I now have Charles Beke's book on Jabal Baghir being Sinai

Click here to find it on Amazon.

He still placed Kadesh and Paran in the Sinai Peninsula, in fact Paran is what he prefers to call that Peninsula.  I feel I have firmly proven they are Petra, east of Israel's southern border, however this mountain fits Petra as Kadesh quite well regardless of that.

He actually gets into an early version of Mziraim wasn't Egypt speculation, but his take on that isn't as extreme.  He argues Miizraim was a tribe dwelling on the Wadi al Arish the Biblical "River of Egypt", and he identifies them as the Hyksos.  I actually think this may be a reasonable way to reconcile the issues, Mizraim settled there but his 7 named sons lead colonies into Africa.

He also predates Wyatt and Cornuke in arguing for the Biblical Yam Suph referring to specifically the Gulf of Aqaba.

I'm not willing to settle on this theory for Sinai yet.  What compels me to make a post on this is some of the material that surprisingly adds new context to the Petra as the original Mecca speculations.

Beke is informed by local Arabs that Jabal Baghir is also known as Jebel en-Nur or Jebel e-Nur, the Mountain of Light.  And the thing is he doesn't even seem to know that name is more famously the name of a Mountain near Mecca where Jibril first appeared to Muhammad.  He was simply told the Mountain of Light is one of three Mountains visible from Aqaba.

Dan Gibson, the main popularizer of the Petra as the original Mecca theory doesn't identify this mountain with Al-Nour, instead his location for the Cave of Hira is within Petra north of where the major Tombs are.  But I think this mountain being a little further from "Mecca" then it's usually thought to be can work well, it's a place Muhammad traveled to and stayed for a month.

On page 417 Beke concludes that an earlier writer, Burckhardt, had used the name Jebel Shafeh to refer to Jebel Shera, if Jebel Shera is a mountain near Petra, it might be the one Gibson has identified as Safa or it might by Gibson's Marwah.

I wonder if it would be accurate to describe Jebel Bagir as 5 Kilometers from Aqaba?

Dan to Beersheba

Beersheba might seem like an odd Biblical location to question the traditional identification of.  But I really feel the modern Israeli city of Beerhseba is too far north to work for how often Beersheba is an idiom of Israel's southern border.  And maybe it's too far west too, this idiom should perhaps be the middle of the border otherwise it's more of a corner.

Part of the confusion comes from Gerar, I think Biblical Gerar includes the modern traditional location but extents further to cover a descent chunk of the southern Negev.  It's a region not a city.

There are three chapters of The Bible that define the Southern Border without reference to Beersheba or Gerar.  Numbers 34, Ezekiel 47 and Ezekiel 48, all three can be difficult to interpret because of how they use place names that appear only in these three chapters, plus other aspects that are translated inconsistently.  The Lamsa translation of the Peshita version of Ezekiel seems to make Tamar and Meribah-Kadesh different names of the same location, and I think of all the versions I've read that makes the most sense in the context of other aspects of Biblical geography.

Numbers 34's use of Zin further confirms that Barnea is the same Kadesh (the Wilderness of Paran I think refers to everything west of the Arabah while the Wilderness of Zin is a more specific sub section of Paran.)  I think the reason Numbers 21 at first looks like it's saying they just arrived at a new location is because they did move slightly, but in the grand scheme of things are still on the same dot on a map of Jordan small enough to fit on my Labtop's computer screen.

So all three of these chapters place Kadesh on or very near the eastern edge of the Southern Border.  While the Western part of the border is the Wadi al-Arish.  Kadesh as I've already argued is Petra in Jordan.  The name Beersheba is not introduced till Genesis 21 but it's still implied to be pretty much where Abraham and Sarah settled at the start of chapter 20.  So the information in those chapters of Genesis combined with other references to Kadesh and Paran further support Beersheba being close to the same latitude as Kadesh.  And also about halfway between Kadesh and the Egyptian border.

Frankly I currently think Avdat is about where Beersheba should be.  The ruins at Avdat standing today (you can see them in the 73 film version of Jesus Christ Superstar) are Nabataean ruins contemporary with the Greco-Roman period, as is the name Avdat itself.  Biblical Beersheba I do not expect to have been a bustling Metropolis, it was probably a pretty humble village with no major buildings, the construction of Nabatean Avdat could easily have eliminated whatever remains older Beersheba had.  Avdat did have a Well which was the water source of it's Roman Bathhouse.

