Truth Magazine

By Mark Mayberry

The word “Armageddon” appears only in Revelation 16:16. It is described as the rallying-place of the kings of the whole world who, led by the unclean spirits issuing from the mouth of the dragon, the beast and the false prophet, assemble there for “the war of the great day of God, the Almighty. ” The battle of Armageddon is anticipated in Revelation 16:13-16 but is not fought until Revelation 19:11-21.

The Battle of Armageddon is the source of much sensational speculation. The far-fetched views and misconceptions which people have on this subject are truly amazing to consider. Much of the problem lies with the advocates of the false system of Premillennialism. They teach that a universal war will soon take place among the nations of the world, and the final, catastrophic battle of that war will occur on the plains of Megiddo. The battle described in Revelation is viewed literally. It will be a bloody holocaust such as the world has never known. It is argued that conflicts are now developing that will lead to Armageddon. It supposedly will take place after the 7 years of tribulation, and just before the second advent of Christ. How does their teaching harmonize with the Scriptures?

Armageddon Defined

The word Armageddon is derived from the Hebrew Har-Magedon, which means the “Mountain of Megiddo.” The city of Megiddo lay in north central Palestine. It was strategically located on the southern rim of the Plain of Jezreel. This valley, also known as the Plain of Esdraelon, was some 20 miles long by 6 miles wide. A major highway linking Egypt and Mesopotamia went through this area. Because of its location, Megiddo became an important military outpost. It is often described in the Bible as a military stronghold (Josh. 12:2 1; 17:11; Jdg. 1:27; 5:19; 2 Kgs. 9:27; 23:29; etc.)

Actually, there was no literal mountain named “Megiddo.” The reference is either to the mountains that were near the town of Megiddo, or possibly to the large mound of the city itself. “The fact that the tell of Megiddo was about 70 feet high in John’s day, and was in the vicinity of Carmel Range, justifies the use of Heb. har, used loosely in the Old Testament for ‘hill’ and ‘hill country’ (BDB, p. 249; cf. Josh. 10:40; 11:16, RSV)” (New Bible Dictionary, s.v. “HarMagedon”).

The Symbolism of Names and Places

A place can become symbolic because of some historical event with which it is associated. For example, all are familiar with the saying, “He met his Waterloo!” Waterloo was a small town in central Belgium where Napoleon was finally defeated in 1815. The expression has come to represent a disastrous defeat.

Consider the words “Remember the Alamo!” In that battle, a small group of men stood bravely against impossible odds. That small mission in San Antonio represents the spirit of courage and sacrifice, and is a proud part of the heritage of Texas.

So it is with the plain of Megiddo or “Armageddon.” It was the scene of so many decisive battles, that it came to stand for battle itself. “These low hills around Megiddo, with their outlook over the plain of Esdraelon, have witnessed perhaps a greater number of bloody encounters than have ever stained a like area of the world’s surface” (ISBE, s.v. “Har-Magedon”).

Megiddo had been the scene of never-to-be forgotten battles. It was famous for two great victories. Here Deborah and Barak overthrew Sisera and the army of the Canaanites (Jdg. 4:15; 5:19-21). Against overwhelming odds, Gideon and his 300 here defeated the Midianites (Jdg. 6-7). It was famous for two great disasters. Here wicked King Saul, who had been rejected by God, was defeated by the Philistines (1 Sam. 31). Later, Josiah was killed here when he tried to prevent Pharaoh Necho of Egypt from going to the aid of Assyria (2 Kgs. 23:29-30; 2 Chron. 35:22). To the Jewish mind, Megiddo was a place of great slaughter and represented God’s terrible judgment upon the wicked. Thus Armageddon became a poetic expression for terrible and decisive conflict.

Its Significance In the Book of Revelation

What is the message of Revelation when it speaks of the battle of Armageddon? This book was written during a time of severe and widespread persecution. The Christian movement appeared to be on the brink of extinction. This was an hour of desperate need. John wrote in order to reassure disciples that the forces of evil would be completely overthrown and Christianity would triumph victoriously. The Book of Revelation is a message of victory. The Greek word nikao – translated “overcome,” isconquer,” or “victory” – is found 28 times in the New Testament, and 17 of these are in Revelation.

John wrote concerning things that would “shortly come to pass.” Those who take a futuristic and literal interpretation of Revelation fail to grasp the true message of the book. No interpretation of the book as a whole or this battle in particular can have any significance unless it has application to those first century saints to whom the book was addressed.

