"A Crown Was Given Unto Him" - Rev 6:2

To Honor Jesus Christ, Glorify God, Encourage Believers, & Warn All
Est 07-06-2002

This information is offered with the hope that YOU can come to KNOW the Lord personally.   07-11-2004

These words describe the very first ACT of the 7-year tribulation period, once the pretext for the act has been made.  If the pretext for the ACT is the " confirm [ing]" of the Mideast Peace agreement, then, what could the " crown " represent?  This "crown" is given before the " conquering " starts.

Revelation 6:2   And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.

Discussion is underway regarding a solution to Mideast Peace.  Here are some of the  specifics as advocated by TheGlobalist.com..  It is said that "this leader would have a proven track record of leading Palestinians toward democracy... [and} a strong relationship with the United States ."

The question is then asked: "... is King Abdullah someone whom the United States could trust with brokering peace and administering Palestinian territory ?"    Did you see that?  " Administering Palestinian territory "  could be the REASON " a crown [will be] given unto him ."

It is the said of the King -

"King Abdullah himself attended secondary school in Massachusetts - and studied at both Oxford and Georgetown universities. He is more comfortable speaking English than he is classical Arabic. If you're seeking a living example of the potential synergy between the United States and Arab nations, the King of Jordan is such a man ."

Of course, these aspects of Abdullah could make him too much in the western camp and therefore unacceptable to Palestinians.

However, it is widely recognized that His Majesty's wife is of  Palestinian descent and that Jordan is largely (by population) a Palestinian nation.  Jordan has been the ONLY Arab nation willing to do anything for the refugees.  But, Jordan is hurting for money and needs the West to financially support their efforts.  If you read the speeches of King Abdullah, he is constantly referring to financial and technological development for his nation.  Several nations have recently forgiven the Jordanian debts (which they desparately needed).   In  order to accomplish his goals he will need-

Dan 11:43   ... POWER OVER THE TREASURES of gold and of silver,  

According to theglobalist.com "He's also shown his skill in coping with a large Palestinian population."

Did you know that the country "Jordan" got its name after 1967.  Prior to 1967 it was known as "TransJordan."  This was due to the fact that before the Israelis occupied the West Bank (to protect itself from invaders), the Jordanian territory was across ("Trans") the Jordan River.  So Jordan has already ruled the "occupied" territories previously.

[King Abdullah knows the lesson of his father, the recently deceased King Hussein, who at the last moment allowed his military to be a participant in the assault on Israel in  1967, partly to gain favor with Arab nations.  The result?  -   Major miltary losses and embarrassment.   The former ruler of Jordan had a grand history of kowtowing where appropriate to stay in power.  The staying power of King Hussein was incredible.   There has been a great deal of suffering within the Hashemite ruling family.  Hussein went through 3 divorces.  An older family member (his uncle?) was named temporary ruler prior to Hussein (upon the death of Hussein's father) but the uncle was declared incompetent to rule due to being a manic.  It was then that the teenager Hussein became ruler of the Hashemite kingdom.

Consider also that King Abdullah's grandfather was murdered (for supposedly being a traitor to Arab causes) by a gunman whose bullet also hit King Abdullah's father (Hussein was 15 at the time).  The reason  the 15 year old Hussein did not die?  King Abdullah's grandfather had pinned a medal on the 15 year old (the day before) and the medal deflected the bullet.  King Hussein was a darling of the CIA for years.  Hussein was present at the 1993 signing of the Peace Accord between Arafat and Yitzak Rabin (since assassinated also). Assassination  is apparently a way of life for Mideast leaders, especially those who make agreements with Israel.  In addition to having a precedent for ruling Palestinians, the Hashemites have a history of appeasing the Western powers.]

Finally, TheGlobalist.com says "With King Abdullah at the helm, Jordan can make the peace - and then make Palestine ."

Did you catch this sequence, first " confirm " the "peace", then a "crown" (a Palestinian state?), then ... " conquering "    ?

The antichrist allows the Palestinians/Jordanians to escape .

More on the King .

Donald Rumsfeld Discusses the Soon to Be "Crown"

From the Washington Post Website:

"My feelings about the so-called occupied territories are that there was a war," Rumsfeld said. "Israel urged neighboring countries not to get involved in it once it started. They all jumped in and they lost a lot of real estate to Israel because Israel prevailed in the conflict ."