Avdat was an important stop on the road connecting Gaza to Petra. That fits pretty well with the picture I've painted above of the relationship between Beersheba and Kadesh.

Then I learned about Shivta, another city on that trade same route who's name actually seems connected to Beersheba's original name in Genesis 26:33 and Joshua 19:2.  

I now think Beersheba was in the area of either Shivta/Sobota/Subeita, Ruheiba (which seems to have the most notable Well in the area according to Dan Gibson) or Elusa.  And that Avdat/Obodat to their south was the ancient settlement of Abida son of Midian.

The Geography of Sinai and Kadesh

This is not the first post I've made on that subject.  I have for various reasons become more interested in Kadesh then Sinai.  That includes the extent to which the Wandering in the Wilderness has typological significance to aspects of the End Times.

Among people trying to argue for alternatives to the traditional site of Mt Sinai, those who are merely moving it further north in the peninsula still accept the traditional sites of Kadesh-Barnea and Paran and everything else just about.  But I feel you can't make the argument that the traditional Sinai is based on probably wrong European guesses but keep all the others, because those identifications came even later and are derived from that Sinai location. 

It really doesn't matter that you think they aren't compatible with each other, the people who first choose current Barnea either didn't consider the 11 days verse from Deuteronomy, or had reasons for thinking it fit just fine.  I've seen people specifically argue for the 11 days journey fitting locations even further apart, so I frankly am uninterested in using that as an argument at all.

Frankly I suspect even Empress Helena gets too much credit/blame, I think a lot of what's attributed to her is more folklore then history.  I do think she went to Jerusalem and played a role in choosing the Church of the Holy Sepulture, but I have my doubts she went down to those remote parts of the Sinai.

Paran is a good one to start with.  Both Eusebius and Jerome place Paran in Arabia Deserta.  That is a lot more specific then just saying Arabia, that is a precise Roman Geographical term for the Arabian Desert that was distinct from and between Arabia Petraea/Nabataea and Arabia Felix(Yemen).

This witness to Paran being in Arabia Deserta has been used to support the Paran of Hagar and Ishmael being the Hejaz and Mecca, but most Biblical evidence places the Ishmaelite Tribes in or very near modern Jordan.  Mecca and Medina/Yathrib are south even of most lands associated with the sons of Keturah, though Josephus says her sons were settled in Arabia Felix which is basically Yemen.

Contrary to what some Jabal el-Lawz enthusiasts will tell you, Arabia in antiquity did sometimes include the Sinai Peninsula.  But the basis for that is mostly the Sinai being part of the Roman Province of Arabia Petraea which before Trajan conquered it was the Nabataean Kingdom.  The Sinai was also known to have been inhabited by Qedarites in the 5th Century BC.  

Biblical support for a Trans-Jordan Paran begins with Genesis 14 where El-Paran and Kadesh are associated with Seir and the Horites and various other obscure tribes that later Torah passages associate with the lands of Edom, Moab and Ammon.  And that is further backed up by the very first verse of Deuteronomy.

I'm not entirely decided on if I think Kadesh-Barnea and Kadesh-Meribah are the same location, but at this moment I lean towards them being the same, since both have equally valid reasons for being placed in Jordan.  It could be possible they are sperate specific encampments but still close enough that a modern city could encompass both.

Kadesh-Meribah is used in Ezekiel 47:19 and 48:28 as a marker for Israel's southern border.  Basically you're supposed to draw an east-west line from Kadesh-Meribah to a river that flows into the Mediterranean Sea (probably the Wādī al-ʻArīsh).  That supports it being a location on or very near the border between Israel and Jordan.

Josephus in Antiquities of The Jews Book 4 Chapter 4 Section 7 identifies Petra as a Metropolis of the Arabs and as where Aaron died.  Now strictly speaking that is Biblically Hor not Kadesh-Meribah.  However the area of Petra includes sites locally identified with everything in Numbers 20.  It's possible that at one time this was not all considered one city.  Numbers 20 implies Kadesh is on the King's Highway which fits Petra but not the traditional location.

All that is how I was thinking about the Josephus reference.  Now I know that the Petra linked Mount Hor is technically South West of Petra proper.  Since Numbers 20:21 says they turned away from Edom when they went to Hor that can fit the city of Kadesh being North of Hor.  It still seems weird that Josephus didn't mention the name of Petra sooner.