Revelation is an apocalyptic book, filled with signs, visions, and highly symbolic language. Any interpretation of this book that seeks to literalize its images is doomed to absolute failure. This is the cardinal sin of the Premillennialism. Those who would interpret Armageddon literally are very selective in their approach. The context speaks of three frogs, a great red dragon, a sea beast, and an earth beast. If one expects a literal battle, he should expect the army to be headed bfthree frogs. Both figures are symbolic; neither is literal. There is no reason for making one literal and the other symbolic. If we make the battle literal, why not the other symbols as well?

The context speaks of God pouring out his wrath upon the evil forces that opposed the early church. Even though all the forces of evil be gathered together as one in their conflict against God, they will be overwhelmed by his decisive and unrelenting judgment. Using the figure of Armageddon, the apostle John is not referring to any particular locality. Ultimately, Armageddon cannot be located on the maps of the earth; its geographical location is unimportant.

In the Book of Revelation, the battle of Armageddon represents the decisive conflict between good and evil. It symbolizes occasions when righteousness and evil are engaged in deadly combat. However strong the forces of evil may appear, and however hopeless therighteous may seem, God will ultimately win the victory!

How comforting this message must have been to those early Christians who were suffering under the heavy hand of the evil Roman empire. The whole thrust of the Apocalypse is to assure the saints of this victory, and to exhort them to avoid compromising with error. Rome was the evil force at that time, but the principle is timeless. God and his cause will be victorious in the end!

Let us never forget that we are at war with Satan and his forces (Eph. 6:11-17; 1 Pet. 5:8-9). We must earnestly contend for the faith (1 Tim. 6:12; Jude 3). The battle will be fierce, but we have the assurance that victory is ours. Ultimately, spiritual evil will be overthrown by the great power of the Almighty God (1 Jn. 5:4; Rev. 20:10-15).

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 22, pp. 675-676
November 17, 1988

By Edward O. Bragwell, Sr.

Good brethren can be a source of joy, encouragement, and wholesome pride. Paul wrote to the Thessalonians (2 Thess. 1:3-4): “We are bound to thank God always for you, because your faith grows exceedingly, and the love of every one of you all abounds toward each other, so that we ourselves boast of you among the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that you endure. (all emphasis mine, EOB).

Brethren can also disappoint us. We must not let this discourage and/or embitter us to the detriment of our service to the Master. When conscientious Christians are engaged in an intense struggle to guard and sometimes to restore the moral and doctrinal purity of the church, it is awfully discouraging to have influential brethren say and do things that adversely affect this work – especial ly brethren whom we personally know, love and appreciate.

Maybe we learn that a preacher, an elder, or other teacher, known and respected for years by us for his strong stand on moral issues has in fact been secretly practicing immorality for years. Or, a brother whose biblical scholarship has benefitted us greatly proves to have a “blind spot” on some vital truth. Or, we see brethren, who ought to know better, openly compromising with digressive brethren – at the very time we are righting tooth and toenail to curb the influence of the digression on those not yet grounded in the faith. Or we may work for weeks to convince people from the community to attend a gospel meeting to study with us. They accept our invitation but half of us have left town that week. Any or all of this is almost enough to make one want to throw in the towel.

As we find ourselves in this position maybe Paul’s message to the young preacher Timothy would do us good (read 2 Tim. 2:14-21). A summary of the message would be: “Don’t let brethren’s misbehavior throw you.”

Paul knew how discouraging brethren could be at times. Some had criticized (judged) him when he least deserved it (1 Cor. 4:3-5). Some had caused him a great amount of anxiety (2 Cor. 7:5-8; 11:28). Some had loved him less when he loved them more (2 Cor. 12:14-15). Some had shocked him by so quickly turning away from the truth to error (Gal. 1:6). Some had forsaken him when he could have used their moral support the most (2 Tim. 4:10,16).

Young Timothy was now learning how disappointing brethren can be. Two brethren, prominent enough for Paul to mention by name, were spreading a cancerous message among the brethren (vv. 17, 18). Some were being taken in by their influence (y. 18). Still others were in danger of being overthrown, so Paul urges Timothy “remind them of these things” to counter this error (v. 14).

Paul then reminds Timothy, beginning with verse 19, that, in spite of the disheartening demeanor of some of his brethren, basic facts were still true. As we struggle to do right and are discouraged by brethren’s unrighteousness, let us also remember that “nevertheless. . . “:

1. The foundation of God still stands solid (y. 19). The faith of some may have been overthrown, “Nevertheless the solid foundation of God stands.” Brethren may have feet of clay, but the foundation of God is still a solid rock. The revelation of God, through the apostles and prophets (Eph. 2:19-3:7), is still true. The gospel plan of salvation is still valid. The pattern for the worship, work and organization of the church remains unchanged. The purpose and mission of the church have not been overthrown. The verses that teach the pure and godly standard of living are still in the Book. The promises of God are still sure. It matters not how brethren may distort these things by their practice and pervert them by their teaching, they are still in the Book.

