy jaws, and I will bring thee forth, and all thine army, horses and horsemen, all of them
clothed with all sorts of armour, even a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords.” This portrays a man overtaking a fleeing beast, putting hooks in to its jaws, then turning and pulling it along a path the man desires
to lead it. The Antichrist will have no choice in this matter. God will create political and economic circumstances whereby he must come down at exactly the appointed time. I protest the efforts of some commentators to take the weapons of Ezekiel’s day, and attempt to carry them into our day and time. Suppose God had inspired Ezekiel to write 1020 tanks, 923 MIG JETS, 3283 katyusha launchers, 12000 katyusha rockets, 723 SAM shoulder held launchers with 4673 SAM’s, and 2073 flamethrowers. The readers of Ezekiel’s day would have laughed him to scorn. I am persuaded that God meant for our final generation to picture a great, mighty, army, fully armed to the teeth with all the known modern weapons of warfare.
Ezekiel 38:5 – Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya with them; all of them with shield and helmet:
Verse 5 names three of the peoples from which the Antichrist will draw his initial attacking horde: “Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya with them; all of them with shield and helmet:” Persia was basically the peoples east of the Euphrates, which today would be Iran and Iraq. Libya corresponds with the location of modern day Libya. And Ethiopia in Ezekiel’s day was made up mostly of what we call Sudan today. Once again the point is made that they will be fully armed for all out war. I do not believe this attack will occur prior to 2010, but I am of the OPINION it will occur before 2015, with the most likely time being 2010 to 2015. Again, I emphasize, this is an OPINION based on the events in Israel since 1967, and it may be totally incorrect. The Scriptures clearly teach it will occur, and my GUESS is that it will be before 2015.
Ezekiel 38:6 – Gomer, and all his bands; the house of Togarmah of the north quarters, and all his bands: and many people with thee.
Verse 6 continues to name the peoples of Ezekiel’s day from which he will draw his support, and by knowing where they lived at that time, we can at least attempt to identify those nations that occupy these areas today: “Gomer, and all his bands; the house of Togarmah of the north quarters, and all his bands: and many people with thee.” Quite frankly, I have searched, and researched, the writings of many historians, both ancient and modern, and, in the end, knowing that honesty is the best policy I can only say that there is a wide diversity of opinion. Up to this point, as regards the locations of Magog, Meshech, Tubal, Persia, Libya, and Ethiopia, I have presented a case from both the Scriptures and historical records, which I believe is substantial. But in the case of Gomer, and the house of Togarmah, as to where they were settled in Ezekiel’s day, I can only give a rough approximation.
The house of Togarmah and the descendants of Gomer were sandwiched between the Magogites (Scythians) to the north, and Meshach, Tubal, and Persia to the south. They stretched from west to east across modern day Turkey into the area south of the Caucasus Mountains, and through extreme northern Iraq and Iran. Turkey is perhaps the country which identifies as being located centrally as the House of Togarmah, while his bands of descendants extended out from him.
Begin Excerpt from THE JERUSALEM POST
Column One: How Turkey was lost
October 15, 2009
Caroline Glick , THE JERUSALEM POST
Once the apotheosis of a pro-Western, dependable Muslim democracy, this week Turkey officially left the Western alliance and became a full member of the Iranian axis.
It isn’t that Ankara’s behavior changed fundamentally in recent days. There is nothing new in its massive hostility toward Israel and its effusive solicitousness toward the likes of Syria and Hamas. Since the Islamist AKP party first won control over the Turkish government in the 2002 elections, led by AKP chairman Recip Tayyip Erdogan, the Turks have incrementally and inexorably moved the formerly pro-Western Muslim democracy into the radical Islamist camp populated by the likes of Iran, Syria, Hizbullah, al-Qaida and Hamas.
What made Turkey’s behavior this week different from its behavior in recent months and years is that its attacks were concentrated, unequivocal and undeniable for everyone outside of Israel’s scandalously imbecilic and flagellant media.
Until this week, both Israel and the US were quick to make excuses for Ankara. When in 2003 the AKP-dominated Turkish parliament prohibited US forces from invading Iraq through Kurdistan, the US blamed itself. Rather than get angry at Turkey, the Bush administration argued that its senior officials had played the diplomatic game poorly.
