Tag Archives: end time

The Apocalypse: The End of Days Prophecy- Introduction

The Apocalypse: INTRODUCTION 

No book in the world is more frightening than the Revelation Prophecy. Its exact name is the Revelation of Jesus Christ.  It is the last book of the Bible, and it is a book of events, which are yet to take place. What is foretold is so horrific I could not ever imagine living through it. Residing in these last days is difficult enough.

The Revelation Prophecy begins when society totally degenerates into sinful behavior. The sin in our society has increased to such proportions that the time is near for the Revelation Prophecy to begin. In part, the book is  given as a warning.

If you are a Christian, there is not much time left to serve the savior, and if your life is not dedicated to the Lord, you want to make sure you give him all of your heart, mind and soul. The days are literally numbered so you will want to make the most of them. If you do not know Jesus as your personal savior, now is the time to accept Him, do not delay, it is the only way you will escape the Tribulation detailed in the Revelation.

My hope is that this book will help you to understand the meaning of the mysterious words in the Prophecy.  In addition, I hope you will see and how current events are lining up with what is forecasted to happen during the soon to be final years of the earth. Habakkuk 2:2 states:

Then the Lord answered and said, write the vision, And make it plain on tablets. That he may run who reads it. For the vision is yet for an appointed time; But in the end it will speak; and it will not lie. Though it tarries wait for it. Because it will surely come, It will not tarry.

 The Apocalypse is going to happen. There is nothing or no power on earth that is going to stop it from occurring. Based on the signs it is going to begin sooner than many realize. While Bible teachers and prophecy experts might not agree on the small details in the Revelation prophecy. The message is very clear. Heed it.

 You are reading the Apocalypse: The End of Days Prophecy, for more from Erika Grey go to www.erikagrey.com,  you can also purchase the Apocalypse: The End of Days Prophecy on Amazon.

The Revived Roman Empire: Chapter 13

 

THE EU TECHNOLOGY AGENDA

RACE networkRFlD is a European Union project which has been established to position the EU as a world leader in RFID excellence. The EU recognizes that RFID will increasingly influence the way people work and live and will bring great business opportunities and social benefits. It is therefore essential that Europe plays a leading role in shaping future developments. The vision of RACE networkRFlD is to provide a network of excellence that creates opportunities and increases the competitiveness of European Member States in the area of RFID thought leadership development and implementation.

THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE MARK OF THE BEAST

“I want to talk about a very different revolution that is taking place right now, quietly sweeping the globe without bloodshed or conflict…Its effects are peaceful, but they will fundamentally alter our world, shatter old assumptions and reshape our lives…as its emblem, one might take the tiny silicon chip-no bigger than a fingerprint” Ronald Reagan

God commanded Ezekiel to place a mark on the foreheads of the men he would spare from the judgment inflicted on the wicked living in Jerusalem (Ez. 9:4). Revelation’s 144,000 witnesses-12,000 men from each of the 12 tribes of Israel-each have God’s seal on their foreheads (Rev. 9:4, 14:12). Paul, in his letters to the Corinthians and Ephesians, tells Christians that the Holy Spirit seals them. Therefore they will escape eternal hell fires (I Cor. 1:22, Eph. 1:13-14, 4:30). In the new heaven and earth, God dwells among man, and his servants have his name on their foreheads. Revelation 3:12 tells us:

“He who overcomes I will make him a pillar in the Temple of My God, and he shall go out no more; and I will write on him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, the New Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God; and I will write on him My new name.” Satan has always attempted to counterfeit God. His mark has been a characteristic of Satanism throughout the ages.   According to Montague Summers, in her book The History of Witchcraft and Demonology:

In 1661 the pupils of a cult confessed the Devil gives them a mark, which marks they renew as often as those persons have any desire to quit him. The Devil reproves them and more severely, and obligeth them to new promises, making them also new marks for assurance or pledge, that those persons should continue faithful to him. The Devil’s mark to which allusion is here made, or the Witches’ mark, as it is sometimes called, was regarded as perhaps the most important point in the identification of a witch, it was the very sign and seal of Satan upon the actual flesh of his servant, and any person who bore such a mark was considered to have been convicted and proven beyond all manner of doubt of being in league with and devoted to the service of the fiend”

During the Tribulation, Satan attempts to establish his kingdom here on the earth. His mark, on each of his followers, bears his name. According to Rev. 13:16-18:

“And he causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand, or on their forehead: And that no one may buy or sell, except one who has the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is 666″

The Antichrist will implement a system by which no man can buy or sell unless he wears a mark placed on his forehead or wrist. This etching in one’s flesh represents the Beast or 666. Revelation refers to the mark in a spiritual context. Whosoever receives it spends eternity in hell (Rev. 14:11, 15:2, 19:20, 20:4). God punishes this abomination by sending a plague of foul and loathsome sores upon those who have the mark and worship the image (Rev. 16:2). Bible scholars theorize that the mark is part of a high-tech system that eliminates cash for the buying of goods. Thus, many evangelical theologians and students of prophecy follow the latest related technological developments, and note their possible evolution towards a cashless society. While this scenario provides one possible raison d’etre for the mark, other applications must not be excluded, such as high-tech identification and human tracking systems. The Antichrist launches this as both a technological breakthrough and a prerequisite for life in his totalitarian regime.

 THE TECHNOLOGICAL RACE AMONG NATIONS

After careful examination of the prophetic writings, and considering the current global population, we can see that the Antichrist will not accomplish the Scriptural forecasts without technological breakthroughs. At no other time in history have science and technology made greater strides, or become a greater priority for nations than today.

The technological race replaced the Cold War as the new bandwagon of the superpowers. Today, technology is the key to national power. As Edward N. Luttwak, an American military strategist and historian theorized, we have gone “from geopolitics to geo-economics.” He points out that methods of commerce have displaced military methods. Mr. Luttwak stated: “In this new era competitive technology projects are one of the weapons of commerce.” The stake is what former Chancellor Helmut Schmidt once called the struggle for the world product, rather than for traditional power. The question occupying the nations of today is: who will win the technological race?

Studies over the past forty years have indicated that technological change is one of the most important factors that influence to a nation’s rate of growth. A country’s possession of knowledge has replaced its possession of natural resources as the key to economic prosperity. According to an EU Commission report on Science and Technology:

In this era of rapid technological change, the economic health of a region will depend on its capabilities to capture knowledge in science, technology and to foster innovation and entrepreneurship. Knowledge and its utilization are replacing the possession of a natural resource base as the key to economic prosperity and leadership. Any region which chooses to remain competitive in this next phase of the industrial revolution must adapt to this new order and devise mechanisms to exploit the economic potential of developed knowledge and technology.

For this reason, Japan aims to stay at least five years ahead of other countries in the development of new technologies. Nations now pursue the economic growth that new technologies can spur. From computers to television, consumers want the latest features. This fact has increased growth and spending in commercial research and development programs by Europe, the US, and Japan. This means that nations are in a race to promote new technological breakthroughs, and they work hard at making and selling the latest technologies. The European Union jumped on this bandwagon.

In 1974, the Council of Ministers decided to extend European Union research to the whole of science and technology, and instructed the Commission to implement several major research programs. In 1987, the European Union entered into the Single Act an article that gives the Union formal powers in the field of research and technology. It stated:

“The Communities’ aim shall be to strengthen the scientific and technological basis of European industry and to encourage it to become more competitive at the international level.…it shall encourage undertakings to exploit the Community’s internal market to the full.”

Today, scientific research is the third largest area of EU spending, after agriculture and structural development. Information technology heads the list of basic areas of future research programs. The Federal Trust for Education and Research, a think-tank organization that aids in formulating EU policy, stated in a report that:

“Europe cannot afford to exclude itself from the profound technological transformation which is currently sweeping the world and which is expected to be the locomotive of economic development over the next two or three decades. Historians have noted that, periodically, the world brings forth a new technology, or group of related technologies, of such a revolutionary nature that it transforms the whole basis of economic activity…There is little disagreement that information technology is the mainstream technology of the current era”

One cannot help but wonder if the EU will herald the Mark of the Beast as a technology of “a revolutionary nature, “to transform the world economy.

 THE COMMISSION’S RTD NETWORK

Although the Mark of the Beast exists, the Antichrist must be in a political position that provides him direct access to technological programs and the power to implement them. We have established that the Commission presidency holds the seat of the Antichrist. The Commission presently oversees all research and technological development (RTD) programs in the European Union. It proposes, initiates, and implements RTD decisions. This gives the Commission direct and total control over technological projects. The Commission can even propose and suggest their own ideas. This will be the case with the Beast’s mark.

The Commission has its own network. Various groups of specialized Commission officials manage the Union’s RTD programs. These men, scientists by training, often come from university laboratories or industrial research centers. From their central position, they do much to speed up the circulation of ideas and the dissemination of knowledge.

Three of the most important committees with general responsibilities include CREST, CODEST, and IRDAK. CREST, the Committee for Scientific and Technical Research, consists of senior officials liable for scientific policy. It advises both the Commission and the Council of the European Union. CODEST, the Committee for the European Development for Science and Technology, enlists twenty-four members who are leaders from the scientific world. IRDAC, the Industrial Research and Development Advisory Committee, includes representatives from European industry. The advisory committees for each of the sectors concerned aid in the preparation and use of the individual programs.

One of the Commission’s Vice President’s is in charge of RTD. Other commissioners have the task of overseeing the individual research programs. One overlooks the development and use of advanced technology and the activities of IRDAC, while others are in scientific and technical cooperation with European Free Trade Association (EFTA) and non-member countries. This internal network will give the Antichrist direct access to new technologies. The key RTD program devised by the Commission to create a technological base to compete with the US and Japan is ESPRIT: The European Strategic Program for Research and Development in Information Technology. The Commission launched it in 1984. The Commission must approve the selected projects. Proposed projects that have strategic and commercial importance receive money. Concerning the ESPRIT program, the Commission wrote in the mid 1980′s:

“In world trade, electronic equipment will overtake the automobile sector in the 1990′s with worldwide R&D spending on information technologies rising from $35 billion in 1986 to some $90 billion in 1990. It will remain one of the dominant sources of technological advance until the end of the century …information, in all its forms to become both one of the leading international commodities in itself and a vital element of economic activity in general. And it is rapidly becoming a driving force for social change….Information technology is therefore of key importance to the economy, both in renewing the competitiveness of established sectors and in the new opportunities it offers for a Europe rich in information skills. For Europe to make the most of opportunities offered by information technology requires strategic action.…The blueprint for this emerging European Technology Community has been established in the 1980′s with the European Strategic Program for Research and Development in Information Technology”

One of ESPRIT’s projects deals with payment cards and electronic purses. Commission officials are testing the cards. In the same way the future officials will test the Mark of the Beast. The European Union also has links with many countries through bilateral agreements on scientific and technical cooperation. These include major industrial powers such as the US, Japan, and Canada. They also admit the new industrialized Third World countries (Mexico, Brazil, India). The EU also maintains permanent relations with other international organizations active in research, such as the specialized UN agencies. As President of the Commission, the Antichrist will have knowledge of recent developments, and will support programs that suit his policies.

The Commission decides who will buy and sell with the Union. The Union will incorporate the “Mark of the Beast,” i.e., this technological system, into EU financial policy. The mark will serve several purposes. Despite the economic benefits and other rhetoric, the technology will mainly act to mark his citizens and monitor them in his dictatorship.

REPLACING THE CASH SYSTEM

The mark will not just happen one day; it will not occur overnight. The system’s rise will occur as a gradual order of events. Prior to buying and selling with the mark, financial experts will campaign for a cashless society. This is already happening. An international consortium of market leaders which aims for a “no cash” economy has formed in the payments industry, to develop standards for a new way to pay by “electronic purse.” Consumers use this card with a microcomputer instead of cash or checks when paying.   The aim is to use it for everything from vending machines and public transportation to traditional passports and pay telephones. A pan-European consortium of consultants, academic institutions, and technology companies put together the EU-backed system. Banks can use the “smart cards” for many uses such as an alternative to traditional passports and credit cards, and as a method of payment for payphones, taxis, shops, and vending machines. Even police spot-checks in the EU will use an integrated system of identification using machine-readable ID cards. Smart cards and electronic purses will lay the groundwork for the Beast’s mark.

Payment cards and electronic banking will replace the cash system. Prompting this change is the enormous cost of paperwork. Prior to the wide use of the internet, the US spent $30 billion per year to process nearly 40 billion checks. In international trade, paperwork costs range between 4 and 15 percent of the value of the merchandise. Electronic data interchange reduces these costs. The Internet has added its contribution to reducing these costs and also by offering online shopping, banking and payments debited directly out of one’s bank account to pay credit cards, utilities, taxes and mortgages.

The EU plans to develop a “European Nervous System” that would connect government computers in the EU nations, to transfer data about everything from taxes to pollution levels. This nervous system will no doubt be in place before the mark is developed. The system has the potential to connect worldwide. The Antichrist will use such a system to keep track of all the marked individuals. There is also another Biblical parallel here. God’s Holy Spirit indwells each Christian, and connects them (so to speak) to Jesus through his Spirit. Computers will act as the counterfeit to the Holy Spirit. As the Christian connects to the body of Jesus, the individual living during the Tribulation will connect to the Beast’s “central nervous system,” i.e., computers.

The devices that will become the Mark of the Beast already exist. Companies call them bio-implants. Bio-implants are now available for the identification of animals and the medical field uses them in humans for patient identification. A veterinarian places it beneath the animal’s skin, and it contains information about the pet and his owner. The company VeriChip sold them to a Barcelona nightclub which used them for 125 patrons who used their chip as a debit card to debit drinks.

Verichip received FDA approval in 2004 as implantable radio-frequency identification (RFID) microchip. Twice the length of a dime the medical technician implants it between the shoulder and elbow of an individual’s right arm. Once scanned it responds with a unique 16 digit number which links to information about the user held on a database for identity verification, medical records access and other uses. A doctor or medical practitioner performs the insertion procedure under local anesthetic in a physician’s office. In the beginning of 2007, Verichip Corporation created Xmark, its corporate identity for healthcare products. Xmark incorporates Hugs and the Halo system of infant protection: the RoamAlert system of wandering protection; the MyCall emergency response system; and the Assetrac asset tracking system.

An implant in the wrist or forehead of a human individual will become the future use of this technology. It will be able to carry all kinds of data about an individual. With child abductions a concern, and with heightened security since September 11, 2001, and the advent of the war on terror; implants will offer a great appeal. The new technology will also create jobs and contribute to economic growth. The Antichrist will use the mark to monitor those in his police state and even more so by taking the mark the individual will pledge their allegiance to his authority and ideology.

 THE MARRIAGE OF MAN TO COMPUTERS

EU Scientists call it “Adaptive Brain Interface (ABI), and the EU’s ESPRIT program funds and sponsors its development. An individual hooked up to a computer can give the computer commands by his mind alone. Although the immediate application for ABI is to help the physically impaired, as this technology further develops, its potential within a police state is almost unimaginable. In March 2000, in Brussels, a paraplegic named Gabriele Taonconi demonstrated before EU officials his ability to walk thanks to a computer chip implanted near his spine and wired to his legs. They postponed his demonstration because of a computer glitch that prevented commands from communicating to the computer chip. Professor Pierre Rabi Schong of Montpellier University of France, a project coordinator, said the implanted chip allows the user to create artificial muscle movement.

“We are trying to reproduce what happens in the brain…with electrodes to nerves and muscles.”

MEDIA INSIGHT (WWW.UCL.CO.UK)

HUMAN BRAIN PROJECT WINS MAJOR EU FUNDING

The Human Brain Project has been officially selected as one of the European Commission’s two FET Flagship projects. The new project will unite European efforts to address one of the greatest challenges of modern science: understanding the human brain.

The goal of the Human Brain Project is to pull together all our existing knowledge about the human brain and to reconstruct the brain, piece by piece, in supercomputer-based models and simulations. The models offer the prospect of a new understanding of the human brain and its diseases and of completely new computing and robotic technologies.

The Human Brain Project is planned to last ten years (2013-2023). The cost is estimated at 1.19 billion euros.

 More than 80 European and international research institutions are involved in the project, including UCL groups led by Professor Alex Thomson (UCL School of Pharmacy), Professor Neil Burgess (UCL Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience) and Professor John Ashburner (UCL Institute of Neurology).

 The project will also associate some important North American and Japanese partners. It will be coordinated at the Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne (EPFL) in Switzerland, by neuroscientist Henry Markram with co-directors Karlheinz Meier of Heidelberg University, Germany, and Richard Frackowiak (a former UCL Vice-Provost) from the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (CHUV) and the University of Lausanne (UNIL).

MEDIA INSIGHT (WWW.UCL.CO.UK)

HUMAN BRAIN PROJECT WINS MAJOR EU FUNDING

Professor Malcolm Grant, UCL President & Provost, said: “By funding the Human Brain Project the European Commission has proved their commitment to funding large scale science research. UCL’s role in the Human Brain Project will strengthen and further develop the world-leading research already underway here in the fields of neurology and neuroscience.”

 Researchers hope to better understand the energy efficiency of the human brain, and use this knowledge towards the development of biologically inspired computers. Such devices could have a major impact on industry.

Another major goal of the Human Brain Project is to generate tools and infrastructure for the research community and catalyze the development of new treatments for brain disease.

 The Human Brain Project is the world’s largest brain research program and more than 20 UK research teams in academia and industry will be involved in the start of the project.

 The selection of the Human Brain Project as a FET Flagship is the result of more than three years of preparation and a rigorous and severe evaluation by a large panel of independent, high profile scientists, chosen by the European Commission.

Eventually a computer chip will not only track one’s movements, but control individuals, reducing men to robots performing acts against their will. Never before in history have new technologies moved to the forefront of national policies. The European Union is able to research, develop, and, through the Commission, implement whatever system it chooses. The Antichrist will enter his position in a world market where the development of new technologies governs economic growth. Initially, the system will offer all kinds of economic and social benefits. With a secured identification system for buying and selling, all kinds of crimes will diminish. Those who receive the mark will suffer the wrath of God. The Bible predicts the horrific side effect of grievous sores that breaks out on the bodies of the implanted. The Antichrist will not just implement the system for economic and social benefits; this is his mark, his label on those he rules. It will act as his tie to them, and it counterfeits God’s seal of redemption. The born-again Christian must accept the good news of the Gospel before he receives the Holy Spirit and God’s seal of redemption. In the same way, before one receives the mark, one will have to accept the Antichrist’s gospel concerning his deity.

