According to Fruchtenbaum, Reagan’s model comprises of one tenth, a mere slice of the whole pie. 

IS THE FOURTH KINGDOM ROMAN?
When it comes to reconciling Daniel 7:20 “little horn” with Daniel 2, Reagan insists that Antiochus Epiphanies is the whole interpretation, yet perhaps the best advice on this whole controversy is to heed to Rev. Dr. Matthew Henry's comment "Who is this enemy -- whose rise, reign and ruin are here foretold? Interpreters are not agreed. Some will have the Fourth Kingdom to be that of the Seleucidae and the ‘little horn’ to be Antiochus.... Others will have the Fourth Kingdom to be that of the Romans, and the ‘little horn’ to be Julius Caesar and the succeeding emperors, as Calvin says. The Antichrist, the Papal Kingdom, says Mr. Joseph Mede.... Others make the ‘little horn’ to be the Turkish Empire; so Luther, Vatablus, and others. Now I cannot prove either side to be in the wrong. And therefore, since prophecies sometimes have many fulfilling and we ought to give Scripture its full latitude (in this as in many other controversies) -- I am willing to allow that they are both in the right.” ¹²

CHALLENGE 2: Besides the argument over whether Magog is Russia, can anyone cite any literal reference to a nation that God destroys in the End-Times that is not Muslim? One needs to slowly ponder this question in order to fully grasp its magnitude—No one can escape the fact that in every context in the Bible in which God destroys nations in end-times, all of them today are Islamic. The evidence even compounds when one finds out that all the verses in which Christ fights nations referred to literally—all of them without exception are Muslim. To take the question into action on one occasion during a lecture to a private audience of only prominent prophecy authors during the Pre-Trib Prophecy Conference in Dallas Texas, and is on record, I asked the same question and none raised a hand to respond. In frustration, I finally decided to choose someone out of this silent yet elite audience, I pointed to Dr. Randall Price, a prominent Bible Prophecy teacher and asked him to respond, in which he said “When you ask about literal references there aren’t any.” Grant Jeffrey another known author attempted once to respond with Cush not realizing that biblical Cush a reference sometimes translated as Ethiopia defined in the Unger Bible Dictionary as a landmass south of Egypt. Today this will be Sudan and Somalia. Grant Jeffrey chose one of the most fundamentalist Muslim nations as a response to find non-Muslim nations in end-times. In fact, Arnold Fruchtenbaum points to Cush as Somaliland. David Reagan, in attempting to take on my second challenge, inadvertently ended up supporting my view: “Yes, I can. It is Babylon, whose destruction is described in detail in Revelation 18” ignoring that the crucial word in that question is “literal”.  If Babylon is his response to cite any literal reference for a non-Muslim nation that God destroys, this would still support my view— Mystery Babylon is an allegoric reference.

CHALLENGE 3: In every portrayal of Christ’s return to the earth, is He not fighting a nation that today is Muslim? The significance of this question is this—scholars are unanimous, that Christ’s second coming must happen after Antichrist appears on the scene. Christ’s mission will be to destroy Antichrist and establish His Millennium kingdom. This is why supporters of the European Union model insist that Islam must be destroyed before the Tribulation since Islam’s involvement destroys their whole model. Yet the Bible leaves no room for debate since in the context of all of them, Christ fights Muslim nations. Next time you attend a prophecy conference ask: “Is Jesus on earth on the Day of the Lord?” The Day of the Lord or the Day of Wrath which Reagan himself explains it as: “God has appointed a day when He will deal with all the kingdoms of the earth and their political leaders by pouring out His wrath through the return of His Son, Jesus the Messiah. ¹³ Ezekiel in chapter 30 also tells us of that day “For the day is near, even the Day of the Lord is near” (Ezekiel 30:3) What nations are dealt with on that day? Not all scholars agree on the context, yet this is the Day of the Lord in which Cush and Phut, Lydia [Turkey] and all Arabia, Libya and the people of the covenant land will fall by the sword along with Egypt (Ezekiel 30:5). Other prophecies show these nations are cast into Hell, including Asshur – “Iraq – Syria”,  (Ezekiel 32:22-23) Elam – “Iran” (Ezekiel 32:24-25) Meshech & Tubal  “Asia minor  -Turkey” (Ezekiel 32:26) – Edom – “Arabia” (Ezekiel 32:29). These are punished for striking terror against Israel and the believers (Ezekiel 32:22-24 & 27).