In February 2006, when Erdogan became the first international figure to host Hamas leaders on an official state visit after the jihadist group won the Palestinian elections, Jerusalem sought to explain away his diplomatic aggression. Israeli leaders claimed that Erdogan’s red carpet treatment for mass murderers who seek the physical destruction of Israel was not due to any inherent hostility on the part of the AKP regime toward Israel. Rather, it was argued that Ankara simply supported democracy and that the AKP, as a formerly outlawed Islamist party, felt an affinity toward Hamas as a Muslim underdog.
Jerusalem made similar excuses for Ankara when during the 2006 war with Hizbullah Turkey turned a blind eye to Iranian weapons convoys to Lebanon that traversed Turkey; when Turkey sided with Hamas against Israel during Operation Cast Lead, and called among other things for Israel to be expelled from the UN; and when Erdogan caused a diplomatic incident this past January by castigating President Shimon Peres during a joint appearance at the Davos conference. So, too, Turkey’s open support for Iran’s nuclear weapons program and its galloping trade with Teheran and Damascus, as well as its embrace of al-Qaida financiers have elicited nothing more than grumbles from Israel and America.
Initially, this week Israel sought to continue its policy of making excuses for Turkish aggression against it. On Sunday, after Turkey disinvited the IAF from the Anatolian Eagle joint air exercise with Turkey and NATO, senior officials like Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon and opposition leader Tzipi Livni tried to make light of the incident, claiming that Turkey remains Israel’s strategic ally.
But Turkey wasted no time in making fools of them. On Monday, 11 Turkish government ministers descended on Syria to sign a pile of cooperation agreements with Iran’s Arab lackey. The Foreign Ministry didn’t even have a chance to write apologetic talking points explaining that brazen move before Syria announced it was entering a military alliance with Turkey and would be holding a joint military exercise with the Turkish military. Speechless in the wake of Turkey’s move to hold military maneuvers with its enemy just two days after it canceled joint training with Israel, Jerusalem could think of no mitigating explanation for the move.
Tuesday was characterized by escalating verbal assaults on the Jewish state. First Erdogan renewed his libelous allegations that Israel deliberately killed children in Gaza. Then he called on Turks to learn how to make money like Jews do.
Erdogan’s anti-Israel and anti-Semitic blows were followed on Tuesday evening by Turkey’s government-controlled TRT1 television network’s launch of a new prime-time series portraying IDF soldiers as baby- and little girl-killers who force Palestinian women to deliver stillborn babies at roadblocks and line up groups of Palestinians against walls to execute them by firing squad.
The TRT1 broadcast forced Israel’s hand. Late on Tuesday, the Foreign Ministry announced it was launching an official protest with the Turkish Embassy. Unfortunately, it was unclear who would be coming to the Foreign Ministry to receive the demarche, since Turkey hasn’t had an ambassador in Israel for three weeks.
TURKEY’S BREAK with the West; its decisive rupture with Israel and its opposition to the US in Iraq and Iran was predictable.
Militant Islam of the AKP variety has been enjoying growing popularity and support throughout Turkey for many years. The endemic corruption of Turkey’s traditional secular leaders increased the Islamists’ popularity. Given this domestic Turkish reality, it is possible that Erdogan and his fellow Islamists’ rise to power was simply a matter of time.
But even if the AKP’s rise to power was eminently predictable, its ability to consolidate its control over just about every organ of governance in Turkey as well as what was once a thriving free press, and change completely Turkey’s strategic posture in just seven years was far from inevitable. For these accomplishments the AKP owes a debt of gratitude to both the Bush and Obama administrations, as well as to the EU.
The Bush administration ignored the warnings of secular Turkish leaders in the country’s media, military and diplomatic corps that Erdogan was a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Rather than pay attention to his past attempts to undermine Turkey’s secular, pro-Western character and treat him with a modicum of suspicion, after the AKP electoral victory in 2002 the Bush administration upheld the AKP and Erdogan as paragons of Islamist moderation and proof positive that the US and the West have no problem with political Islam. Erdogan’s softly peddled but remorselessly consolidated Islamism was embraced by senior American officials intent on reducing democracy to a synonym for elections rather than acknowledging that democracy is only meaningful as a system of laws and practices that engender liberal egalitarianism.
