Is Ezekiel 39 a Prequel to Ezekiel 38?

[Update April 2023: I've mostly abandoned this theory and now just place both chapter after The Millennium.  That said there is I feel some value in some of the observations I made here.]

The name Gog is in The Bible outside Ezekiel and Revelation.  Everyone knows Magog is, as a son of Japheth.  However I have realized that Gog is as well (and I'm not referring to those Septuagint additions either, this is in the KJV and the Masoretic Text).  But first the main topic for this study.

I did a post on Ezekiel 38 and 39 being after the Millennium, in the context of Chris White's argument.  I wavered there a bit but ultimately came to agree with Chris.  Back then I still supported identifying Magog, Rosh, Meshech and Tubal with Russia, but I've now come to be more willing to agree with White's identifications for the locations of the nations involved also.

I alluded in that post to having once seen but forgotten where an assessment that Ezekiel 39 takes place before Ezekiel 38.  I've now found a website making that argument but I don't think it's what I originally saw.  It argues Ezekiel 39 is Armageddon and Ezekiel 38 is the post Millennial invasion.

https://escapeallthesethings.com/gog-magog/
I haven't looked at other articles on that site.  I suspect there is plenty I disagree with, I'm here endorsing only possibly this article.  I left a Comment that may or may not ever get approved where I made some incorrect statements since I didn't think them through well enough.  I'll try to say what I meant to better here.

First, when making an argument like this, it's useful to state that you're aware the modern chapter divisions aren't in the original text.  In this case the first verse of Chapter 39 does make sense as a partial change of topic, and the last verse of 38 does sound kind of like a conclusion.

Now I have dedicated this Blog to arguing Revelation needs to be interpreted Chronologically.  But the reason I emphasis that is because it's what's distinct about Revelation from other Prophetic books.  Others aren't even all one vision unless it's really short.  And even within one vision or revelation there are reasons why it could suit Yahuah to show some things out of order.  The difference in Revelation is John is being shown a clear sequence of events.  And that the Book defines itself as how to make sense of the rest of The Bible.

So I'm not 100% sure I agree with this view of Ezekiel 38 and 39 yet, but I want to have a conversation about it.

As for why would God show Ezekiel these battles out of order?  Why do so many Historical movies not start at the beginning of what they're going to show?  Why did Star Wars start with Episode IV?

The core argument for seeing Ezekiel 39 as Armageddon is that Revelation 19 :17-21's language of the birds devouring the flesh of the defeated armies is borrowed from Ezekiel 39.  Indeed people who argue both chapters are about Armageddon have this as their strongest argument, while I defending a Post-Millennial view argued that could be generic battle aftermath imagery, what's more important is John used proper names from Ezekiel 38&39 in chapter 20 not 19.  However that was always the one exception to my strong conviction that when Revelation is explicitly drawing on imagery from an Old Testament Prophecy, it is depicting that same Prophecy.  Now a solution to that problem exists, and so I can point out how language of Ezekiel 39 is drawn on in Revelation 19 before the Millennium and language of Ezekiel 38 is drawn on in Revelation 20 after The Millennium.

To the objection that implies it's inaccurate to define Armageddon as an invasion from the north, I wouldn't address that how this article did at all.  The Hill of Megiddo is not the site of the battle but the gathering place of The Beast's Armies.  They are planning to attack Jerusalem, though they may be cut off at Bethel before they get there.  Or they are headed to The Woman's hiding place in The Wilderness (Arabia).  Either way, they are coming to their target from the North, Megiddo was in the Northern Kingdom, close to the northern extremity of what was allotted to Western Manasseh.

It's possible, though maybe a stretch, that Gog is only really an individual in chapter 39, that Ezekiel 38 means Gog as a geographical or tribal indicator.  Some things said in 38 might be a little difficult to interpret that way, but it's possible.  There are other Prophecies where Yahuah seems to speak to nations as if they were individuals.  Also remember that translators sometimes add more pronouns than the original Hebrew directly justifies.

Revelation 20 definitely seems to be using Gog not as a person but as a location or tribe, that is why it (and never Ezekiel) says the three word phrase "Gog and Magog", they are refereed to as two of the same kind of thing.

Meanwhile Ezekiel 39 describes the place where Gog will be buried being named after him.  That will be important later.

Also Ezekiel 39 never directly refers to Magog as being part of the invasion, it says that when the invaders are destroyed he'll also send fire on Magog and "them that dwell carelessly in the Isles".  39 also never mentions Persia, Cush, Phut, Gomer and Togarmah, Tarshish or Sheba and Dedan.

Revelation 20 gets mistakenly claimed to have all nations involved.  It just says the Nations in the four Corners, it doesn't say all.  Ezekiel 38's alliance represents all four corners, Phut in the West, Cush in the South, Persia in the East, and Gog, Gomer and Togarmah are associated with the north.

I also think Armageddon may not be as absolutely everyone as people assume.  I've talked on this blog about how I view the 6th Bowl of Wrath in Revelation 16 as being about the Scattered House of Ephraim returning to their land, in Northern Manasseh.

The idea that one or both Gog and Magog invasions are about the scattered Northern Israelites in some capacity is supported by the Four Corners terminology, as God said Israel would be scattered to the Four Corners, and also by Revelation 20:8 saying their Number was as the Sand of The Sea, an idiom repeatedly used of Israel's numbers in God's Promises to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and of specifically the North in Hosea.

Meshech and Tubal can both be associated with ancient Uratu, in modern Kurdistan, near where the Assyrians took the Northern Tribes they deported, and where the Kingdom of Adiabene emerged in the first century.  Uratu also had four ancient Kings named Rusa.  So maybe "Prince of Rosh, Meshech and Tubal", should instead be "Prince Rosh of Meshech and Tubal"?  But also one of these Rusa had a location named after him, Rusahinili.  There is also a Rosh of the tribe of Benjamin mentioned in Genesis.

This article unlike others seeking to identify a Gog invasion with Armageddon, insists Gog can't be The Beast since The Beast is cast into the Lake of Fire, and not killed or buried.  Indeed, it may instead be that Gog is one of the Kings of The East, along with Rosh.  But maybe there are other ways to look at it, who knows.

There is no doubt in my mind that Ezekiel 38 is about the post Millennial Gog and Magog invasion of Revelation 20.  Ezekiel 39 is either more on that, or it's Armageddon, but there is no Pre-Trib or Mid-Trib Gog and Magog invasion.

Ironically we are now in an era where it's liberals/leftists who are paranoid about Russia.

Now what about that reference to Gog I promised?  It's in 1 Chronicles Chapter 5 verses 4-6.  The context is talking about the Tribe of Reuben at the time they were deported by Assyria in about 745 BC.

The sons of Joel: Shemaiah his son, Gog his son, Shimei his son, Micah his son, Reaiah his son, Baal his son, Beerah his son, whom Tilgath-pilneser king of Assyria carried away captive: he was prince of the Reubenites.

So it seems Joel was a Prince of Reuben at the time of the captivity, and he and his seven sons were carried away into captivity.  And his second son was named Gog.  The word for Prince used here is Nasi, same as in Ezekiel 38 and 39.

Why am I certain this isn't just a coincidence of names?  Because Ezekiel 39:11 says the place where Gog is buried is east of the sea, all scholars agree the Dead Sea is meant here.  Reuben was one of the trans-Jordan tribes, and the only one who was far enough south to be east of the Dead Sea.  My English language Jerusalem Bible has a footnote here implying that the river Arnon is specifically mentioned.  I'm not sure why it thinks that, might be something lost in translation, but I mention it because it's consistent with what I just said, the Arnon was meant to be the southern border of Reuben, the border between Reuben and Moab.

So the reason Gog is being associated with persons or peoples separated by over a Thousand Years is I think because it's identifying descent from Gog ben Joel of the Tribe of Reuben.

People who want to interpret Ezekiel as just referring to his own time like to see Gog as Gyges of Lydia.  Well Gyges, who was called Gugu in Assyrian inscriptions, died before Ezekiel's time.  But I do think Gyges could be the same individual as the Gog of 1 Chronicles 5.

The deportation of the Trans-Jordan tribes was in 745 BC.  Gyges reigned from 716 to 678 BC.  If he was Joel's second born son he could have been between 7-20 years old when deported.

Gygyes' story in Greek sources has a lot of myth mingled in.  Needless to say I don't think he was the son of a Dascylus.  The story of him being a Bodyguard could be plausible, sometimes kings have used foreign mercenaries as Bodyguards, like Caligula, and Israelites living in Exile could have been attracted to such a job.

The version of his rise to power that involves him sleeping with the prior King's wife, have the potential to remind a Biblically literate reader of Reuben's sin.  That could mean one of two things.  The story is made up but Gyges encouraged it out of affinity with his ancestor. Or that it's a trait he inherited.

Gyges could be an ancestor of Cyrus.  A later king of Lydia from his dynasty, Alyattes, had a daughter named Aryenis who married Astagyes of Media and may have been the mother of Cyrus's mother Mandane.  A daughter of Cyrus married Dairus I and was the mother of Xerxes, who was probably an ancestor of Apamea royal wife of Seleucus I, who I've shown were ancestors of Charlemagne.  In that line from Seleucus to Charlemagne were princes of Galatia.