Perhaps sharing a few from the volume of hundreds of prophecies of Jesus’ wars during the Great Tribulation can shed more light: “See Jehovah rides on a swift cloud and is coming to Egypt. The idols of Egypt tremble before him, and the hearts of the Egyptians melt within them.” (Isaiah 19) Does this remind you of the song “behold He comes”? Yet rarely do they tell you which verse does the song apply to, or whom does Jesus fight. Even Christ’s judgment of the nations “I will gather all nations and bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat” (Joel 3:2) then the Lord continues  “Now what have you against me, O Tyre and Sidon [Lebanon] and all you regions of Philistia [Gaza]” (Joel 3:4) It couldn’t be more clear! It was as if Jesus himself was speaking directly to Hezbollah (Tyre and Sidon) and Hamas (Philistia) and challenging them regarding their bloodlust against the Jewish people. Their fight against Israel is in reality a declaration of war on the King Himself. In Isaiah 25:9-10 at the time of the Lord’s return, we have Christ fighting Moab “And it shall be said in that day, Lo, this is our God; we have waited for Him, and He will save us: this is the LORD; we have waited for Him, we will be glad and rejoice in His salvation. For in this mountain shall the hand of the LORD rest, and Moab shall be trodden down under Him, even as straw is trodden down for the dunghill.” (Isaiah 25:9-10) Even in Isaiah 63, scholars unanimously agree that He fights Edom (Arabia). Even Reagan admits that Edom are the Arabs ¹⁴

Are the Arabs destroyed prior to the coming of Christ as Reagan claims? Then Antichrist establishes his European rule? Can anyone find a verse in the Bible in which Christ fights and nations are literally mentioned which are not Muslim?

This is exactly why Reagan like others in the prophecy circles insist Islam must be removed prior to Christ coming. Since the Muslim world are still on earth upon the Lord’s return fighting against Him, their whole premise of a European Antichrist falls apart and all their arguments are obsolete. If Antichrist is the one that annihilates the Muslim world as is claimed by Reagan, and since Christ must be on earth to destroy the Muslim hordes, then the question would be—does Christ collaborate with Antichrist? God forbid. I rest my case. 

While the position that Islam is the Antichrist may not be the premiere position held by many in today’s prophecy teachers, let it not be said that what is presented in my book God’s War on Terror which I co-authored with Joel Richardson, or the works of Goodman’s Assyrian Connection is a new or novel theory.

AN UNORTHODOX VIEW
Finally, and perhaps what people accuse others of, they are guilty of it themselves. Probably the most bizarre and unorthodox view of my critic David Reagan is his contention that the use of “eternal punishment” in Matthew 25:46 is ‘not really eternal.’ Reagan, without stating this as a view, insists that this teaching is found in the Bible: “the Bible teaches the unrighteous will be resurrected, judged, punished in Hell for a period of time proportional to their sins…” ¹⁵ Reagan even goes to the extent of defining how God should act “‘My first difficulty with the traditional view [regarding eternal hell] is that it seems to impugn the character of God. I kept asking myself, ‘How could a God of grace, mercy and love torment the vast majority of humanity eternally?’ It did not seem to me to be either loving or just.’” ¹⁶

STRAW MAN METHOD
Just to show Reagan’s Straw Man method, let me present an example in full context.

Reagan writes: Richardson then quotes 1 Kings 4:34 which says that men of all nations came to listen to Solomon’s wisdom, “sent by all the kings of the world, who had heard of his wisdom.” He then asks derisively, “Was Solomon’s wisdom so impressive that not a single king in all the earth failed to hear of it?” That’s not what the verse says. Read it again. It says the kings who had heard of his wisdom sent representatives — not all kings.

Response: What Reagan is saying here is exactly what we said. Reagan concludes “Context determines meaning, and the context of Revelation 13:7 clearly means that the Antichrist kingdom will be worldwide, not just a regional coalition of Muslim nations.”

Alright, to use the same logic Reagan uses, lets first address his official position on Zechariah 14 is that “I will gather all the nations to Jerusalem to fight against it” is a global battle and not regional. Since context determines meaning, then according to Reagan’s own logic when the text says  “I am going to make Jerusalem a cup that sends all the surrounding peoples” should mean that only the surrounding nations round-about Jerusalem is what is included—the Middle East region, and not the whole globe. We should agree, yet we do not. In order for Reagan’s theory to make sense, he must contradict his own argument. If we accept his official position that Zechariah 14 is a global attack, then, does Reagan support the idea that New Zealand, Canada, Greenland and Papua New Guinea will also attack Israel? If Babel’s fall in which the whole globe was at stake sparked God’s “Let us go down and confuse their tongue” to rescue humanity, don’t you think that Jesus return is sparked by Antichrist attempt to rule globally? In other words, do you believe that God will allow Satan to rule the whole globe? Also, why does God give us composites of beasts and horns? These composites are geographic, and so what is the purpose for such composites if indeed Antichrist rules the whole globe? Such composites are unnecessary.

