Armageddon

(From the Greek transliteration of an unknown Hebrew phrase usually thought to be Har-megiddo , “Mount Megiddo.”) The word “Armageddon” occurs in the Bible only in Rev. 16:16 , as the Hebrew name for a “place” to which three “unclean spirits” ( v. 13 ) gather “the kings of the earth” to “the battle of that great day of God Almighty” ( v. 14 )—John’s designation for what is popularly called the battle of Armageddon. The gathering to Armageddon is the principal feature of the sixth plague ( vs. 12–16 ). The sixth angel pours out his “bowl” upon “the great river Euphrates,” whose “water was dried up, to prepare the way for the kings from the east.” Then three “demonic spirits” resembling frogs go forth from the mouths of the “dragon,” the “beast,” and the “false prophet” to “the kings of the whole world, to assemble them for battle on the great day of God the Almighty” ( vs. 13–16 , RSV ). The sixth plague closes with the nations of the earth gathered for battle, and the context implies that battle is joined as the seventh angel pours out the vial of the seventh plague. In popular usage “Armageddon” means any major military conflict involving many nations, though usually without reference to the biblical meaning of the term. Armageddon was not given specific emphasis by earlier Protestant interpreters, but in the first four decades of the nineteenth century, the increased emphasis on the imminence of the end of several prophetic periods in the prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation led to increased interest in the subject of Armageddon. A large group of expositors taught that events foretold in Rev. 16:12–16 paralleled those of Dan. 11:44 , 45 , since in both instances the establishment of Christ’s eternal kingdom follows almost immediately. Furthermore, it was pointed out that the “king of the north” of Dan. 11:40–45 , whom many identified as the Ottoman Empire, occupied the area drained by the Euphrates River, which is mentioned in Rev. 16:12 . Their belief that the Turks were referred to by “the great river Euphrates” under the sixth trumpet ( Rev. 9:14 ) strengthened the conviction that the Euphrates mentioned under the sixth plague must refer to the same power. The fact that throughout the nineteenth century the territory of the Ottoman Empire was progressively being diminished (“dried up”), coupled with belief in the imminence of the event foretold, tended to confirm this interpretation. Politically and in the public press the Turkish Empire was referred to as “the sick man of the East,” and its demise was supposed to be imminent. Contemporary events were construed as part of the drying-up process to which Rev. 16:12 referred. The “Eastern question” occupied the continuing attention of political leaders throughout the century, and of the interpreters of Bible prophecy as well. History of Seventh-day Adventist Interpretation. Millerite interpreters had held varying views on Armageddon. For example, William Miller taught that the sixth plague was a diminishing or taking away, of “the Turkish power” and was then (1836) in the process of fulfillment, “so that the way now appears to be prepared for the kings to come up to the battle of the great day” ( Evidence . . . of the Second Coming of Christ [1836], p. 185). Josiah Litch, who placed the plagues “in the future, and after the second advent” ( Prophetic Expositions, [1842], vol. 1, p. 175), believed that ‘the great river Euphrates’ will be as literally dried up to make way for kings of the Eastern world to come up to Jerusalem and Palestine to that battle, as the same river was dried up before Cyrus, when he entered and took the city of Babylon; or as the Red Sea and the river Jordan were dried up to make a highway for Israel through their bed. The effects of the sixth vial will be, first , to dry up the waters of the river, to make a highway; and secondly , to send forth the spirit of devils to deceive, by miracles, the kings of the whole earth, and their armies, and gather them” ( ibid. , p. 183). SDA publications contained little on the subject of Armageddon until the 1850s. In an article in 1852 in the Review and Herald, G. W. Holt contended that the plagues were “real and literal,” as were the plagues of Egypt. After quoting Rev. 16:12 , Holt declared, “This doubtless will be literal, and better understood about the time of its fulfillment” (2:105, Mar. 23, 1852). Whether by this statement he wished merely to affirm that the sixth plague would, like the others, be literal, or whether by “literal” he meant that the prophetic symbols in this verse were to be literally understood (for example, that the river Euphrates would be literally dried up, as Litch had held), is not clear. Interpreting verses 13 and 14 , he comments: “This work of deception will probably increase until the great majority are led captive, and so deceived by it as to engage in the great battle against the Lamb and his humble followers. By this means they are led to resist the truth, and make war upon those that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. Thus Pharaoh and his host were deceived by the magicians and led on until they were overwhelmed in the water of the Red Sea” ( ibid. , p. 106). A similar view was expressed by R. F. Cottrell in the Review and Herald in 1853: “But the last work of the spirits will be to gather the nations to the battle of the great day of God Almighty ( Rev. 16:14 ). They are now preparing the way, and gaining an influence over kings and subjects, and when the sixth vial of the wrath of God shall be poured out, they will gather them to the battle. . . . Notwithstanding men are crying peace and safety, while sudden destruction is hanging over their heads; and the spirits of devils are arrayed against God and his truth; yet that truth will triumph” (4:157, Nov. 22, 1853). An early SDA hymnal included a hymn