Cyrus went on to conqueror Lydia, ending Gyges' dynasty.   At that point you could argue he fully became a successor of Gyges.

Making a Reubanite prince an ancestor of Charlemagne would be interesting to Britam supporters, since they like to make France Reuben.  France having it's own River Arnon is an interesting coincidence.  And it's also interesting here how both Eugene Sue in Les Mysteries du People and Paul Feval in Anne of the Isles (Translated into English by Brian Stableford published by BlackCoatPress) construct fictional narratives with a mythical patriarch of a clan of Pre-Christian and Pre-Roman Gallic (specifically Bretan) France named Joel.

But as interesting as that all is, I think the Gog(s) of Ezekiel and Revelation will be attacking from Turkey or Northern Iraq.

Update: More on Lydia

The city of Sardis wasn't always called that it seems.  Homer called it Hyde, and I agree with the theory that Homer was contemporary with Gyges.  The oldest surviving reference to it being called Sardis is in the 470s BC.

I've talked on my Revised Chronology Blog about the Sherden/Shardana of the Seas Peoples being linked to both Sardis and Sardinia and possibly descending from the Sardite clan, descendants of Sered of the Tribe of Zebulun in Numbers 26:26.

In Gyges time however the Sherden were not yet native to Sardis, but were among the foreign mercenaries he was using and also recommended to Psamtick I of Egypt (Seti I in my chronology).  The son of a Reubanite prince using members of other Tribes as mercenaries would certainly be interesting.

The Masoretic Text's Hebrew spelling of Gog is Gimel-Vav-Gimel, and Magog is Mem-Gimel-Vav-Gimel.  But the vav like yot was sometimes used like a vowel in the Masoretic text, so some people theorize for words like this the vav might not have been used originally.  This factors into two theories about the etymology of Gog and Magog.

One is the idea that Magog is a Hebrew code for Babel (Babylon).  If the Vav is dropped then you get Magog from taking the next letter after it in the alphabet for each letter of Magog and then turning it backwards.  Gog then becomes just Bab, which means gate in the pagan etymology of Bab-El.  Makes me think of the Persian false prophet known as The Bab (but there was also Babai The Great an important 7th Century leader of the Church of The East).

The other is the theory that Agag might be a related name.  The Septuagint replaces Agag with Gog in Balaam's oracles, in Numbers 24:7, and I've heard the Samaritan Pentateuch does as well, the Samritians don't regard any of the Prophets so had no bias to want to add a name made famous by Ezekiel (or possibly Amos).

In the context of looking for Gog in Media or Persia, it's interesting to remember that Haman was called an Agagite (technically his parent, presumably father, was).  The Septuagint additions to Esther has the Persian King call Haman a Macedonian.  Maybe Makedon could be related to Magog somehow?  But also a Macedonian princess named Gygaea married a Persian noble and was the mother of another Persian noble.  Gygaea was also an ancient name for Lake Mamara in Lydia.

Update April 2020: Maybe Ezekiel 37's relationship is the same, maybe it's the Bodily Resurrection and final regathering of Israel that doesn't happen till the White Throne Judgment leading into the descent of New Jerusalem.  So we have three straight chapters that perhaps should be read in reverse?

England and Edessa

On another blog the other day I did a post theorizing that the early traditions of Mary Magdalene going to Ephesus and the later ones taking her to southern France are perhaps explained by the first Christians of Lyon coming from Ephesus.

Since making that, I decided to look into traditions about the early Briton Church again, which as usual lead me to Simon Zelotes, the only one of the Twelve that I think could have come to Britain.  Of other traditions about where he went, I totally reject ones making him the same as Simon the Half Brother of Jesus, or the Simon who was the second Bishop of Jerusalem.  For reasons explained in my post on the Brothers and Sisters of Jesus.  Other aspects of that post may be relevant later.

He's said to have spent some time in Egypt but no claims that Egypt is where he died.  The same Disciple being linked to both Briton and Egypt could be interesting in light of my England and Egypt post.  (My calling this post England and Edsessa is kinda misleading since it's mostly about pre Anglo-Saxon Britons, but I wanted to repeat that previous double E phonetic effect.)

What's most interesting is Simon's link to Edessa, many traditions seem to also pair him with Jude//Thadeus, who is even more strongly linked to Edessa.  The associations with Aremnia and Iberia of the Caucus could have to do with Moses of Khorene treating Agbar of Edessa as part of Armenia's history.  And them being said to go to Persia may have to do with Edessa being a Parthian client kingdom during much of the first century.

The key thing is that as soon as I realized Simon Zelotes who I'd long knew was sometimes said to come to Britannia had also been associated with Edessa.  I immediately thought of how King Abgar the IX and/or X of Edessa is theorized to be who the Liber Pontificals actually meant by King Lucius of Britain.

This is more complicated then the Ephesus to Lyon connection for three reasons.

1. That a group of Christians came to Lyon from Ephesus in the Second Century is a known fact independent of thinking the development of traditions about Mary Magdelene had anything to do with it.  While here I admittedly have little to go on to prove anyone ever came from Edessa/Osroene to Britain during the time frame in question.

2. I don't necessarily think this migration is the sole or even primary origin of Briton Christianity, as the Ephesus to Lyon connection seems to be.  Tertulian and I think also Irenaus have quotes showing Christians were in Britain already before the time of Abgar IX.  And I still think Aristobulus of Romans 16 came to Britain as there are no alternate traditions for him.

3. Simon Zelotes like all of the Twelve I think did more traveling around then Mary Magdalene did, who traditions take only to Ephesus and much later France.  So maybe he individually did go to both places, (especially since he's said to have come to Britannia twice, in the early 40s and in 60), while I'm certain Mary was never actually in France.  But there are some reasons in the New Testament to think the Twelve went mainly to places with a very strong Jewish presence, which Edessa had in the first century, but Britannia did not.  Acts 2:9-11 mentions Mesopotamians and Arabians (Osroene was an Arabian kingdom in Mesopotamia) present at Pentecost, but not Britain or Gaul.  I think Paul lead the way West while the Twelve focused mainly on the East (I've already shown that Peter didn't go to Rome). I'm interested in theories of Paul coming to Britain but haven't looked that deep into it yet, the main book on it is pretty expensive.

Much of ancient Osroene was in modern Syria (but all of it East/North of the Euphrates).  But it had chunks of Iraq and modern Turkey, including Edessa itself and the city possibly responsible for the Lucius in Britain scribal Error, Birtha aka Birecik.

Bede added to the Lucius of Britain story that under him the whole country converted and remained Christian at least until the Diocletian Persecution. Elsewhere that persecution is not known to have had any notable incidents in Britain, in fact it seems it wasn't enforced in The West much at all.  But major focal points of much of it were in Turkey and in the East.  Logically, this may have been a time when many Christians in the East migrated West.

Another figure controversially associated with both Turkey and Britain is Empress Helena, but in this case it's her beginning not end that is being disputed.  The source for her being born in Nicodemia is not till the 6th Century, and seems to be based on her and Constantine's later connections to Nicodemia.  So I'm inclined to doubt she was born there.  But the problem with the much later traditions of her being born a Briton princess is that Constantius Chlorus didn't come to Britain until within a year before he died there and Constantine was already an adult.

I think maybe an overlooked clue to Helena's origin is her name.  Before her the only royal families Helena would have been a dynastic name for are Osroene and Adiabene, who intermarried with each other.  Helen of Adiabene married Abgar V of Edessa after her first husband died.  I think the two later kings of Osroene called Bar Ezad were sons of Helena's son Izates II of Adiabene probably by a daughter of Abgar.  So just as mythical Welsh genealogies make Empress Helena a descendant of Lucius of Britain, I think she may really have been a descendant of Lucius Abgar of Birecik.

Regardless of Constantine's ancestry, his descendants I think include many monarchs of the British Isles right down to the present.... but first.

Both the other wife of Constantius, and the only wife of Constanine who is ancestral to his successors, Fausta, were daughters of Eutropia.  A woman of seemingly noble origin in Roman Syria.  And so I think very likely to descend from the Near Eastern Roman aristocracy that descended from Antiochus IV Epiphanes of Commagene and thus from the Seleucid Dynasty.  And also from daughters of the Ptolemaic Dynasty like Cleopatra Thea, Tryphenea and Cleopatra Selene.  So this post is again further backing for making British Royalty descendants of Egyptian Royalty.

Flavia Maxima Constantia, was a granddaughter of Constantine, and a descendant of both daughters of Eutropia.  She married the Western Emperor Gratian.  They are in mainstream history presumed to have had no children, but they were married for long enough, and there's a lot of time that Constantia isn't mentioned.  How she died at only 21 max isn't known, maybe she died in child birth.  If Gratian had any "legitimate" children it was by her, he died before he could even have consummated his second marriage.

Welsh traditions say that Magnus Maximus was married to a daughter of Gratian named either Helena or Ellen.  Welsh genealogies sometimes say he had two wives, one named Helena and one Ellen, one a daughter of Gratian and the other of a mysterious Eudaf.  Eudaf is a name used in other welsh texts to refer to Octavian Caesar Augustus, whether the name actually comes from Octavian or Augustus is hard to tell, but this is why the Eudaf who is a father in law of Maximus is sometimes given as a King Octavius of Britain.  Gratian's full name as Emperor was Flavius Gratainus Augustus, so I think his daughter was the only wife of Magnus Maximus.