Antichrist will be given “authority over every tribe, people, language, and nation,”

(Revelation 13:7). Reagan argues that this is an ironclad case for the Antichrist ruling the entire world, which he uses in his march against Jerusalem. Since Zechariah 14 is this attack by Antichrist, the word used for “earth” in Zechariah is “eretz,” which most often is translated as “land.” But there are many verses in the Bible that also use this same type of language, yet are clearly not speaking of the whole globe. These verses all use a Hebrew grammatical construct that is an exaggeration or an emphatic statement in order to convey their point.

Similarly, in Joel 3 which Reagan agrees is regarding the judgment of Antichrist and his hordes, “I will gather all the nations and bring them down to the valley of Jehoshaphat… for there I will sit to judge all the surrounding nations,” (Joel 3:2, 4, 9-12).

Once again, Joel, like Zechariah, specifies just who the nations are. These verses even specify at least two of the guilty parties involved, Lebanon and Gaza. In fact, this pattern is found quite extensively through the prophets. Reagan fails to share what truly is in our book, yet now you know the rest of the story.

DAVID REAGAN AND MAHDI
Reagan lacks basic comprehension on Islam and a live debate with him will prove this beyond a shadow of doubt. No serious researcher on Islam would ever write: “In fact the concept of a Mahdi is not even found in orthodox versions of the Hadith like Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim…” even worse “there are no confirmed tradition amongst Sunni Muslims that believe in Mahdi.” His article is riddled with “in fact” without  any reference to back his views on the subject. We even warned him of this uneducated error before publishing his report and he never heeded any counsel. The Mahdi ¹⁷ is well documented in all of the main Hadith collections—Al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, Sahih Al-Tirmidhi, Sunan Ibn Majah, Sunan Abu Dawud, and Sahih Al-Nisa'i. (see reference 16).

The extent of his errors is like a Muslim stating that ‘Protestants unlike Catholics do not believe in Jesus’ second coming.’ That ‘we have no collected traditions by Protestant reformers or commentators that Jesus will return—only Catholics believe in the return of Christ.’ The problem extends beyond pulling a ‘fast one’ on ‘simpletons,’ but to even supply them with portraits of this coming Messiah. Reagan is unaware that its sacrilege to Muslims to draw him, but to confuse him with a dead man from Sunni-Sudan? His research extends to plugging in “The Mahdi” (as well as our photos) in Google search engine, and copied from Wikimedia the images. The evidence is obvious, he sent an email to Joel Richardson stating “90% of Muslims (The Sunnis) do not believe in Mahdi” which he consulted “Wikipedia.” I have heard all sorts of outlandish claims, but this tops-them- all. Reagan needs to get more educated. In 1976, the Muslim World League (Rabitah al-‘Alam Al-Islami), probably the most prestigious and one of the largest Muslim Sunni organizations in the world,  issued a fatwa which declared that belief in a coming Mahdi is universal for all Muslims: “The Memorizers and scholars of Hadith have verified that there are reliable and acceptable reports among the Hadiths on the Mahdi; the majority of them are narrated through numerous authorities. There is no doubt that their status is unbroken and sound reports. And the belief in the appearance of the Mahdi is obligatory…none denies it except those who are ignorant of the Sunnah and innovators in doctrine.” (Fatwa issued in Mecca by "The Muslim World League" ¹⁸

REAGAN’S CONFUSION
He cannot fathom how Muslims will deify Mahdi, he states “A person would have to cease being a Muslim in order to believe that any man could be God.”

Reagan’s confusion stems from focusing on Muslim claim, not fact. His argument is that since Muslims claim that they do not worship a man, then we must believe them. He even needs lessons on basic Scripture, that the Bible is what defines worship, not claims by men.

Some men deny that they worship money, yet the Bible says they do. Muslims deny that Allah is a front for Satan, yet he is, regardless of Muslim claims. The Bible states clearly that the idols of the Gentiles are mediums used to worship devils. I presume that Reagan would counter that Muslims do not worship an idol. Especially since this is what Muslims claim. Muslims in fact, do not only worship Lucifer, but Muhammad and the Black Stone as well. All Muslims bow towards the Black Stone. If we use Reagan’s flawed logic above, then Muslims do not worship Satan and neither do they worship Muhammad or a black stone.

FACT—MUSLIMS WORSHIP THE BLACK STONE
Islam teaches that every Muslim must get his sins cleansed by venerating The Black Stone at least once in their lifetime, since the Black Stone is black due to it taking away the sins of Muslims. From a biblical definition—not only do Muslims deify Muhammad, they also deify the Black Stone—this idol takes the position of Jesus Himself, since only Jesus can remit all sin.

Even the Book of Acts addresses such issues: Everyone knows that Ephesus is the official guardian of the temple of the great Artemis, whose image which fell down to us from heaven (Acts 19:35).

Will Reagan say that these did not worship Artemis or her image?

The image of Artemis is strikingly similar to the meteorite stone image in Mecca which Allah commands 1.3 billion Muslims to literally bow down and prostrate themselves toward at least seventeen times during their five daily prayers.