Kadesh and Hor were not under Edom's control at the time of Moses but are near Edom's border according to both Numbers 20 and Josephus.  But Petra did become Edomite for awhile later during the Kingdom period being the city known as Cela/Sela/Selah in 2 Kings 14:7 and Isaiah 16:1, but also sometimes simply translated Rock in Obadiah verse 3 and Jeremiah 49:16.  Cela is a city also named in the Amarna Letters and is in fact the Semitic equivalent of the Greek Petra.

This Hebrew word for Rock first appears in The Bible in Numbers 20 verses 8, 10 and 11, being used of the Rock Moses stuck.  The first Meribah incident in Exodus 17 at Rephidim where Moses did what he was supposed to do uses different words for rock/stone, cagal in verse 4 and tswur in verse 6.  So is it possible the use of this word for rock is circumstantial evidence we are in the future Edomite Cela?

[Apparently the Petra=Sela assumption is outdated, Edomtie Sela is now identified as a place further north.  I still think Moses using this word for Rock here and not at Rephidim could reflect this location being the same mountain range and thus same kinds of rocks.  Petra being on the King's Highway but to the South of Edom arguably fits Kadesh of Numbers 20 even better.  Isaiah 42:11 does refer to a Cela being inhabited by Kedar.]

Numbers 13 places Kadesh-Barnea in Paran.  Genesis 21:21 identifies Paran as where Hagar raised Ishmael.  And I feel it's reasonably implied Hagar returned to the same location as her earlier temporary exile from Genesis 16:14, the well between Kadesh and Bered.

Petra as Kadesh lends credence to the Petra was the original Mecca theory of Dan Gibson which I've discussed in a few posts on a different blog already.  What Mecca claims to be Biblically is basically the Kadesh and Paran of these verses of Genesis.  Though there is still no Biblical support for Abraham building a House of Worship there, he only did that at future Israelite locations, Shechem, Bethel and Mamre near Hebron.  However the meaning of the name Kadesh suggests it was considered Sacred by someone.

Of course Kadesh could be one of a number of Genesis place names that appear as an editorial decision from Moses and not names already used at that time.  A Samaritan source known as Sharḥ al-Asāṭīr claims that Mecca was build by the sons of Nabojath (Nabateans).

Sinai I do now lean towards placing in the Sinai Peninsula.  It being described by Josephus as "between Egypt and Arabia" best fits that location, yet is also consistent with being sometimes placed in Arabia because it was part of the Roman Province and the Nabataean kingdom.

That said what Paul says in Galatians I don't even think we should consider geographically useful.   Paul is using Sinai as a symbol, and his association of Sinai with Hagar suggests he's combing Sinai and Kadesh of Paran in his symbolism.  However if both were part of the Domain of Aretas when Paul was writing that makes his fusing them together as both Hagarene work.

I find it amusing when Jabal El-Lawz proponents use Josephus calling Sinai the largest mountain in the area against Jebel Musa and then talk about how tall their mountain is.  When Mount Catherine right next to Jebel Musa is taller then Jabal El-Lawz.  That said I am also interested in more northern theories.  Being the tallest in the region isn't a Biblical detail and in fact I think it's a very secular mindset that would want that to be the case, God doesn't need to prove how Big He is the way Men do.

Some people will also place Sinai in Petra, Jebel al-Madhbah (the Mountain of the Altar).  Clearly however that is too close to the Numbers 20 events I now place there.  But maybe this mountain has some importance to the Petra=Mecca theory?  Maybe it's the original Jabal al-Nour, since after all that mountain's role in Muhammad's biography tempts one to thematically compare it to Sinai.  Question is does Madhbah have a cave that could work as the Cave of Hira?  I would hope whoever first tried to convince people this was Sinai/Horeb made sure there was a cave for Elijah in 1 Kings 19:8-9?

Maybe Jebel al-Madhbah is the Mount Paran of Deuteronomy 33:2 and Habakkuk 3:3.

The only East of Aqaba location I'm currently willing to consider for Sinai is Jabal Ahmad al Baqir in southern Jordan.  It kind of perfectly fits the Deuteronomy picture of the Seir mountains being between Sinai and Kadesh-Barnea if the later is indeed Petra.  Unfortunately no one has made documentaries on this mountain and I can't find the 19th Century book that proposed it online, and Amazon has no copies at the moment.