Rumsfeld apparently referred to Jordan, which held the West Bank and east Jerusalem until it joined Egypt and Syria in the 1967 Middle East war. Israel won and Jordan lost the territory.

Since then, Rumsfeld said, Israel repeatedly has offered to pull back but "at no point has it been agreed upon by the other side ."
At some point, the defense secretary said "there will be some sort of an entity that will be established " which Israel can deal with securely. "Maybe it will take some Palestinian expatriates coming back into the region and providing the kind of responsible government that would give confidence that you could make an arrangement with that would stick," he said.


End 08-06-2002

State of the Union address of President Bush of today's date.
Our goal in the middle east- "a democratic Palestine. "

Since Palestine does not exist, this begs the questions:
Where will it be?  How it will it come to be?

Making a "democratic Palestine"  is the real reason for deposing Saddam Hussein.   Regime change in Iraq will enable the "redrawn Mideastern map."  This will lead to a new "political entity."  One need not be FOR or AGAINST this campaign.  The campaign is in God's hands in any case.

Ultimately, the political "entity" will become the beast empire  of the Holy Bible.


From the following website-

we read-
Political decisions in Washington, and facts on the ground in the Middle East, will ultimately resolve all the jockeying for position. Restoration of a Hashemite to the throne of Iraq has its logic at a time when rulers and boundaries are in question. But if justice were properly to be done, Saudi Arabia ought to be broken up , and the Hijaz and the two holy cities of Mecca and Medina returned to the Hashemites, who have a more legitimate title to rule than the Saudi family.

end 04-17-2003

From the website -
We read-

Regime Change, Literally - Jordan's King May Rule Post-War Iraq
Pacific News Service, William O. Beeman, Feb 19, 2003

A recently revealed document suggests that until recently, regime change in Iraq was considered not as a U.S. security issue, but as an Israeli one. PNS commentator William O. Beeman looks at the ill-advised plan.

In September 2002, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and Vice President Dick Cheney reportedly suggested that a post-war Iraq be unified with Jordan into a "Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and Iraq. " The story was dismissed by many Middle East experts as a wild rumor. However, the rumor has surfaced again, and it is given new credence by the revelation of a document written in 1996 by Bush White House policy makers now associated with Wolfowitz and Cheney.

The possibility that Iraq could be ruled by the Royal Family of Jordan in the future gives new meaning to the frequently used term "regime change."

End 04-19-2003


For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
December 4, 2003

President Bush and His Majesty King Abdullah of Jordan Remarks
Remarks by President Bush and His Majesty King Abdullah of Jordan in a Photo Opportunity
The Oval Office

10:07 A.M. EST

PRESIDENT BUSH: We're going to have some opening statements, and then I'll take a couple of questions -- two questions. The Jordanian press may want to ask a question.

First, Your Majesty, thanks for coming. It's great to have you back. I view His Majesty as one of -- one of our really close friends in the world . You know, I went to London recently and gave a speech about reform and reform in the Middle East, and the possibilities of governments that adhere to rule of law and transparency, and women's rights and economic freedom. And, Your Majesty, you're doing just that. I'm proud of your leadership. It's -- you're a modern leader with a big heart and a vision for what is best for your people.

I also want to thank you for your very strong support in our mutual desire to bring peace to the Middle East. We made a tough decision when it came to Iraq, and, Your Majesty, you stood with us. And we made the right decision when it came to Iraq, because Iraq will be free and will be peaceful. And that's in your interests, and it's in our interests, and it's in the world's interests that we succeed.

HIS MAJESTY KING ABDULLAH: Thank you, sir. Well, Mr. President, again, it's always a pleasure to see you and to be back here in Washington. I'm very grateful for your support for the region, what you're trying to do to bring peace and stability for all of us in the Middle East -- Iraq, the Israelis, the Palestinians. And so I'm looking forward to our discussions today, and see how we can best bring hope to all of the people of our part of the world.

And the President has always been very courageous in trying to do the right thing and to push for a dialogue and hope for all of us in the Middle East. And I'm very appreciative.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Everybody knows where I stand. I gave a speech right here in Rose Garden in June of 2002. I laid out what I believe is necessary to achieve peace in the Middle East. It starts with having a Palestinian state that is at peace with Israel, a Palestinian state based upon democratic principles, a Palestinian state which recognizes the hopes and aspirations of the Palestinian people, and a Palestinian state with leadership which is committed to defeating and dismantling the terrorist organizations who are trying to prevent a Palestinian state from emerging .