Al-Tirmidhi, one of the greatest Muslim commentators notes “many years ago, the Black Stone was, “whiter than milk; it was only later that it became black as it absorbed the sins of those who touched it.”

Even the stone according to the Bible is an “image”. Biblically speaking, an image does not only mean a statue. Likely, the image of the beast can include a stone.

FACT—MUSLIMS WORSHIP MUHAMMAD
Muhammad’s name literally means “The Most Praised One”. If this alone is not worship, I do not know what else is. Can Reagan deny that Muslims elevate Muhammad over Yahweh? What you will find here is an astounding yes. Muhammad “The Praised One” is a title of deity. This is a name of blasphemy. The Antichrist system blasphemes God. Of course Muslims do not claim that they worship Muhammad. Yet they do. Allah himself in the Quran commanded: “Allah and His angels pray upon the prophet[Muhammad]. O ye who believe pray upon him and salute him with a worthy salutation” (Qur’an 33:56). Even Allah himself prays upon Muhammad. Reagan is in checkmate, he can either insist on his view and defend Muslim claims, or abandon his uneducated guesswork. Without Muhammad, there can be no Islam and without believing in Muhammad, no one can become a Muslim. The Islamic creed mandates it “There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger.” Muslims elevate Muhammad with God for no Christian would be mandated to state, “There is no God but Yahweh and Ezekiel is His messenger.”

Allah in the Quran even shared many of his names with Mohammed. He holds a uniquely exalted status unparalleled by anything or anyone else. He is given the title Al-Maqam-Al-Mahmud (The Glorious). The Mahdi who Muslims believe is the essence of Muhammad, likewise is called “glorious”, Ahmadinijad stated: “pave the path for the glorious reappearance of Imam Mahdi—may Allah hasten his reappearance.”

 Muslim scholar, Dr. G. F. Haddad, in an article with a blasphemous title, The Best of Creation states “[There is no] other Prophet [other than Mohammed] or angel-brought-near with whom Allah Most High shared as many of His own Names in the Qur’an as He did with the Prophet. With respect to his foremost name—Mohammed—peace be upon him, consider the poetic verse of Hassan ibn Thabit (RA): ‘And He drew out for him [a name] from His own Name so as to dignify him greatly: The Owner of the Throne [God] is The Glorious [Mahmûd], and this is the Praiseworthy [Mohammed]!’” ¹⁹

Islam claims that God, whose name is Mahmud, or the Glorious or the Praised One, named Mohammed after Himself. This is quite the claim. Mohammed wanted to be like God. Even intersession is attributed to Muhammad “It may be that thy Lord will raise

thee to a praised estate’ (Qur’an 17:79), a station which the Prophet said none but he would receive. And this is the Station of Intercession at the right of the Glorious Throne.” ²⁰

Only Jesus is positioned at the right hand of God where He is the only one that intercedes for mankind: “Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us” (Romans 8:34). One will never find in the Scriptures Ezekiel, Daniel, Amos, Habakkuk, or Jeremiah given such titles.

FACT—MUSLIMS WORSHIP MAHDI
Like Mohammed, the Mahdi is exalted by Islam to be above all of creation, and is claimed by Islam to sit in the Temple of God in Jerusalem. ²⁰ Mahdi in Islam has titles that belong only to God. ²¹

Now, lets examine II Thessalonians 2 that Reagan uses as evidence to write-off for Islam. Antichrist “oppose and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sits in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God” (II Thessalonians 2:4).

The Mahdi, like Muhammad exalts himself above all that is called God. In other words, he gives himself titles that only belong to God. The II Thessalonians 2 text is perfect and no serious mind can deny— it does match Islam’s deification of a man.

RECONCILE ISAIAH 14
Isaiah 14 Lucifer is addressed as the man-Antichrist  “Is this the man who made the earth tremble?” (Isaiah 14:16) When was this Lucifer a man?

According to Muhammad “The Mahdi is the peacock of all angels and of the dwellers of the heavenly realm, he is dressed and adorned with the cloaks of light.( Ibin Al-Sabbagh in AlFusul Al-Muhimma, transmitted by Ibin Abbas.) He is not mere man, but a man-angel and the peacock of all angels—Lucifer.

Ahmadenijad prayed in front of the whole world to see “O mighty Lord, I pray to you to hasten the emergence of your last repository, the promised one, that perfect and pure human being, the one that will fill this world with justice and peace.” The Mahdi, who is referred to as: “the perfect human being who is heir to all prophets and pious men.” Even heir to Jesus Himself since Jesus according to Islam will stand behind Mahdi in the Hour of Judgment. Being a perfect man is not only what Shia believe. What Ahmadinejad was saying is that the Mahdi of Islam is essentially the reincarnation of Mohammed—the perfect man.