The Manna Miracle and the origins of The Sabbath, Exodus 16

The precedent for The Sabbath was absolutely set by the Creation week recorded in Genesis 1&2.

But there is a debate about if it was kept by believers as a custom before the Exodus.   We have evidence of what animals are clean and unclean being known in Genesis.  But nothing from Genesis 3 on through the first Passover that in any way alludes to Patriarchs or Hebrews keeping The Sabbath.

Now Exodus 16 which is the account of The Manna miracle is constantly cited as proof it was known before the giving of The Law.  Indeed the Decalogue in Exodus 19 refers to it as something they already knew.

The thing is, if you study Exodus 16 carefully, it seems to be presenting this story as the origin of The Sabbath.  Nothing in here suggests it was already being practiced.

On the 15th day of the Second Month, the Israelites complain.  Then Moses tells them what is about to happen.  This was BTW the month following the very first Passover.

At evening, when the 16th started, Yahuah's Glory appeared onto them and they eat Quail (and no vice president had to shoot anyone in the face).  Then in the morning of that day they found the first Manna.

On the 6th day that the Manna fell they were instructed to gather twice what they usually did so they'd have Manna the following day which they were told not to collect Manna on.  And thus that seventh day was named The Sabbath.

Now to many this would be an argument against Christians needing to keep it.  I however see no correlation between what we have to keep and what came in with Moses, to me those issues are addressed elsewhere.

I'm writing this here because I feel understanding this could help us understand the Eschatological importance of The Sabbath.  Because the Manna is often seen as another miracle repeated in Revelation in chapter 12.

If The Sabbath was a rule already.  That would have to make this 15th of Iyar a Sabbath, but they don't seem to be keeping a Sabbath at the moment and no comment is made on it.  Yahuah waits till it's Sunday to speak to the people.

If you counted hypothetical Sabbaths backwards from this.  The 8th and 1st of that Iyar would have been Sabbaths.

And if the Nisan of the first Passover had 30 days, then it's Sabbaths would have been the 24th, 17th, 10th and 3rd.  But if it had 29 days then they would have been the 23rd, 16th, 9th and 2nd.

The latter would happen to fit my model for the Nisan of the Crucifixion as a Thursday supporter.  The former would happen to fit what is usually argued for by Wednesday supporters.  But you can't get a Friday model from it.  That doesn't prove anything but it's amusing.  And either of those would put the hypothetical anniversary in advance of The Ascension on the 27th of Iyar, which might be interesting.

Maybe God arranged this so it would happen to fit where The Sabbath would haven been if it'd been being kept since Adam.  But either way, I'm convinced now that the origin of The Sabbath as a custom kept by humans is in Exodus 16.

Nehemiah 9:12-15 also states that it was at this time that Yahuah made The Holy Sabbath known to them.

Israel's hiding place in The Wilderness during The Day of Yahuah

I still believe the doctrine that Israel will have a Hiding Place in the Wilderness during the three and a half years between The Rapture and the start of the Millennium.

The Woman of Revelation 12 is Israel, and verses 6 and 14 refer to her hiding in the Wilderness in a place prepared by God.

Matthew 14 also records Jesus warning to flee to the Wilderness when you see The Abomination of Desolation.

What I have come to disagree with is the popular view that this hiding place is in the land anciently ruled by Edom but today part of Jordan, Biblically identified with Bozrah, though for some reason popularly identified with the distinct Petra.

Daniel 11:41 is taken as assurance that Edom, Moab and at least part of Ammon (all in modern Jordan) will escape The Antichrist.  But I've already shown that Prophecy was about Caesar Augustus, and refers to those lands being ruled by the Nabatean kingdom of Aretas.  And even if it does have a second fulfillment, this passage still doesn't directly connect itself to this doctrine, and that lack of control is not guaranteed to be permanent, Rome did eventually conquer the Nabatean Kingdom under Trajan, the same Caesar who conquered Babylon for Rome interestingly.

The main basis for placing their hiding place in Bozrah is Micah 2:12.

I will surely assemble, O Jacob, all of thee; I will surely gather the remnant of Israel; I will put them together as the sheep of Bozrah, as the flock in the midst of their fold: they shall make great noise by reason of the multitude of men.