entitled “Armageddon.” With phraseology based on Rev. 14:14–20 and 19:11–21 , it emphasized the role of Christ and the angels in the battle of Armageddon, in defeating the wicked powers of earth and delivering God’s beleaguered people immediately prior to the resurrection and the appearance of Christ in the clouds of heaven ( Hymns for Second Advent Believers Who Observe the Sabbath of the Lord [1852], pp. 23, 24). Early in the Civil War certain individuals, obviously not the responsible leaders of the church, declared that the battle of the great day of God was beginning. James White, as editor of the Review and Herald , pointed out in the issue for Jan. 21, 1862 (19:61) that “preparations for that battle do not commence until the time of the pouring out of the sixth vial,” and that battle is joined only as the Son of God, accompanied by the angel armies of heaven, descends to earth. “The great battle is not between nation and nation,” he wrote, “but between earth and heaven,” between Satan and Christ. The first formal exegesis of Rev. 16:12–16 in SDA literature appeared during the course of a series of articles entitled “Thoughts on the Revelation,” by Uriah Smith, which ran in the Review intermittently from June 3, 1862, to Feb. 3, 1863. In the issue for Dec. 2, 1862 (21:5), Smith identified the symbolic drying up of the river Euphrates as “the consumption of the Turkish empire,” which power, he said, would cease to exist altogether under the sixth plague. He considered the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire a necessary prelude to the battle of Armageddon, inasmuch as that battle, he said, would be fought at Jerusalem, and Jerusalem was then in the hands of the Turks. The dissolution of the Turkish Empire, he said, would prepare the way for “the kings of the East”—by which he understood nations to the east of Palestine—to fight in the battle at Jerusalem. He identified the three “unclean spirits” that gather the nations to Armageddon as “Paganism, Catholicism, and Protestantism.” These, the great religious organizations of the world, would gather the nations to “an unequal warfare . . . against the Lord of hosts.” The gathering of the nations he assigned to the sixth plague, and the battle itself, which he identifies with the judgment of Babylon in vs. 17–19 , to the seventh. This exposition was retained when the series of articles appeared in book form in 1867 and became the standard SDA pattern of interpretation for the next three quarters of a century. About this time Smith also began to identify the king of the north ( Dan. 11:40–45 ) with Turkey. Earlier he had identified this king with the Papacy ( Review and Herald 19:192, May 13, 1862). The international situation that culminated in the Russo-Turkish War (1877–1878) led to expectation of the imminent end of the Ottoman Empire, with Armageddon following immediately. In the Review and Herald for Mar. 28, 1871 (37:116, 117), Uriah Smith wrote: “All eyes are now turned with interest toward Turkey; and the unanimous opinion of statesmen is that the Turk is destined soon to be driven from Europe. . . . Time will soon determine this matter; and it may be but a few months.” (See also Thoughts on Daniel [1881], pp. 361–372.) But James White was never reconciled to this view. While admitting that there was “general agreement upon this subject, and that all eyes are turned toward the war now in progress between Turkey and Russia as the fulfillment of that portion of prophecy which will give great confirmation of faith in the soon loud cry and close of our message,” he concluded: “What will be the result of this positiveness in unfulfilled prophecies should things not come out as very confidently expected is an anxious question” ( Review and Herald, 50:172, Nov. 29, 1877; italics supplied). The armament race that led to World War I revived interest in Armageddon. In a Review and Herald article entitled “The Gathering for Armageddon,” W. A. Spicer wrote of the evil spirits of Rev. 16:13 , 14 stirring up the nations for war, and gathering all the world to Armageddon. He said: “Men who know the pulse of international affairs see just before us a world-conflict, which they describe as the Armageddon of the nations. . . . The sure word of prophecy says that it is the gathering to the battle of the last great day. . . . With express speed the world is rushing on to the great Armageddon. Before our very eyes the prophecy is fulfilling. Men of the world bear witness to it. The rest will surely come, and the time is near at hand” ( ibid. 80:6, 7, Oct. 22, 1903). In the Feb. 6, 1913, Review and Herald (90:127) W. H. Branson commented: “It is astonishing to note how the idea of Armageddon is taking hold of thinking people of every country, and how the world is awaiting with fear and trembling the great crisis that Armageddon stands for, and that is so sure and so soon to come.” In the issue for Dec. 25 of the same year (90:1240) F. M. Wilcox asked, “What will be the end of all this great preparation for war?” and answered: “The end of it all will be that foretold by the prophet, the end looked for by far-seeing statesmen-the battle of Armageddon, the last great conflict of earth just preceding the coming of the Lord.” Six years before the outbreak of World War I, S. N. Haskell wrote: “Even the Turks themselves are looking forward to the time when they will have to remove their capital from Constantinople to Jerusalem. . . . All know that when the Turk steps out of Constantinople, there will be a general breaking up of Europe. They may not name the impending conflict the battle of Armageddon, but God has so named it” ( The Story of Daniel the Prophet [1908 ed. ], pp. 282, 283). A few weeks after the beginning of World War I, F. M. Wilcox commented: “The Scriptures indicate that eventually the site of government will be removed to the glorious holy