RECONCILING THESSALONIANS 2 WITH DANIEL 11
Reagan argues that “I believe the behavior of the Antichrist described in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 [that he is God] rules out any possibility that the Antichrist might prove to be a Muslim.”

Does the Bible teach that Antichrist claims to be only deity? If claiming to be God is the only thing Antichrist does, then we have a problem—Daniel 11:39 Antichrist “acts against the strongest fortresses with a foreign god, which he shall acknowledge, and advance its glory” (Daniel 11:39).

Who is this “foreign god” whom Antichrist worships?

How could Antichrist claim to be God and then here he worships a god? How can anyone claim that he is atheist? He worships a god—a singular god.

Habakkuk also confirms, ‘He commits offense, ascribing this power to his god” (Habakkuk 1:11). He claims strength from his false god who promotes violence. The vision is for the End-Times (Habakkuk 2:3). He always changes his mind and cannot be trusted. The Antichrist is the most proud (Habakkuk 2:4).

Islam indeed advances Allah’s glory through Jihad-war and Daniel describes Antichrist as “acts against the strongest fortresses with a foreign god, which he shall acknowledge, and advance its glory” (Daniel 11:39).  Islam exactly does this—advances the glory of Allah through war, to even declare war on the “strongest fortresses”. Only Muslims declare war on the strongest western powers.

The Bible gives us that Antichrist attributes to himself titles that belong to God, and at the same time honors a god of war.

WISE AS A SERPENT
Jesus commanded us to be as wise as serpents. How can we do this if we do not understand the evil mindset of Lucifer? Islam has a catch 22. Antichrist must deny the deity of Jesus and the Trinity (1 John 2:22) because he wants to replace Him. How can Satan take over that position as Messiah and be worshipped and at the same time deny Jesus’ deity? The best argument he could create is that Jesus is a mere man. How could a man become God? He must destroy belief in the deity of Christ and establish himself instead, yet, at the same time he wants to be worshipped as God. He could not claim that Mohammed was God if he is to deny Jesus’ deity. Satan must direct this worship to Himself. The Bible has warned us that Satan will attempt to exalt his man, the Antichrist, over Christ. Islam does exalt Mohammed whom the Mahdi they claim is his spiritual reincarnation above Christ and downgrades Christ; likewise, the Mahdi is believed to have the spirit of Mohammed, and so, he will have the same attributes, and according to Islam will also occupy the Temple Mount.

Muslims indeed worship Muhammad, the Black Stone and will worship Mahdi. Reagan did not explain our work to his followers, which is the only reason that compels me to refute his assumptions. Several of his Lamb and Lion members wrote me directly asking me to, since they easily found that he is not sharing what we documented in our book God’s War on Terror which he claimed he read (most likely skipped thru it) .

THE PSALM 82 ISSUE

Reagan claims: So, I looked for Shoebat’s scriptural proof of Jesus’ presence [in Psalm 83]. Believe it or not, the proof he provided was quotes from two other psalms: 1) Psalm 82:8 — “Arise, O God, judge the earth!” 2) Psalm 80:14 — “Return, we beseech You, O God of hosts.” Neither one of the psalms are related to Psalm 83. Both are prayers by Asaph for the Lord to return to the earth to bring justice. Neither one states that the Messiah is on the earth. This kind of incredibly sloppy proof-texting can be found throughout Shoebat’s book. Whenever he wants to make a point, he goes fishing for a verse. When he finds it, he reels it in and applies it to the passage under consideration, whether it is related to that passage or not.

Response: Evidence of Reagan’s errors, misquotes and slander/libel, can be summed up in the following:

1—As might as Reagan accuse his colleague Arnold Fruchtenbaum with “sloppy proof-texting”, especially since he and many others agree with me that Psalm 83 is completely fulfilled when Messiah comes. Fruchtenbaum states it best: “While such a conspiracy of the Arab nations has been present since 1948, and was evident more so during and after the Six Day War, it is to have its full force in The Great Tribulation” (Fruchtenbaum's The Fooststeps of the Messiah, Revised Edition PP. 489-490)

2—Reagan misquoted both my quote and the Bible—Psalm 82:8 does not simply state “Arise, O God, judge the earth”, but “Arise O God, judge the earth, for thou shall inherit all nations." Why did he eliminate “shall inherit all nations”?

This is obvious—God inherits all nations at the judgment of the nations in Joel 3, Matthew 24 and others.

3—Reagan insists that chapter breaks are crucial to keep the context, that using the previous chapter or the next is “sloppy text proofing…”, yet he stated “Neither one of the psalms [82 & 80] are related to Psalm 83. Both are prayers by Asaph for the Lord to return to the earth to bring justice.” So, according to Reagan, Psalm 81 and 82 are within the same context.