Welsh genealogies put Magnus Maximus in the ancestry of a lot of people.  There may be a route to put him in the ancestry of the Kings of Gwynedd from whom came the Medieval princes of Wales from whom came The Tudors.  But I want to focus on the Scottish connection here.

Rigrawst was the wife of King Brychan of Brycheiniog.  Born 468 AD, she was the daughter of Gwrtheyrn ap Gwidol (Vortigern) and Severa Ferch Mascsen, the daughter of Magnus Maximus. [ Brian Daniel Starr, The Life of Saint Brychan: King of Brycheiniog and Family (Google eBook) (Brian Daniel Starr, 2008) page 59.]  Brychan himself may through his mother descended from Maximus's daughter Gratiana who is said to have married Tudwall of Galloway.

Dyfnwal Hen was a King of Strathclyde.  The Bonedd Gwŷr y Gogledd, a later genealogy of northern kings gives a modified version of Dyfnwal's family tree.^{[Bromwich, pp. 256–257]} Here, he is the son of Idnyued and the grandson of Magnus Maximus.  There are also genealogies making Dyfnwal an ancestor of Gabran mac Domangairt, father of Aeden mac Gabran, from whom descends most later royalty of Scotland, from Malcolm and Duncan of Macbeth (and possibly Macbeth himself) down to the Davids and Alexanders, then to Robert The Bruce (through his great grandmother Isobel of Huntingdon) and eventually the Stuarts including James I ancestor of all Kings of Britain since.  Brychan I've also seen listed as an ancestor of Gabran.  Malcom III of Scotland also had a daughter who was the mother of Empress Matilda and thus Grandmother of the Plantagenet Kings of England, another Daughter of Malcolm's was Mary who married Eustace III of Boulogne.

I did a post in the past on Adiabene where I theorized that Izates II or Monobaz II or both could have married Half-Sisters of Jesus.  I also have a post on Arthruain Legend and Grail Romances where I draw on that post and my Half Brothers of Jesus post and theorize that King Kalafes of Grail Legend may be based on Abgar of Edessa.  And maybe Bron was actually Izatez or Monobaz.  A daughter of Kalafes married a son of Bron who inherited his Kingdom.  I've already suggested that the Davidic Exilarchs of the Jewish Community in Mesopotamia could also descent from Abgar and Izates.  And also the Bagratid Dynasty. 

I don't think Joseph of Arimathea actually came to Britain.  But some things about the Grail legend are geographically contradictory.  For example Sarras is said to be both an island they stopped at on the way to Britain and "on the road from Jerusalem to the Euphrates and Babylon", which makes me wonder if it could be meant to be Sura, which was linked by a roman road to Palmyra in antiquity.

If Josephus is correct that the Tadmor of Solomon was Palmyra, then maybe it's allegorically what the Grail lore meant by the "Ship of Solomon", while also bringing in Celtic Pagan ideas.  When Wikipedia attempts to cast doubt on this identification, it says the Tadmor of 1 Kings 9:18 was built in Judea, that is demonstrably wrong because that verse clearly says Tadmor and Baalath were built "In the Wilderness" a term that refers to the deserts of Arabia, Jordan and Syria.  The "in the Land" phrase just means within what was was promised to Abraham which extended all the way to the Euphrates.  We know from Assyrian inscriptions that Palmyra was called Tadmor/Tadmar.

According to the Vulgate Queste del Saint Graal and Estoire del Saint Graal, Galahad is of the Lineage of Solomon via his descent from the Fisher Kings, and that is why the "Ship of Solomon" is important.  The Grail saga ends with Galahad and the Grail being taken to heaven at Sarras, and then Sir Bors lives on to tell the tale.

If Sarras is Sura then Corbenic could be identified with a city of Osroene or Adiabene.  And Castle Mortal would be another city of the same area.

The traditional timeline for King Arthur is 516-537 based on the Annals Cambrie, but Geoffrey of Monmouth and the Brute Tyslo place his death in 542.  The Exilarch at that time was Mar Ahunai, but he never operated publicly due to the fall out of his predecessor Mar Zutra II's failed rebellion (496-502 AD).  Mar Zutra II also had a son, Mar Zutra III, who became head of an academy.

The Bagratid descent would at this time be represented by the father, or grandfather or maybe even great-grandfather of Guaram I, the first Prince of Iberia.  This Guaram was the son of a Solomon son of Dahn son of Isaac son of Aser.

But perhaps the real forgotten inspiration for this was that via Empress Helena the descendants of the Agbars of Edessa becomes kings in the British Isles.

Update Nov 16 2018: Pelegius and the East.

Pulegius of the Pelegian heresy was a Briton, he lived in the late 4th and early 5th Century.  What's often over looked is how connected the Pelegian Hersey (which is today Amriniasm)  and the Nestorian controversy were.  Pelegius got a lot of his ideas from Rufinus the Syrian, and Celestine was a follower of Pelegius who's association with Nestorius was used against him by Cyril of Alexandria.

However the key difference between the Pelegians of the Latin West and the Nesotrians & other descendants of the Antiochene School in the East was that Pelegius seems to have rejected Universal Salvation while Theodore of Mopsuestia affirmed it, as did Isaac of Nineveh.  Nisibis and Edessa both specifically become home to successor schools to Antioch.

This article isn't mine but seems to be by people who support the Augustinian view of Original Sin way more then I do, interesting information comes up in the comments section as well.
https://blogs.ancientfaith.com/orthodoxyandheterodoxy/2013/09/05/original-sin-and-ephesus-carthages-influence-on-the-east/

A post I made on Cyril and Nestorius.
https://solascripturachristianliberty.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-incarnation-of-logos-and-divine.html

And one I made on Pelegius.
https://solascripturachristianliberty.blogspot.com/2018/04/pelagius-was-in-error-but-it-wasnt-free.html

England and Egypt

In all this speculation about The Lost Tribes, we sometimes forget that Israel isn't the only Biblical nation The Bible foretells to be carried away captive or scattered from their original homeland.  And in Ezekiel 29-30 one of those nations is Egypt.

The extent to which the population of modern Egypt descends from the original Ancient Egyptians is a frequent subject of controversy.

I believe ethnic or so called "racial" features are determined largely by where a people live, so people living in Egypt I think would possibly in time come to look like Ancient Egyptians did regardless of how much they descend from them.  And likewise when suggesting a certain currently "White" populations may descend partly from ancient Egyptians does not mean I think Ancient Egyptians were White, I think when they lived in Egypt they were Brown or Light-Skinned Black like modern Egyptians are.

Historically the modern Population of Egypt seems to descend largely from Assyrians, Persians, Greeks and Romans and others who settled there in classical antiquity, and then Arabs who migrated there after the Islamic conquest.

It is popular to claim that Nebuchadnezzar never conquered Egypt as Jeremiah and Ezekiel foretold.  This is because Egypt is the pillar of how we research Ancient History, and so rarely do we know Egyptian history from anything other then Egyptian propaganda.  Even among the Classical historians, Herodotus just based his whole history of Egypt on what Egyptian Priests told him, and then Manetho was an Egyptian Priest, though one who had his own criticisms of Herodotus.

On another blog I've argued that Amasis was Nebuchadnezzar's governor of Egypt.  And I think Amasis conquering of Cyprus around 570 BC was really Egypt being exiled there.  After 40 years some of them returned, but perhaps not all just as not all of Judah returned after their 70 years were over.

So perhaps one of the nations it's popular to identify with the Lost Tribes is actually Mizraim?  While modern Egypt is still a head of Javan's Leopard?

I did a post on ways America could be viewed as Egypt.  Thing is much of that could overlap with England aka Great Britain aka The United Kingdom, and arguably fit them better.  Including the relationship with modern Israel to some extent.  Britam and British Israelists love to obsess over their perception that Anglo-Saxons are the most pro-semtic people.

England also had a division between north and south, York and London/Somerset.  And the interpretation of Isaiah 19 I alluded to there is one I've criticized elsewhere, so I kinda felt like cheating mentioning that.

And then there is the role of Freemasonry.  While America and Modern France are nations who's history has been shaped by Freemasonry, Britain is where Freemasonry comes from, and London is still the supreme grand lodge of all Masonry.  It was in Brittan that Cagliostro founded his Egyptian Freemasonry in 1776.  Nicolas Bonnevile was involved in Masonry in Britain before becoming a leader of the French Revolution.  Karl of Hesse-Kassel and Brunswick, leaders of German Freemasonry who also joined the Illuminati, where grandchildren of King George II.  And Albert of Saxe-Gotha who harbored Weishaupt is the ancestor of the current British Royal Family.  Mazzini was also harbored in Britain.  And Albert Pike's Freemasonry is what ruled the Confederacy, which Britain secretly supported but couldn't openly.

And it is Britain not America or Modern France that has Ancient Egypt's form of Government,  Monarchy.  Theirs is the one Monarchy the Revolutions never sought to overthrow.  And their Monarchy is firmly tied to their state religion, Anglicanism.  And it was among Anglicans of the 19th century that the desire to co-opt the Pyramid as a Christian symbol saying Enoch built it started.