 

THE NUMBER OF HIS NAME

 

The Book of Revelation provides the one riddle found in Scripture and it concerns the identity of the Beast. Revelation 13:17-18 states: “and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666.”

 

The Mark is also the name of the Beast who is a man. Scripture names no other man with a number except Antichrist who God assigns the number 666. The two other times the number 666 is used in Scripture is mentioned in 1 Kings 10:14 and 2 Chr. 9:13. The Bible tells us that after the Queen of Sheba’s visit, Solomon yearly took in 666 talents of gold from the surrounding nations. Deuteronomy 17:15-17 warns that a king of Israel shall not multiply wives, silver or gold which Solomon did in addition to going after the gods of his foreign wives and building high places for them. 1 Kings Chapter 11 describes Solomon’s descent into idolatry.

 

In addition, Nebuchadnezzar’s idolatrous golden image was 60 cubits high by 6 cubits wide, thus 66. Throughout history, ancient and modern nations use gold for currency. Only after World War II did the world stop using gold as a reserve for currencies. Gold, i.e. money is synonymous with idolatry. The number calculates to his name and relates to the currency system under the Antichrist, which he ties into his dictatorship and his blasphemous identity. He will cause the world to worship him and commit mass idolatry. The riddle which will be solved during the Tribulation further identifies him as the son of Satan and his mark as the means by which one gives one’s soul to the Devil and ends any hope of redemption.

 

The start of the Tribulation ends the age of grace and ushers in a final dispensation. The Beast’s government while rich and powerful becomes a monotheistic dictatorship with the worship and adoration to the State and its leader. The wheat and the tares divide into two categories of persons; those who take the Mark of the Beast and those who say no. Those who do not take the Mark of the Beast will refuse because of their belief in the true God and His Son Jesus Christ.

 

CHANGING OF THE GUARD

 

One of the consequences of the financial upheaval of 2008 and 2009, reported the U.S. newsmagazine BusinessWeek, is that Europe is now richer than North America. The accumulated national wealth of North Americans has dropped by 21.8 percent while Europe’s only fell by 5.8 percent, “down to 22.2 trillion euros-a quarter of the globe’s total wealth” (“Europe Now Richer Than North America,” BusinessWeek, Sept. 16, 2009). As great wealth is necessary for global power, could Europe be on the verge of taking over from the United States? Bible prophecy shows that a new, European-centered superpower will exist immediately before Jesus Christ’s return. It will be a great commercial system whose trade dominates the world. It will change the future global economic order.

The Empire: Preface & Introduction

Preface

This work began in the late 1980’s as a Bible study to see if our world was in fact in the end times. Disappointed by the conspiracy theories that I learned of in my early years as a Christian, which taught the immediate fulfillment of end time prophecy, I embarked on my own research. If prophecy was to be fulfilled, it would occur through the natural order of events. All previous prophecies came about through the affairs of their day.

Jeremiah predicted the Babylonian invasion of Israel and a conspiracy didn’t bring about Babylonia’s power. Historical circumstances and events ushered in Babylonian rule. The prophecies of the birth and death of Jesus Christ and the destruction of the second Jewish Temple occurred during Roman rein through its various leaders. Yet when it comes to end time prophecies, conspiracy theories proliferate from the Catholic Church, Illuminati, Masons, Trilateral Commission, Skull and Bones, Rothschild’s, Bildeburgers, and Jewish conspiracies which are adopted by some radical Islamic writers and feed the fire of anti-Semitism. These authors always claim to have interviewed insiders who tell all.

The Antichrist steps into his position and forms an alliance with ten rulers. He deceives the world. The Bible does not forecast a group of men as conspiracy theories teach, but one man. A false prophet assists him along with the kings who place their allegiance in him. No conspiracies bring about the final world order.

When examining end time prophecies one discovers gaps. A gap creates a hole from the present to the time of fulfillment and conspiracy theorists fill the gaps with a conspiracy theory. When I began this research over 20 years ago there existed many gaps and in this time they have closed or some have narrowed to the place that one can easily speculate on what will occur next. Conspiracy theories substitute for time consuming research on the part of the author. Many of the authors of prophetic works in relation to current events are theologians and spend little time researching current events. In the end the Devil uses these theories as tools to blind believers from the truth and rob God of glory.

No conspiracy will usher in the final world order. Prophecy will reach fulfillment in the geopolitical system. Viewing it from a geopolitical angle provides a more accurate picture of where our world stands in the prophetic time line in relation to the end times.

My hope is that his book will both educate the reader on the end time prophecies in relation to the European Union and will help to eradicate the conspiracy theories which circulate Evangelical Christian circles. After reading this work the reader will both understand the prophetic forecasts and also gain knowledge of the European Union, which if one eliminated the prophetic writings will alarm anyone. In addition, the reader will stand in awe of a God whose words written several thousand years ago are seeing fulfillment through the events of our day.

INTRODUCTION

After World War II, European leaders proposed the idea of forming the European Steel and Coal Community, which birthed the European Union. Skeptics said the complicated idea will fail. In 1957, European leaders signed the Treaty that marked the birth of the European Union. In the mid 1990’s when the EU set out to complete the Common Market and eliminate trade barriers and harmonize laws among the Member States, the skeptics once again said it will fall short.

The prophet Daniel predicted 2600 years ago, the structure of the final world empire that will rule the world in the end of days and launch the Antichrist. He revealed the location of this empire when he forecast that these same people will destroy Jerusalem, and the second Temple. The evil “prince that shall come” will arise from these same inhabitants. During the Roman Empire’s reign this prophecy saw fulfillment and marked the Roman Empire as the launching pad for the Antichrist. Some Bible eschatologists cited the early European Community as the possible political entity because of its location. With the success of the 1992 Common Market, these scholars were on the mark. When the European Union embarked on its plans for a common currency, experts once again said that the feat will fail. In fact, monetary union achieved such success that the euro is stronger than the US dollar and second in line as a reserve currency to the US dollar.

The Union’s next step is to move towards political union and again the skeptics are saying that it will fail for a variety of reasons. Once again they will be wrong as the EU moves to becoming the greatest and most crushing dictatorships ever in existence.

From the start of the research for this work to the completion, this book never became outdated. Most works that relate Bible prophecy and current events quickly become obsolete as the events turn into history. The Gulf War prompted books as did other historical occurrences. This work from start to finish has not deleted dated information and this book withstands the time test because the European Union continues to evolve into the world power forecast by Daniel and John in the Revelation.

This European Union is a complicated entity and this report takes an academic approach by providing the EU’s history, evolution and facts which in many points reveal the EU’s wider ambitions and makeup, which parallel with Scripture. This book could have numbered half the pages and with larger print and act as a sensationalized work and leave the reader on the edge of their seat but with many questions. Given the complexity of the EU, less is not more in writing about the EU and prophecy.

The information compiled for this book relied on the European think-tanks that formulate EU Policy and European publications that cover the desks of EU bureaucrats. One can easily find each of the documented works. Several publications that for one reason or another went out of publication such as the newspaper, The European, and the journal, European Affairs provided excellent information. The Washington Delegation of the European Communities used to publish a magazine called, Europe: Magazine of the European Communities, which produced another viable resource. The EU’s official publications provide another source. This research began before the advent of the internet when one had to access these periodicals manually. The internet made the research easier because much of the material that one had to order from Brussels or London and subscribe to because US libraries did not carry the information, was now available online. Those publications laid the foundation of knowing where to search online. A good deal of the research for this book does not rely on the American press but rather on the European press and news organizations which offer far greater comprehensive reporting on the EU and on world news as a whole.

My goal was to leave no stone unturned and provide an analytical work based on quality research. In contrast on the theological end, this work relied on Biblical commentaries from leading commentators in Evangelical circles. Some answers came to me after much prayer, others as I opened the Scriptures and read them in addition to research.

In completing the work came a satisfaction I never experienced with any other work. I came to a place of blessing seeing Scripture literally unfold before my very eyes. Initially, when the first rough draft of this work was completed in the early 1990’s, this work was ahead of its time as many people had not even heard of the EU and most could care less. I knew that this would change in time when the EU became more recognized and as the world continued to grow more desperate as the birth pangs that Christ prophesized came upon it. These events occurred this last decade with the horrific hurricane disasters that seemed to occur one after another and the world-wide financial crisis.

At times during the course of this work I felt like a historian, only I was writing about what will take place in the future as if it already happened. I discovered the information that intelligence agency’s seek, and questioned why US agencies looked at Japan and China as possible future threats, but never examined the EU, despite its obvious stated ambitions for the global limelight as was in their past, especially considering its undemocratic structure. If I eliminated the Scriptural forecasts out of this report, one will still feel alarmed about the evolving European Union.

As I neared completion of the book, the earthquake in Haiti struck and I felt the urgency to finish the manuscript as soon as possible and get it out to the public because the time of the end is that close.

The EU continues to evolve into the crushing superpower with iron legs forecast by Scripture. Already there are hints of a police state which the British writer and theologian Alan Franklin has reported on concerning various EU laws.

According to prophecy when the Antichrist establishes his dictatorship he will abolish world religion along with any writings that oppose his police state. In that day this book too will be illegal and banned. The timing for this book’s message is now while freedom of religion and speech still exists.

 

The Empire: Chapter 10

THE PEACE TREATY

The Tribulation begins when the Antichrist negotiates a peace treaty with Israel, guaranteeing its security. Three and a half years after these negotiations, he stands in the Jewish Temple and declares himself a god. The Antichrist then lays siege to Jerusalem, and seeks to exterminate the Jews. Zechariah 13:8 tells us that two-thirds of the Jewish population dies due to his exploits. The verse affirms: “And it shall come to pass, in all the land, says the Lord, that two-thirds in it shall be cut off and die; but one-third shall be left in it.” The remaining third, God refines. They call upon His name and He hears them. There are 13.3 million Jews worldwide. This would amount to the deaths of over eight million Jewish people in a three-and-a-half-year time period!

Nearly all Bible prophecy centers on Israel, including the prophecies dealing with the Tribulation. Today the Middle East is a primary focus in international affairs. The Center for Contemporary Arab Studies at Georgetown University concluded: “This very quick trip through history shows that, for several millennia, the Middle East was at the very center of the world stage. In the few hundred years between the sixteenth and the twentieth century’s, it drifted to the wings. Now it has once again been recalled, by a mysterious providence, to the center.”[177]

Jews Return to Their Own Land

Bible scholars view the reestablishment of the Israeli nation as the most important sign of the end times, because so much of Bible prophecy centers on Israel. Many commentators regard Ezekiel 37:1-22, which prophecies about God’s bringing the Jews back to their land from the valley of dry bones, as a reference to the restoration that took place in 1948. Ezekiel 37 predicted Israel’s rebirth as a nation, and in 1948 this prophecy saw fulfillment. The skeletons in the valley are a picture of the way many Jews appeared after the Holocaust. The bones cry, “our hope is lost.” At the moment of their great despair, God brings about this miracle, which is exactly what occurred. The passage discusses God’s bringing the Israelites from all of the nations where they lived, to their own land. During the Cold War, Communist nations did not allow Jews who desired to go to Israel to leave their countries. With the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, another prophecy saw fulfillment. Ezekiel 36:24 states: “For I will take you from among the nations, and gather you out of all countries, and bring you into your own land.”

With the fall of communism, Jews who lived under the oppression of totalitarian regimes returned home. Restrictions on Jewish emigration lifted in the Soviet Union, and twenty thousand immigrants per month poured into Israel.[178] The US, which had always provided open doors to immigrating Jews, decided to limit the number of Soviet Jews entering the country. Israel and some American Zionist organizations pressured the US not to admit them unless strong family links to current residents existed. Some 90 percent of refugees preferred the US to Israel as a destination, but this restriction forced them to go to Israel. Many remained there because of an Israeli requirement for a refund of fares and related costs should such refugees attempt to move to another country.[179] Politics did not force Jews to return to Israel, but God’s divine hand brought them into their land.

Although Israel became a nation, it does not possess all the land God promised to Abraham. Under King Solomon, Israel came to possess most of it. The land promised was Palestine, stretching from the Sinai Desert north and east to the Euphrates River. This includes present day Israel, Lebanon, and the West Bank of Jordan, plus substantial portions of Syria, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia.[180]

Israel’s History of Conflict

• In 1948, Israel became a nation.

THE PEACE TREATY

• Five Arab countries—Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon—declared war and attacked the new nation.

• In 1949, Israel signed a series of truces with the Arab countries.

• In 1956, Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser barred Israeli ships from using the Suez Canal. He launched guerrilla attacks against Israel. Israel attacked Egypt and occupied the Sinai Peninsula and the Gaza strip.

• In 1957, Israel withdrew from these territories under strong pressure from the UN, US, and Soviet Union.

• In 1964, in Cairo, at an Arab League meeting, activists formed the Palestinian Liberation Organization.

• In 1967, after a marked rise in activities against Israel by the Arab countries, Israel launched a preemptive strike. The Israelis destroyed the Egyptian Air Force on the ground. Israeli troops swept to the banks of the Suez Canal, and fought the Syrians in the Golan Heights. Jordan entered the war. When the armies declared a cease-fire, the Israeli army occupied the Sinai Peninsula and Gaza strip, East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Golan Heights.

Theologian and author John Walvoord commented concerning Israel’s victories in this war:

As a result of the war, Israel increased her territory from eight thousand to thirty-four thousand square miles and doubled her population. Most important from the prophetic point of view, Jerusalem was back in the hands of Israel. The prospect of another war averted for the time being. Israel had suffered less than a thousand battle fatalities in contrast to thirty thousand Arab dead. Israel had tremendously increased her stature as a nation among nations and left the military might of her enemies in shambles. The world had begun to notice the prophets’ predictions that the Jews will “never again…be uprooted from the land I have given them (Amos 9:15). [181]

• Israel absorbed East Jerusalem in 1967.

• The UN Security Council adopted resolution 242, which calls for Israeli withdrawal from “territories occupied” in the June War. It also calls for Arab recognition of Israel’s “right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries.” The United Nations invited the PLO to take part in a General Assembly discussion of the Palestine question. It approved a resolution recognizing the right of the Palestinian people to independence and sovereignty, and gave the PLO observer status at its sessions. The Arab League endorsed the PLO as the “sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.”

• In 1970, PLO guerrillas from Jordan made raids on Jerusalem. President Nasser died, and Anwar el-Sadat succeeded him.

• In 1973, Egyptian and Syrian forces attacked Israel on Yom Kippur. A Soviet- and American-sponsored cease-fire resolution ended the fighting and led to an international peace conference at Geneva.

• In 1974, Israel and Egypt signed a disengagement agreement, and Israel signed a similar one for the withdrawal of its forces from Syria and from part of the Golan Heights.

• In 1975, Israel signed a second disengagement treaty with Egypt. In that year the General Assembly adopted a resolution denouncing Zionism “as a form of racism and racial discrimination.” The move outraged Israel and its supporters.

Menachem Begin became Prime Minister of Israel. President Sadat of Egypt went to Jerusalem. This marked the first visit by an Arab head of state to Israel.

 

• In 1978, the top leaders of Israel, Egypt, and the US met at Camp David for twelve days and agreed on two bases for Middle East peace. In 1979, these leaders signed the Camp David Peace Treaty.

• In 1982, Israeli forces invaded southern Lebanon with the goal of ousting the PLO. They besieged Beirut for ten weeks, and sent in American troops. The next year, Ronald Reagan sent Secretary of State George Shultz to the Middle East to conclude an accord on the withdrawal of all foreign troops from Lebanon. Israel and Lebanon signed the agreement.

King Hussein of Jordan and Yasir Arafat of the PLO agreed on an initiative that called for an international peace conference under United Nations auspices. The initiative foundered because the two sides could not agree on how to include the Palestinians, and because Mr. Arafat refused to accept United States participation.

The Peace Process

In 1991, after the Gulf War, former President Bush sent Secretary of State James Baker on a series of trips to the region to explore compromises that would begin the Arab/Israeli peace process.

Israel and Lebanon would discuss the future of Israel’s declared “security zone” in southern Lebanon, which Israel had held since 1982. Syria would promise peace in exchange for the Golan Heights, captured by Israel in the 1967 Middle East War. Israel and Jordan would find a solution to the twenty-four-year Israeli occupation of the West Bank of the Jordan River, territory that Israel seized from Jordan in the 1967 war. Former King Hussein formally renounced his claim to the territory in 1988, clearing the way for a Palestinian state there. Sixty percent of Jordan’s population is Palestinian.

The major dispute is between Israel and the Palestinians. Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip seek autonomy over their affairs, in the form of Arab elections in the occupied territories, independent Palestinian municipal governments, and Palestinian administration of police forces, schools, and health care centers. Palestinians say the Arab eastern half of the city should be their capital. Israelis adamantly oppose negotiations over Jerusalem.[182]

The Oslo Accords

In 1993, Israeli and Palestinian delegations secretly negotiated in Oslo, Norway. They signed the Oslo accords at a Washington ceremony on September 13, 1993, during which former Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzahak Rabin shook hands, ending decades as sworn enemies. The Israelis and Palestinians recognized each other’s mutual political rights, and agreed to strive to live in peaceful coexistence. They set up a time table in which Israeli troops would withdraw from Gaza and Jericho, and for Palestinians would set up their own government. They looked to 1999 for the finalization of a permanent settlement.

Despite Israel’s special thirty-year relationship with the US, Israel met secretly in Oslo, Norway, for this historic conference with Palestine. They notified the US barely a few days before its finalization. US Secretary of State Warren Christopher first viewed the “Declaration of Principles” in an Israeli newspaper. Israeli Political commentator Daniel Ben-Simon stated that “the Oslo agreement put Israel’s patron to shame.”[183]

On September 28, 1995, at a White House ceremony, Israelis and Palestinians signed another deal known as the “Interim Agreement,” or “Oslo 2.” The four-hundred-page pact allowed for a second stage of autonomy for the Palestinians, giving them self-rule in various Arab cities and villages while allowing guarded settlements to remain. The Oslo Accords have not gone according to plan. The continual conflicts that have arisen between the Israelis and Palestinians have caused the peace process to reach many impasses. Former President Clinton sent former Secretary of State Warren Christopher to the region for talks. Madeline Albright followed in his footsteps. The European Union has sent several delegations to the area. Still the peace process has barely moved along.