4—Here is what Reagan kept out from my book “It is crucial to understand that the theme of this war is not only Psalm 83, but Psalm 79 to Psalm 83. God Himself is arising from his throne to judge the nations that attack Israel at the end of the age, again “Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.” (Psalm 82:8). Jesus, who is seated at the right hand of the father, comes down for the final clash between the Lord and his enemies. Who is arising here? This is no small matter and is one of the most amazing descriptions of God fighting nations that are all Muslim. There are several reasons within the text that show us that this is an End-time battle with Islam. God is physically present on the earth “do not be still O God” (v. 1), “Arise O God”

(82:8), “Return, we beseech thee, O God of hosts…” (80:14) is Israel’s prayer:

“blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord” (Matthew 23:39).

5—How does Reagan suppose God is returning “return O God”? He must have been on earth before. This is Messiah.

6. This event is caused by the defiling of the Temple of God: “O God, the nations have come into Your inheritance; Your holy temple they have defiled” (79:1).

Are they going to attribute this to 70 A.D? Especially since they admit that Psalm 82 is Christ’s return?

7—Does Reagan propose two defiling of the Temple and three returns of Jesus?

The only way out of this one is to do the same as in Psalm 82:8, and that is to toss these verses from the Psalm somewhere else in the Bible and exclude them from the context of these Psalms. This is exactly what he did with Psalm 82:8, which is not Hermeneutics, but Gymnastics.

8—The Bible calls these peoples in all 3 Psalms as “God’s enemies” and “haters of God” who in Psalm 83 form a confederacy against You. These nations form a confederacy against Christ.

9—These enemies who hate God are religious and not atheists: The haters of the Lord

pretend submission to Him (Psalm 81:15). The word “Islam” literally means submission. To be a Muslim is to submit to the will of Allah. That these peoples think in their minds that they are in submission to God when in reality they hate and blaspheme Him is yet another clear indication as to the identity and religion of these peoples. Blasphemy is to deny God’s edicts. Here God declared that the land belongs to Israel. To deny that is blasphemy. This is how crucial Israel is when it comes to faith in God.

Why would God arise and judge the earth, then to inherit all nations for an event that preludes Armageddon? Does He not arise and judge the earth at Armageddon?

10—Reagan concludes: “The outcome of this war most likely is detailed in Zephaniah 2:4-5. These verses indicate that the attacking nations will be devastated by Israel.”

Yet, in Zephaniah 3 this “Mighty One” is physically present in Israel’s midst: “The LORD thy God in the midst of thee is mighty; he will save…” (Zephaniah 3:17). It is clear that this is the Messiah. When one examines the Psalms Messiah is portrayed as a soldier and a fighter with the same reference: “Mighty One” “Gird thy sword upon thy thigh, O most mighty, with thy glory and thy majesty.” (Psalm 45:3).

If we apply Reagan’s argument and isolate these verses by applying them at a different occasion, then all the Messianic prophecies that we use become obsolete and void of any argument.

CIRCUMSTANTIAL VS CONCLUSIVE
The several points that we will show are conclusive, yet Reagan who knows law and taught it should know the difference between circumstantial evidence verses conclusive. To make a case he states “One of the tipoffs as to the timing of this invasion [of Gog and Magog] is the statement that following the defeat of the invading armies, the Israelis will spend seven years cleaning up the battle field and burning the leftover weapons. Many have equated this seven years with the Tribulation.” (Ezekiel 39:9).

How is this conclusive? I could understand them burning weapons the first 3 1⁄2 years, but why would they still burn the weapons after the middle of the 7 years? They will need all of the weapons they can get. This theory makes no sense. Yet it makes all the sense to burn weapons during the Millennium. This really adds more support to my view not Reagan’s. Yet this is circumstantial. Yet Reagan treats all his argumentations as conclusive. Are they? Allow us to show what “conclusive” really means.

ON THE TIMING OF THE BATTLE OF GOG AND MAGOG

1—Ezekiel 38-39 In both battles—Gog and Armageddon—Christ is present with the greatest earthquake: “And all the men that are upon the face of the earth shall shake at my presence.” (Ezekiel 38:20) Who is present? God is present—in the flesh. This is indeed the last battle, with Jesus scoring a great victory on behalf of his people against their enemies.

2—If one doubts that Messiah is on earth, the text in verse 7 should leave no doubt. “And the heathen shall know that I am Jehovah, the Holy One in Israel,” (39:7).

The Holy One is in Israel. Other parts of Scripture use the phrase “the Holy One of Israel,” but here the Messiah is actually present on the Earth in the Land of Israel. This “in” is crucial. It’s like DNA evidence in a court of law.