Thing is Bozrah is also a Hebrew term that means Sheepfold, and in context it looks like that is what's being said here, not a place name.  There are no near by references to Edom or other Edomite place names to verify this being the Edomite city.  And to further complicate things Jeremiah 48:24 refers to a Bozrah in Moab.

Amos 1:12 and Isaiah 34 refers to Bozrah specifically and Edom as a whole as being subject to God's Wrath during the Day of Warth.  Now I think that is arguably about Eschatological Edom being Rome/The West, but I think the geographical lands of Ancient Edom could play a role in that, Edom returning to their roots in a sense, not unlike Mystery Babylon returning to Shinar in Zechariah 5.

The final passage cited to prove this theory is Isaiah 63 where Jesus, described similarly to how he is in Revelation 19, is coming from Edom and Bozrah.  This passage also doesn't directly connect itself to the Wilderness hiding place doctrine but I think it's more likely to be relevant then Daniel.

It could be Jesus is traveling through Edom/Bozrah and it's neither the starting or ending point.  However it certainly is not the ending point, so this theory is dependent on saying he goes where Israel is hiding first and then marches to Armageddon.

I however think based on Genesis 28:17 that when Revelation 19:11 says Heaven Opened, that opening is in Beth-El.  Destroying The Armies of The Beast is the first thing Jesus will do, then he'll go to Israel to lead them back to Jerusalem.

So I think the reference to Edom and Bozrah in Isaiah 63 is the same as in Isaiah 34 and other Prophecies about Edom's final Judgment, like Obadiah, of Ezekiel 35-36.

So where do I think Israel will be protected?

I have argued before for seeing the Day of Yahuah as being a typological repeat of much of the history of The Exodus.  In that context I think perhaps this will be the same place they wandered in The Wilderness for 40 years in the days of Moses.  In fact I think the reference to her being fed there in 12:6 possibly alludes to a return of the Manna miracle.  Also Exodus 19:4 uses Eagles' Wings terminology, as does Isaiah 40:31.

We do also see a pattern throughout The Bible of individuals returning to this same location.  David spent some time in Paran which is also a place Israel spent some of the 40 year wandering.  Elijah spent some time at Mt Sinai.  We're never told where Jesus 40 days in the Wilderness was.  Paul in Galatians 1:17 says he was in Arabia for some of the time between his conversion and the beginning of his ministry.  Paul places Sinai in Arabia in Galatians 4:24-25.

That of course leads to debates about where those locations are.

I believe Mt Sinai is in Midian, possibly Jabal El Lawz, a view first popularized in The West by Ron Wyatt but later verified by the more reliable and trustworthy Bob Cornuke.

I've expressed in the past a willingness to believe certain Muslim claims that most modern Western Christians are adverse to.  Doesn't change my complete rejection of the Theology, Christolgoy and Soterology of Islam, or that Muhammad is not eligible to be a Biblical Prophet.  These issues come up in any post I give the Ishmael label to.

The Mt Sinai debate ties into that.  If Sinai is in what we today call the Sinai Peninsula then the Desert of Paran can't be in Arabia either, since Paran is also one of the locations mentioned during the 40 year wandering.

We're used to thinking of the total geography of the 40 year wandering as pretty small because The West since the time of Constantine has been forced to limit it to the Sinai Peninsula.  But once you place Mt Sinai in Arabia, then things can open up.

I want to point out that the Islamic view of Paran is not that it's just Mecca, they view the Wilderness of Paran as the entire Hijaz, that's pretty much all of Saudi Arabia that borders the Red Sea.  But there is also a more specific Mt Paran.

Eusebius and Jerome were Pre-Islamic non Arab Christians who placed Paran in Arabia Desertia, which is the Roman name for Saudi Arabia basically, south of Nabatea (Jordan mostly) and north of Arabia Felix (Yemen).

There are Samaritan sources like some texts of their Pentateuch and their apocryphal Book of Moses that seem to agree with identifying Paran with al-Hijaz and linking Ishmael to Mecca.  However a claim that Abraham built the Kaaba remains incompatible with Genesis.

Immanuel Velikvosky when arguing for his view of the Amalekites (which I agree with, with some qualifiers) in Ages in Chaos saw identifying Paran with al-Hijaz as supporting his theory based on his use of Arab Historians.

I'm even willing to consider valid the identification of the Baca of Psalm 84:6 with Bakkah an ancient name for Mecca.  Though that is pretty difficult to prove.