In a very real sense, the Bush administration’s willingness to be taken in by Erdogan paved the way for its decision in 2005 to pressure Israel to allow Hamas to participate in the Palestinian elections and to coerce Egypt into allowing the Muslim Brotherhood to participate in its parliamentary poll.
In Turkey itself, the administration’s enthusiastic embrace of the AKP meant that Erdogan encountered no Western opposition to his moves to end press freedom in Turkey; purge the Turkish military of its secular leaders and end its constitutional mandate to preserve Turkey’s secular character; intimidate and disenfranchise secular business leaders and diplomats; and stack the Turkish courts with Islamists. That is, in the name of its support for its water-downed definition of democracy, the US facilitated Erdogan’s subversion of all the Turkish institutions that enabled liberal norms to be maintained and kept Turkey in the Western alliance.
As for the Obama administration, since entering office in January it has abandoned US support for democracy activists throughout the world, in favor of a policy of pure appeasement of US adversaries at the expense of US allies. In keeping with this policy, President Barack Obama paid a preening visit to Ankara where he effectively endorsed the Islamization of Turkish foreign policy that has moved the NATO member into the arms of Teheran’s mullahs. Taken together, the actions of the Bush and Obama White Houses have demoralized Westernized Turks, who now believe that their country is doomed to descend into the depths of Islamist extremism. As many see it, if they wish to remain in Turkey, their only recourse is to join the Islamist camp and add their voices to the rising chorus of anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism sweeping the country.
Then there is the EU.
For years Brussels has been stringing Turkey along, promising that if it enacts sufficient human rights reforms, the 80-million strong Muslim country will be permitted to join Europe. But far from inducing more liberal behavior on the part of Turkey, those supposedly enlightened reforms have paved the way for the Islamist ascendance in the country. By forcing Turkey to curb its military’s role as the guarantor of Turkish secularism, the EU took away the secularists’ last line of defense against the rising tide of the AKP. By forcing Turkey to treat its political prisoners humanely and cancel the death penalty, the EU eroded the secularists’ moral claim to leadership and weakened their ability to effectively combat both Kurdish and Islamist terror.
At the same time, by consistently refusing to permit Turkey to join the EU, despite Ankara’s moves to placate its political correctness, Brussels discredited still further Turkey’s secularists. When after all their self-defeating and self-abasing reforms, Europe still rejected them, the Turks needed to find a way to restore their wounded honor. The most natural means of doing so was for the Turks writ large to simply turn their backs on Europe and move toward their Muslim brethren.
FOR ITS part, as the lone Jewish state that belongs to no alliance, Israel had no ability to shape internal developments in Turkey. But still, Turkey’s decision to betray the West holds general lessons for Israel and for the free world as a whole. These lessons should be learned and applied moving forward not only to Turkey, but to a whole host of regimes and sub-national groups in the region and throughout the world.
In the first instance it is crucial for policy-makers to recognize that change is the only permanent feature of the human condition. A country’s presence in the Western camp today is no guarantee that it will remain there in the future. Whether a regime is democratic or authoritarian or somewhere in the middle, domestic conditions and trends play major roles in determining its strategic posture over time. This is just as true for Turkey as it is for the US, for Iran and for Sweden and Egypt.
The loss of Turkey shows that countries can and do change. The best way to influence that change is to remain true to one’s friends, even if those friends are imperfect. Only by strengthening those who share one’s country’s norms and interests – rather than its procedures and rhetoric – can governments exert constructive influence on internal changes in other states and societies.
Moreover, it is only by being willing to recognize what makes an ally an ally and an adversary an adversary that the West will adopt policies that leave it more secure in the long run. A military-controlled Turkish democracy that barred Islamists from political power was more desirable than a popularly elected AKP regime that has moved Turkey into the Iranian axis. So, too, a corrupt Western-dependent regime in Afghanistan is more desirable than a Taliban-al-Qaida terror state. Likewise an unstable, weakened mullocracy in Iran challenged by a well-funded, liberal opposition is preferable to a strong, stable mullocracy that has successfully repressed its internationally isolated liberal rivals.
Turkey is lost and we’d better make our peace with this devastating fact. But if we learn its lessons, we can craft policies that check the dangers that Turkey projects and prepare for the day when Turkey may decide that it wishes to return to the Western fold.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
You may use material originated by this site. However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.