On September 28, 2000, Israeli opposition leader Ariel Sharon led a delegation on a visit to the Temple Mount for a message of peace. After his visit, crowds of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank attacked Israeli security forces with guns and rocks. Palestinians blamed Sharon’s visit to the Muslim holy site for sparking the conflict, which continued into 2001 with each side blaming the other.

In July of 2000, Bill Clinton, Ehud Barak, and Yasser Arafat met at Camp David to work out the final arrangements for a Palestinian state. Barak made concessions above and beyond the framework of Oslo. He offered the Palestinians control over a large portion of Jerusalem, but Arafat walked away without making any counter-proposals. Both sides did not demonstrate flexibility during the summit to negotiate a settlement. When it became clear to the Palestinian authority that Israel could not fulfill every demand of the necessary reciprocal compromises, the Palestinian Authority chose to break off negotiations without offering any of its own proposals. Clinton placed the blame for the failure of the talks squarely at Arafat’s feet. Israel transferred virtually every Arab City and town in the territories to Arafat’s control, supplied the Arab militia with weapons, began paying Arafat a multi-million-dollar monthly allowance, and lobbied for additional financial support to permit the Palestinian authority to build an airport, operate radio and television networks, and deal with other countries as a sovereign power. But the terror and violence accelerated. The Israeli death toll soared, and captured documents proved that Arafat and his Palestinian authority schemed with terrorist states such as Iran and Syria to acquire armaments and fund terrorism. Their aim remains the same—the destruction of Israel. Again, at the Taba Talks in January 2001, Israel once again showed its willingness to make far-reaching political and strategic compromises in order to achieve peace.[184]

In February 2001, Sharon defeated Ehud Barak for the position of Prime Minister. In December 2002, Sharon made a speech at the Herzliya Conference Institute of Policy and Strategy, and stated that the next phase cannot continue until there is a calm from terrorism and until the Palestinian government reforms, that peace cannot occur with Arafat as president of the Palestinian Authority, nor without the dismantling of all existing security bodies, the majority of which are involved in terror.[185] In 2004 Yasser Arafat died.

The EU and Israel

For the Tribulation to begin, the European Union must sign a treaty with Israel, guaranteeing Israel’s peace. The US sponsors the current peace initiative. Henry Kissinger suggested in late November of 1990 that US leadership in the Middle East might be ending. “We are in a transitional period,” he said. “I would think that over a period of ten years, many of the security responsibilities that the United States is now shouldering in the Gulf ought to be carried by the Europeans who receive a larger share of the oil from the region.”[186]

For many years, the EU has followed developments in the Middle East closely, particularly the Arab-Israeli dispute. Only since the late 1970s has the EU taken a common West European stand on the Arab-Israeli conflict. They support a peaceful solution based on the 1980 Venice declaration. It affirms the right of all states in the region, including Israel, to exist within

secure frontiers, and the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. The Union believes an international peace conference on the Middle East would provide the most suitable framework for negotiations and provides aid and economic assistance to the territories.[187] It is now an EU plan to become a leading player in the Middle East. Garret Fitzgerald stated in his report to the Trilateral Commission on the Israeli-Palestinian issue:

In some European capitals, where there has for a long time been a feeling that Europe’s interest in the Middle East is greater than that of the United States but where the United States’ much greater influence in the region is recognized albeit with some sense of frustration, this American approach has been criticized as too limited and narrow, and also as being too optimistic….If, however, the policy fails, many in Europe would wish to see their governments in the European Union taking up the torch, without, perhaps, having a very clear idea as to how they could succeed where the United States had failed. [188]

In a statement by the EU Presidency to a joint meeting of members of the European Parliament and the Knesset on January 17, 1990, EU diplomats made it clear that if the Baker initiative failed: “The Twelve will be active in seeking an alternative to the Israeli-Palestinian dialogue as a means of advancing the kind of settlement advocated by the EU.”[189] The EU feels qualified to play an important role in the advancement of peace, security and development in the Middle East, both by reason of its geographic proximity and its long-standing ties with the region. The Union regards itself as the most important economic group in the world today, with corresponding political influence. It also provides two of the permanent members of the UN Security Council.

The Mediterranean area is the Union’s third main market for Community products, and the source from which the Union obtains some of its basic needs. On the EU’s current agenda of foreign policy aims is “to play a very active part in efforts to achieve a lasting peace and stability in the Middle East.”[190]

On the day the fighting ended in the Gulf, Luxembourg Foreign Minister Jacques Poos declared that the EU must help to establish peace and security in the Middle East. EU foreign ministers discussed the challenge of promoting stability in the Middle East after the war, hoping to play an influential role in rebuilding the region. Poos said in an interview that “the Middle East needs a Marshall Plan—a Europe and, if possible, worldwide plan.” The foreign ministers have underlined their willingness to do everything possible to ensure lasting peace in the region.

At a meeting in Luxembourg, EU members pleaded with then US Secretary of State James Baker for a role in the peace process. The European request evoked a lukewarm response. He suggested that the EU have observer status. During an emergency meeting the EU expressed fears that Washington will sideline the Union.[191] They issued a statement to the New York Times in 1992, in which they stated that they “hoped for a full role as cosponsor of any Middle East peace conference. Israel stated that it wants the EU to have only observer status at any peace talks. It has long been concerned over the EU’s contacts with the Palestine Liberation Organization. One EU aide, however, noted that [the EU] would have to live with the peace, and wants to be part of the creation of it.” He added that it firmly believed that “the more international the conference, the better its chances.”[192] Israel fears that the EU, which has proclaimed the need for Palestinian self-determination, has a strong pro-Palestinian and pro-Arab bias.

EU Middle East experts say the Union can make a “positive contribution” to the peace talks through its close historical, political, and economic links with the Arab world. The EU used political and economic pressure to persuade Israel to invite the Union to the negotiating table. Several EU ministers insisted that Union aid for Israel—and the Arab countries—depended on a heightened EU role in the Middle East. EU diplomats admitted that in Israel’s case, the trade and economic argument was probably more effective. The EU is Israel’s leading trading partner; the EU is Israel’s largest market for exports and its second largest source of imports after the US. EU ministers promised Israel a closer economic relationship with the EU. They offered it on the condition that Israel recognize the Union’s hopes of playing a “special role” in the Middle East. Of all the EU states, the Netherlands is an especially keen defender of Israel’s political and economic interests.[193] According to former Italian Prime Minister Gianni de Michelis:

We insisted on being among the countries promoting the conference, on equal footing with the United States and the Soviet Union. We would find it difficult, if not unfathomable, to accept a lesser role, considering the contribution the Twelve can make to the peace process and to subsequent

developments. We wish to be present not because we are seeking prestige, but because of the clear advantages our presence would bring to everyone. We have explained this several times to our Israeli friends who up until now have been those most reluctant to accept the Europeans, whom they consider as favoring the Arabs and thus wanting to transform the future conference into a court against Israel… However, vital its tie to the United States may be, the one to Europe is perhaps even more so in the long term. Israel is the daughter of Europe’s history, and not only of the holocaust that was a tragedy not only for the Jews, but also for Europe.…Anchoring Israel to Europe means eliminating one of Israel’s motives for insecurity, that of having to rely on an ally that is geographically distant, not only in terms of military assistance but also in terms of development.[194]

The EU believes it can play an important role in the peace process by providing Israelis and Arabs with economic incentives to reach a diplomatic solution. They have begun work on a regional Arab-Israeli economic cooperation program. The EU will aim at the creation of new and binding trade, industrial, and environmental links between Israel, the Palestinians, and all Arab countries in the region. The EU’s Middle East experts underline that “a precise program for cooperation, the economic advantages clearly spelt out, would be an added incentive to finding a solution to all political problems.”

Former Italian Prime Minister Gianni de Michelis and Former French Foreign Minister Roland Dumas met in Sicily along with the Middle East ambassadors. They called for “a renewed, dynamic role” for Europe,

including a seat at the negotiating table. At a press conference, Dumas said Europe must take on the role the Soviet Union could no longer play. It was no good asking Europe to make a major economic contribution while virtually excluding it from the key questions of disarmament and regional security.[195]

The Conference on Security and Cooperation in the Middle East

The EU bases its Middle East proposals on the Conference on Security and Cooperation in the Middle East. This proposal, issued in 1990 by the foreign ministries of Italy and Spain, is a regional arrangement for the Middle East. It takes in the Arab world, Israel, and Iran. The CSCE’s global approach promotes peace in the Middle East. It acts as a multilateral forum covering the entire region. Agreed on will be guidelines on several issues: security, economic development, water and other natural resources, environmental issues, and human rights.

The Conference on Security and Cooperation in the Mediterranean and the Middle East reserves a special role for the UN. Participants include the US, Soviet Union, the EU and some of its member countries, and other states from Morocco to Iran. The euro-Mediterranean conference met for the first time in Barcelona in 1995. It marked the first time foreign ministers from Syria and Israel attended the same conference.

The EU took a lead role by pledging more aid to Gaza and the West Bank than the US. It is at work creating a free trade zone with Israel. The conference launched the euro-Mediterranean Partnership and established the euro-Mediterranean Free Trade Area.[196]

The EU Demands a Leading Role in the Middle East

The European Union took a leading role in the first Palestinian elections. They coordinated an international observation operation to ensure their success. The Union voiced anger at Washington shutting it out of an emergency summit held in Washington in 1996. The French foreign minister’s spokesman stated that “the European Union has its place in the peace process. It is bound to be part of a peace settlement because it finances 75 percent of aid to the Palestinian territories.” To establish its role, the Union invited Arafat to meet its foreign ministries before he went to Washington. Italy’s foreign minister stated: “Tonight’s meeting of the European troika with President (Yasser) Arafat in Luxembourg underlines the role of Europe in the Middle East peace process, especially since it is being held before the Washington Summit.” The European Union on several occasions voiced its anger over being a money box for the Middle East without having any say in the region. They desired a role alongside the United States. Shireen Hunter, visiting research fellow at the Brussels-based Centre for European Policy Studies, stated: “If Europe is going to have any reality whatsoever, Europe has to act in one of the most important strategic areas otherwise Europe can’t be taken seriously as a global actor.” Europe continues to press for a greater role in the region, voicing its desire to have a political role as strong as its economic one.[197]

The Palestinians and Arab countries have been pushing for a greater European role to counter what they see as Washington’s pro-Israeli stance. The Union is convinced that peace in the Middle East depends on the full implementation of the existing agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. They also believe in a final solution based on international law as set by the United Nations and the principle of land-for-peace. The Union calls for “total withdrawal for total security.”

The European Parliament stated that the Union “cannot nor should not, accept East Jerusalem to be considered part of the territory and sovereignty of Israel.” The Union urges the option of a Palestinian state and they refer to east Jerusalem as a Palestinian city. The Union wrote former President Clinton to propose a joint American-European initiative to revive the Middle East peace negotiations. The United States politely brushed off the European proposal. Although the US welcomed European efforts and said they had a productive role to play, the US reaffirmed its position as having the central role in the Middle East peace negotiations.[198]

Europe essentially put its foot in the door of Middle East diplomacy. At a meeting of European and Mediterranean foreign ministers, the Dutch foreign minister brought together Yasser Arafat and Israel’s foreign minister on the sidelines of the conference. The EU president exclaimed, “it’s indispensable, the political role of Europe here.” He was speaking of the euro-Mediterranean forum. In the Amsterdam Treaty negotiated in the Summer of 1997, the Union called for and committed itself to peace in the Middle East. European diplomats hoped to get the two men together again at the next Euro-Med meeting, to win a greater role in the Mideast Peace Process. [199]

In early 1998, the EU Commission urged the European Union to review its aid program to the Middle East peace process, demanding concessions from Israel and a bigger say in the US led negotiations. In the policy paper, the Commission said that the EU should insist that Israel stop sealing off Palestinian territories from the outside world. It noted that living conditions deteriorated despite the mounds of money the EU dumped into the region. The paper said the EU should insist on participating alongside the United States in all talks between Israel and the Palestinians, and should take the lead in coordinating international economic aid. The Commissioner responsible for Middle East policy stated: “We think it is perfectly logical, as may happen in a private company if you are the main shareholder. It wouldn’t be normal for you not to be included on the board.”[200]

Since 1998, the EU’s aggressive determination to be part of the peace process helped to evolve its role as a “key player in the political and economic process.” The EU’s recent stated position on the Middle East peace process is that of a “promoter of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace and of prosperity for the region.”

The EU also acts as a “facilitator in the peace process.” It holds regular meetings with the main actors involved. The EU Troika (present and incoming Presidency, the High Representative for CFSP, and the Commission) make routine visits to the Near East. The activities of the EU Special Envoy for the Peace Process, the political talks with all parties, aimed at promoting the EU’s positions, contribute to strengthen the role of the Union in the negotiations for the final settlement of the Israeli-Arab conflict.[201]

The EU presidency issues frequent statements concerning the various stalemates that have occurred in the peace process. They also have partaken in monitoring the early Palestinian elections of 1996 and the training of Palestinian policeman. The EU has also teamed up with the US, as agreed in the Trans-Atlantic Declaration, to work together in the peace process.

At the US-EU summit in Washington on December 18, 1998, the EU stated in their Declaration on the Middle East Peace Process:

We will work together, including through our respective envoys, in the political and economic area, to build on this achievement and to help the parties move the peace process forward to a successful conclusion. We will use our partnership to support the implementation of seek ways to help the parties in the Lebanese and Syrian tracks to restart negotiations with the aim of reaching a comprehensive settlement.

The EU lends a good deal of economic support to the Middle East region. They are the largest donor of non-military aid to the peace process. The EU is the first donor of financial and technical assistance to the Palestinian authority. They are the first trading partner and a major economic, scientific and research partner of Israel, and are also a major partner of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt. In 2000, they signed the EU-Israel Association Agreement and committed themselves to establishing a partnership which provides for close political and mutually beneficial trade and investment relations together with economic, social, financial, civil scientific, technological and cultural cooperation.[202]

In the Laeken Declaration, which resulted from the European Council’s meeting in Laeken on December 14 and 15, 2001, EU leaders issued a “Declaration on the Situation in the Middle East,” stating that “it is imperative to put an end to violence.” The EU reaffirms Israel’s right to live in peace and security, and supports the establishment of a Palestinian State. The EU appeals to the Palestinian authority to end terrorism, and demands that they dismantle the Hamas’ and Islamic Jilhad’s terrorist networks, “including the arrest and prosecution of all suspects: a public appeal in Arabic for an end to the armed intifada.” The EU demands that the Israeli government withdraw all military forces, and lift all closures and restrictions—including freezes on settlements and operations—directed against Palestinian infrastructures.

A key statement of interest to students of prophecy reads: “The European Union remains convinced that setting up a third party monitoring mechanism would serve the interests of both parties. It is prepared to play an active role in such a mechanism.” Could this lead to the guarantee of peace in the region and the Covenant of Death?[203]

In May of 2002, when President George Bush, Jr. met with Commission President Prodi during a summit, he affirmed the EU’s importance in the Middle East Peace process by stating:

The United States and the EU share a common vision of two states, Palestine and Israel, living side by side in peace and security. This vision offers the Palestinian people a new opportunity to choose how they live. We should take this opportunity to help build institutions that will serve the Palestinian people, a Palestinian state and its neighbors, as well….The EU, as well and the United States has an important role to play. When the EU and the United States work together we multiply our effectiveness.[204]

In the July 2002 issue of The Federalist, Guido Montani, the Secretary General of the UEF in Italy, stated:

Presently the European Union does not have the means necessary for intervening adequately in the Middle East. The Federalists therefore are calling on the Union’s governments to convene urgently a meeting of the European Council and to declare a State of Emergency, granting the European Commission all the military and budgetary powers for solving the crisis in the Middle East.

He adds that the European Commission will act as a “provincial European government,” which should call for an international conference. He refers to “The European Peace Plan,” which must call for “the immediate creation of a Palestinian State.” Mr. Montani also adds that “the European Union, unlike the USA and Russia, has an interest in proposing to all of the Middle East countries (and not just to Palestine) a Marshall plan for development and peace.”[205]

In August 2002, the Danish presidency of the European Union announced that it was working on a three-stage Middle East peace plan, which envisioned the creation of an independent Palestinian state in 2005.

The Danish plan hoped to signal to the Arab world that Europe is still a major player in the Middle East region. Former Danish president Per Stig Moeller stated: “We must make progress on security, political and economic issues to strengthen the belief among Palestinians in a state that will be theirs and that is within reach, and reassure Israelis that they will at last have security within their own borders.”[206] Thus the groundwork for the treaty spoken of in Scriptures exists and only awaits the arrival of the Antichrist to formalize and sign it, yet the events still continue to evolve.

In December 2002, the EU, US, UN, and Russia held a Quartet meeting to discuss Middle East peace, and put forth a road map that envisions two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security.[207]

On Apr. 30, 2003, the Roadmap for Peace took place based upon a speech by President Bush and the principles of the Oslo Accords, this plan is supervised by the Quartet: the United States, the European Union, the Russian Federation and the United Nations. It called for serious alterations in the Palestinian government and resulted in the appointment of Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas. Afterward a summit took place with Sharon and Abbas reaffirming their commitment to the Roadmap. Sharon promised withdrawal of Israeli troops from Palestinian areas, and Abbas pledged an end to the Intifada and the Palestinian culture of hate against Israel. Despite the agreement, Palestinian terrorists carried out a suicide bombing in Jerusalem and the Israeli Cabinet waged war against Hamas and other terrorist groups, and halted the diplomatic process.

Later that year at the Fourth Herzliya Conference, Prime Minister Sharon presented a plan for Israel’s unilateral disengagement from the Gaza Strip and northern Samaria in exchange for peace. The disengagement plan, called for evacuating nearly 9,000 Israeli residents living in Gaza and the West Bank.

In 2005, at the Sharm el-Sheikh Summit I, Sharon met with PA President Abbas, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and King Abdullah of Jordan to announce the implementation of Israel’s disengagement from the Gaza Strip and parts of the West Bank. Abbas and Sharon agreed upon a

Ceasefire. Later in August Israel pulled all of its citizens out of the Gaza Strip and the Northern West Bank.