In context it does sound like a Desert or Wilderness location, I'm even wondering now if Psalm 84 could be directly applicable to Israel's End Times wildness protection.

Psalm 84 being a Davdic Psalm is taken as meaning it's probably a location linked to a place David was during his exile.  Well 1 Samuel 25:1 says David went to Paran after Samuel died.

The usage of Psalm 82 by Islamic apologists remains wrong in that Baca is not the destination of this Pilgrimage.  They basically try to argue Zion just means Sacred Land and thus can mean the Kaaba.  Zion only came to mean that after David placed his Tabernacle on Mt Zion, this being a Daivdic Psalm shows David's Zion is what he meant.  While he was in Paran he longed to return to Zion.

If you take the size of New Jerusalem in Revelation 21-22, and place it's center at Jerusalem or Beth-El, it's total land would include Mecca and Medina, and one or two of it's southern gates would be just south of them in Arabia.  So you could have people pilgrimage through those gates and past Mecca towards Zion.

So basically I think Arabia, not Jordan is where Israel will be protected during the last 1260 days.

Or maybe this and the Petra view don't conflict, since another suggested location for Mt Sinai is Jabel al-Madhbah near Petra.  Petra isn't named as such in the Bible being a Greek name and the city as we know it from the Greco-Roman period.  It was the Nabatean capital making it actually Ishmaelite territory just outside of Edom.   But again during the NT era the Nabateans ruled Edom, Moab and much of Amon.  But being connected to Ishmael's oldest son makes it logical to be near Paran.

It is named in The Bible as Cela/Sela/Selah, often translated Rock. Possibly first being given that name in 1 Samuel 23:25-28.  And having being given another name in 2 Kings 14:7.  It's refereed to in Obadiah 3 and Jeremiah 49:16.  Showing at times Edom did have it.  But it's linked to Kedar in Isaiah 42:11.  And it identified as being in The Wilderness in Isaiah 16:1.

It is used of the Rock Moses smote the second time, when smiting it wasn't what he was supposed to do, in Numbers 20, and mentioned in Psalm 78:16.  And it's used in Number 24:21 about the Kenites, the clan of the Father in-law of Moses.  And in Deuteronomy 32:13.  It's also possibly being mentioned in Judges 1:36.

Could The Antichrist rule from Egypt?

This post is not a speculation on his ethnic ancestry, or his religious affiliation prior to the Abomination of Desolation, this is mainly just geographical.

The only clue Revelation gives us about where he will rule from is that it's West of the Euphrates, based on Revelation 16 when the 6th Bowl is poured out.  But since the Euphrates is also the Western border of what God promised to Abraham, perhaps it's not too difficult to extrapolate from that that it'll be West of what God promised to Abraham, that Israel is in the middle of this conflict as they were the Daniel 11 conflicts.

A lot of false assumptions about the Antichrist exist because of a desire to find him in as many Old Testament prophecies as possible.  I no longer view him as The Assyrian.  And in Daniel I feel only chapter 7 and 8 give us any hints about him and 8 is mostly typological.  Daniel 11:40-45 is the basis for thinking of Egypt as a nation he goes to war with, but that is actually about Augustus.

What about the Fourth Beast being Rome?  The Ten Horns I believe are European nations that emerged from Rome, the Little Horn emerges after them.  The Eight King I believe must be a king of one of the first three Beasts.  So it's a complicated relationship, basically I feel the Horns provide his military strength.  And it could be noted that the Roman Emperors took over the Pharonic Worship in Egypt, Egypt was treated uniquely among Roman Provinces, as the personal possession of The Emperor.

Rob Skiba's Yahuah Triangle theory is interesting, I disagree with the Pyramid stuff, but he has a valid point that throughout the The Bible the narrative seems to bounce back and forth between Israel, Mesopotamia and Egypt.  At face value Egypt seems absent from Revelation, but we often see typological parallels to the Exodus and Wandering in Revelation.

Some Jewish traditions name The Pharaoh of the Exodus Adikam, like the Sefar Olam and the Prayer of Asenath, and the alleged Jasher.  This obviously wasn't his real name since it's a blatantly Hebrew name.  It could be a shortened form of Adonikam, a name which in Ezra 2:13 is linked to the number Six Hundred and Sixty Six.

I have recently discussed reasons to suspect a connection between Satan's Seat and Egypt.