England was originally seven Anglo-Saxon kingdoms that were eventually united.  In Genesis 10 Misraim had seven sons.  And with that correlation we could view York as Upper Egypt and London/Somerset as Lower Egypt, now switched geographically because in Egypt up and down were viewed differently then most places because of how The Nile works.

Many looking for Biblical significance to Modern Britain will site them being represented as a Lion, and also heraldry that shows a Lion and a Dragon.  Ezekiel 32:2 says.

Son of man, take up a lamentation for Pharaoh king of Egypt, and say unto him, "Thou art like a young lion of the nations, and thou art as a dragon in the seas"

So that fits too.

Perhaps those whom Britam identifies with Joseph are really Misraim.  While the true identity of Joseph is as Native Americans and perhaps other Israelites wound up in America via the Trans-Atlantic slave trade, enslaved by Egypt once again.  Hosea 9:3 does say "Ephraim shall return to Egypt".

I mentioned France a couple times because there is a school of thought out there that identifies France with Egypt, spiritually at least.  This mostly comes from a desire to see France as the source of modern Atheism thanks to people like Voltaire, and the Reason worshipers of the Revolution.  And then saying that Ancient Egypt was the most Atheistic nation of antiquity.  The former accusation I could nitpick, but the latter is what is truly absurd.  Egypt was anything but Atheistic, in fact at times Ptah came close to resembling a Monotheistic concept of God.  But their main contribution to modern religious trends is Gnosticism.

During World War I, Britain's military operations in the Near East were carried out from Egypt.  You can see this demonstrated in the film Lawrence of Arabia.

Herodotus Histories Book 2:159 records that after Pharaoh Necho's victory at Megiddo, he sent his cloths to Branchidae of Miletus in Ionia for some reason.   Bill Cooper in After The Flood dates 509 BC as when the Milesians came to Ireland from Miletus.  The leaders of that colonization were already Grandparents when they reached Ireland and their mother was a daughter of Pharaoh.  Necho as Rameses II (who is confirmed to have had red hair) had plenty of daughters to spare, over 40.  And the Egyptian royal-line unlike Judah's was traditionally passed through the daughter of Pharaoh.  So perhaps the same royal line British Israelism claims to be heirs to the Throne of David, are actually heirs to the throne of Egypt?

Jeremiah 46:24 says the daughter of Egypt will be delivered to the people of the north, through their father Scota's children were traced back to Magog, The Bible associates Magog with the North.  Or it could be alluding to scattered offspring of the Northern Kingdom.

Also in After The Flood, Bill Cooper documents how all seven Anglo-Saxon royal houses traced their ancestry back to Odin.  Similar sources have lead many others to speculate a real King named Odin may have lived about 100 BC-300 AD.

I may feel the need to place Odin a little earlier then that, his worship was entrenched among Germanic peoples from Rome's very earliest contact with them during the last century BC.  Though strictly speaking the Greco-Roman sources just say they worshiped Mercury/Hermes.  Maybe they identified this deified King with that planet later.

The genealogies further traces Odin back to a Geat and then Geat back to Sceaf, only needing around 17 generations.  Bill Cooper is convinced Sceaf is Japheth, I'm not so much.  He sites one source that rendered Sceaf as Seth, and then tries to argue that Seth could be a corruption of Japheth, an argument that in the Hebrew is only them ending with the same letter.

But maybe he was Seth/Set of Egyptian Mythology?  The Egyptians did consider red hair a sign of descent from Seth.  Or perhaps this reflects the name Seti/Sethos, a Set theophoric name.

As a supporter of revised Chronology I place Seti I in 664-609 BC, and Seti II in the 570s BC.  But Seti II had a son called Seti-Merneptah who's fate is unknown.  This is the same time period as Egypt's foretold scattering.  Seti II's grandfather was Rameses II.  And the time the historical Odin is speculated to have lived could be defined as 17 generations later.  Matthew recounts 14 generations from the Captivity to Jesus, but he'd already demonstrated a willingness to skip generations.  Luke has more then that in the same time frame.

Now the Pross Edda traced Sceaf back to Memnon of Greek mythology.  That is generally viewed as something made up by the medieval writer.  But I did recently argue for the Ethiopia of Memnon and Cepheus being around Seir, where the Horites lived.  And have also argued for the gods of Egypt coming from the Horites.  And also it is known that the Ancient Greeks identified a large statue of Amenhotep III in Thebes with Memnon.

But still.  Mainly my hunch now is Sceaf/Seth identifies a Seti of the 19th Dynasty as the progenitor of Anglo-Saxon royalty.  A Seti was also one of the lesser known sons of Rameses II.  And Ramses firstborn by Nefertari (who I discussed on the revised chronology blog, linking him to Ezekiel 30) had a son named Seti.  A Seti had also been Viceroy of Kush, who may have been of the royal family since he's called a hereditary Prince.  Perhaps he's the same as one of the before mentioned Setis.

For this scenario the descent from Egypt overlaps with who I've argued elsewhere to descend from Dan.  It's interesting typologically that Leviticus 24 talks about a Blasphemous Israelite who's mother was Danite and Father was an Egyptian.  Meanwhile Scota's descendants I think intermarried with remnants of Manasseh, Asher, Zebulun & Issachar.  Manasseh's mother was also an Egyptian.

Of course it's not just English Royalty and Nobility that claims descent from Scota, it's the same with Irish and Scottish Royal and Noble houses. And descent from Odin can also be claimed by continental Royal Families of Denmark and Norway and some in Germany, there were Saxons who remained in Germany (Queen Victoria and her Husband both descended from Royalty of Saxony).  But it was in King James I that the English Crown become the one to unite these two Royal lines together.

All the ways in which British Royalty can be traced back to the Seleucid Dynasty, also involve Ptolemaic Queens and Princesses, Cleopatra Thea, Tryphanea, and the children of Anthony and Cleopatra. The Ptolemies including the most famous Cleopatra also tended to have red hair.

Possible Davidic Descent of British Royalty

The main Tea Telphi legend used by British Israelism is most likely not true.  And the means suggested by Britam doesn't hold up under scrutiny either.

But, I read something interesting on a certain Genealogy website.

http://www.geni.com/projects/Descents-from-Antiquity/12283

Pagano Ebriaci

Pagano Ebriaci (?-c1091), of Pisa, ancestor of the Christian Ebriaci family, might have been a convert from Judaism, a son of Joseph of Fustat. The relationship is conjectural, and seems to have originated in the suggestion that the surname Ebriaci means "the Hebrew". Another theory is that the name Ebriaci might derive from a Latin word meaning drunk.

If Pagano Ebriaci was a son of Joseph of Fustat, then he was a grandson of Hezekiah IV, 38th Exilarch and a descendant of King David.

Pagano Ebriaci was an ancestor of Edmund FitzAlan, 9th Earl of Arundel, through Manfredo III, marchese di Saluzzo."

EdmundFitzAlan is through his son Richard an ancestor of Henry V of England as well as Elizabeth of York, Queen-Consort of Henry VII and thus ancestor of James VI of Scotland and I of England and thus all modern British and Netherlands Royalty. Also through his Granddaughter Alice Holland, Countess of Kent he is an ancestor of Henry VII himself through his mother.

Richard FitzAlan also has more then one connection to the Dukes of Norfolk, making him an ancestor of both the current Norfolk Family and Anne & Mary Boleyn.

Elizabeth of York I have shown in an earlier post to have possible Bagartid Ancestry.

On my Conspiracy blog I have a post on The Bolyen family including Mary Bolyen's descendants.

Christians have long suspected The Antichrist could claim Davidic descent.  I think it's not impossible he could legitimately have Davidic Descent.  Two of David's direct sons were arguably types of The Antichrist, Absalom and Adonijah (one of those is more sympathetic then the other).  And even Solomon himself after he back slid is directly connected to the number 666.  And we could also look at some of the worst Kings of Judah, especially Manasseh who we're told placed Idols in the Holy Place.

There is a tradition in the Talmud that says the Messiah would be Maternally of Dan and Paternally of David.  The reverse of Samson.  Since the Anglo-Saxons and Normans both likely descend from Dan.  And the current Queen and her Husband both descend from Danish Royalty.  It looks like such a mingling is taking place.

Update 5/14/2017: I now have this sort of follow up post.

The Tiburtine Sibyl and The Last Roman Emperor Constans

A Prophecy attributed to the Tiburtine Sibyl in 380 AD forms the embryo of the Last Roman Emperor tradition.

Of all the false prophecies I view as Antichrist seeds, The Last Roman Emperor is perhaps the most directly like the Biblical Antichrist, being defined as Greek and Roman at the same time, since it developed largely in the Byzantine Empire, it easily reconciles the way Daniel points to both Rome and Greece as the nations the Antichrist will rule.  And in some of the 7th century apocalypses he's said to conquer both Syria and Egypt, which is interesting if you still think Daniel 11:40 is about the Antichrist.

Usually, when dealing with these false prophecies my view is that the Antichrist figure within said Prophecy is in the role of a Decoy Antichrist.  And that is certainly the case with the later elaborations of the Last Roman Emperor tradition.