I also talked about the need for the Israelis to keep in mind that if they support a Palestinian state, which they have told me they do, that the conditions on the ground must be such for a Palestinian state to be able to emerge. And that's why we're continuing to talk to them about the illegal settlements and outposts -- illegal outposts and settlements, as well as the fence.

As well, nations in the neighborhood must take responsibility. The King and I have spent a lot of time talking about this subject . He understands fully what I'm talking about. I want to remind you that it was in Jordan where His Majesty hosted us. I stood up with His Majesty, as well as Prime Minister Sharon and then Prime Minister Abu Mazen, and made a public declaration that we were prepared to work together for the creation of a Palestinian state. Abu Mazen has since been shoved aside, and the process stalled. What the Palestinians need is leadership willing to remain committed to the aspirations of their people, and bold enough to stand up and fight off the terrorists organizations . And His Majesty and I will be glad to work with such leaders, as they emerge.

In order for there to be a "crown" (Revelation 6:2), there needs to be a "state" and a "leader".  The President started his statement and he almost called Abdullah ("His Majesty") as "one of " the great leaders of the Mideast.  He stopped short of doing this because any leader that is the choice of the United States would receive instant opposition among conservative Muslims.  That the King of Jordan is in agreement with United States policy is clear.

That there is to be a "state" is abundantly clear from the repeated use of the expression "Palestinian state ."  The need for a "leader" has been discussed by the President " nations in the neighborhood must TAKE RESPONSIBILITY.  The King and I have spent a lot of time talking about this subject."  "What the Palestinians need is leadership...bold enough to stand up and fight off the terrorists organizations."

Bush says "His Majesty and I will be glad to work with such leaders, as they emerge."

That the future includes 10 Islamic Kings ("leaders") who will " work witha Mideastern leader is clear.  That the leader's kingdom is in the Mideast is also clear.  This leader must be "bold enough to stand up and fight off the terrorists organizations . "     It should not be surprising that the chief function and overriding objective of the Biblical leader will be to enforce confirmity among Islamic terrorists.

In a recent edition of the Jordan Times online, it was said: "Statesmen have to tell people what they need to hear and not what they want to hear."  http://jordantimes.com   Such "leadership" will be provided by the Biblical antichrist.

End 12-06-2003

The Coming of the Lord is Drawing Nigh
from the World Tribune.com of Dec 17, 2003 we read:

JERUSALEM — The United States has pressed Israel to facilitate the establishment of a Palestinian state in 2004 .

Israeli and U.S. diplomatic sources said the Bush administration has discussed with Israel measures to ensure an interim Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip by mid-2004 (Mid-2004 is SUMMER-2004).  The sources said the measures being proposed include a Palestinian ceasefire in the war against Israel and a military withdrawal from areas captured in the 1967 war.

"The United States wants a measure of stability over the next year in the Middle East that would allow for the success of efforts in Iraq," a diplomatic source said. "This would mean unilateral Israeli measures over the next few months."

The discussions to renew efforts to establish a Palestinian state began in November amid the formation of a new government by Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei. The U.S. meetings with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his aides focused on creating conditions for an interim Palestinian state without PA fulfillment of U.S. demands to dismantle insurgency groups.

The administration had planned to establish an interim Palestinian state by the end of 2003. But the collapse of the Palestinian ceasefire in August and the resignation of then-Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas torpedoed the U.S. timetable.

Abbas resigned under threats from PA Chairman Yasser Arafat and his aides in a move that many in the State Department blamed on Israel. Senior State Department officials said Israel undermined Abbas by hesitating to withdraw from areas of the West Bank and Gaza Strip and failing to ease restrictions on Palestinians.

By November, the sources said, Israel and the United States agreed that Abbas's successor, Qurei, would not institute democratic reforms or crack down on insurgency groups. At that point, the administration proposed a series of meetings with younger-generation Palestinians expected to be influential in a post-Arafat Palestinian society as well as measures that would preserve the option of a Palestinian state with permanent borders by 2005.

The administration requested that Israel commit to withdrawing from large areas of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, dismantle unauthorized outposts and refrain from large-scale military operations in PA-controlled territory.

Another request relayed by President George Bush was that Israel maintain its pledge to safeguard Arafat.