In 2007, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s accepted the revised Arab Peace Initiative. In response to the March 28, 2007 Arab League Summit at Riyadh, Olmert invited the Arab heads of state to a meeting in Israel to further discuss the initiative and collaborate on improving it. Olmert met with Abbas, Mubarak and Jordan’s King Abdullah II. They discussed containment of Hamas in the Gaza Strip and to strengthen Abbas’ Fatah party in the West Bank. Later that year, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas signed a joint statement in Annapolis, Md. to lay the groundwork for peace talks.

In 2008, President Bush embarked on a tour of a number of Middle East countries, starting with Israel. The purpose of the visit was to advance peace negotiations initiated at the Annapolis conference in Nov. 2007. Bush urged the Palestinian side to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure and also called on Israel to halt settlement construction and remove unauthorized settler outposts.

The Peace Valley plan is an effort personally supported by Israeli President Shimon Peres, which seeks to promote a new approach based on economic cooperation, and promotion of joint economic and business projects. In May 2008, Tony Blair, the special envoy for the Quartet announced a new plan for peace and for Palestinian rights, based heavily on the ideas of the Peace Valley plan.

In December 2008, the EU expressed the hope that Lebanon – Israel peace talks would be possible. The EU has praised the Arab Peace Initiative, as a major step forward for the Middle East Peace Process, since it offers a basis for peaceful and normalized relations between Israel and all 22 members of the Arab League.

The Resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict is now a strategic priority for Europe. They believe that without this peace, there will be little chance of dealing with other problems in the Middle East. The EU’s objective is a two-state solution with an independent, democratic, viable Palestinian state living side-by-side with Israel and its other neighbors.

The Bible tells us that the Antichrist confirms the covenant with Israel, and guarantees Israel’s peace. In 1993, the Federalist Trust, a European think-tank organization that aids in formulating EU policy, and is ahead of its time usually suggesting policy that the EU adopts a few decades

later, published a report on the Middle East. They wrote up a proposed treaty that guarantees Israel’s peace. The proposal offers the security that the US initiative fails to offer. The report proposes the establishment of a “regional security community” as the basis for the Arab-Israeli peace settlement. The proposed treaty states that the guarantor states would protect the community against external attacks. The Union would secure Israel’s peace with its army. The Scriptures state that the Antichrist confirms the covenant with many. The proposed treaty includes the world’s great powers and reads:

Moreover, the incorporation of the great powers into the security package as both the guarantors and supervisors of this arrangement raises the costs of violation dramatically. Should a certain state decide to defy the superpowers (and the other co-signatories to the agreement) and to embark on a belligerent/irredentist course, it will clearly identify itself as an aggressor and will run the risk of losing the political goodwill as well as the economic and military support of the international community, thereby dooming such a move. Hence, a security community consisting of a militarily constrained Palestinian state and a demilitarized Golan, guaranteed and strictly supervised by the great powers may satisfy Israel’s security concerns and ally its apprehensions of the adverse implications of loosening of the US-Israeli strategic relationship, caused by such a proposed arrangement. [208]

It is likely that this proposed treaty is “the covenant of death” spoken of in Scripture. According to Amos Perlmutter: “People who live in a constant state of war naturally yearn for peace; for a nation, security is the equivalent of sanity for an individual. The Israelis search for security is an obsession, a quest for an almost metaphysical security, even if they know that such protection is beyond their political and military capabilities.”[209]

When the Antichrist signs the peace treaty with Israel, this covenant assures Israel total peace. The Israelis will feel safe from the threats of their neighbors. The CSCM is the skeletal form of the proposals yet to come. The EU will guarantee Israel’s peace in the region and will act as her

protector. The world will view it as one more event in history, no cause for concern. This covenant marks the beginning of the Tribulation and ends the dispensation of grace. With events occurring at unprecedented speed, anything is possible and leaders can sign a treaty almost overnight. According to The European Journal of Internal Affairs:

Disarmament creates a fourth paradox. Never before has history seen such an acceleration. There was a time when governments determined their security priorities on a long-term basis and when diplomats negotiated for many years the finer details of acts, verification, ceilings and the like. Those items seem well and truly passed. Today, diplomats are called upon to establish treaties within six months or a year (as was said by President Bush at the Brussels summit last May), whereas the negotiating process, though working at maximum speed, will nevertheless still be unable to keep pace with the political changes which are speedily occurring both East as in the West.[210]

In Israel’s ancient past the nation became part of the empire that took it over. Thus, Israel was Assyria, Babylon, Persia and Rome. Israel will also be part of the EU. Coincidentally Israel voiced a desire to join the European Union and the Union considers Israel a possible candidate country. If the country joined it will have the security of the EU and its territory will belong to the empire. According to Michael Sctender-Auerbach from the think-tank the Century Foundation:

For Israel, EU membership would not only provide a strong security guarantee, but would afford them all of the economic advantages of the vast EU market. For the security establishment, it could possibly mean even opening the door to membership in NATO. The EU and Israel already have a formal Cooperation Agreement—ratified five years ago by the Knesset, Israel’s parliament—and this relationship has influenced economic, political and cultural exchanged.

Auerbach pointed out that Israel joined the Euro-Mediterranean zone, which will boost Israel’s financial gains in the textile industry. For Israel to gain entry into the EU it will need to negotiate a peace settlement with the Palestinians consistent with Security Council resolution 242 and to settle its border disputes with Syria and the Golen.

He also added that “as an EU member at peace with its neighbors, Israel would bolster Europe’s status as a world leader and international power broker. This will also provide Israel with the security and membership in a community of nations that accept and protect them.” He added that “the EU can currently guarantee peace without Israel becoming a member of the EU, but Israel as a member will no doubt solidify any peace agreed by providing the same protection as it would for the rest of the Member States.”[211] For the first time in history, geopolitical speak now matches what the Scriptures predicted.

Israel’s Covenant of Death

Because the EU holds strong relations with the Arab world, the Antichrist will also use these relations to guarantee Israeli peace. He will campaign for peace in Israel and the region as a whole. Israel will trust him and feel secured by his promises. With him they will sign what the Bible calls their covenant with death. Concerning Israel’s signing this agreement, in several places in Scripture the Bible elaborates on the deceit behind this promise. In the book of Isaiah, God reveals the truth of this covenant. Isaiah 28:15, 18 reads:

Because you have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with Sheol we are in agreement: when the overflowing scourge passes through, it will not come to us; for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood we have hidden ourselves.

Your covenant with death will be annulled, and your agreement with Sheol will not stand; when the overflowing scourge passes through, then you will be trampled down by it.

God is telling the Jewish nation that “with hell they are in agreement” because the man they are dealing with is none other than the Devil in a man’s body. The phrase “we have made lies our refuge” exposes that the guarantees of the treaty are false, for this leader who promises to guard Israel will seek to destroy it. He tells them that “when the overflowing scourge passes through, you will be trampled down by it.” Another words, when this man wages war against Israel, the nation will be destroyed by it. God elaborates on the Antichrist’s deception and intention as he signed this agreement. In Psalm 55: 20-21 it says:

He has put forth his hands against those who were at peace with him:

He has broken his covenant.

The words of his mouth were smoother than butter,

But war was in his heart;

His words were softer than oil,

Yet they were drawn swords.

Scripture provides a view to the emotional and physical picture of Israel once the Antichrist breaks the treaty and lays siege to the nation. Isaiah 33:7-9 states:

Surely their valiant ones shall cry outside: the ambassadors of peace shall week bitterly.

The highways lie waste, the wayfaring man ceases.

He has broken the covenant, he has despised the cities, he regards no man. The earth mourns and languishes; Lebanon is ashamed and shriveled: Sharon is like a wilderness: and Bashan and Carmel shake off their fruits.

Daniel 11:37 emphasizes the Antichrist’s regard for no man. It states: “He shall regard neither the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above them all.” Genesis 3:16 teaches that Eve represented all of womanhood. Her “desire shall be for your husband.” The desire of women is man. Thus, the Antichrist will regard no man.

The Antichrist?

The most shocking event took place in February 1998, when former Commission President Jacques Santer went on a weeklong tour of the Middle East to promote Europe’s political role in the region. Santer actually spoke of guaranteeing Israel’s peace. According to Reuters: “European Commission President Jacques Santer said on Saturday that the Middle East peace process could best move forward if Israel’s security was guaranteed and the Palestinians were able to develop their economy.”

Santer stated: “It is very important that the people of Israel live in security. The best condition is also to give the Palestinians the right to economic development.” Santer asserted that “Europe has to play a stronger role in the peace process.” The whole purpose of his visit was to ensure Europe’s political involvement. Santer affirmed: “We want political involvement and that’s why I’m here.” It does not get any closer than this, as one of the future commission president’s identity will be the Antichrist and he will mirror Santer’s words.

We know that the Antichrist must be pro-Israel in his policies. Despite some of the Union’s pro-Palestinian positions, Santer stated: “We are as pro-Palestinian as we are pro-Israel.” As if already holding a preeminent place in the peace conference, Santer added: “We have to see how we can have a real balance to make a breakthrough in the involvement and that’s why I’m here.” [212]

Santer’s visit was the first by a European Union president to the region. Despite having a Commissioner who is responsible for the Middle East region, Santer took it upon himself to act alone. During Santer’s visit he met with the Israeli leader.

Only since this last decade has the European Union made such inroads into the peace process. The Union evolved from desiring a role to achieving one. It is haunting that in 1993 the Federalist Trust drew up a treaty proposal and the Union is now in the place to initiate it. There is coming the day when the Union will broker the peace. It is possible that European leaders are negotiating this treaty this very moment.

NOTES

 

  1. Charles Isawi, “The Middle East in the World Economy: A Long Range Historical View,” The Center for Comtemporary Arab Studies, Georgetown University, 1985, p. 13.
  2. Shuomo Avineri, “The Impact of Changes in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe,” Mediterranean Quarterly, Winter 1991.
  3. Garret Fitzgerald, “The Israeli-Palestinian Issue,” A Report to the Trilateral Commission, New York, May 1990, pp. 36-37. See also Robert Shawn, “A Change of Dutch Heart,” Middle East International, December 1991, p. 14.
  4. Monica Borkowski, “Israelis and Arabs: The 44 Years of Rage and Hate,” New York Times, October 1991.
  5. Op. Cit. John v. Walvoord, pp. 37-38.
  6. For chronological history see Monica Borkowski, “Israelis and Arabs: The 44 Years of Rage and Hate,” New York Times, October 1991.
  7. Israel Shahak, “Israel and Iraq: Establishing a Relationship,” Middle East International, December 1993. See also Muhammad Hallaj, “The Americans Try to Catch Up,” Middle East International, September 1993. “The Oslo Accord Text of the Declaration of Principles,” Middle East International, September 1993.
  8. Mark R. Levin, “Not So Fast,” Mark R. Levin on Bush & Mideast, on National Review Online, 25 June 2002, http://www.nationalreview.com/levin/levin062502.asp. See also Jeff Jacoby, “The Road to War in the Mideast Since the Oslo Agreements,” 2 April, 2002, http://www.science.co.il/Arab-Israeli-conflict/Articles/Jacoby-2002-04-04.asp.
  9. Speech by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon at the Herzliya Conference Institute of Policy and Strategy, 4 December 2002, http://www.herzliyaconference.org.
  10. Leon T. Hador, “The United States, Europe, and the Middle East,” World Policy Journal, Summer 1991, vol. VIII, no. 3, p. 21.
  11. Op. Cit. European Political Cooperation, pp. 10-11.
  12. Op. Cit. Garrett Fitzgerald, pp. 5, 140.
  13. Op. Cit. Stanley Hoffman, p. 39.
  14. A.G. Shawky, “A Secure Middle East,” European Affairs, August/September 1991, p. 48. See also “100 Critical Days,” p. 77.
  15. Leon T. Hador, p. 444. See also “The War Is Over,” Reuters: Europe Magazine, March 1991, p. 32.
  16. Thomas L. Friedman, “US Sees New Mideast Peace Momentum,” New York Times, 12 May, 1991.
  17. “Europe and Israel: Biting the Carrot,” Middle East International, 14 June, 1991, p. 6.
  18. Gianni de Michelis, “The Mediterranean after the Gulf War,” Mediterranean Quarterly, Summer 1991, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 3-5.
  19. Shada Islam, “Europe: Pressure from Baker,” Middle East International, 11 October, 1991, pp. 5-6.
  20. Shada Islam, “Aid for Palestinians,” Middle East International, 6 December, 1991, p. 7. See also “100 Critical Days,” p. 74. De Michelis, p. 7. Yezid Savigh, “Security and Cooperation in the Middle East: A Proposal,” Middle East International, 10 July 1992, p. 16. Martin Kohler, “The Italian Search for Mediterranean Security,” Mediterranean Quarterly, Fall 1991, p. 51.
  21. Shada Islam, “The Shape of the Aid Plan,” Middle East International, 8 October 1993, p. 7. See also “CFSP Statement on the Palestinian Elections,” Reuters, 23 January, 1996. Paul Taylor, “EU Shut Out of Washington Summit, Invites Arafat,” Reuters, 30 September, 1996. Jeremy Gaunt, “EU Wants to Be More Than Bankroller in Middle East,” 7 October 1996. Miral Fahmyu, “France Says Time Ripe for Europe Role in Mideast,” Reuters, 13 December 1996. Paul Taylor, “Chirac Says EU Must Co-Sponsor Mideast Talks,” Reuters, 19 October 1996. Jonathan Wright, “EU Refused to Be Mere Paymaster in Mideast-Italy,” 21 October 1996. David Fox, “EU Increases Pressure for More Say in Middle East,” 21 October 1996. Nashwa Hanna, “Egypt’s Mubarak Meets European Team,” 11 November 1996.
  22. “EU draws Applause with Mideast Land-for-Peace Plea,” Reuters 12 November 1996. Alister Doyle, “US, Israel Said Amenable to EU Middle East Role,” Reuters 9 January 1997. “France Ready to Send Troops for Mideast Peace,” 13 February 1997. Nicholas Doughty, “Hebron Deal Shows US Role Despite EU Ambition,” Reuters, 15 January 1997. “Peace Talks Must Be Based on Land-For-Peace,” Reuters, 17 January 1997. “EU Envoy Wants to Alter Mideast Peace Formula,” Reuters 6 March 1997. Gillian Handyside, “EU Parliament Slams Israel over New Settlements,” Reuters, 13 March 1997. “EU Urges Palestinian State Option,” Reuters World Report, 17 June 1997. Khaled Abu Aker, “EU Asserts Palestinian Rights,” Reuters, 12 November 1997. Issam Hamza, “EU Team Offers Syria Ideas to Activate Peace Talks,” Reuters, 13 November 1997. “EU Proposes Joint Mideast Peace Bid with US”, Reuters, 8 April 1997. “US Stresses Its Central Role in Mideast Peace,” Reuters, 9 April 1997.
  23. Jonathan Wright, “Europe Puts Foot in Door of Mideast Diplomacy,” Reuters, 17 April 1997. Draft Treaty Amsterdam, Presidency Conclusions, Annex III European Call For Peace in the Middle East. David Fox, “EU Hopes to Bring Arafat and Levy Face to Face,” Reuters, 22 July 1997.
  24. “EU Urged to Review Aid to Mideast Peace Process,” Reuters World Report, 16 January 1998. “Europe Wants Greater Mideast Role,” United Press International, 17 January 1998.
  25. “The EU and the Middle East Peace Process—The Union’s Position and Role,” http://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/mepp/index.htm.,Slobodan Lekic “EU: Jerusalem should Be Joint Capital,” Associated Press December 8, 2009

Leon Hadar, “EU Expansion to Israel and Palestine,”Atlantic-Community.Org, February 25, 2008, http://atlantic-community.org/index/articles/view/EU_Expansion_to_Israel_and_Palestine

European Commission: Trade: Israel, http://ec.europa.eu/trade/creating-

opportunities/bilateral-relations/countries/israel/

  1. “The EU’s Mediterranean & Middle East Policy-Overview,” http://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/med_mideast/intro/index.htm.

“The European Union & Policy,” Delegation of the European Commission to the State of Israel www.delist.ec.europa.com (accessed January 15, 2010)

  1. Laeken Declaration, “Declaration of the Situation in the Middle East,” p. 30.

Gerald M. Steinberg, “The European Union and the Middle East Peace

Process.”Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, November 15, 1999,

http://www.jcpa.org/jl/vp418.htm

  1. “President Bush Meets with European Leaders,” 2 May 2002.
  2. Guido Montani, “A European Initiative for Peace in the Middle East,” Federalist Debate, Torino, Italy, July 2002, Year XV, no. 2, pp. 14-15.
  3. “Denmark to Unveil New Mideast Peace Plan,” 28 August, 2002.
  4. “US, UN, Russia, EU Discuss Road Map to Mideast Peace,” 20 December, 2002.
  5. The Middle East and Europe: The Search for Stability and Integration, ed. Gerd Nonneman, London: Federalist Trust for Education and Research, 1993.
  6. Amos Perlmutter, “Israel’s Dilemma,” Foreign Affairs, Winder 1989/90, p. 121.
  7. Pierre Lellouche, European Journal of International Affairs, Winter 1990, p. 125
  8. Michael Shtender, “Israel and the EU: A Path to Peace,” Century Foundation, November 3, 2005,http://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=NC&pubid=1129

Robbie Sabel, “Israel Should Become a Member of the Council of Europe,” Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DRIT=6&DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=253&PID=0&IID=1824&TTL=Israel_Should_Become_a_Member_of_the_Council_of_Europe

  1. “Santer Says Europe Seeks Greater Role in Middle East,” Reuters, 7 February 1998.

 

The Empire: Chapter 7

28 European Nations?

The Bible specifically states that ten nations head the federation and align with the Antichrist. Presently 28 nations are members of the European Union. The 28 nations are Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Croatia and the United Kingdom.

There is talk of the Union’s expanding to include even more members. Some experts estimate that up to thirty-five countries could make up the Union within a generation. Some even suggest that the Soviet Union could become a member of the Union. After the revolution of 1989, the list of would-be members of the European Union grew. Even Israel joins the list.