But this is short, and it's attributed to a pagan Oracle.  Oracles usually give cryptic prophecies, that could have two potentially opposite meanings, or an unexpected meaning that in hindsight should have been obvious.  "A Prophecy that misread could have been"-Yoda, Revenge of The Sith.

So let's look at what this Prophecy says closely.

THE LATIN TIBURTINE SIBYL
Then will arise a king of the Greeks whose name is Constans. He will be king of the Romans and the Greeks. He will be tall of stature, of handsome appearance with shining face, and well put together in all parts of his body. His reign will be ended after one hundred and twelve years. In those days there will be great riches and the earth will give fruit abundantly so that a measure of wheat will be sold for a denarius, a measure of wine for a denarius, and a measure of oil for a denarius. The king will have a text before his eyes that says: "The king of the Romans will claim the whole Christian empire for himself." He will devastate all the islands and the cities of the pagans and will destroy all idolatrous temples; he will call all pagans to baptism and in every temple the Cross of Christ will be erected. "Then Egypt and Ethiopia will be eager to stretch their hands to God." ~ Whoever does not adore the Cross of Jesus Christ will be punished by the sword. When the one hundred and twelve years have been completed, the Jews will be converted to the Lord, and "his sepulchre will be glorified by all." In those days Judah will be saved and Israel will dwell with confidence. At that time the Prince of Iniquity who will be called Antichrist will arise from the tribe of Dan. He will be the Son of Perdition, the head of pride, the master of error, the fullness of malice who will overturn the world and do wonders and great signs through dissimulation. He will delude many by magic art so that fire will seem to come down from heaven. The years will be shortened like months, the months like weeks, the weeks like days, the days like hours, and an hour like a moment. The unclean nations that Alexander, the Indian king, shut up (i.e., Gog and Magog) will arise from the North. These are the twenty-two realms whose number is like the sand of the sea. When the king of the Romans hears of this he will call his army together and vanquish and utterly destroy them. After this he will come to Jerusalem, and having put off the diadem from his head and laid aside the whole imperial garb, he will hand over the empire of the Christians to God the Father and to Jesus Christ his Son. When the Roman empire shall have ceased, then the Antichrist will be openly revealed and will sit in the House of the Lord in Jerusalem. While he is reigning, two very famous men, Elijah and Enoch, will go forth to announce the coming of the Lord. Antichrist will kill them and after three days they will be raised up by the Lord. Then there will be a great persecution, such as has not been before nor shall be thereafter. The Lord will shorten those days for the sake of the elect, and the Antichrist will be slain by the power of God through Michael the Archangel on the Mount of Olives.
Translated from the edition of E. Sackur, Sibyllinische Texte und Forschungen. pp. 185—86.

1. It never describes Constans as actually fighting the Antichrist, the enemy he goes to war with is Gog and Magog.

2. Although the Antichrist is mentioned while Constans is still reigning, it's not till after Constans puts down his Crown in Jerusalem that the Antichrist is "openly revealed", and reigns in the House of God in Jerusalem.  Same place we were just told Constans was.

I think this prophecy, even as it's author originally intended, is open to a reading where Constans and The Antichrist are the same individual.  That he will "give up" his authority to beings that present themselves as being God and Jesus but are perhaps actually Satan and The False Prophet.

Constans is an interesting name, it's a diminutive form of Constantine and Constantinius (but a few lesser known Emperors are known by that name exactly).  The seventh century Syrian elaborations on the Last Roman Emperor figure didn't give him a name.  And the Western Catholic tradition of the Great Catholic Monarch removed the Greek affiliation altogether saying he'll descend from Clovis, the Merovingian.  However...

When Constantinople fell to the Turks in 1453 AD.  Emperor Constantine XI removed his royal garments on the battlefield when he knew it was lost so no one could tell who he was.  After the battle was over the Turks identified a body as his and marched it around the city in victory, but the people failed to recognize it as Constantine.  No body was ever indisputably identified as Constantine.  A rumor spread that an Angel had saved him and turned him into a marble statue and hid him beneath the wall of Constantinople, and that one day God would revive him to drive out the Turks.  The legacy of this legend remained important to the Greeks ever since, it was rekindled during their War of Independence in the 1800s and lingers to this day.

You may be thinking of course, "How can the same person be both  King of the Greeks and a Prince from the Tribe of Dan?"

Ezekiel 27 speaks of Dan and Javan having a connection.  And indeed Greek mythology speaks of the Danoi.  This further leads to speculation about connecting Dan to the Tutha de Dannan who in Irish mythology came from Northern Europe.  I'm highly skeptical of most British Israelism claims, but the Tribe of Dan is very interesting.

Britam identifies Dan with Denmark (which is the only Britam identification I kinda agree with). The Royal family of modern Greece from George I on are also Danish Royalty by virtue of their direct Pater-lineal descent from Christian IX of Denmark.  Every modern King of Greece (King of the Hellenes as they call themselves) is also officially a Prince of Denmark.  King of the Greeks and Prince of Dan.

I discus the genealogy of George I of Greece and Christian IX of Denmark on a different blog.  That information can be overlapped with my Genealogy of The Antichrist study to show that they descend from the Seleucid Dynasty. as well as probable Merovingian descent from Clovis.  This family is also taking over the British Royal family, involving a few of the lines different people have in different ways sought to connect to the House of David.

The current King in exile is Constantine II and is often called by his supporters Constantine XIII, viewing the modern Greek Kingdom as heir to the Byzantine Empire, and evoking the mythology about Constantine XI.

Constantine II has 4 children, Pavolos the oldest son is the Crown-Prince.  Pavolos has 5 children, 4 of whom were born in the United States.  Princess Maria-Olympia, Prince Constantine-Alexios, and Prince Achileas-Andreas all three of whom were born in New York.  Prince Odysseus-Kimon and Prince Aristidis-Stravos who was born in Los Angeles.

The pieces are in place for some charismatic leader of this royal family to bring together the Byzantine Last Roman Emperor tradition, the Great Catholic Monarch Tradition, and the British Israelite understanding of Messiah Ben-Joseph and/or the Talmudic tradition that says Messiah Ben-David will also be half Danite, like how Samson was half Danite and half Judean.

Modern Greece had 7 Kings when it was a Kingdom.  Now that is certainly not what the 7 Kings of Revelation mainly mean as I've firmly shown elsewhere, but it's interesting how patterns repeat.

Long ago when I hadn't settled on my current view of the 7 heads, when discussing a possible connection to the Kings of Rome, I argued that the 7th reigning a little while might not be about reign length so much as implying being driven from his position rather then reigning till he died as a King normally does.  Which also happened to Constantine II.

From there it is interesting that it was during the reign of the Sixth King that Israel was reestablished in 1948.

Update Feb21st2016: Another option I just considered re-reading the Oracle is maybe the "Antichrist" there is really The False Prophet.

Could Antiochus Epiphanes claim descent from the Lost Tribes?

I've already talked a lot about the possible familial connections of the Seleucid Dynasty in my three part Genealogy of The Antichrist study.

In light of my recent speculation that the Eight King could be Antiochus Epiphanies himself.  As well as my other speculation that The White Horseman could claim, validly or not, Ephraimite descent and try to claim he's Messiah Ben-Joseph.  This is an interesting speculation.

As I said before, I don't think he'll admit to being the hated Epiphanes, I think it's possible if he is open about being someone from the past, he might claim to be his more fondly remembered father.

I do not necessarily endorse Lost Tribes became Western Europeans theories in general.  But the nature of tribal migrations is complicated.  And Dan certainly had an interesting history.  Also my theory is more about him claiming such a lineage then if it's actually true.

Antiochus Epiphanes is not usually someone advocates of such theories seek to claim.  But I have a different perspective.

The Macedonian Royal family claimed descent, like the Spartans, from the sons of Herakles and through him to Perseus and Andromeda of Joppa and the Danoi.  All allowing possible connections to Dan or Edom.  But the Seleucids have no provable direct connection to the Agrid line however.

The sons of Herakles whom the Spartan and Macedonian royal families claim descent from supposedly intermarried with the leading family of the Dorian tribes.  Some engaged in Lost Tribes related theories have speculated that the Dorians could have a connection to Dor, a port city of Manasseh, one governor of Dor had married a daughter of Solomon.  Dor is also associated with the Tjekker of the Sea Peoples.

The Macedonians were distinct from the other Dorian derived classical Greek nations in also having some Celtic stock to them.   So Oliver Stone was not being completely random casting Irish and Scottish actors as Macedonians in his Alexander The Great film.  The relationship between the Celtic and Cimmerian peoples is complex.

Apama the wife of Seleucus I was the daughter of Spitamenes, a Perisan Satrap.  He had in his ancestry Persian and Median rulers and through them Assyrian ones too.  The mother of Esarhaddon was possibly an Israelite.  Further back there were Assyrian Kings named Asshur-Dan about whom we know little, making me wonder if connections between Assyrian Royalty and the Denyen might have taken place.

The City of Antioch itself is pretty much in the heart of the Danuna/Laish Dan area.

The Crimmerians are at the center of the main Lost Tribes became Europeans theories.  Most critics of the view just point to the obvious connection between the Cimmerians and Gomer son of Japheth, that Bill Cooper documents well in After The Flood.  He covers it in both the Where to Begin chapter and Appendix 3.