2. The seal of God is still unbroken (vv. 19,20). The Lord still knows those who are his (cf. John 10:27,28). He still stands by those who “depart from iniquity.”

3. The house of God is still great (v. 20). It is great in spite of the dishonorable vessels in it (cf. 1 Cor. 3:11-14). One can find all the evils of society among our own brethren. All the rotten attitudes of society are among those claiming to be Christians. All the low down meanness of our society characterizes some members of the church. There are brethren who will lie, cheat, steal, curse, fornicate, etc. on the par with any worldling. “Outsiders” do not have a monopoly on spiritual ignorance and religious prejudice.

Nevertheless, God’s house is still great because of the honorable vessels in it – the “Sold and silver.” These, like healthy organs, receive little of our attention because they demand none. They go about daily doing what they are supposed to do, often taken for granted, but seldom complaining. They just do their work and do it well. Like humming, they are seldom noticed unless one just stops and thinks about what is really keeping the vehicle moving ahead. Unless the motor develops a knock, we tend to take it for granted. Like precious metal, tried and proven by fire, these will be there when we need them. As we read the reams written and hear the multitude of words spoken about problems from within, let us not forget that for each one demanding attention by his misconduct there are hundreds, who may or may not be well known, who practice and teach the truth and uphold the hands of the faithful. Because of them, with their faith in God and his word, the house of God will remain great.

4. The salvation of God is still personal (v. 21). “Therefore if anyone cleanses himself from the latter, he will be a vessel for honor.” “Be diligent to present yourself approved to God” (V. 15, emphasis, in these verses, mine – EOB). Let me be concerned with my purity, even when my other brethren are impure. Let me be concerned with my duty, even when the rest of the church is negligent. Let me be more concerned with my doing than with what we are doing or not doing.

Let me be concerned with my part of a work, realizing that I am not responsible for all parts. In the work of evangelism and edification, let me be busy planting and watering, leaving the increase to God (1 Cor. 3:3). Let me sow the seed faithfully, even if some do not fall on good and honest hearts. Let this joint supply its part (Eph. 4:16), even if the other parts become disjointed. Let me realize that in the final analysis God judges me as a person, not us as a people. I can be saved even if my work (the recipients of my “planting and watering”) is burned (I Cor. 3:14,15). There were a few even in Sardis (a dead church)”Who had not defiled their garments (Rev. 3:3,4).

Granted, there are a lot of things among brethren that are not right. There is much corrective work to be done. There is much to discourage us if we let it. But, we can be faithful – remembering that the Lord is faithful. When all forsook Paul, he said, “But the Lord stood with me” (2 Tim. 4:17), His foundation is stiff solid, his seal still unbroken, his house still great and his salvation is still available to each of us – even if all others rejecting and are lost.

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 22, pp. 673, 695
November 17, 1988

By R.J. Evans

Suppose you knew that you were going to die shortly due to some circumstance beyond your control. What would you do? If this were the case, many people, no doubt, would begin making great changes in their present course of life. Knowing and realizing that time is running short, the true values of life would be easily recognized.

The apostle Paul is an example of one who was in a circumstance where he knew death was imminent. He wrote to Timothy: “For I am already being offered, and the time of my departure is come. I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith: henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge shall give to me at that day. and not to me only, but also to all them that have loved his appearing” (2 Tim. 4:6-8). If you knew you were going to die tomorrow, could you confidently declare today with Paul, “I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith”?

A good friend of mine and fellow-Christian, from Plant City, Florida, gave me a copy of a letter that was written by one of his ancestors during the Civil War. It was written by William O. Tafs to his mother while he was in a camp near Chattanooga, Tennessee, dated November 13, 1863. 1 quote a small portion of the letter:

Be it a pleasure to me to see everybody in the world walking in answer to God, whether I was one of the number or not. Nothing pleases me better than to see or hear of my friends seeking the way to heaven. Mother, you don’t know how much satisfaction it would be to me to be at home with my dear brothers and sisters and go with you all to church. Oh, I think it would be the greatest satisfaction to me of anything in the world, but alas, many miles apart we are, probably never to meet again in this troublesome world. I hope we may meet in Heaven that’s free from sin and sorrow.

These touching words give evidence of the fact that this lonely soldier knew and understood the true values of life. If we who are Christians were in a similar circumstance, would there not be certain things we would clearly realize and seek to accomplish? Such as:

1. We would realize that life is but just “a vapor that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away” (Jas. 4:14).