Twenty seven members do not resemble the ten-nation federation spoken of by Daniel and John in the Revelation. Currently, discussions concerning the Union going forward with political union with an inner core of nations are underway. A few decades ago when the number of nations which opted for EU membership grew, various bureaucrats determined that the Union must deepen the process of integration before enlarging. The Union must unify politically, economically, and militarily before accepting any new members. Union delegates fiercely debated widening the EU’s membership to include nearby countries. The prevailing view was that the EU should strengthen itself inwardly before it took on any new members. The Commission and the Council of the European Union formerly the Council of Ministers determined that the EU will have to achieve both political and economic union. [118]

In a larger EU, decisions become harder to reach. Solving language questions becomes extremely difficult. In a nine-language EU, any meeting of ministers requires twenty-seven interpreters. A sixteen-language EU, needs forty-two interpreters at each meeting. Some took this as evidence that a wider community required a stronger central government. With twelve members in the European Council, each representative speaks for ten minutes. This takes two hours, and rises to three hours for eighteen members, and four hours for twenty-four. Unanimous decision making becomes impossible, and a thirty-member Commission and larger European Parliament becomes too unwieldy.

The EU’s founders designed the EU’s institutions for six members. When membership reached twelve, these members expanded its capacity to the full. [119] According to the Federalist Journal Crocodile, the newsletter of “The Crocodile Club” founded in 1980 by an informal group of members of European Parliament that favored greater European integration and greater powers to the European Parliament:

There are no clear objective criteria for determining the optimum or maximum size of the Union. No one can say how many Member States it can cope with without risking paralysis or regressing into a mere free trade area. It is therefore impossible to lay down the number of Member States admitting of no further enlargement of the Union. No one can gauge the maximum absorption capacity which the Union could not exceed without bringing about its destruction, but it is indisputable that a limit exists.

The Community as presently constituted cannot encompass enlargement. Without further reform, enlargement to include 15 or more Member States would eventually spell its destruction. The choice for the Union is consequently not between deepening or widening but rather between deepening or dissolution.[120]

With enlargement, the EU sought to strengthen itself politically and suggested that a strong united core proceed ahead of the other nations. [121]

According to European Affairs, a publication which devoted itself to European Union issues:

It might be possible to envision by the end of this century a Europe of concentric circles: (1) the EU at the core; … trying to bring the two parts of Europe closer together responds to a historical urge that both sides feel. The historical basis of a whole Europe or common home after all goes back to the Empire of Charlemagne, and then the holy Roman Empire, and should at a minimum encompass the territories of those empires; both were culturally and geographically primary West European. The EU will become a community of different speeds, tiers and forms of association. [122]

As the Union prepared to enlarge its membership it went to work on internal strengthening in order to facilitate the incorporation of new members. Each country that joined the Union met strict criteria. They must be sound economically, have secure democratic institutions and adopt the body of EU law.

Former German foreign minister Joschka Fischer called for the relaunch of the process of unification through the creation of a federal core. This core will comprise of a limited number of countries, and will constitute “the centre of gravity” to which all the other states of the Union will be attracted. Another possibility is for Europe to progress at different tiers and speeds. Former French President Valéry Giscard’Estaing published what he called a Manifesto for a Federal Europe. In his manifesto, he calls for the formation of a core group of federalist countries within a wider European Union. Giscard calls this core the “European Power.” It consists of all and only those countries which are a part of European Monetary Union (EMU).

Heads of state meeting in Nice decided to undertake an in-depth review of the future of an enlarged Union and called European citizens to take part in it. The European Policy Centre, a think-tank for EU policy, devoted its resources to this debate. In the fall of 2000, Notre Europe, a think-tank founded by former European Commission President Jacques Delors, held a debate on the structure of an enlarged Europe, which had several contributors including Joschka Fischer. Although they used different metaphors—a multi-speed Europe, a pioneer group, three spheres formed on the basis of a Eurozone, which is the politically integrated area, the avant garde; some writers have referred to this inner political core as the Union’s “avant-garde” for political union —all of the speakers echoed the same message: that with the Big Bang of members about to enter the Union, institutionally the Union cannot go forward as it is currently structured without the new members’ leading to its demise. [123]

Guy Verhofstadt, former Belgian Prime Minister and EU Parliamentarian authored a manifesto for Europe titled, The United States of Europe: Manifesto for a New Europe, in it he discusses the inner core and added his own proposals and summarized them in his article, “Only a New ‘political core’ can drive Europe forward again.” He stated:

 

Only through adopting a unified approach in all these areas will Europe really count as a world player. …In such a scenario, Europe would comprise two concentric circles: a political core that is a “United States of Europe” based on the Eurozone, and surrounding it a confederation of countries, or a “Organization of European States.” Naturally, this political core must never prevent or oppose any form of broader cooperation. All EU Member States wishing to join it, old or new, should be able to do so; the sole precondition should be their willingness to work unconditionally on pushing ahead with the overall political project. The notion of a “United States of Europe” is the only option for the old continent. [124]

 

The suggested next step after the Lisbon Treaty, which will insure that the Union continues to strengthen and not be diluted by all of its members will be to form this inner core. This solid core will become “the engine of the union.” [125] Knowing that the Union will have a ten nation federation and that discussions are underway for an inner core, we see that the evolution of the Union lines up with Scripture. Europe will become a giant empire with the EU governmental power house of the Commission

 

and ten nation Council at the center. The next step for the EU is to form this core and when we see the EU number a political core of ten we know that the Tribulation is right at the door.

 

The Three Horns Plucked by the Roots

 

Daniel, in three separate verses, tells us that the Antichrist plucks out by their roots, three of the first horns (Daniel 7:8). Daniel envisions the ten-nation federation at its pinnacle of power. He describes the appearance of a little horn, “before whom three of the first horns were plucked out by the roots.” Disturbed by his vision, Daniel talks to an angel who discloses the truth of the fourth beast. “And about the ten horns that were on its head, and about the other horn which came up (the little horn) before which three fell.” The angel explains: “The ten horns are ten kings who shall arise from this kingdom: and another shall rise after them; he shall be different from the first ones, and shall subdue three kings.”

One view holds that this verse refers to three of the ten kings that the Antichrist subdues. In the Hebrew translation, to subdue means to humble, put down, or humiliate. This contradicts the precept of the ten-nation federation. The ten kings willingly give their power and strength unto the Beast, and have one mind. They receive power with the Beast (Rev. 17:12-13).

The Antichrist, unlike any of the other leaders who held his position, subdues them. These three kings follow his policies unwillingly, unlike the others, and he expels them from the federation. There exist many variables. The Scriptures can indirectly be stating that thirteen kings exist when the Antichrist subdues them. He expels three of them, leaving his final federation with ten. Or he can subdue three of the member nations of the wider group of 27 nations. When the Antichrist subdues three nations, this verifies his position as the man of sin. The Antichrist raises the EU to its zenith of power with his select ten nations (Rev. 13:1).

No article in the Treaty of Rome allows the EU to expel a member. Denmark, for example, rejected the Treaty on Political Union and opted out of specific policies, but it remains a full-fledged member of the European Union. No nation within the Union wishes to forfeit the economic benefits of membership. Each nation relies on its role to influence the EU’s evolution. Previous rocky relations with Greece caused EU partners to lament the absence of an expulsion clause. A petition circulated requesting signatures for the expulsion of Greece.[126] The Constitution that voters rejected included a clause that allowed for expulsion of members. When Denmark rejected the Treaty on European Union (Maastricht Treaty), there was talk in Bonn, Paris, and Brussels that Denmark could face expulsion. According to The Economist: “The eleven would renounce the Treaty of Rome and start again with a new treaty that excluded Denmark. The Council of Ministers’ legal service claimed that this would be legal.”[127]

Which three members will the Antichrist expel? Those which probably did not fit into the Old Roman Empire’s original borders? Denmark happens to be one. It presently takes an anti-Federalist stance and initially voted no to the Maastricht Treaty, which caused a stir in the whole Union. It agreed to sign, but only under its provisions. The future world ruler will not tolerate Member States half-hearted in their commitment. A ten-nation federation within the EU’s present institutional structure ensures its strength. It is no coincidence that EU policy makers wish to limit the Union’s membership from the inner core which various EU leaders have proposed since the early 1990’s.

If EU founders originally designed the Union for six members and maxed out at twelve, ten nations will end up being a good number. Taking ten of the most ambitious leaders will help the union reach important decisions quicker and more efficiently. The number might start with fewer or more but will end up at ten.

The leaders of the participating nations will form some sort of agreement like the Schengen agreement which eliminated border controls between the member countries of the Union in the mid 1980’s. Schengen added impetus to the completion of the Common Market and the Amsterdam Treaty of 1997 incorporated the agreement into EU law. An Executive Committee ran Schengen and when it became part of EU legislation, the duties of the Executive Committee transferred to the EU’s institutions in the co-decision procedure; the process by which they adopt directives and regulations. The Union will most likely incorporate the political core in the same way. They will draw up an agreement with the aim of moving the Union forward politically. Based on the Bible’s description, the ten nation federation and the Antichrist run the Union. The ten king federation will bring together the ten Council members and the President of the Commission.

The other option is to streamline the European Council which brings together the Commission President and the leaders of the EU Member States to contain members of the political core only. The Vice President of the Commission currently attends its meetings. Or the Council of the European Union which comprises of the Heads of the Member States will be revamped to reduce it to the ten strongest and add the Commission President, i.e. Antichrist. Either way the other Council will comprise of the leaders of the remaining Member States. The EU can also add the core as an additional Institution which would comprise of the ten prime ministers and the Commission President. However the EU makes these changes, the student of prophecy should keep an eye on its evolution.

Meanwhile the EU as a whole will continue to add more members. Despite the EU’s apparent willingness to consider taking in so many new members, there are strict conditions for admission. The criteria for the inner core will be those nations that possess the greatest ambition and commitment to move forward politically to evolve the Union into a full fledged political world empire. These leaders of all the remaining Member States will be ripe for the Antichrist’s leadership and vision to move the EU into becoming the most powerful and crushing world empire that has ever existed. When the Union becomes the ten-nation federation, the ten leaders will be ready to meet and assist their leader in the same way the twelve apostles assisted Jesus. When this core forms the Tribulation will practically be at the door.

States on the Current Agenda

 

Recognized candidates Applied Potential Candidates
Croatia, Macedonia, Turkey Albania, Iceland, Montenegro Bosnia & Herzegovina, Kosovo, Serbia

 

States Not on the Current Agenda States Outside Europe Eastern Europe States Outside ENP &Eap
Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland Cape Verde, Israel, Morocco KazakhastanRussia

 

Special Territories of Member States MicrostatesWithin western Europe, there are five microstates: Eastern Partnership States
British Dependencies, Danish self-governing communities, French overseas departments and collectivities AndorraMonacoSan Marino and Vatican City. The fifth, Liechtenstein is a member of EFTA. Monaco, San Marino and Vatican City have all signed agreements allowing them not only to use the euro, but to mint their own coins. Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine

Progress

 

Croatia became the 28th member in 2013 Macedonia possibly will join around 2016, and Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, Serbia, and Turkey following, either together or in smaller groups.

NOTES

  1. “European Community from Atlantic to Where?” Economist, 30 August 1991. See also “From Luxembourg to Maastricht,” p. 4. See also Wikipedia contributors, “Enlargement of the European Union, “Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopediahttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Enlargement_of_the_European_Union&oldid+324890035(accessed November 30, 2009)
  2. “Survival of the Fattest,” Economist, 11 April 1992, p. 54. Bernard Cassen, “How Large Is Europe?” European Affairs, August/September 1991, no. 4, pp. 19-20. See also “Leading to a Community,” Eurocom, September 1991, and Economist, 12 March, 1993.
  3. “The European Daisy,” Crocodile: Letter to the Parliament of Europe, Brussels, October 1992, Wikipedia contributors, “Crocodile Club,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Crocodile_Club&oldid=317606870 (accessed February 5, 2010)
  4. Report La Commission reporte l’ecamen de cu point a sa 1112eme reunion du z juillet 1992. “Europe and The Challenge of Enlargement,” EC Commission, June 1992. “A New Partnership” #34-38.
  5. Robert D. Hormats, “Redefining Europe and the Atlantic Link,” Foreign Affairs,” Fall 1989, pp. 80, 84. See also Gregory F. Treverton, “The New Europe,” Foreign Affairs. America and the World, 1991-1992, p. 97.
  6. “The Debate on the Structure of an Enlarged Europe,” Notre Europe, 10 October 2000. See also Robert J. Gutman, Valéry D’Estaing, Europe, May 1997.
  7. Guy Verhofstadt and ‘The United States of Europe’: The Eurozone as a new core Europe: Manifesto for a New Europe, The Federal Trust for Education and Research, London, January 2006,Guy Verhofstadt, “Crisis-busting I: “Only a new ‘political core’can drive Europe forward again” Europe’s World, Spring 2006 http://www.europesworld.org/NewEnglish/Home_old/Article/tabid/191/ArticleType/ArticleView/ArticleID/21046/CrisisbustingIOnlyanewpoliticalcorecandriveEuropeforwardagain.aspx
  8. Olivier Vedrine, “Analyze: A “solid core” to build a political European Union”www.multipol.org, April 30, 2009
  9. “Europe: The Sick Man of Europe,” Economist, 9 May 1992.
  10. “Europe Ways Round That Little Danish Inconvenience,” Economist, 13 June, 1992. See also “How to Leave the Stage Gracefully,” European, 13-19 June, 1996.

 

 

 

 

The Empire: Chapter 6

 

THE SEAT OF THE ANTICHRIST

t want another committee. We have too many already. What we want is a man of sufficient stature to head the allegiance of all people and to lift us out of the economic morass in which we are sinking. Send us such a man and be he god or the Devil we will receive him.

Former Belgian Prime Minister, 1st President of the EU Parliament: Paul-Henri Spaak

Daniel’s visions of the final world empire, describe a distinct political government, and provide a view to its institutional and structural make-up. Under the Antichrist’s authority, it reaches its zenith of power. Daniel describes it as “dreadful and terrible and exceedingly strong.” The Beast devours and breaks in pieces its enemies to the point of crushing their remains (Dan. 7:7). John likewise sees it in its final form “rising up out of the sea”—a figurative illustration of its rise to power (Rev. 13:1). This political power possesses the combined strength of all the empires before it. Unlike them, it devours and treads down the entire earth (Dan. 7:23, Rev. 13:2).

The Ten Horn Federation

The Beast has ten horns, and among them comes up a little horn who is the Antichrist (Dan. 7:7-8). Daniel 7:24 states that “the ten horns are ten kings who shall arise from this kingdom: and another shall rise after them.” Revelation 13:1 depicts the horns as wearing crowns. Both, the book of Daniel and the Revelation identify the horns as kings (Rev. 17:12). The prophets add that these kingdoms do not in exist at the time of the writings. European nations did not come into being until over a millennium later. Only in this last couple of centuries have these nations reigned as separate, sovereign kingdoms. The horns wearing crowns signify established kingdoms or nations. The little horn appears after the kings, and “comes up” among them. His small horn represents a relatively new political seat on the world stage when he takes power. Horns grow with age, but this one grows extremely large, quickly. Daniel tells us, “And out of one of them came a little horn, which grew exceedingly great, toward the south, toward the east, and toward the glorious land” (Dan. 8:9-10).

Despite the EU’s newness in the international arena, it has the potential to create a dictatorship that could obtain world rule. Satan himself provides the Antichrist with a political position by which he rises to greatness and conquers the world. He wears no crown because he is not the king of any one nation, yet he leads the federation.

The Antichrist exists in a symbiotic relationship with the kings. Revelation 17:13 tells us: “These are of one mind and they will give their power and authority to the beast.” The Antichrist partners with the Kings. Some label the Union a confederation. The Union considers itself a federation. In a confederation, nations or states share governmental tasks. In a federation, the members relinquish some of their sovereignty to a higher authority, which makes the laws and regulations for the signing states. The Scriptures describe the federation’s members as actual nations, not provinces or states. The Bible’s federation acts as a dictatorship.

The Treaty of Rome

Seven main institutions (based on the Treaty of Rome) make up the European Union: the Commission, the European Parliament, the Council of Ministers, the Court of Justice, and the Court of Auditors. Nine additional treaties amended the Treaty of Rome, which established the European Union on March 1, 1957. The recent Lisbon Treaty added two more institutions: the European Central Bank, and the Council of Europe which the EU previously regarded as governing bodies but not official institutions. The Treaties provide the format for the EU’s institutional structure and the agreements by which the signing nations are to abide. The member nations surrender parts of their national sovereignty to the higher authority.

The Council of The European Union

The Antichrist will be in a federation with ten kings. These kings are the Council of The European Union formerly named the Council of Ministers. They are the governmental heads of each of the Member States. Each nation addresses them by a different title, but the Bible refers to them as kings. “Prime ministers” and “presidents” have essentially the same meaning. The Council represents the highest decision-making authority in the EU, and holds the preeminent position in the institutional power balance. Although the Council does not initiate EU laws, it must approve all Community legislation. Its secretariat is located in Brussels. The Council also concludes, on behalf of the EU, all international agreements; makes the decisions necessary for framing and implementing the Common Foreign and Security Policy; and adopts measures in the field of police and judicial cooperation.

The Bible always refers to the word “council in a negative context. In Mark 13:9, Christ warns the Jews during the Tribulation to “watch out for yourselves: for they will deliver you up to councils; and you will be beaten in the synagogues. And you will be brought before rulers and kings for My sake, for a testimony to them.” The EU’s Council of Ministers may be one of the councils Christ mentioned in Scripture. The scriptures specifically mention councils and two councils exist within the EU’s institutional structure.

It is common knowledge among journalists covering the EU that the Council of Ministers meets in secret. The Belmont European Policy Center stated, in a report on the Maastricht Treaty, that the “EC Council of Ministers remains the most secretive of Community institutions.”[91] On this subject, The Economist commented that the ministers are “The EC’s real legislature and the only one in the world that does not let in the public.”[92]

In 2009 when EU leaders met to nominate the first president of the Council and foreign affairs minister, the Former Lavian president Vaira Vike-Freiberga, said that EU leaders conducted the nomination process with Soviet-style secrecy and contempt for the public. He attacked the EU for operating in “darkness and behind closed doors” and said it should “stop working like the former Soviet Union.”[93] The Council of Ministers already acts in an undemocratic fashion. The previous chapter discussed the ambition that reigns among these leaders for leading superpower status which creates the climate for a powerful leader.

Revelation 17:12 describes the ten horns as ten kings who “receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast.” During the Tribulation, the Council promotes the Antichrist’s agenda and essentially acts in a marriage type of relationship with him. They act together as if joined with the Antichrist leading. As Jesus led his disciples, the Antichrist will lead the Prime Ministers or Presidents.