Thing is, the name Gomer also appears in Hosea as the name of the prostitute God has Hosea marry who becomes a symbolic type of Ephraim/Israel.  So advocates of the theory suggest using that name could also be a prophecy about a future intermingling of the descendants of Gomer and the Northern Kingdom.

Khumri is how the Assyrians rendered the name of Omri, which they used to refer to the Northern Kingdom in general even well after the House of Omri fell. The basis for connecting the northern Kingdom exiles to the name of the Cimmerians has often been just based on arguing that Khumri could've become Ghumri and Gimri and so on.  That I think is largely what makes it look silly to people.  Though more implausible things have happened in etymology.

Our pre-history of the Cimmerians is pretty speculative, drawing mainly form Herodotus and other heavily contrived Greek accounts.  But a connection between their name and Crimea I do consider likely.

The first appearance of the Cimmerians in Assyrian records is during the reign of Sargon II, dated to about 714 BC.  After the first two main deportations of the Israelites.  At this time they seem to be "In the midst Mannae" a buffer state between Assyrian and Uratu, rather then where they usually were later.  They assisted Sargon in his war with Uratu.  Mannae is mentioned in The Bible as Minni in Jeremiah 51:27.  Their kingdom was located south and east of Lake Urmia.  Firmly within Median territory where many exiles had been taken according to II Kings 17:6.

Later the Cimmerians during the reigns of Esarhaddon and Asshurbanipal would become enemies of Assyria, and ally with other traditional enemies of Assyria.  It's not implausible that descendants of exiled Israelites would have been attracted to joining up with the Cimmerians.

The Cimmerian nation at it's greatest extent expanded into many other regions of Turkey, like Pontus and Cappadocia.  In Hellenistic times the Cimmerians who remained in the region were known as the Galatians.  The Hellenistic kingdoms of Galatias, Cappadocia and Pontus royal families intermarried a lot with the Seleucid Dynasdty, as well as Pergamon and Commagene.  The mother of Antiochus IV Epiphanes was the daughter of Mithridates II of Pontus.

The True Identity of The False Prophet

I've discussed The False Prophet's possible ties to other Bible Prophecy, and the nature of his Signs and Wonders, as well as who he might claim to be.  Now I shall speculate on who he really is.

The term "Son of Perdition" is used only twice, the 2 Thessalonians 2 passage that's been important to this study is the second.  You'll recall I argued that the "Son of Perdition" could be the second Beast rather then the first.

The first was John 17:12 where it refers to Judas Iscariot. Because of that many have taught that Judas is the Antichrist. This ties in with the statement about Judas being sent to "his own place" after he died, possibly meaning the Abyss.

But to me Judas being The First Beast isn't possible because Judas was not a King in a succession of Seven Kings.  (I also partly feel it's important that both the death and resurrection of The Beast is witnessed by the 70th week World.)  But since I've already argued Paul's "Son of Perdition" might actually be the Second Beast rather then The First.  I notice that those issues are not a problem with Judas being The False Prophet.

There are two Old Testament prophecies cited in the New Testament as referring to Judas, yet when read in their entire context seem much grander then just Judas as we normally think of him, (and have been interpreted as referring to The Antichrist independently of noting their Judas connection). Psalm 109 (in Acts 1:20), and Zechariah 11 (in Matthew 27:9).  The latter has also already been relevant to this study.

Zechariah 11:17 calls him "the idol shepherd that leaveth the flock", sounds like it could connect to the same terminology as the verse where Jesus calls Judas the Son of Perdition. "I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.". This is a strong verse on Eternal Security, but Judas is sort of the exception that proves the rule, and his being lost is a fulfillment of prophecy.

Psalm 109 actually has three evil personages in mind, the subject of the Psalm (Who we are told is Judas) and verse 6 says "Set thou a wicked man over him: and let Satan stand at his right hand." Could it be another picture of the counterfeit Trinity?

In John 6:70 Jesus refers to Judas as "a Devil" (after saying He Chose him). In the Greek this is Diabolos, any time you see references to people being possessed by "a devil" "devils", or any references to plural "devils" the Greek is Daimon or Daimonian. This is the only time Diabolos refers to anyone other then Satan himself, but in reference to Satan it's always "the Devil" not "a Devil" so this is very unique.

Revelation 13 says of the Beast out of The Earth "he spake as a dragon", the dragon in mind here is almost certainly The Dragon. Judas is the only person who is known to have been indwelt by Satan himself, (Luke 22:3 and John 13:27). So he could easily speak with his voice.

Judas had the ability to perform miracles, just like the False Prophet will do. In Matthew 10:1-8 the Disciples (all of the Twelve are listed, including Judas) are given the power to perform miracles. Even tough Judas wasn't really saved he could perform divine miracles, including healing and raising the dead.   In this period they'll be Satanic miracles rather then divine as in Matthew 10, but the point is Judas has experience in doing this.

In Revelation 13:13 he can make "fire come down from heaven on the earth". Satan had this ability in Job:12. But Luke 9:51-56 implies this was also in the arsenal of the Twelve, though Jesus rebuked John and James then for desiring to use it in that way.  Chris White considers that miracle the key clue to who the False Prophet claims to be, why not consider it also a clue to who he really is?  Judas as one of the 12 is the only unsaved Human outside Revelation ever even remotely attributed this power.

The Second Beast isn't just the religious leader, he's also in charge of the new economy. In Revelation 13:16-17 we're told he makes everyone get The Mark and requires them to need it to buy or sell. John 12:6 tells us Judas was in charge of the moneybag during Jesus' ministry, he was their treasurer.

Judas "hanged himself" the same day Jesus was crucified. Different means of execution (the Greek term here is precise, it refers to hanging with a rope to cause strangulation), that can both fit the description of "hanged on a tree" (Deuteronomy 21:23). The First Resurrection began with Jesus, so perhaps likewise the Second Resurrection will begin with Judas.

 It's popular today to view Judas sympathetically, as someone doomed by fate, and as someone probably forgiven for what he did. The Bible definitely paints him as a Villain however.

I'm not saying it's evil to sympathize with him at all, he was human and I wouldn't want movies to make him a 1 dimensional mustache twirling villain.  But remember that he was motivated by Greed.  He was not a disillusioned revolutionary like many movies have chosen to paint him.

Jesus Christ Superstar was a popular Musical, the writer of which said once his agenda was to show Jesus as "just a a messed up dude like Judas", meaning to show Jesus as human but not divine. That is the Antichrist Hersey on it's own, but on an esoteric level I noticed something.  It does not carry the story to Jesus Resurrection, but it does have Judas sing a song after he hung himself (the title track).  In the first movie version of it, this sequence began with Judas clothed in white descending from heaven hanging onto a star.

The only Biblical basis to try and claim Judas was redeemed is Matthew 27:3 "Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself". First Repentance is not synonymous with Salvation, even those who erroneously think it's required for Salvation view it as only a first step. But also this word in the Greek is similar to but different from the usual word(s) for repentance which mean a change of mind. Metamellomai (met-am-el'-lom-ahee), simply means he was regretful.

Why he regretted it is not necessarily because he felt guilty. All the immediate text tells us is that "he saw that he was condemned", which could mean a number things, not liking how others view him, or it could simply refer to the outcome of what he did not being what he expected. But even so, feeling guilty isn't enough, what saves you is placing your Faith in Jesus.

Some of the Judas is the Antichrist theorists have suggested that what happened at Gethsemane was not what he planned, that he did not expect Jesus to simply willingly hand himself over. After all Satan's previous attempts to kill Him Jesus had averted somehow. It's been suggested that Satan didn't know yet there would be two Advents.

Now, "that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet" is not a contradiction, first off there is a connection to Jeremiah 32:6-9.  Second, chapters 9-14 of Zachariah unlike the earlier chapters do not begin with Zachariah identifying himself, it's possible he was recording additional prophecies of Jeremiah that he gave after his own Book was finished, and that weren't scribed by Baruch accounting for a different literary style.

Now as for the supposed contradiction in how Judas died. I'm not entirely sure what I do think, but viewing them as somehow irreconcilable is absurd given the lack of detail both verses have.

Matthew 27:5 simply says "And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself." It actually does not say he died here at all, lots of attempted self hangings fail, it's kind of the easiest form of suicide to botch.

But all Luke says in Acts 1:18 is "this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out." This could mean the rope broke and he fell. It's possible Luke intended here a Poetic connection to a parable he recorded Jesus saying in Luke 5:36-39.

 And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.  And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish.  But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved.  No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.

What's Interesting is that Acts 1:18 implies Judas himself bought the field, while Matthew 27 says the Priests did. But that's not a big deal, the money was still legally Judas's, that's the point of what the Priests did with it.

Zachariah 11 is a very cryptic Prophecy. And without the help of the New Testament it's not necessarily clear who will throw the money, and it's possible many Rabbis did indeed assume it was the Good Shepard. So the theory of some is that when Judas threw the money he expected the Priests to interpret it as fulfilling that prophecy. And that now Satan had figured out that the Messiah had to be "hung on a tree" and that Judas was intentionally making a last minute ploy to set himself up as a False Messiah.