"We also have made clear to the Israelis, as the president has in his public statements, that they have obligations as well," State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said on Thursday, "and that we're looking for ways for the parties to move forward on the roadmap to produce some progress for the sake of the people on both sides."

Israeli officials said the administration suggested unilateral measures by the military as early as mid-2003 when Washington was trying to implement the international plan for a roadmap. The suggestions became more pronounced after the resignation of Abbas in September and the acceleration of the security fence.

"We conceded Greater Israel when we accepted the roadmap," Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said. "The acceptance of the roadmap meant the concession of almost all of Judea, Samaria [West Bank] and the Gaza Strip."

The U.S. effort demands an immediate Israeli withdrawal from unauthorized outposts in the West Bank, the sources said. They said a list of outposts was discussed between U.S. ambassador to Israel, Daniel Kurtzer, and Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz. Kurtzer has insisted that inhabited outposts be included in the first stage of evacuations.

The administration stressed to Sharon that the United States would consider other international proposals to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict unless the Israeli government launched its own plan to reduce tension with the Palestinians.

On Friday, Secretary of State Colin Powell plans to welcome the architects of an Israeli-Palestinian peace program. Former Israeli security chief Ami Ayalon and Palestinian university chief Sari Nusseibeh will meet Powell and senior White House officials as part of the U.S. effort to prod Sharon to launch his own initiative to facilitate a Palestinian state. This is the second time in as many weeks that Powell has met with Israeli opposition elements to discuss their peace initiatives.

The sources said the U.S. requests for Israeli unilateral measures were described as a means to avoid international pressure on the Jewish state They said Sharon had relayed his commitment to an interim Palestinian state by July 2004, a timetable meant to coincide with the administration's intention to form a permanent government in Iraq.

See the Peace Plan of the Bible
See the location of the antichrist's kingdom
See how the antichrist may subdue Iraq itself
See how ancient Assyria fits into the current situation



The centrality of the invasion of Iraq by the United States as the "operational"  beginning of the formation of the future political empire of Revelation 13 is best understood when we read a 1996 study for the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies .  This study was to be used by Prime Minister of Israel Netanyahu as a "strategic" definition of his vision for a proactive policy to further the security interests of the nation Israel.

[Friends, what you are about to read here is a 1996 blueprint for the actions of the Ariel Sharon Likud government for the last few years, as well as a blueprint for the real rationale for invading Iraq .  The irony of the situation is that Israel's [and the United States'] strategic policy for defending Israel will lead to the political empire of the future antichrist as revealed in the Books of Daniel and Revelation.  As I have stated numerous times, this website does not support nor does it oppose policies.  All we do is try to report the policies and actions as they relate to Biblical prophecy .  

There is much "liberal" commentary that avers that "Zionists", "Jews", and "radical fundamentalists" promoted the invasion of Iraq to hasten the Second Coming.  It is doubtful that many neo-conservatives, who
did support the invasion of Iraq, even believe in the reality of the Rapture or Second Coming.  Nobody but a post millennialist, or an amillennialist,  would even suggest such a foolish thing; because they believe they are responsible for making heaven on earth.  It is assuredly not premillennialist "dispensationalists" who believe the Lord's return can be hastened by their actions, their policies, and least of all their support of  war.


from the website-

However, we can read about the real reasons behind the Iraq Invasion-

A Clean Break:
A New Strategy for Securing the Realm

Following is a report prepared by
 The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies "Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000." The main substantive ideas in this paper emerge from a discussion in which prominent opinion makers, including Richard Perle, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser participated. The report, entitled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," is the framework for a series of follow-up reports on strategy.

Note: IASPS says on its website http://www.israeleconomy.org/about.htm  The Institute for Advanced Strategic & Political Studies (IASPS) is a Jerusalem-based think tank with an affiliated office in Washington, D.C. 

Benjamin Netanyahu’s government comes in with a new set of ideas. While there are those who will counsel continuity, Israel has the opportunity to make a clean break ; it can forge a peace process and strategy based on an entirely new intellectual foundation, one that restores strategic initiative and provides the nation the room to engage every possible energy on rebuilding Zionism, the starting point of which must be economic reform. To secure the nation’s streets and borders in the immediate future , Israel can:

Work closely with Turkey and Jordan to contain, destabilize, and roll-back some of its most dangerous threats. This implies clean break from the slogan, "comprehensive peace" to a traditional concept of strategy based on balance of power.