The EU Commission:

When the European member nations signed the Treaty of Rome, they agreed to hand over some of their powers to a higher authority called the Commission. As the EU’s executive arm, it acts as an overseer of the EU Treaties, and upholds them. Members of the Commission represent the interests of the Union as a whole. The size of its staff is comparable to the US Department of Commerce.

The Commission, a non-elected body, is comprised of representatives from each of the member nations. The Commission has a president who sits among the Council of the European Union (or “kings”). He is responsible for the major decisions and laws that move the EU forward into the international arena as a single political and economic entity. Former Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt suggested changing its name to the “European Government”, calling the present name of Commission: “ridiculous” because of its governmental powers. Coincidentally, the Commission’s headquarters are located in Brussels with the President’s office and the Commission’s meeting room based on the 13th floor of the Berlaymont building.[94]

The Commission President’s position fits the description of the “little horn” in Daniel for he stands among the ten horns or prime ministers and unlike the kings which head nations, he has no nation beneath him, he heads the federation. The horn signifies a relatively new position on the world stage which fits the EU Commission. The Scriptures provide specific details concerning the Antichrist’s authorities. The political seat he holds must allow him the powers cited in the prophetic writings.

The EU Commisson presidency provides the Antichrist with the powers outlined in Scripture—His position must allow him a minimum of a seven-year term

Daniel 9:27 states: “Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week,” i.e., seven years. The seven-year Tribulation begins with the signing of a peace treaty with Israel. The Antichrist is in power before the Tribulation begins. No leader signs a treaty on the day of his election. The Council of Ministers appoints the Commission President to a five-year renewable term. They make these appointments in years ending in four and nine.

He will become strong with a small number of people

Daniel 11:21, 23, states: “And in his place shall arise a vile person, to whom they will not give the honor of royalty; but he shall come in peaceably and seize the kingdom by intrigue. And after the league is made with him he shall act deceitfully; for he shall come up and become strong with a small number of people.” Some say these passages refer to Antiochus IV Epiphanes, a ruler of ancient Greece, reputed as a famous persecutor of the Jews. While he represents a prototype of the final world ruler; this prediction describes how the Antichrist comes into power. [95]

The people do not elect the Commission President. The Council of Ministers consults with the European Parliament, and nominates the person they intend to appoint to the Commission presidency. This nomination, subject to a vote and the approval of the European Parliament, concludes by the Council of Ministers’ appointment. The “small number of people” refers to this close-knit group of EU bureaucrats who place him in power. It may also signify his being a prime minister from one of the smaller EU countries. To date, European Commission Presidents have held prior EU posts such as officials from one of the Member States and even former prime ministers.

During the 2009 nomination of the first EU Council President, journalists noted that EU leaders strategized picking someone from a small country with little international power instead of a charismatic heavyweight. As the EU chose former Belgian Prime Minister Herman van Rompuy as the new Council President and Britain’s Catherine Ashton for the post of EU High Representative a headline reported, “Unknown duo chosen a new faces of Europe.” The idea is that a low key leader will be more effective in achieving consensus among so many leaders of the various nations than a well-known charismatic one. According to the Associated Press: “for EU leaders to pick a boss they can all live with, they must strike the right balance between big countries and small, east and west, socialists and conservatives, perhaps male and female. They must manoeuvre between proponents of a strong Europe and those who fear it—eurocentric’s and euroskeptics, in the local parlance.”[96] The EU will select the leader who the Bible deems as the Antichrist in the same manner.

HE WILL BE IN A FEDERATION WITH TEN KINGS

Revelation 17:12-13 tells us: “And the ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have received no kingdom as yet; but they receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast, these are of one mind, and they will give their power and authority to the beast.” This verse describes the relationship of the ten kings to the Antichrist. They both strive for the same goals. One entity does not exist without the other. The Council of The European (formerly Council of Ministers) give their strength and power to the Commission. Without the member nations that hand over their authority to the Commission, there would be no European Union. Several articles in the EU Treaty reflect their having one mind. Article 162 states: “The Council and the Commission shall consult each other and settle by common accord their methods of cooperation.”

The Scriptures are unprecedented in their accuracy and detail. Although written 1,900 years ago, one Bible verse epitomizes the contents of two treaties in just 14 words. “These shall have one mind and shall give their power and strength unto the Beast.” Over and over, one reads of the Commission’s and Council Ministers’ simultaneous role. Peter Ludlow, the founding director of the Centre For European Policy Studies think-tank in Brussels, referred to the Commission-Council relationship as a “partnership.”[97] Of the EU’s institutions, the Commission and the Council (of Ministers) represent the leading authorities. The Court enforces EU laws, and the Parliament acts as a forum with some legislative powers.

He will be both President and foreign minister Signing treaties with other nations

The Commission negotiates treaties, making agreements with other nations and with world organizations. It makes recommendations to the Council of the European Union i.e. the Council of Ministers, which authorizes the opening of negotiations and conducts them. Special committees formed by the Council assist the Commission. The Commission proposes agreements to the Council, which votes by a qualified majority, consults with the European Parliament, and then concludes the agreements. The Commission President thus negotiates and signs treaties with other nations. The Commission can impose sanctions on third world countries. It maintains EU relations with the UN, WTO and all other world institutions. The Council and the Commission take responsibility for ensuring the consistency of all EU policies.

The Antichrist will have a diverse role from that of the ten kings

Daniel 7:24 states: “The ten horns are ten kings who shall arise; from this kingdom and another shall rise after them; he shall be different from the first ones.” As the EU’s executive arm, the Commission’s major responsibility is to oversee EU treaties. It initiates EU laws and policy. Thus, the Higher Authority acts as the lawmaker while the Council of the European Union approves the laws.

His POSITION WILL give him the power to expel three of the kings

Daniel 7:24 continues, “…and shall subdue three kings.” Regarded as the “Guardian of the Treaties,” the Commission can take action against member governments that it believes have violated their treaty obligations. It proposes to the Court of Justice the fines imposed on Member States proven in default under the treaty. Presently, the Union cannot expel a Member, but allowing this action has come under discussion. The Lisbon Treaty amended articles to allow a nation to withdraw from the Union.[98]

HE WILL HAVE AUTHORITY TO DETERMINE WHO WILL BUY AND SELL WITH HIS GOVERNMENT

Revelation 13:17 tells us: “…and that no one may buy or sell, except one who has the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.” This passage deals with individuals living under the Antichrist’s dictatorship, and extends to persons worldwide. The Commission initiates the Union’s internal market policy and external trade, including that with the US. It determines the guidelines for trade with other countries, as well as for its members within the Union. Thus, the Commission determines with whom it will buy and sell, and how. The Commission also negotiates international trade agreements.

THE ANTICHRIST WILL CHANGE TIMES AND LAWS

Daniel 7:25 reports: “He shall speak pompous words against the Most High, shall persecute the saints of the Most High, and shall intend to change times and laws.” The Commission introduces EU legislation, carries out decisions, and oversees the enforcement of European laws. With this authority, the Antichrist can easily implement his laws and change existing ones.

HE WILL HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO RECENT TECHNOLOGICAL ACHIEVEMENTS, AND CONTROL OVER THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES

Revelation 13:16-17 states: “And he causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their foreheads; And that no one may buy or sell, except one who has the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.” The Commission oversees the research and development of new technologies. It determines which programs and projects will receive funding. The development of new technologies remains an EU priority. The Antichrist will have access to those new technological systems, and the power to authorize their implementation.

HIS GOVERNMENT MUST GIVE RISE TO A dictatorship

Revelation 13:15 tells us that “he was granted power to give breath to the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast to be killed.” The Antichrist kills those who do not worship him—a common trait of most dictatorships. Dictators reign from political positions that provide them with complete authority. The Commission’s authorities are not balanced by either the Court of Justice or the Parliament. The European people do not elect its members, although it is the EU’s executive arm, making it a non-democratic institution.

Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, in a major speech in Bruges, Belgium, assailed the idea of a supernational European State. In an address to the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France, Jacques Delors had predicted that by the mid-1990s, the EU would develop “an embryo European government.” Thatcher referred to these possible developments as “a nightmare” that would create “bureaucratic centralism” in the EU. She also warned: “We fought two world wars to make the world a safer place for democracy. Here we are preaching more democracy to the old Communist Soviet Union and ourselves practicing less democracy and more bureaucracy.”

During Thatcher’s Prime Ministership, she stood as a strong opponent of a federal Europe and represented the lone ranger among the other members of the European Council. In her later years she gave speeches against a European superstate. Mrs. Thatcher stated that a United States of Europe will endanger world peace. Thatcher uttered her strongest statement when she called the European Federalist project, “a nightmare.” She asked: “Were it to come about does anyone suppose that such a power would not soon become a rival to America? Thatcher then affirmed: “If this new Europe were not to follow the path to separate great power status, it would be the first such power in history to renounce its independent role.”[99] Margaret Thatcher saw from the beginning that the Commission held too much power in the institutional power balance. She understood that this amount of centralized power can lead to a dictatorship. While she never directly stated these words she used other lighter terms which place the Union’s structure in a similar sphere.

Maurie Duverger commented in L’Express of Paris, reprinted in World Press Review, that:

After 1992, nearly 80 percent of economic regulations will be enacted by the EU in Brussels, not in the capitals of the Member States. That means that decisions will be taken away from parliaments elected by universal suffrage and handed over to a political system that will largely escape the grasp of such parliaments. Europe invented democracy. But the more Europe unites, the more democracy is whittled away. As national powers are gradually reduced by the growth of a supra-national power, citizens will be chagrined. [100]

Former EU European Parliamentarian David Martin, commenting on the EU’s “democratic deficit” and need for institutional reform, stated: “If the EC was a state and applied to join the Community, it would be turned down on the grounds that it was not a democracy.”[101] Tony Benn, one of the most prominent figures in postwar British politics, and a longtime Labour Party member, affirmed: “The European Community is entirely undemocratic. It is run largely by commissioners who are not elected and cannot be removed. The Council of Ministers is the only legislative body in what’s called the ‘free world’ that meets in secret.”[102]

Secretiveness is a common characteristic of dictatorships. Certain EU legislation is fashioned in a secretive, undemocratic fashion. The Belmont European Policy Center stated that: “Unfortunately, the EU Treaty contains certain provisions, which govern Co-decision Procedure…having the effect of making the legislative processes unnecessarily secretive and prima facie inconsistent with the principles of democratic government.”[103] This report emphasized the secretiveness of Council of Ministers meetings, which echoes throughout several foreign affairs journals and articles.

The Antichrist’s federation will have secret agendas. Amazingly, when the Antichrist takes his position as President of the European Union Commission, he will have the platform for his dictatorship. Of all the Institutions, the Commission holds the greatest powers, and the other EU governmental bodies do not balance its authorities. The former journal

European Affairs stated: “At present the European institutions are upside down. The only institution with democratic legitimacy on a European scale, the European Parliament, has consultative powers only. The most dynamic body, the one that has the power to get things moving, is arbitrarily appointed and accountable to only one: the Commission of the European Communities.”[104]

The American Free Press upon Estonia’s admission into the EU quoted former Estonian Prime Minister Edgar Savisaar, and others as comparing the EU with the Soviet Union. “The forced propaganda of the European Union is reminiscent of the Soviet Union’s methods and brainwashing,” Rolf Parve, wrote in Kesknadal, the weekly paper of the Center Party.[105] “Moscow and Brussels differ in one point,” Professor Igor Grazin, one of the leading anti-EU voices in Estonia says: “The Soviet Union theoretically allowed nations to leave the union. Brussels is creating organs, however, which would kill that idea in the bud.” Savissar compared the “big bureaucratic system” of the EU with that of the Soviet Union. Currently, the EU is regarded by several politicians as a superstate, and they state this derogatorily.

According to Wikipedia: “a superstate is an agglomeration of nations and or/states, often linguistically and ethnically diverse under a single political-administrative structure. This is distinct from the concept of superpower, although these are frequently seen together. It is also distinct from the concept of empire where one nation dominates other nations through military, political, and economic power, as in the Roman Empire, although and empire may also be a superstate, as in ancient Persia, India and China.[106]

His Kingdom will be divided and will involve many men

Nebuchadnezzar’s vision in Daniel 2:28-45 illustrates the Beast’s complexity. The Bible states that the fourth kingdom is “strong as iron,” and “breaks in pieces and shatters all things,” Daniel adds that there is weakness amidst its strength. Daniel 2: 41-43 records:

Whereas you saw the feet and toes, partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; yet the strength of the iron shall be in it, just as you saw the iron mixed with ceramic clay.

And as the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly fragile.

As you saw iron mixed with ceramic clay, they will mingle with the seed of men; but they will not adhere to one another, just as iron does not mix with clay.

The iron and clay which makes up the image’s toes do not mix. The iron legs have power to break in pieces and crush all that opposes the Beast. The Bible states that clay represents the seed of men. The potter’s clay signifies a divided kingdom and the complexity within this kingdom—iron is firm, clay is brittle. The kingdom divides at the legs into feet and toes mingled with clay. John F. Walvoord, in his book Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation, discusses this passage and relates the various interpretations from well-known Bible expositors. A. C. Gaebelein states that “monarchies and clay represent democratic rule.” Lutheran Hebrew Old Testament scholar Johann Karl Friedrich Keil argues that “it is all the means employed by rulers to combine the different nationalities, a sort of intermarriage.” Walvoord concludes that this diversity, “whether this refers to race, political idealism or sectional interests,… will prevent the final form of the kingdom from having any real unity.”[107]

The vision depicts an analogy of the European Union’s institutional structure as it exists today. One iron leg represents the EU Commission, while the toes symbolize the Council of Ministers. The toes mingled with clay represent the sovereign nations who still hold elections and rule their countries while handing over specific powers to the EU Commission. Clay, or the democratic electoral process, conflicts with totalitarian rule. The Scriptures stand unprecedented in their accuracy. One must pay tribute to those Bible scholars who successfully interpreted prophetic passages while there no telltale signs in world affairs manifested. Some Bible Eschatologists teach that the Beast has ten toes which represent the ten nations because the Scripture refers to the feet of the image and feet have five toes a piece thus ten toes. The Scripture does not specify the number of toes which can be many.

Dwight Pentecost sited Kelly’s observation who that: “There will be, before the age closes, the most remarkable union of two apparently contradictory conditions—a universal head of empire, a separate independent kingdom besides, each of which will have its own king; but that one man will be emperor over all these kings… God has said they shall be divided.…In virtue of the iron there will be a universal monarchy, while in virtue of the clay there will be separate kingdoms.”[108]

Europa the EU’s website elaborates by stating about the EU’s institutions:

The European Union (EU) is not a federation like the United States. Nor is it simply an organization for co-operation between governments, Like the United Nations. It is, in fact, unique. The countries that make up the EU (its ‘Member States’) remain independent sovereign nations but they pool their sovereignty in order to gain a strength and world influence none of them could have on their own. Pooling sovereignty means, in practice, that the Member States delegate some of their decision-making powers to shared institutions they have created, so that decisions on specific matters of joint interest can be made democratically at the European level.

While the nation’s pool their sovereignty, conflict and disunity arises as each nation responds protecting its own culture, people and industries.

The EU is a kingdom divided. While linked by the Treaty of Rome, each government still holds autonomy. The Member States speak their own languages and retain identity with their individual histories and cultures. EU citizens elect the leaders of the EU Parliament and Council of Ministers, and clay (i.e., the seed of men) represents this democratic practice. The EU’s motto is “united in diversity,” which literally can be the plaque underneath the image of toes mingled with clay.

Due to the Union’s many languages, which numbers 23 official languages, EU officials must make sure that all 27 Member States understand the legislation. They provide interpretation at many hundreds

of meetings held every week. Twenty-five percent of university graduates employed by the Commission directly engage in language work. In the smaller Community institutions, this figure can be as high as 70 percent of graduates. Along with each new member accepted into the European Union, this number increases.[109] The EU Parliament is the biggest employer of interpreters in the world employing 350 full time and 400 free-lancers when there is higher demand.[110]

Further magnifying the Union’s diversity are each nation’s differing governments and politics. Although the Union refers to the nations as Member States, they are separate sovereign countries. Some of the nations hold grievances with other nations, for historical or economic reasons. This world power will never have any real unity while it is both united and divided. In examining EU citizens’ views and gripes toward other Member States, this division further intensifies. Nevertheless, Scripture tells us that this world power will be dreadful and terrible and exceedingly strong (Dan. 7:7).

These facts have caused some to believe that the EU will never have any real unity or strength. What the European Union is seeking to do has never been done in the world’s history. Separate sovereign nations are joining to become a single economic and political unit. The Bible spoke about this in ancient history. In our day we will see it happen.

We know from Scripture that the European Union federalists will attain economic and political union. The ideal of retaining each member state’s government, language, and culture within this federation will be the weakness amid its strength.

The Vice President of the Commission

The Lisbon Treaty created the position called High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy which in actuality will serve as the European Union’s Foreign Minister. The Former position of High Representative merged with the European Commissioner for External Relations to produce the new Foreign Minister position. The rejected Constitution called the position, Union Minister for Foreign Affairs. The Minister would also be a Vice-President in the Commission. [111]

The European Parliament

The Parliament directly represents the people of Europe and links to the toes on the image in the book of Daniel. As with all other EU institutions, the EU parliament has evolved since its inception. In 1974, the Heads of Government agreed to permit direct elections. In 1979, the EU held the first direct elections. Although the EU Parliament is the second largest democratic electorate in the world, second to India, but unlike most national parliaments, the EU parliament does not have legislative initiative. The Parliament’s 736 members, elected every five years by voters in all Member States, have significant power over budgetary matters. They scrutinize, draft EU legislation, question the Commission and Council of Ministers on their conduct of EU affairs, and debate topical issues.

Acting as a check upon the Commission, Article 140 of the Treaty of Rome requires Commissioners to appear before Parliament to respond to questions. The Commission submits an annual report of its activities to the Parliament. The Commission is required to resign as a body if the Parliament adopts a motion of censure against it. Of the four attempted motions of censure, none succeeded.

A majority of Parliament must approve international treaties—save certain trade agreements. In many other areas the Parliament may amend laws, unless the European Commission and all members of the Council object. The Parliament may ask the Commission to propose laws, and may challenge acts of the Commission or Council in the Court of Justice.