mountain between the seas, referring evidently to Jerusalem. . . . The river Euphrates, representing the Ottoman government, is rapidly being dried up that the way of the kings of the East may be prepared to take part in the great battle of Armageddon” ( Review and Herald 91:9, Oct. 15, 1914). In the issue for Sept. 17 (91:7) C. M. Snow suggested that if Turkey should enter the war, “then this [World War I] is the first stage of the Armageddon battle. But that is yet to be determined. The outcome of this war we cannot forecast. Its relation to Armageddon depends upon the aligning and shifting of the nations themselves. Will those shiftings and alignings so dry up that power designated as the Euphrates that the way will be prepared for the forces of heathenism and Mohammedanism to come up to the common battleground of the world? Time will tell. But if this war does not do it, another must follow soon that will.” When Turkey did declare war, six weeks later, G. B. Starr wrote: “‘The Ottoman Empire in Europe will soon be merely a memory’ (London Times , Oct. 30, 1914). . . . For nearly forty years the writer has watched with deepest interest the movements in the Near East with reference to the fulfilment of the predictions relating to the Eastern question, and rejoices in the clear evidences that the last step, the last act of the drama, is at hand”( Review and Herald 91:3, Nov. 26, 1914). The outbreak of hostilities in 1914 inspired cautious admonitions not to consider that war the biblical Armageddon. A. O. Tait counseled: “The furious way in which this European war has broken out, and the rapidity with which it is spreading from one nation to another, is causing many people to ask the question, ‘Is this the beginning of Armageddon?’ “To this question we can clearly say, No, the war of Armageddon has not commenced; for it will be observed, in the prophecy already quoted, that that war of Armageddon takes place under the pouring out of the sixth of the seven last plagues, and these plagues have not begun to fall, as everyone knows” ( Signs of the Times 40:7, Aug. 18, 1914). Said C. M. Snow: “The war now being fought in Europe is not Armageddon, but it is entirely possible that it may lead into that battle” ( Review and Herald 91:7, Sept. 17, 1914). W. W. Prescott wrote: “This great war is not Armageddon. It is not surprising that that word appears in the papers, but it is not Armageddon. This war is not the end” ( ibid. 91:6, Oct. 1, 1914). The armament race culminating in World War I was paralleled by other developments that introduced the nations of the Far East into the Armageddon picture. The awakening of Japan under the enlightened rule of the great emperor Meiji (1852–1912), the Sino-Japanese War (1894–1895), the Boxer Rebellion in China (1900), a brilliant Japanese victory in the Russo-Japanese War (1904–1905), and the Chinese Revolution (1911) gave birth to the idea that Armageddon would be essentially a battle between the nations of the Orient (the “kings of the East”) and the Occident. The king of Sweden is said to have declared as early as 1896 that “the Occident will be conquered by the Orient” (see R. C. Porter, “The World’s Armageddon Battle in Prophecy,” Review and Herald 90:748, 749, Aug. 7, 1913). The Boxer Rebellion led to the coining of the popular phrase “Yellow Peril” (London Daily News , July 21, 1900, quoted in The Oxford English Dictionary , art. “Yellow”). A series of four articles by R. C. Porter in the Review and Herald during July and August 1913 was based on the idea of Armageddon as essentially an East-West struggle. In his Aug. 7 article (90:749) Porter wrote of the great world color problem as a challenge to the White man’s supremacy, and of “the battle of Armageddon as the probable result of present conditions in the East.” He quoted Archibald R. Colquhoun, F.R.G.S., as saying in the Daily Mail Year Book (1908), “There is no question that the victory of Japan over Russia [in 1905] raised the question of relations between white and yellow in an entirely new form, and moreover that a spirit of renaissance is at work throughout Asia, which is destined to challenge the vaunted supremacy of the white man ” (emphasis his). Following World War I, Lothrop Stoddard popularized such phrases as “Yellow Peril” and “the rising tide of color” in a series of books, including one entitled The Rising Tide of Color (1920). C. B. Haynes used both of these expressions in his book On the Eve of Armageddon (1946 ), p. 54. Decreasing emphasis on the role of Turkey in Armageddon, between World War I and World War II, was paralleled by greatly increased emphasis on the role of Japan and other Asian nations. But with the decisive defeat of Japan in World War II, this emphasis also disappeared. Under the title “Japan and the Kings of the East” ( Ministry 19:10, June 1946) Andrew N. Nelson emphatically denied that Japan had anything to do with “the kings of the East.” As world developments made the application of Dan. 11:45 and Rev. 16:12 to Turkey increasingly improbable after World War I, and likewise that of Rev. 16:12 to Japan after the close of World War II, there developed in SDA exegesis a trend toward eliminating both Turkey and Japan from consideration in connection with these prophecies and toward returning to the more general view of the pioneers. Hence there are many today who hold that the battle of Armageddon is the conflict between the forces of good and the forces of evil that will culminate in the destruction of the wicked at the second coming of Christ. Others, however, hold that the battle will be of a military character, waged between nations of the earth, and that this military battle will be terminated at the second coming of Christ. The word “Armageddon” seldom appears in Ellen G. White’s writings. See, for example, 6T 406 and several passages printed in SDACom , 7:967, 982, 983.