Change the nature of its relations with the Palestinians , including upholding the right of hot pursuit for self defense into all Palestinian areas and nurturing alternatives to Arafat’s exclusive grip on Palestinian society.

Forge a new basis for relations with the United States —stressing self-reliance, maturity, strategic cooperation on areas of mutual concern, and furthering values inherent to the West. This can only be done if Israel takes serious steps to terminate aid, which prevents economic reform.

This report is written with key passages of a possible speech marked TEXT , that highlight the clean break which the new government has an opportunity to make. The body of the report is the commentary explaining the purpose and laying out the strategic context of the passages.

A New Approach to Peace

Early adoption of a bold, new perspective on peace and security is imperative for the new prime minister. While the previous government, and many abroad, may emphasize "land for peace"— which placed Israel in the position of cultural, economic, political, diplomatic, and military retreat — the new government can promote Western values and traditions. Such an approach, which will be well received in the United States, includes "peace for peace ," "peace through strength" and self reliance: the
balance of power .

A new strategy to seize the initiative can be introduced:


We have for four years pursued peace based on a New Middle East. We in Israel cannot play innocents abroad in a world that is not innocent. Peace depends on the character and behavior of our foes. We live in a dangerous neighborhood, with fragile states and bitter rivalries. Displaying moral ambivalence between the effort to build a Jewish state and the desire to annihilate it by trading "land for peace" will not secure " peace now." Our claim to the land —to which we have clung for hope for 2000 years--is legitimate and noble. It is not within our own power, no matter how much we concede, to make peace unilaterally. Only the unconditional acceptance by Arabs of our rights, especially in their territorial dimension, "peace for peace," is a solid basis for the future.


Moving to a Traditional Balance of Power Strategy


We must distinguish soberly and clearly friend from foe. We must make sure that our friends across the Middle East never doubt the solidity or value of our friendship.

Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq — an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right — as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions .
Jordan has challenged Syria's regional ambitions recently by suggesting the restoration of the Hashemites in Iraq . This has triggered a Jordanian-Syrian rivalry to which Asad has responded by stepping up efforts to destabilize the Hashemite Kingdom, including using infiltrations. Syria recently signaled that it and Iran might prefer a weak, but barely surviving Saddam, if only to undermine and humiliate Jordan in its efforts to remove Saddam.

But Syria enters this conflict with potential weaknesses: Damascus is too preoccupied with dealing with the threatened new regional equation to permit distractions of the Lebanese flank. And Damascus fears that the 'natural axis' with Israel on one side, central Iraq and Turkey on the other , and Jordan, in the center would squeeze and detach Syria from the Saudi Peninsula. For Syria, this could be the prelude to a redrawing of the map of the Middle East which would threaten Syria's territorial integrity.

Since Iraq's future could affect the strategic balance in the Middle East profoundly, it would be understandable that Israel has an interest in supporting the Hashemites in their efforts to redefine Iraq, including such measures as: visiting Jordan as the first official state visit, even before a visit to the United States, of the new Netanyahu government; supporting King Hussein by providing him with some tangible security measures to protect his regime against Syrian subversion; encouraging — through influence in the U.S. business community — investment in Jordan to structurally shift Jordan’s economy away from dependence on Iraq; and diverting Syria’s attention by using Lebanese opposition elements to destabilize Syrian control of Lebanon.

Most important, it is understandable that Israel has an interest supporting diplomatically, militarily and operationally Turkey’s and Jordan’s actions against Syria, such as securing tribal alliances with Arab tribes that cross into Syrian territory and are hostile to the Syrian ruling elite.

King Hussein may have ideas for Israel in bringing its Lebanon problem under control. The predominantly Shia population of southern Lebanon has been tied for centuries to the Shia leadership in Najf, Iraq rather than Iran. Were the Hashemites to control Iraq , they could use their influence over Najf to help Israel wean the south Lebanese Shia away from Hizballah, Iran, and Syria. Shia retain strong ties to the Hashemites: the Shia venerate foremost the Prophet’s family, the direct descendants of which — and in whose veins the blood of the Prophet flows — is King Hussein.

The conclusion one draws from this is that a CROWN was at stake in the invasion of Iraq.

End 07-11-2004

How Is a Man Saved?

Home Page

Please e-mail us with questions or comments today.   If you need someone to lead a Bible study, let us know.  

"I am the way, the truth, and the life" - Jesus Christ
John 14:6