The Council must consult the Parliament on who heads the Commission, and must approve the choice of a new team of Commissioners. The EU Parliament compares to the US Congress with its President, which the people elect for two and a half year terms acting as its speaker. [112]

Some end time watchers reported on the European Parliament Presidency as the possible launching pad for the Antichrist, assuming this President led the Union. The Union’s institutional structure comprises of five presidents: the Council’s, Parliaments, Court of Justice’s, Court of Auditors and the Commission. Of the five, the Commission President heads the European Union.

The Court of Justice

The Court of Justice, located in Luxembourg, is comprised of 27 judges, one from each member state plus one other, assisted by 8 advocates-general. The Council of the European Union appoints the judges and advocates-general for six-year renewable terms. The judges elect the President of the Court of Justice for a renewable term of three years. The President presides over hearings and deliberations, directing both judicial business and administration. The EU’s Court parallels the US Supreme Court. It enforces EU treaties, determines the interpretation and implementation of Union legislation, and resolves conflicts between Union and national laws. Basically it makes sure that the Member States effectively apply the laws. Union law (based on the Treaties of Rome) and national law of the individual member countries now intertwine. Its decisions attracts more and more of the national courts’ attention. Court decisions strengthen EU institutions and promote EU policies. Verdicts reached by simple majority are binding on all parties, and are not subject to appeal.[113]

The Court of Auditors

The Maastricht Treaty established the Court of Auditors as the fifth institution of the EU. The Court of Auditors examines the accounts of all of the Union’s revenues and expenditures. One member from each EU member state and a President, make up the Court. The Court has no judicial functions. It is rather a professional external investigatory audit agency. The Court checks if officials implement the budget of the European Union correctly, and ensures that EU funds are spent legally and with sound management. A staff of approximately 800 auditors, translators and administrators supports the Court.[114]

The European Council

The European Councils held their first meeting in 1961 and formalized them after 1974. These brought together the Commission President and the leaders of the EU countries in deciding political guidelines for the Union. The Council has no formal executive or legislative powers, it deals with major issues and meets about four times a year in Brussels. The Lisbon Treaty made the European Council a full-fledged European institution. It is headed by a President. Elected by the Council for two and a half years; the President prepares the Council’s work, ensures its continuity and works to secure consensus among member countries. The position is a non-executive, administrative role. The highest political body of the EU, it is chaired by a member of the Council of the European Union formerly known as the Council of Ministers President. He can call meetings beyond the four that are formally required to take place. Lisbon gave the Council greater say over a variety of EU related matters. While the Commission and Council of the European Union are two separate institutions that work together, the European Council brings these two groups together as one institution. [115]

The European Central Bank

Established in 1998 and modeled on the German Bundesbank, the bank which was once independent from any European or national institution is now a governmental institution of the European Union. The Governing Council, the supreme decision making body of the ECB takes decisions on monetary policy, interest rates and reserves of the ESCB along with other matters. The Union only allows the President of the European Council, the President of the EU Commission and members to attend its meetings. Governing Council members represent the interests of the Eurozone as a whole.

Also Within The Institutional Structure

The Economic and Social Committee represents the views and interests of EU nationals.

The Committee of the Regions ensures the respect of regional and local identities and prerogatives.

In addition the EU has other bodies that play specialized roles, the European Investment bank, European Investment Fund, European Ombudsman, European Data Protection Supervisor, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, European Personnel Selection Office and the European Administrative School.[116]

The False Prophet

Revelation 13:11 tells us that John saw another beast, but this beast comes out of the earth vs. the Antichrist’s empire, which rises from the seas. He has two horns like a lamb but speaks as a dragon. The Bible describes in Revelation 12-15:

And he exercises all the authority of the first beast in his presence, and causes the earth and those who dwell in it to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.

He performs great signs, so that he even makes fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men.

And he deceives those who dwell on the earth by those signs which he was granted to do in the sight of the beast, telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast who was wounded by the sword and lived.

He was granted power to give breath to the image of the beast that the image of the beast should both speak and cause as many as would not worship the image of the beast to be killed.

While the Beast rises out of the sea as a giant monster the False Prophet in contrast comes out of the earth like a lamb and possesses two horns. The “False Prophet” might be a spiritual leader, his designation as prophet and his comparison to a lamb signifies this. Since the Antichrist abolishes religion, he may act as a spiritual occultist. Hitler consulted occultists during his time in power. His possessing two horns might mean that he holds a leadership position in addition to his position in the Antichrist’s federation.

The False Prophet can rise from the EU Commission holding the title of Vice President of the Union. This Prophet has similar powers of the most powerful Biblical prophets: Elijah and Elisha. Both raised someone from the dead and performed great miracles. The False Prophet breathes life into the Beast’s image, which is either a statue or an actual human clone of the Antichrist. God made man in his image and in the same wording the Bible states that this replica is the image of the Beast. Antichrist might use the science of cloning to try to deceive the people that he can create life. God allows the False Prophet the power to breath life into the image so that it speaks and the world worships his likeness. [117] His clone fits the description of the “abomination of desolation” that stands in the holy place (Matt: 24:26, Mark: 13:14).

All who do not worship the image of the Beast, Antichrist’s henchmen will kill. Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon foreshadows the Antichrist and is one of the titles given to him. He leads the first world empire seen in Daniel’s dream image and represents the head of gold. As the Antichrist whose little horns grows to the host of heaven, (Dan. 8:10) the Scriptures depict Nebuchadnezzar as a tree whose height also reaches the heavens (Dan. 4:11, 20). For seven years God gives Nebuchadnezzar a mental illness that makes him act like an animal (Dan. 4:15-16). Similarly, the Antichrist reigns as a Beast for seven years.

Like the Antichrist, he sets up a golden image which stood 60 cubits tall and six cubits wide, i.e. 66. Babylonian officials played music and commanded those who heard the music to fall down and worship the golden image. Those who refused to worship the image soldiers cast into a fiery furnace. As with the Antichrist the King of Babylon required all nations and peoples to worship the image (Dan. 3:7.) Daniel and two of his friends refused to worship the idol. Soldiers cast them into the furnace and they survived and one like a son of God walked amongst them in the furnace, which soldiers heated seven times hotter than usual. As Daniel, the tribulation saints will experience the captivity under Babylon as the Jews did the year Jeremiah predicted the invasion. At this time the EU functions as the dictatorship described in Scripture.

In reviewing the EU’s undemocratic institutional structure which places too much power in the European Commission, and the Commission Presidency which will allow the Antichrist all of the powers outlined in Scripture, one can only stand in awe at the accuracy of the Bible.

NOTES

  1. Op. Cit. European Union Treaty, p. 82.
  2. “Europe: Rings-Doves and Openness,” Economist, 22 August 1992.
  3. Andrew Willis, “Eastern States Counter EU’s Secretive Nomination Process, ”EU Observer, November 13, 2009, http://euobserver.com/9/28985
  4. Wikipedia Contributors, “European Commission,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=European_Commission&oldid=325819644 (accessed December 6, 2009)
  5. John F. Walvoord, “Prophecy Knowledge Handbook,” Wheaton: Victor Books, 1990, pp. 268-270.
  6. “Unknown Duo chosen as New Face of Europe,” Euranet: European Radio Network, November 20, 2009 http://www.euranet.eu/eng/Archive/News/English/2009/November/Unknown-duo-chosen-as-new-faces-of-Europe

“Europe Unity Tested by Talk of President,” Associated Press, November 15, 2009

Stephen Castle, Steven Erlanger, “Belgian Prime Minister Picked as European President” International Herald Tribune, November 19, 2009

  1. Peter Ludlow, “Maastricht and the Future of Europe,” Washington Quarterly, Autumn 1992, pp. 120, 124, 126.
  2. “Treaty of Lisbon: Taking Europe Into the 21st Century: A More Democratic and Transparent Europe: , Europa.eu, http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/glance/democracy/index_en.htm

Christopher Bollyn, “Estonians Wary of European Union,” American Free Press, November 19. 2003, http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=1065

  1. “World Affairs: Western Europe,” Encyclopedia Britannica, p. 444. Stephen Prokesch, “Thatcher Will Leave the House of Commons but Plans to Keep Speaking Out,” New York Times, 29 June, 1991. “Quotes,” EUROCOM Bulletin, June 1996.
  2. Maurice Duverger, “The Evolving European Parliament,” World Press Review, September 1989, p. 32.
  3. “Quotes,” EUROCOM Bulletin, “August/September 1990.
  4. Tony Benn Interview by Kent Worcester, “Europe’s Democratic Defecit,” World Policy Journal, Fall 1991, p. 741. See also George Ross, “After Maastricht,” World Policy Journal, p. 507. See also Stephen Woddard, “The Lessons of the Vote in Denmark,” New Federalist, March 1992, p. 3.
  5. “From Luxembourg to Maastricht, 100 Critical Days to Maastricht,” p. 46.
  6. Alaine Lamassoore, “Three Houses, One Home,” European Affairs October/November 1992, no. 5, p. 21.,
  7. Wikipedia contributors, “President of the European Commission,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia,http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=President_of_the_European_Commission&oldid=325347588 (accessed December 15, 2009)
  8. Wikipedia contributors, “Superstate, “Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia,” http:en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Superstate&oldid=325729983 (accessed January 5, 2010)
  9. Op. Cit. Walvoord, pp. 70-71.
  10. Op. Cit. Dwight Pentecost, pp. 319-320.
  11. Richard Hay, “The European Commission and the Administration of the Community,” European Documentation periodical 3/1989, Luxembourg: Official Publication of the European Communities, May 1989, pp. 21-22.
  12. For more information see Wikipedia contributors “European Parliament,” Wikipedia, The FreeEncyclopedia,http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=European_Parliament&oldid=324812904(accessed December 9, 2009)
  13. Wikipedia contributors, “High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia,http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=High_Representative_for_Common_Foreign_and_Security_Policy&oldid=325763093(accessed December 6, 2009)
  14. “European Parliament: The Appointment of the Commission President and the Rest of the Commission,” Europa.eu http://www.europarl.europa.eu/parliament/public/staticDisplay.do;jsessionid=27BC70E7D1F26252ED0CE49E68F1235F.node1?id=146&language=en
  15. For additional commentary on EU institutions see Seth Elliot, “The European Parliament,” Europe, June 1990, p. 8. See also “Talking Shop Become Hyper-Market,” Economist, 1 February 1992, p. 50. See also Europe, November 1989, p. 40, and Emile Noel, Working Together: The Institutions of the European Community, Luxembourg, 1988, p. 38.For more on Court of Justice see Wikipedia contributors, “European Court of Justice,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia,http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=European_Court_of_Justice&oldid=325957550(accessed December 10, 2009)
  16. For more on see Wikipedia contributors, “Court of Auditors,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia,http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=European_Court_of_Auditors&oldid=326156770 (accessed December 7, 2009)
  17. For more on see Wikipedia contributors, “European Council,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia,http:en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=European_Council&oldid=324262075(accessed December 6, 2009“What is the Difference Between the “Council” and the “European Council,” Folketinget.dk,http://www.folkentinget.dk“Q&A What are the EU President and Foreign Policy Jobs,” Reuters November 19, 2009, Valentina Pop, “New Treaty Will Not Create ‘One Phone Number’ for Europe,” EU Observer, November 18, 2009 http://euobserver.com/9/29010
  18. “European Union Institutions and other bodies,” Europa.euhttp://europa.eu/institutions/index_en.htmWikipedia contributors, “Institutions of the European Union,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia,http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Institutions_of_the_European_Union&oldid=325971759 (accessed December 15, 2009)
  19. Susan Anderson, “The Cloning of Human Beings” University of CT: August 10-15, 1998 Boston, http://www.bu.edu/wcp/MainBioe.htm

 

 

The Empire: Chapter 1

 

AS WAS THE TIME OF NOAH: AS WAS THE TIME OF LOT

As Was the Time of Noah: Violence

One-third of the Bible’s message is prophetic. History records the fulfillment of all biblical prophecies except those pertaining to the Tribulation. The “Great Tribulation” occurs within a seven-year time frame (Dan. 9:25-27). It culminates at the battle of Armageddon, which draws the world’s armies together in war, which ends with the cataclysmic description of the darkened sun, falling stars and the powers of the heavens shaken (Matt. 24:29). This prompts the second coming of Jesus Christ, who joins the conflict with His heavenly battalion and marks the end of civilization. Daniel 8:23 confirms that the Tribulation begins when society degenerates to such a great degree that God judges the earth. God’s purpose is to end sin, fulfill prophecy, and create a new world ruled by Christ.

During Israel’s history God utilized the prophets to forecast calamity and judgment on Israeli kings and on the nation for turning against God and following other gods and pagan practices. In some instances, if the king or nation repented, God changed his mind and replaced blessings for judgment. Prior to the Babylonian invasion of Israel the prophet Jeremiah spent his life warning the kings of Israel and the Israelites of the coming Babylonian captivity. In looking at the kingdom period we see that sin progressed from idolatry and worshiping pagan gods to sacrificing children to them. The Israelites torturously murdered their children by burning

them in fire to the god Molech. Israel’s habitual sin resulted in the Babylonian captivity and the destruction of Solomon’s Temple. When God judged Sodom and Gomorrah with fire and brimstone and Noah’s civilization with the flood, he rescued Noah and Lot’s family and warned

each of them of the coming judgment. During the Tribulation God shakes the world with his power and sends his spokespersons. While a few look to Him, the greater number of mankind curses God rather than turn to Him. Today we have God’s warning written in the Bible, which contains the books of the Prophets and details the events of the Great Tribulation, which occur during a seven year period of time. Evangelicals believe that just as God spared Noah and Lot’s family, he will take believers out of the world in the Rapture just prior to the start of the Tribulation. (Matt.24:30-36, 40-41)

The book of Daniel announces 70 weeks of specific prophetic events which will affect the nation Israel. A Biblical week equals seven secular years. Seventy Biblical weeks total 490 years, which encompass three decrees affecting Jerusalem. Two of these have already happened: from the edict to rebuild Jerusalem under Cyrus, down to the cutting off of the Messiah, was 483 years. The remaining seven years await fulfillment (Dan. 9:24).

During Jesus’ ministry, people questioned him about the end of the world. They wanted to know when the end will happen. Jesus provided several signs which include, wars and rumors of wars, famines, pestilences, earthquakes, false prophets, and lawlessness, and all nations will have heard the Gospel. Christ exhorted believers to “watch” for the signs of the times (Mark 13:37). Jesus compared the events leading to His second coming to the labor pains of childbirth (Matt. 24:8, Mark 13:8). These occur closer together, increasing in severity, until the moment of birth.

Events on the international scene, and the escalating rates of violence and natural disasters, happen today at an ever-quickening pace. Hurricanes, tornadoes, and earthquakes break records in their frequency, and strike localities once untouched by the forces of nature. The term tsunami came into our vocabularies after one struck in 2004. According to National Geographic News, the tsunami that stuck the Indian Ocean in 2004 became the deadliest tsunami in history. The US Geological Survey estimated that

it released the energy of 23,000 Hiroshima-type atomic bombs. After the Haiti earthquake in 2010, Time Magazine recorded the “Top 10 Deadliest

Earthquakes” in history and three of them occurred within the last six years;

the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami, the earthquake that struck Kashmir Pakistan in 2005 and the quake in Sichuan Province in China in 2008.[1]

In this past decade, the 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons were so devastating they made it into Wikipedia’s “Timeline of US History.” In 2004 it records the hurricanes “had numerous unusual occurrences impacting US properties.” The 2005 hurricane season is recorded as taking its toll in the Southeast, “most notably, Hurricane Katrina became the costliest hurricane of all time.”[2]

The shock waves that rippled through political events and weather patterns hit the global financial markets in late 2007. The financial crash occurred in 2008 after the recession began. The same unpredictable patterns felt in the weather now hit the financial markets, first striking the US and then rippling through the global markets. High level financial managers sat baffled as predictable strategies became unreliable as markets reacted by going in unforeseen directions they had never before moved in history. So great was its impact that the major financial newspapers reported that the world economy came to a literal stop. [3]

Back in 1989, the Berlin Wall collapsed, marking the end of the Cold War and the beginning of the New World Order. The rise of Islamic fundamentalism and the Middle East conflict presented the superpowers with a new focus. In the same period, major American cities experienced in one year’s time the doubling of their murder rates. The growth of violent gangs proliferated and killing of rival gang members and innocent victims turned city streets into battlefields. Worldwide crime statistics mounted. National and ethnic conflicts took place in so many nations that civil wars and border disputes became a trend in the New World Order.

Christ, commenting on the end times, foretold in Matthew 24:12: “lawlessness will abound.” In two of the Gospels, He compares the days before His coming to the era of Noah and Lot (Matt. 24:37, Luke 17:26). As in the days of Noah, violence becomes an epidemic (Gen. 6:11-12). Wickedness permeates society, and yet people live life as usual. This describes our generation. With prisons filled to capacity, city streets likened to battle grounds, and killings occurring at a record pace, violence has become a social crisis. As a result of the crimes committed by teenagers and grade school children, inner city schools conduct “bullet drills,” use metal detectors to scan for weapons, and hire armed security guards.[4] The Economist commented that “it is not condoms that they should be giving out in New York City schools; it is bullet proof vests.”[5] In the later years of his life, political commentator and author William F. Buckley remarked that “after two or three more disarmament conferences with the Soviet Union et al., the largest standing army in the world is likely to be New York City school children.”[6] Children kill their parents, murder each other, and are basically out of control.

In civil wars, the acts committed on civilian populations by militants surpass the realm of brutality and are nothing short of savage. This past century recorded more mass murder than any other time in history. This does not even include abortions, which, when totaled worldwide in the last two decades, exceed the present US population in number.[7] Yet, violence and lawlessness are only part of the social picture described by Christ in the last days.

As Was the Time of Lot: Sexual Immorality

God destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by raining fire and brimstone on them. These cities were renowned for open homosexuality. Young boys accompanied men and engaged in homosexual and violent activities. Sodomites apprehended and raped strange men, and dealt violently with anyone who tried to stop them (Gen. 19:19). These peoples had a distorted sense of right and wrong. Christ compared the days before the Tribulation to the days of Lot, who lived in these cities. Therefore violence, lawlessness, homosexuality, and sexual deviancy (e.g., sex with children) will characterize the end times.