2. We would go to our loved-ones and friends and express our love for their souls and attempt to teach them the gospel of Christ (Matt. 28:19-20; Mk. 16:15-16; Acts 8:4).

3. We would not use some of the petty excuses that are sometimes given for not attending the assemblies of the saints. We would easily see that the Lord and his cause is much more important than TV programs, ball games, etc. (Matt. 6:33; Heb. 10:25).

4. We would not find it hard to take time to approach the throne of God in prayer, asking him to forgive us of our sins and giving him thanks for all the many blessings he has so bountifully supplied (Phil. 4:6; 1 Thess. 5:17).

5. There might be some to whom we would go to correct some wrong, or maybe just to give them a few kind words of encouragement (Matt. 18:15-17; Gal. 6:1-2; 1 Thess. 2:11; Heb. 10:24-25).

6. We would want to go to others and express our gratitude and appreciation for all the many kind and helpful deeds they have done for which we have neglected to thank them (Phil. 1:3-6; 4:14-20).

7. We would realize the importance of Bible study and would want to learn all that God requires of us (2 Tim. 2:15).

There may be other things that we would do that I have not mentioned, but let us realize that there is a possibility of death coming shortly and a certainty of facing God in the judgment. Bearing this in mind, let’s not wait until it is too late to do some of the things that have been listed. Remember: “And inasmuch as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this cometh judgment” (Heb. 9:27).

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 21, p. 653
November 3, 1988

By Fred A. Shewmaker

Have you ever considered why certain religious publications are not appreciated? After a religious publication begins to arrive in my mail box and I have considered its content for a few issues, it may become plain to me that I lack an appreciation for that publication. Until recently I never gave any consideration to why I fail to appreciate those publications. The usual procedure was to glance through it and then pitch it in the nearest wastebasket. Some one may ask, “Why not send the editor a cancellation notice?” My answer is: I would not care to have it published, along with the editor’s abusive comments, for others to read in the next issue.

Recently I have given my reason for failing to appreciate certain publications some serious thought. My lack of appreciation does not arise out of my disagreement with the content. I read many things with which I do not agree, without losing appreciation for the publications in which they appear. What then is the reason for almost automatically discarding certain religious publications?

There may be various answers given to this question by others. My answer is that I am turned off by derogatory or inflammatory descriptives of persons the author of an article is attempting to chastise. The editors of the publications, which I almost automatically toss in the wastebasket, have a penchant for selecting such articles for their publication.

Examples of the type of descriptives that turn me off: (1) professional ministers; (2) elite servant; (3) pew warmers; (4) a congregation of onlookers; (5) the corporate assembly; (6) local pulpiteer; (7) professional priests; (8) visiting “evangelists”; (9) special minister; (10) party’s papers; (11) special clergyman; (12) professional go-betweens; (13) Church of Christ ministers; (14) “celestial aristocrats.”

These belittling descriptives were found in one article. Although the article is one that indicates the author might go farther than I am willing to go in opposition to public confessions of faults, I am very sympathetic to the basic point of it. I too believe that public confessions in some places are over emphasized and over done. It also may be true that some preachers, who emphasize the need for public confession, are motivated by a desire to make a good show.

The author of the article and editor of the publication may recognize the examples as being from his work. If so, please let him understand that I am not faulting his opposition to public rededication and confession of fault every time an improper thought enters one’s mind. Numerous articles, which I have written, express opposition to one thing or another. Every false doctrine, unscriptural practice and unauthorized organization should be opposed. No one ever should oppose another for opposing something. If what the other opposes is approved by the word of God, an effective way to show that it should not be opposed is to show how it is authorized by the Bible. Our effort should be expended attempting to persuade those who are wrong to repent, rather than trying to ignite their resentment.

Allow me also to state that false teachers should be charged with the crime which they are committing against the law of Christ. However, in most cases, articles refuting false teaching should not attack the person teaching error. I am not objecting to identifying a false teacher. I am saying, attacking his error does not necessitate belittling him.

In the early days of the twentieth century name calling both in political and religious debates was normal. Audiences not only expected it, they also accepted it as proper. In those days W. W. Otey participated in a debate at Portland, Indiana. My wife’s grandfather not only was present at that debate, he also was a close friend of Otey. He told me that in the debate Otey’s opponent called him many unflattering names, but brother Otey’s only response was, “I came loaded for bear, but have had to step aside for an animal of a lower order.” Such restraint by brother Otey at a time when a much stronger response was expected by an audience which would have accepted and approved it, might serve us well as an example for our day, when such is not usually approved by the general public.

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 21, p. 658
November 3, 1988