If as I suggested in part 3 of this study, The False Prophet claims to be Jesus.  Judas would have an advantage in pulling that illusion off, he too was a first century AD Judean male of probably about the same age.  He also interacted with the man he'd be seeking to imitate.  But it wouldn't be impossible for such an individual to pass as Elijah either, fitting Chris White's theory.

Another purely conjectural note.  What if the False Prophet as a fake Jesus chooses to incorporate a claim that certain heresies have made about Jesus having children who became ancestral to various Royal Houses is true?  Easy enough claim to make, but what if he offers to prove it via a DNA test?  Remembering that Psalm 109 is about Judas, it also tells us he had a wife and children.  Maybe he helped sire the bloodline(s) claimed to be from Jesus?

I no longer view the Islamic Antichrist theory as being likely to be how things play out.  But I do still hold that the Mahdi is among many false Prophecies Satan inspired for the purpose of being possible avenues for The Antichrist.

Part of that theory is seeing Isa as the False Prophet.  It is also well known how the Koran is interpreted at one point as claiming Jesus wasn't on the Cross but was switched with someone.  Well the apocryphal Gospel of Barnabas (not to be confused with his also falsely attributed Epistle) seems to, in the form of it we have, be a pseudo Proto-Islamic text, claiming to foretell Mohamed by name, and agreeing with many Islamic ideas like Ishmael over Issac.  In this Gospel of Barnabas the person who was on the cross instead of Jesus was Judas, which is potentially interesting.

The Seven Kings of Revelation 17(and 13) Part 3: Herodian Dynasty

I shall return now to the assumption that the Angel meant John's own time.  Remembering how I ended my Edom=Rome study.  I've considered, and found some others have as well, that they might be the Herodian dynasty.

In Revelation 13 it also says "upon his heads the name of blasphemy". Herod, which is actually "Herodes" in the Greek texts, derives from the same Greek root word as "hero" and "heroic".  To the Greeks however, Heroes were the Demigods, half human half god beings, or deified humans. So the very meaning of the name of Herod was Blasphemous.  It's also occurred to me that the name could be a masculine form of Hera, after whom Herakles(Hercules) was named.

1. Herod The Great, 37-1 B.C. Was the first to have the name and the first to rule as King, being proclaimed King of The Jews (Rex Judearum) by the Roman Senate. He massacred the children of Bethlehem.

2. Herod Archelaus, B.C. 1-6 A.D. Was mentioned at the end of Matthew 2. When he was deposed The Scepter departed from Judah. Babylonian Talmud, Chapter 4, folio 37

3. Herod Antipas, B.C. 1-39 A.D. Beheaded John The Baptist, and mocked Jesus on the day of The Passover.

4. Herod Agrippa I, 37-44 A.D. Only one other then The Great to rule as King of Judea.  Martyred James and tried to kill Peter in Acts 12 which goes on to record his death. And indeed from that account I've considered him more then any other Heordian a type of The Antichrist.

Acts 1220-23

And Herod was highly displeased with them of Tyre and Sidon: but they came with one accord to him, and, having made Blastus the king's chamberlain their friend, desired peace; because their country was nourished by the king's country.  And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them.  And the people gave a shout, saying, "It is the voice of a god, and not of a man".  And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost.

This is verified by Josephus in Antiquities of The Jews Chapter 8.

Now when Agrippa had reigned three years over all Judea, he came to the city Cesarea, which was formerly called Strato's Tower; and there he exhibited shows in honor of Caesar, upon his being informed that there was a certain festival celebrated to make vows for his safety. At which festival a great multitude was gotten together of the principal persons, and such as were of dignity through his province. On the second day of which shows he put on a garment made wholly of silver, and of a contexture truly wonderful, and came into the theater early in the morning; at which time the silver of his garment being illuminated by the fresh reflection of the sun's rays upon it, shone out after a surprising manner, and was so resplendent as to spread a horror over those that looked intently upon him; and presently his flatterers cried out, one from one place, and another from another, [though not for his good,] that he was a god; and they added, "Be thou merciful to us; for although we have hitherto reverenced thee only as a man, yet shall we henceforth own thee as superior to mortal nature." Upon this the king did neither rebuke them, nor reject their impious flattery. But as he presently afterward looked up, he saw an owl sitting on a certain rope over his head, and immediately understood that this bird was the messenger of ill tidings, as it had once been the messenger of good tidings to him; and fell into the deepest sorrow. A severe pain also arose in his belly, and began in a most violent manner. He therefore looked upon his friends, and said, "I, whom you call a god, am commanded presently to depart this life; while Providence thus reproves the lying words you just now said to me; and I, who was by you called immortal, am immediately to be hurried away by death. But I am bound to accept of what Providence allots, as it pleases God; for we have by no means lived ill, but in a splendid and happy manner." When he said this, his pain was become violent. Accordingly he was carried into the palace, and the rumor went abroad every where, that he would certainly die in a little time. But the multitude presently sat in sackcloth, with their wives and children, after the law of their country, and besought God for the king's recovery. All places were also full of mourning and lamentation. Now the king rested in a high chamber, and as he saw them below lying prostrate on the ground, he could not himself forbear weeping. And when he had been quite worn out by the pain in his belly for five days, he departed this life, being in the fifty-fourth year of his age, and in the seventh year of his reign;

5. Herod of Chalcis, ???-48 A.D. After the death of Agrippa was given stewardship of The Temple and responsibility for appointing The High Priest.

6. Herod Agrippa II, 48-100 A.D. Took responsibility for The Temple from Herod of Chalcis. Paul was tried before him in Acts where he said "almost you have convinced me to become a christian". Lived for awhile in rumored Incest with his sister Berenice. He was the current Herodian monarch through both Nero and Domitian's reigns.  Died in about 100 A.D.

7 option 1. Tiberius Claudius Atticus Herodes, Legatus of the Iudaea Province 99-102 A.D. He is not known to have been biologically Herodian, but he happens to have the name, and little is know about his ancestry. He was the last Herodes to govern Judea or Jerusalem.  And he did so for only 3-4 years.

7 option 2. Bar-Kokhba.  Rashi described Bar-Kokhba as "one of the Herodian kings" at the same time as emphasizing his reign was short (two and a half years).  In his commentary on Sanhedrin 93b.

My Genealogy of The Antichrist study documents potential ties between the Herodian dynasty and modern European Royalty through their intermarriages with Roman Aristocracy.

Genealogy of The Antichrist: Antiochus to Charlemagne

St. Arnulf of Metz is a 33–generation descendant of Antio-
chos II
Theos
Numbers in each generation follow
Ahnentafel
coding.
Generation 1
1. St. Arnulf of Metz,
maiordomus
in the kingdom of Austrasia
(c.582–16.8.640). He married Dode (–?–), daughter of Arnold of Schelde,
after 611.
Generation 2
2. Bodogisel, ambassador to Byzantium in 589.
Generation 3
4. Mummolin,
maiordomus
in 566 in Neustria.
Generation 4
9. NN. married to Munderic.
Generation 5
19. Artemie, married in 513to Florentinus, bishop of Geneve.
Generation 6
38. Rustique, bishop of Lyon between 494 and 501
Generation 7
76. Rurice de Limoges, bishop of Limoges c. 485-507
Generation 8
152. NN.
Generation 9
304. Adelphius.
Generation 10
609. Anicia, married to Pontius.
Generation 11
1219. Turrenia Anicia Iuliana, married to Quintus Clodius
Hermogenianus Olybrius, consul in 379.
Generation 12
2438. Anicius Auchenius Bassus, prefect in 382 in Rome, mar-
ried to Turrenia Honorata.
Generation 13
4876. Amnius Manius Cæsonius Nicomachus Anicius Paulinus
Honorius, consul in 334.
Generation 14
9752. Amnius Anicius Iulianus, consul in 322.
Generation 15
19504. Sextus Anicius Faustus, consul in 298.
Generation 16
39009. Asinia Iuliana Nichomacha, married to Quintus Ani-
cius Faustus.
Generation 17
78018. Caius Asinius Nicomachus Iulianus, proconsul in Asia
circa 250.
Generation 18
156036. Caius Asinius Quadratus Protimus, proconsul in A-
khaia circa 220.
Generation 19
312072. Caius Asinius Quadratus, historian, c. 200.
Generation 20
624144. Caius Iulius Asinius Quadratus.
Generation 21
1248288. Caius Iulius Quadratus Bassus, consul in 105, mar-
ried to Asinia Marcella.
Generation 22
2496576. Caius Iulius Bassus, proconsul in Bithynia, 98.
Generation 23
4993152. Caius Iulius Severus, nobleman from Akmoneia in
Galatia.
Generation 24
9986304. Artemidoros, nobleman in Galatia.
Generation 25
19972608. Amyntas, tetrarcus of Trocmes.
Generation 26
39945217. NN., married to Brogitarix, king of Galatia c. 63–50
b.C.
Generation 27
79890435. Berenike, married to Deiotarix I, king of Galatia,
63–41 b.C.
Generation 28
159780871. NN. (daughter).
Generation 29
319561742. Attalos Philometor III, king of Pergamon, 138–133
b.C.
Generation 30
639123485. Stratonike of Kappadokia, married to Eumenes,
king of Pergamon, 197–159 b.C.
Generation 31
1278246970. Ariarathes IV Eusebes Philopator, king of Cap-
padokia, 220–163b.C.
Generation 32
2556493941. Stratonike, married to Ariarathes III.
Generation 33
5112987882. Antiochos II Theos I, king of Syria, 261–246 b.C.,
b. 290 b.C.