According to Donald E. Wildmon, who wrote The Case Against Pornography, “Child pornography has become a $2–3 billion annual business in the US alone.” Mr. Wildmon concluded with Charles H. Keating, Jr., of Citizens for Decency that there exists “a nationwide campaign to normalize sex between adults and young children—to promote incest.”[8]

Incidents of men raping men and boys have increased, judging by the number of offenders currently serving time in US prisons. In New York

City, a rapist abducted an 11-year old male walking home from school and sodomized him.[9] Grade school children now experiment with sex, and acts of rape occur among them. These incidents will continue to increase as society becomes the civilization God said He would have to judge. Joel 3:3 declares: “They have cast lots for My people; Have given a boy in exchange for a harlot, and sold a girl for wine, that they may drink.” During the Tribulation, soldiers sell children for sexual purposes, for as little as a bottle of wine. Men will use boys as prostitutes. These acts mirror crimes committed against children today. We have arrived at the end times that Christ foretold in the Gospels.

The rock musician formerly known as Prince toured in the late 1980’s with his release of “Signs of The Times.” On the CD cover, the peace symbol of the 1960’s replaces the “o” in the word “of.” In the 1980s, it became the “Cross of Nero.” The upside-down cross with the broken cross members signifies the defeat of Christianity among the occultists. Christians view the immorality of the day as signs leading to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, while Satanists see today’s perils as the defeat of Christianity.[10]

False Prophets: The Rise of Cults and the Occult

During the Tribulation, false Christs and prophets perform signs and wonders so great that, if it were possible, they will deceive the very elect (Matthew 24:24). In the present day, weeping and bleeding statues—of Mary and Jesus, and even of Elvis—border on the bizarre, and gain followings. The United States has seen a tremendous rise in cult and sect activities in the past quarter century. Among them, cults that act out murder and mayhem have risen. From Charles Manson, and lesser known criminals who claim to be deities and murder for the cause of their religion, to Jim Jones, who in 1978, incited 918 of his followers to commit mass suicide by drinking poison in Kool Aid. In 1995, the Japanese cult Aleph, released sarin nerve gas into the Tokyo subway system killing twelve people, severely injuring fifty and causing temporary vision problems for nearly a thousand others. They conducted an earlier attack in 1994, that killed seven and injured 500 others in an attempt to hasten the apocalypse. In 1997, there was also the Heaven’s Gate UFO cult whose 39 members committed suicide in unison at the appearance of the Comet Hale-Bopp. [11]

In addition to cults Satanism is also on the rise in America. Since 1969, The Satanic Bible by Anton Szandor LaVey has gone through 21 printings. The Satanists believe in the coming Antichrist, the son of Satan himself, who will have power and defeat Christianity. Even they hold that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and prospective members must renounce Him. Satanists know that to get to God, one must go through His Son.[12]

Jesus foretold of false Christs and prophets who will perform great miracles. Falun Gong, founded in the early 1990’s by Li Hongzhi in China, provides a prime example of the cult leaders Jesus forecasted will come claiming His deity and able to perform miracles. Li Hongzhi equates himself with a god and claims to have supernatural powers. A Chinese national recalled witnessing a video where Li performed levitation. According to the New World Encyclopedia, Li stated, “If I cannot save you, nobody else can do it. Wikipedia records Falun Gong as having 70 million practitioners in China and over 100 million Falun Dafa in 114 countries and regions around the world. [13] According to Jesus we will see more false Christs like Li Hongzhi as the end approaches.

In The Last Days Perilous Times Will Come

Violence and sexual perversion mark this decade. Our society is laden with social maladies, and thus has become a replica of Noah’s and Lot’s. Reports of horrific crimes committed both by children and against them fill our airwaves. In part, the breakdown of the family—evidenced by the rising divorce rate—is to blame for the unruly children who shoot up their schools, and kill their parents and peers. Our homes are in upheaval; people cannot manage to live or work together. Not only must we be aware of the criminals who rob us on the street or invade our homes, but we must also be conscious of the many scams perpetrated by wealthy corporate leaders who rob their employees and investors. It is as if every person is out for themselves. In 2 Timothy 3:1-4, the Bible summarizes the self-centered state of man in the last days:

But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come:

For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self control, brutal,despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God.

We are, no doubt, at that place of narcissism and lawlessness described in the Scriptures. It is only logical that if events on the social scene point to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, in the international arena they must come the same distance.

Historical events now happen at such rapid speed that more occurs in a few years than would normally take place over decades. After the fall of the Berlin Wall, Joseph S. Nye, Jr., Director of the Harvard Center for International Affairs noted that: “The world has changed more rapidly in the past two years than at any time since 1945.” Mr. Nye suggested that when George Bush launched his New World Order, he never “thought through what it meant by the concept he launched.”[14] Politicians grappled with its meaning. Christians recognize the New World Order as the final world order leading up to the Tribulation. This order signifies global government and the launching of the Antichrist as a world leader. To understand how the events of the last few years fit into the prophetic picture, we must first look to what the Bible tells us about the Tribulation period.

NOTES

1“The Deadliest Tsunami in History?, ”National Geographic News, January 7, 2005, http://news.nationalgeographic.com /news/, Dan Fletcher, “Top Ten Deadliest Earthquakes,” Time in partnership with CNN, January 13, 2010,http://www.time.com

/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1953425_1953424,00.html,

  1. Wikipedia contributors, “Timeline of the United States History (1990-present), Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Timeline_of_United_States_history_(1990-present)&oldid=326271835 (accessed November 12, 2009)
  2. Avi Zenilman, “Eight Days That Shook The World,” The New Yorker, September 14, 2009 http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2009/09/eight-days-that-shook-the-world.html, see also Andrew Leonard, “The Day the Economy Almost Stopped,” How The World Works, February 10, 2009, http://search.salon.com/salonsearch.php?breadth=salon&search=the+day++the+world+economy+almost+stopped
  3. Seth Mydans, “Bullets and Crayons: Children Learn Lessons for 90s,” New York Times, 16 June 1991.
  4. American Survey, “Guns and Children in Schools Protection Racket,” Economist, 30 November 1991.
  5. William F. Buckley, “Guns and Children,” National Review, 21 October 1991.
  6. This figure was based on the numbers recorded in the following articles: Kerstin Witt, “Abortion in the Soviet Union,” World Press, August 1989. See also Susan Greenhalgh, “Socialism and Fertility in China,” The Annals: World Population Approaching the Year 2000, July 1990.
  7. Donald E. Wilmon, The Case Against Pornography, Wheaton: Victor Books, 1986, p. 13.
  8. Sara Rimer, “Crime Visits New York’s Children and Dread Haunts Many Parents,” New York Times, 19 January 1992.
  9. Thomas W. Wedge, Satan Hunter, Canton: Daring Books, 1988, p. 196.]]
  10. 11. Wikipedia contributors, “Jim Jones,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia,

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jim_Jones&oldid=335808313 accessed December 5, 2009, Wikipedia Contributors, “Heaven’s Gate (religious group),” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopediahttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Heaven%27s_Gate_(religious_group)&oldid=336632291(accessed December 5, 2009, Wikipedia contributors, “Aum Shinrikyo,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Aum_Shinrikyo&oldid=333113722(accessed December 10, 2009

  1. Ibid. pp. 13, 24-5, 63.
  2. New World Encyclopedia Contributors, “Falun Gong,” New World Encyclopedia, http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Falun_Gong (accessed December 14, 2009), Wikipedia contributors, “Falun Gong,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Falun_Gong&oldid=338626170(accessed December 15, 2009)
  3. Joseph S. Nye, “What New World Order,” Foreign Affairs, vol. 71, no. 2, Spring 1992.

THE EU ANTICHRIST

For One of the most shocking 21st century reports on the real agenda of the European Union buy my report The Revived Roman Empire  for only 13.99, the cheapest prices anywhere on the net. Elsewhere this report renamed THE EU ANTICHRIST sells for 39.99.

You can also purchase THE EMPIRE: The EU and Bible Prophecy at Amazon .

Or you can go to my original work, The Seat of the Antichrist: Bible Prophecy and The European Union  from Amazon from which the EU Antichrist derives and uses much of what is written in this book.

You will not find anywhere else the comprehensive reporting that these books and reports offer on the EU an Bible Prophecy.. If you are currently wondering if the Antichrist will come out of the EU, or the world of Islam you need to read The EU Antichrist, or The Empire, The EU and Bible Prophecy or the Seat of the Antichrist.

Just today I tweeted about the EU plot to create an Emperor of Europe. All of this is in line with what is written in the pages of my EU Antichrist, EU Empire exposes.  In each of my reports the EU is exposed as being the Final World Empire, the Revived Roman Empire and the launching pad for the Antichrist. That’s right, the EU Antichrist, not Middle East Antichrist, nor US Antichrist, but EU Antichrist.

You will find that The Revived Roman Empire which is also named EU Antichrist, The Empire and the Seat of the Antichrist are all compelling exposes and you will be shocked at what you will learn. You will also see how Bible Prophecy is  unfolding before our very eyes in the geopolitical realm.

The Four Horsemen of Revelation

The Four Horsemen of Revelation blogtalkradio show The Erika Grey Prophecy ‘Talk Show script

I used to take the view that The four horsemen of Revelation 6:1-8 symbolize the Antichrist’s reign of terror. Entering the world on a white horse in the name of peace, he comes to conquer. The red horse depicts the bloodshed of war. The black horse depicts famine. The pale horse, a mixture of all the colors, represents the death of one-fourth of the world’s population-a result of antichrists  conquests.

In my book the Seat of the Antichrist I  pointed out that the Nazi flag was red, white, and black, and both the swastika and the circle are satanic symbols. Hitler declared that these colors formed “the most brilliant harmony in existence.” Red and black are also the symbolic colors for Satanism. While the colors hold true verse two stood out to me and I missed an important phrase in verse 4 concerning the read horse that states, “and it was granted to the one who sat on it to take peace from the earth and that people should kill one another, and there was given to him a great sword. I realized this was not the Antichrist’s conquests but what Jesus said about nation rising against nation and kingdom against kingdom.    I also now believe that the four horsement are talking about the first half of the tribulation.  So instead I believe the picture is this. The Antichrist arrives to conquer.  We are told in Daniel that he accomplishes his aims. For he will prosper and thrive Daniel :24. So we have at the beginning of the tribulation the prince on the white horse arrives on the scene and comes to conquer.  Meanwhile peace is taken from the earth and men start killing one another and kingdom rises against kingdom and nation against nation and this means wars will be taking place all over the globe.  This means that most likely some sort of a war will break out on US soil.  The perilous times of 2 Timothy will be ushered in which we are already seeing because society is becoming so sinful and violent.   The EU will enter into some of these conflicts if they effect their interests.   In the course of all of these wars we have famine in part brought by the wars and also via the weather patterns, which have now gone up notches from before the start of the tribulation.  Famine will now be more severe as it is a Tribulation plague.   We also see from the four horsemen that men also die because of the beasts of the field so even the animals get in on the picture and are not the same.  Animals that normally do not kill humans will kill them.

We might also see the Russian invasion of Israel at the very start of the Tribulation. Mind you the Antichrist is already in position when this invasion takes place and the treaty marks the beginning of the tribulation period.  The Russian invasion can also occur after the treaty.  The Russian invasion can be part of this war climate.

The four horsemen are part of the first half of the Tribulation and by midway through the tribulation one fourth of the world’s population die from these horsemen.   In the revelation is not the only place in Scripture we see the horsemen. We see the horsemen in Zechariah 1:8-11, only the horses are red, sorrel and white.  A man rides on one and they are sent to walk to and fro through the earth and the earth was resting quietly, why did God send the horses because He was about to bring Judgment onto the “nations at ease”  that scattered Israel. We see the four horsemen of Revelation we see fiery red, white, black and pale and these horses bring specific riders with them who bring various plagues to the earth.  In Revelation 9:16 we see an entire army of 200 million horses with riders bringing in another plague which I discussed in the last episode and we see in Revelation 19 Jesus on a white horse and his armies of believers following Him on white horses. In this appearance Jesus is coming to strike the nations with a rod of iron and tread the winepress of the fierceness of God’s wrath. Rev. 19:15.  When we see heavenly horses in the Bible we see judgment coming.  When God sends a heavenly horse He is sending judgment.

While I used to hold the view that many in Bible Prophecy hold that the four horsemen of Revelation signified the bloodshed wrought by the Antichrist’s wars, rather the four horsemen continues the birth pangs and brings wars of nation against nation, kingdom against kingdom and person against person.  As I stated I do believe the Antichrist will get involved in these wars in the same way the
US had involved itself in conflicts to promote its aim and agenda.   In Revelation we have the marching of the army of 200 million and I believe this is the Antichrist’s army and from his army 1/3 of mankind will be killed. So of the 5 and a quarter to a half a billion that are left after the four horsemen, another third die via his army which brings the earth’s population to 2 ½ to 3 billion. We do not know how many will be killed by all of the other plagues and it is hard to guess.

Jesus compared the time of the end to the days of Noah and Lot in their violence and immorality.  Daniel tells us that sin will abound.  We are already seeing so much unprecedented violence that it is seems like it is becoming the new norm.  One of the first plagues God inflicts on the earth is that He takes peace from it. So right after the rapture all chaos hits,  and the famines, we are beginning to see, the escalating prices in food due to droughts will also hit and the famine will no doubt lend to the violence and lack of peace on the earth.  The famine will result from war, and the escalation of droughts and other natural disasters via the hand of God. As terrible as all of this is, it hits a higher crescendo at the midpoint of the tribulation when the earth is literally slaughtered with wars, natural disasters of epic proportions that end in the battle of Armageddon and the destruction of the earth.

The Identity of the 200 Million Army in Revelation 9

What is The Identity of the 200 Million Army in Revelation 9 below is my script from my blogtalkradio show. The Prophecy Talk Show

13 Then the sixth angel sounded: And I heard a voice from the four horns of the golden altar which is before God, 14 saying to the sixth angel who had the trumpet, “Release the four angels who are bound at the great river Euphrates.” 15 So the four angels, who had been prepared for the hour and day and month and year, were released to kill a third of mankind.16 Now the number of the army of the horsemen was two hundred million; I heard the number of them. 17 And thus I saw the horses in the vision: those who sat on them had breastplates of fiery red, hyacinth blue, and sulfur yellow; and the heads of the horses were like the heads of lions; and out of their mouths came fire, smoke, and brimstone. 18 By these three plaguesa third of mankind was killed—by the fire and the smoke and the brimstone which came out of their mouths.

Years ago in Hal Lindsey’s Book the Late Great Planet Earth he identified the army in Revelation 9: 15-19 as China’s  because China’s population was so large their army numbered 200 million and no other army in the world was that large.  But, China makes no sense because we see China entering at the end at Armageddon in Revelation 16: 12 tells us:

Then the sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up, so that the way of the kings from the east might be prepared.

China also does not make sense to come during the tribulation because the Beast the Final World Empire is going to be so powerful that it makes no sense for The Chinese to come out of nowhere and invade  the world when the Antichrist will have such a firm grip.  What does make sense is for China along with Russia and the nations of the world to come Against the Antichrist When he is in Jerusalem in the battle of Armageddon to defeat him because at that point he will need to be defeated. Remember he rises the EU to its pinnacle of power and nations trade with his empire and there are good relations.  It is at midway that when he steps into the holy of holies and declares himself as god that the Great tribulation begins and he institutes the mark of the beast which he will have power to do because at that time his empire will hold the world’s reserve currency and will have the leading say in world institutions and will be the strongest economically and politically and militarily and the world will have to go along with his policies to benefit economically, remember all the nations are now connected economically.

Once the great tribulation begins and he goes forth to conquer with great fury to conquer,  We are told in Isaiah 10:14 And my hand hath found as a nest the riches of the people: and as one gathered eggs that are left, have I gathered all the earth; and there was none that moved the wing, or opened the mouth, or peeped.  We know the Antichrist will control the Middle East region and some of this area will be won during this conquest.  Egypt will come into his hands during this time. When the Antichrist sets himself up in the holy of holy’s as god at that point he seeks to annihilate the Jews and all religion upon the face of the earth.  This is good reason at the end for the armies of the world to decide to come against him at the battle of Armageddon.  So who is the army in Revelation 9, it is the army of the beast.  In the four horsemen of Revelation 6 we are shown that the four horsemen and the first horse is the prince on a white horse who goes forth to conquer.  While we know it is not China there are to possibilities of what it can be. I can be a demonic army or can possibly be the army of the Antichrist.  The heads like the heads of lions, we are told that the beast as a mouth like a lion and the colors hyacinth blue and sulfa read are the colors of the EU military flag.   There is also read in the breastplate  and the Hebrew word for red is pyrinos and it means shining like fire. brimstone sulfurous, Jacinth

The smoke, fire and brimstone with power and the mouth and tails sounds like a belt fed rifle. When a gun fires we see fire and smoke. What is worth noting that while the three elements are related, in the bible they are referred to as 3 separate plagues, Rev. 9”:18 By these three plagues was a third of mankind killed-by the fire and the smoke and the brimstone which came out of their mouths.  This next verse sounds like a belt fed rifle or machine gun it reads, “For their power is in their mouth and in their tails, for their tails are like serpents, having heads; and with them they do harm.

In Revelation 9 we see that the Antichrist’s army is 200 million men and is one of the plagues of God. The four angels accompany this army and lend it their strength and one third of the world’s population is killed by this army.  When we go back to the four horsemen of the Revelation we see that war is also part of that campaign, but this one is different and separate.  We do not know the reason for it but we do know that Daniel describes the beast as dreadful and terrible with great iron teeth and he has crushing power.

In conclusion I want to say it is my view if in fact this passage is talking about an army, it is not the Chinese army but the EU’s army,  Today the EU has 505 million citizens, during the Tribulation we know that some of the Middle East countries will be in its sphere of influence including Israel.  Its population will be greater than it is today and can possibly produce an army of 200 million men.  Today the EU has the world’s largest standing army when you take the military of each of the member countries and ad them together. While the EU does not officially have a military the provision for one was laid out in the Lisbon treaty.  The next treaty the one that will be negotiated in 2015, EU leaders have already proposed giving the EU a full defense arm.  The horsemen of 200 million can be the number of heavenly horses that are released and do not correspond with the number of the army, but my hunch is that they do.   Right now the European union Military staff exists and when you ad all of their forces together you come up with about 5 million men, this is personnel age 17-45, active, reserve and paramilitary. So during the Tribulation if this army is in fact the EU army it will triple. This brings us to another question, how big will the EU Empire become, that is the topic for another commentary.