3—Not only is Christ present, but the destruction of both Gog and the Antichrist is accompanied by an earthquake of unparalleled proportions: “For in my jealousy and in the fire of my wrath have I spoken. Surely in that day there shall be a great shaking in the land of Israel; So that the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the heaven, and the beasts of the field, and all creeping things that creep upon the earth, and all the men that are upon the face of the earth, shall shake at my presence, and the mountains shall be thrown down, and the steep places shall fall, and every wall shall fall to the ground,” (Ezekiel 38:19-20).

Shake at my presence? In the same verse, we read about the earthquake and his presence on earth. This is not a small event. Every creature on the earth will shake at the presence of Jesus.

4—We also have verse 19, which states, “My fury shall come up in my face.” (Ezekiel 38:18). This is a literal face.

The only choice Reagan has is to allegorize this “presence” and “face”. If so, then he must allegorize the literal feet that will touch the Mount of Olives in Zechariah 14. By this, he will enforce a Jewish interpretation that denies Jesus is Messiah. He has only two choices. So which one is it?

5—The Book of Revelation also tells us that this event occurs when the Antichrist’s armies are gathered together against Israel: “Then they gathered the kings together to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon…And there was a great earthquake, such as was not since men were upon the earth, so mighty an earthquake, and so great…and the cities of the nations fell…And every island fled away, and the mountains were not found,” (Revelation 16:18:-20).

6—Both descriptions tell us that the mountains are “thrown down.” In other words, no nations are left. Only one kingdom remains—The Kingdom of Messiah.

Conclusion:

The only way out for Reagan to separate the similarities in the two texts, he must find ways to state that Ezekiel 38-39 is not Revelation 16:18-20. This will force view and unclear text as evidence over plain text which should be the driving method to interpret the Bible.

ON THE LOCATION OF GOG AND MAGOG
Reagan claims: “There is no way that Turkey could be considered a nation located in “the remote parts of the north.”

1—For Reagan’s statement to be correct, Matthew Henry then must be wrong. The Matthew Henry Complete Commentary speaks of this diversity of opinion. “Some think they find them [Gog and Magog] afar off, in Scythia, Tartary, and southern Russia Others think they find them nearer the land of Israel, in Syria, and Asia the Less Turkey. (Matthew Henry, Bible Commentary) Josephus also points to the Scythians.

Matthew Henry agrees with me, yet he completely disagrees with Reagan.

Not only Matthew Henry, but every Bible map agrees with me—none agrees with Reagan. If we examine some of the greatest Biblical references, like the Macmillan Bible Atlas, Oxford Bible Atlas, and The Moody Atlas of Bible Lands, they all locate Magog, Meshech Tubal, Gomer and Beth Togarmah in Asia Minor, and not Russia proper. Are all our maps which were done by historians wrong? This region is all Muslim. Also, if you find all historic references in any book of your choice that supports the Russia theory, you will find all of them when quoting historians without exception point to southern Russia—never Russia proper.  In fact, no serious historian agrees with this new theory founded by Scofield.

2—The text doesn’t say “farthest” but “remote parts,” “sides,” “quarters”, which easily fits the maps—sides of the north. In other words, go north and like a windshield wiper, go on either side—this is Asia Minor and the C.I.S nations of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kirgizstan, Turkmenistan… all Muslim. When the text says “remote parts” “sides” “quarters”, the text is perfect. Reagan even gave the quote “remote parts” not “farthest”.

3—In Ezekiel 39:18 the dead bodies of the fallen soldiers of Magog are called the “fatlings of Bashan.” Most Bible encyclopedias identify Bashan with Syria and Turkey.

One cannot call Russians “fatlings of Bashan.”

RUSSIA?
Regan states: “Ezekiel 38:15 clearly states” the invasion will be led by the Prince of Rosh”.

Reagan never states that translations divide on the issue.

If Rosh is Russia, I have but one question: One common denominator in the argument over the Gog and Magog story is that everyone at least agrees that Gog is Prince of Meshech and Tubal. No serious historian would argue that Meshech and Tubal are not in Turkey. If we go with the translation that Gog is “prince of Rosh, Meshech and Tubal” are we then to say that Gog rules both Russia and Turkey?

You might want to counter that Gog could indeed be the chief over this whole confederacy. But apart from the fact that these two nations have warred against each other from time immemorial, why didn’t the Bible then give him the title of “prince of Rosh, Meshech, Tubal, Persia, Phut, and Cush”?

Gog is of the land of Magog, a very specific place, and he is the ruler of his domain;

“Meshech and Tubal,” which must be associated with Magog. All these are given for locators and are not intended to lead us into a wild goose chase or a genealogical and historical puzzle.

THE RUSSIA ERROR
It is actually far simpler than some make it. The error of the Russian theory arose from the Scofield Study Bible, which identifies  Mesheck and Tubal with the modern Russian cities of Moscow and Tobolsk. The only basis for this interpretation is the somewhat similar sound of the two words. Thus: Meshech sounds like Moscow, and Tubal sounds like Tobolsk. However, one cannot simply take a word from an ancient Semitic language (in this case, Hebrew) and find a correlation to a modern name from a drastically different language (in this case an early form of Scandinavian) simply because the two words “sound the same.” While this may be convincing to some for the sole reason of phonetics, it is very irresponsible hermeneutics.