To many, all Daniel 8 tells us for certain is he'll come from or rule one of the Kingdoms Alexander The Great's empire was divided into.  One of those was Egypt, the Ptolemaic Dynasty.  Ptolemaioin is a known attested variation of the name Ptolemaios/Ptolemy that has a Greek Gematria value of 666.  3 Maccabees is an apocryphal book included in the Orthodox canon where Ptolemy IV Philopater seems to serve as a type of The Antichrist.

In Isaiah 19 the "Cruel Lord" who rules Egypt could be viewed as The Antichrist, but I also see it as fulfilled in the 20th century.  I'm still unsure entirely what to make of Isaiah 19, I'll likely return to it in the future.

The real smoking gun however to me is what I've noticed that few have before about Ezekiel 29-32.

A lot of people even who are Futurists think those Prophecies were fulfilled by the time the Old Testament ended.  There is a statement that is interpreted as saying Egypt would never have a native ruler anymore, and then saying that was fulfilled by the time the Ptolemaic dynasty took over.  But the statement was not about ethnicity but that no one would ever rule from Egypt again (perhaps more specifically Egypt being an Empire ruling other lands).  So we know that isn't fulfilled yet because of the Ptolemies, the Fatimid Caliphs and modern Egypt.

Bishop James Ussher tried to argue the prophecy of Egypt being uninhabited for 40 years was fulfilled during what we today call the Neo-Babylonian empire.  But archaeology is lacking for that and even his seeing it documented in Herodotus seems like a stretch.  I think it's possible that that 40 years is the first 40 years of the Millennium, which I don't view as being as Utopic as most people do.

Some verses here mention Nebuchadrezzar by name implying an at least typological connection to Ezekiel's own time.  But it's also important to remember that this isn't all one Prophecy, there are numerous "The word of Yahuah came onto me saying" indicating a separate prophecy.  All linked in some way but also separate.  Nebuchadrezzar is mentioned by name only in 29:17-21 and 30:1-19, the latter may have been given the same day as the former.  I could make this argument independent of those prophecies, but his role is still at least typologically linked due to the title Terrible of the Nations being applied to him.

Ezekiel 30:24 says "And I will strengthen the arms of the king of Babylon, and put my sword in his hand: but I will break Pharaoh's arms, and he shall groan before him with the groanings of a deadly wounded man.".  The word for "deadly" there can also be translated "mortally".  Being mortally wounded by a sword is a defining trait of The Beast in Revelation 13, and this is the only Old Testament prophecy that has that same terminology.  Later chapter 32 again refers to the Sword of the King of Babylon.

Then in chapter 32 and also slightly 31 it talks about Pharaoh descending into the underworld.  The most vivid description of the underworld the Hebrew Scriptures have.  Chapter 31 also says "the Pit" a likely idiom of specifically The Abyss.  The Beast ascends out of the Abyss.  32:17 dates this Prophecy to the 15th day of the month.  I've argued before the 15th of Nisan is when Jesus entered Sheol, so perhaps the Antichrist enters it on the same day.

A further striking detail is that Ezekiel 29:3 calls Pharaoh the "Great Dragon" this is the only place outside Revelation that the phrase "Great Dragon" is used.  Now at face value that seems to identify Pharaoh with Satan, and there are other Prophecies I see as about Satan even though it seems like a human ruler because it's in the context of Satan's relationship to that nation. Also later the Hebrew word translated "whale" in the KJV is the same word translated Dragon here.

But again the Dragon in Revelation gives his Seat to The Beast, so maybe the Pharaoh in 29:1-16 and 30:20-26 aren't the same. or maybe they're doing some kind of mimickery of the Ancient Egyptian view of the relationship between Osiris and Horus, both of the gods associated with the Rulership of Egypt, who were father and son and thus in comparative mythology get misleadingly compared to the Trinity.  And in that context Thoth could be the role taken by the False Prophet.

And given what I've said before about Babylon being in conflict with The Antichrist in Revelation. I think The Terrible of The Nations/King of Babylon/Assyrian of these prophecies is the man who will kill The Antichrist.  And may perhaps be a Messiah Ben-Joseph claimant given my theories about the Kings of the East and the Lost Tribes.

The talk of Egypt in Isaiah 27 could also be a clue.

I've done a post on how this could tie in with American Antichrist theories.

And now I've maybe found a smoking gun in Daniel 11?