I copied the above line of descent from another source, but because other things in that source are bad info I don't want link to it. But this line of decent I have studied generation by generation and it's valid, though a few mistakes might have been made in exactly how it was expressed.  At a certain point it overlaps with my Genealogy of Commanege, Julia the wife of Gaius Julius Quadratus was the daughter of Gaius Julius Alexander and Iotapa daughter of Anitochus IV of Commagene.  From them came the Historian of 200 AD.

Arnulf of Metz's son Ansegisel married Saint Begga, the daughter of Pepin of Landen. They had Pepin of Herstal the father of Charles Martel, the father of Pepin the Short, the father of Charlemagne.

Ansegisel and Begga also had a daughter Clotilda of Heristal who was married to the Merovingian king Theoderic III of of Neustria and Austrasia. Bertrada of Prum was very likely their daughter, she was the mother of Caribert of Laon.  His daughter daughter Bertrada of Laon was the wife of Pepin the Short mentioned above and mother of Charlemagne.

Another note on the above line of descent. Munderic claimed to be a son of Chlodoric the Parricide, who's called that because he murdered his own father, Sigobert the Lame, in order to take his kingdom. Chlodoric acted upon the instigation of Clovis I a rival king of the Salian Franks. After Sigobert's death Clovis then accused Chlodoric of the murder and had him killed in his turn for the crime. In this way Clovis became king of Sigobert's and Chlodoric's lands. Sigobert the lame could be a descendant of Merovee by a line independent of Clovis I.

It is well known that pretty much all modern European Royalty can claim descent from Charlemagne.  And other prominent families too.  It's been claimed in Conspiracy theory circles that almost all Presidents of The United States are descendants of Charlemagne.  I'm not sure how verifiable that claim is.

Charlemagne also as can be shown above had Merovingian ancestry.  So that can tie into theories about how DaVinci Code type claims might be used.  But other means exist to try and give this same European Royalty Davidic Ancestry.
http://www.britam.org/Tribesman/GeneaologyDavid.html
The theories being drawn on here have been discredited by many skeptics.

But it's interesting, between that and the Armenian/Georgian royalty.  We have a lot of people with Seleucid descent and also claims to Davidic descent.

Genealogy of The Antichrist: Descent from Antiquity

This is a family tree I made myself of the royal family of Commagene and placed on my Flickr account

I need to update it. What I know now that I didn't know then was that Gaius Julius Alexander Berenicianus, listed there as a maternal grandson of Antiochus IV of Commegene and paternal grandson of Tigranes VI of Armenia, had married a woman named Cassia Lepida. Her mother is unknown but her father was Cassius Lepidus, the son of Junia Lepida and Gaius Cassius Longinus, who was Consul suffectus in 30 A.D. (The year I date the Crucifixion) and a direct descendant of the Gaius Cassius Longinus who was one of the assassins of Julius Caesar on the Ides of March 44 B.C. Junia Lepida was a descendant of Augustus's granddaughter Julia the Younger.

Berenicianus and Cassia Lepida had a daughter named Julia Cassia Alexandria who married Gaius Avidius Heliodorus. Their son was Gaius Avidius Cassius who was a brief Roman Usurper of the 2nd Century A.D. He had three children, Avidius Heliodorus, Avidius Maecianus, and Avidia Alexandra.

Tigranes VI of Armenia was of direct pater-lineal descent from Herod The Great and the Hasmoneans as shown in these family trees I made.
Herodian Dynasty
Hasmonean Dynasty

The next two family trees aren't my own, but taken from tyndalehouse, a very good site on the Ptolemaic Dynasty (Which intermarried with the Seleucids) though I disagree with them on some things.
Seleucid Family Tree
Continuation of Seleucid and Ptolemaic Lines

Now there is a new Seleucid-Genealogy website. They disagree with the Tyndale site on some things.  Their different take on the Acheaus line intrigues me.[Now we have to use the Wayback Machine for it.]

"The most complete proposal for a DFA is the Bagratid one. The route starts with Arsaces, the first of the Arsacids, flourishing ca. 250 BC. One of his descendants, king Tiridates III of Armenia, who reigned early in the 4th century, is known to have been ancestor of Nerses the Great. The latter's son Sahak I was the father-in-law of Hamazasp I, an Armenian ruler from the Mamikonian dynasty. Then the line can be traced, though not with certainty, to a much later Mamikonian, Samuel II of Armenia, whose son-in-law was Smbat VIII Bagratuni, Constable of Armenia and forefather of all the living Bagratids. The advantage of this route is that its crucial links (from Arsacids to Gregorids, from Gregorids to Mamikonids, and from Mamikonids to Bagratids) may be corroborated by near-contemporary sources, dating to within a century after the key marriages took place."

 The Above used to be on Wikipedia's Descent from Antiquity page. Wikipedia currently doesn't number any Smbat as VIII, but it's not uncommon for these numberings to be different in different sources.  The Son in Law of Samuel II of Armenia is currently numbered as Smbat VII.  Also the person called Sahak I above is more commonly known as Isaac of Armenia.

Ruben I who founded the Roupenian Dynasty of Armenian Cilicia in the Eleventh Century is generally agreed to have been a Bagratid relative and probably also descended from Smbat.  Later Gabriel of Melitene is believed to be connected either by his wife or mother to Ruben I.  Gabriel's daughter was Morphia of Melitene.

 Tiridates III of Armenia was of direct Pater-lineal descent from Khosrov I of Armenia. Khosrov I was one of the sons born to King Vologases II of Armenia (Vagharsh II) who is also known as Vologases V of Parthia by an unnamed mother. Vologases was of direct pater-lineal descent from Vonones II of Parthia (Who is numbered Vonones I on the Tyndale site's genealogy). He and his brother were the sons of Darius son of Artavasdes of Media by a daughter of Antiochus I Theos of Commanege (another correction I need to make to my genealogy is that daughter was named Athenais not Iotapa). The wife of Darius is an unnamed Arascid princess, who may herself already be descended from earlier intermarriages between the Arascid and Seleucid dynasties.

The Bagratid dynasties have also claimed Davidic Descent.

Maria Taronitissa was probably of Bagratid descent via the Roupenians, she married John Doukas Komnenos a Duke of Cyprus who had descent from Byzantine Emperors. Their daughter Maria Komnene married Amalric I Crusader King of Jerusalem.   All modern claimants to the Crusader King of Jerusalem title are descendants of that marriage.

Amalric's mother Mellisende of Jerusalem had ruled as Queen of Jerusalem.  Her parents were Baldwin II of Jerusalem and his wife Morphia of Melitene who also descended from Armenian nobility.  Another daughter of theirs was Alice of Antioch who married Bohemond II of Antioch and had a daughter, Constance of Antioch.  Constance had a number of children from whom the Princes of Antioch descend, and a daughter, Agnes of Antioch.  Agnes had 6 children, and from them descended all later kings of Hungry, and her daughter Constance of Hungry was the mother of Wenceslaus I of Bohemia.

Mary of Lusignan was the daughter of Hugh I of Cyprus and Alice of Champagne, daughter of Queen Isabella I of Jerusalem, daughter of Aalmric and Maria Komnene.  She is an ancestor of modern British Royalty.

Marie de Lusignan (1215-1251/3)

Hugh, Count of Brienne (1240-1296)

Walter V of Brienne (1278-1311)

Isabella of Brienne (1306-1360), claimant to the Kingdom of Jerusalem

Louis of Enghien (d. 1394)

Marguerite of Enghien (b. 1365) m. John of Luxembourg, Lord of Beauvoir

Peter of Luxembourg, Count of Saint Pol (1390-1433)

Jacquetta of Luxembourg, married Earl Rivers

Elizabeth, Queen of England m. Edward IV

Elizabeth of York m. Henry VII

Elizabeth of York was the mother of Henry VIII, and his Sister who was an ancestor of both parents of King James Stuart VI of Scotland and I of England.

Returning to the subject of the Western branch. Avidius Heliodorus and other descendants of Antiochus IV of Commanege where based in Syria. At least two Syrian based Usurpers during the Crisis of the Third Century are also probably descended form them, Joptainians and one named Seleucus. The entire Aristocracy of Roman Syria (and surrounding regions) from the Second Century onward was Seleucid.

Eutropia was a woman of Syrian origin living in the late Third and early Fourth centuries AD. By her first husband she had Flavia Maximiana Theodora, who married Constantius I Chlorus, and was the mother of all his children except Constantine I. However her much younger daughter by her second husband Fausta married Constantine I. By the mid Fourth Century the entire Constantinian dynasty was descended from Eutropia. I suspect it's through the Constantinians that the Merovingian dynasty (as well as other early Western European dynasties) can be traced back to the Seleucids, but I can't prove it yet.

Update October 2019: The Heraclied Dynasty who ruled the Byzantine Empire for most of the Seventh Century are also speculated to have had Arascid Armenian Descent.