Tim LaHaye for example explains the reason that we may know that Ezekiel 38 and 39

“can only mean modern-day Russia” is because of “etymology,” that is, by studying the

origin of words. If phonetics is the yard stick to prove where Gog comes from, then Meshech fits best with the ancient Moschi/Mushki far better than it does with Moscow. Likewise Tubal fits far better with the ancient Tubalu peoples than it does with modern Tobolsk, especially because the two locations were well known regions of Asia Minor in Ezekiel’s day. There is no need to look any further. Even Mark Hitchcock admits that Mesheck and Tubal are in modern Turkey, or possibly in parts of southern Russia and northern Iran. 22 Yet Hitchcock chose Russia for Rosh and Turkey for Meshech and Tubal.

Final Conclusion:

1—David Reagan’s article was divisive and void of debate.

2—There are different views on the subject of Eschatology. We have seen how many of the same names that Reagan respects do not agree with him. He chose to isolate people and divide between brethren.

3—David Reagan slandered/libel by claiming that we are revisionists, unorthodox,  when we are not.

4— Reagan fails to share what truly is in our book, yet now you know the rest of the story.

Walid Shoebat is the Author of God’s War on Terror www.Shoebat.com

To comment, challenge our view, or order God’s War on Terror write us at walid@shoebat.com or call 720-935-2826

REFERENCES

1              Froom: op. cit., II pp. 323f, 325f, 331, 340f, 412f, 458 & 518f and also III pp. 40f, 74f, 125-31, 149, 183, 240f, &352f.

2              The Great Heresies, chapter 4 March, 1936, page 127-128

3              Divine Institutes, 7:17

4              Paul Alvarus, Memoriale sanctorum 2.4

5              Martin Luther, Tischreden, Weimer ed., 1, No. 330

6              Works, Holman, Philadelphia, 1915, II, pp.149 & 154

7              Calvin On Islam Revelation Prof. Dr. Francis Nigel Lee, Lamp Trimmers El Paso, 2000

8              Jonathan Edwards, The Fall of Antichrist, Part VII, page 395, New York, Published by S. Converse 1829

9              Jonathan Edwards, The Fall of Antichrist, Part VII, page 399, New York, Published by S. Converse 1829

10           The Coming Prince, Page 273

11           Fruchtenbaum, Footsteps of the Messiah, page 36

12           M. Henry: A Commentary on the Holy Bible, with Practical Remarks andObservations, London: Marshall Bros. Ltd., n.d., IV:1270f.

13           Lamplighter, the message of Pslam 2

14           God’s Plan for the Ages, page 76

15           David Reagan, The Nature of Hell

16           Ibid

17           Sunni references on Mahdi:

Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, v4, Tradition #658, Sahih Bukhari Hadith: 4.658, Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v2, p86, v9, pp 74-75, Sunan Abu Dawud, v2, p7, Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, pp 84,376; V3, p63, al-Mustadrak ala al-Sahihayn, by al-Hakim, v4, p557, Jami' al-Saghir, by al-Suyuti, pp 2,160, al-Urful Wardi, by al-Suyuti, p2, al-Majma', by al-Tabarani, p217, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v9, p144, Fat'h al-Bari fi Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, by Ibn Hajar Asqalani, v7, p305, al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 11, section 1, p249, al-Tathkirah, by al-Qurtubi, p617, al-Hawi, by al-Suyuti, v2, pp 165-166, Sharh al-Mawahib al-Ladunniyyah, by al-Zurqani, v5, p348, Fat'h al-Mugheeth, by al-Sakhawi, v3, p41, Kanz al-Ummal, v7 P186, Iqd al-Durar Fi Akhbar al-Mahdi al-Muntadhar, v12, Ch. 1, al-Bayan fi Akhbar Sahib al-Zaman, By Ganji al-Shafi'i, Ch. 12, al-Fusool al-Muhimmah, by Ibn Sabbagh al-Maliki, Ch. 12, Arjahul Matalib, by Ubaidallah Hindi al-Hanafi, p380, Muqaddimah, by Ibn Khaldoon, p266, 

18           Rabitatul 'Alamil Islami) on Oct. 11, 1976 (23 Shawwal 1396.

19           Dr. G. F. Haddad, Living Islam, The Prophetic Title: The Best of Creation

20           Ibid

21           Muhammad ibn Izzat, Muhammad ‘Arif, Al Mahdi and the End of Time

(London,Dar Al-Taqwa, 1997), p. 40

22           Battle of Gog and Magog, Mark Hitchcock, page 44, 45