John Hagee predicts more doom and gloom

[heb13-13]

Hello Rick.

With regards to the Catholic Church, I used to be part of the same Protestant ban wagon that constantly looked for faults against the Catholic Church.

I don't know what band wagon you think I am on, but I can assure you it is not the same as the one you were on. How would you know anyway?

Be keep in mind that the Catholic Church and the Greek Orthodox Church has existed since the beginning.

That is not true. The false church has existed from the beginning and morphed into the RCC and many other kinds of "churches."

The false church is the church that will not regard Jesus Christ as their LIVING HEAD!

Sure they've made a lot of changes along the way. But if you are not aware, the Protestant Churches came from the RCC.

I am very aware of that.

And look at how many Protestant Churches we have now since the split. There are more "isms" in the Protestant Churches than there are in the RCC or the Greek Orthodox Church. Neither are perfect, but rest assured that Protestants have become a huge gathering of undisciplined Christians.

Yes, I know. I don't favor either one. They both are engaged in hatred and division and worse, usurpation of the Headship of Jesus Christ.

Every time someone gets angry about something, such as a particular pet-pee doctrine, they branch off and start their own Church.

A lot of it is about gain, too. It pays well to have your own church.

In my town, we call this the Bible belt. Why? Because there are literally hundreds of different Denominations in a single town of about 30,000 people. Which one is correct?

Furthermore, I believe that Protestants (despite my being raised a Protestant) do not reflect any aspect of the early Church.

I would agree.

There's far too much talking in the Protestant Churches. What I mean by talking is preaching. Preachers love to stand behind a pulpit and talk....and talk....and talk.

Yep, lecture the masses. I know what you mean.

Those that are organized speakers are usually pretty boring. Those who preach from the hip tend to be more exciting, but often without a solid point. And most importantly, those who wish to sit in a pew a listen to a good sermon, are guilty of merely wanting to hear a good song on the radio. It's entertaining to listen to a good sermon, or sing gospel praises, and there's not much wrong with that. But when you walk out the door, it's as though the song you just heard was nothing more than entertainment.

Yep, nothing like fellowshipping with the back of someone's head for an hour or two. Just makes me want to leap out of bed on Sunday.

Traditional Church practices in the first century did not involve 45 minute lectures or sermons. Most of their services are mimicked in the Greek Orthodox Church; lost of prayer, chanting, teaching, and learning. I visited a Greek Orthodox Church a few years ago, and I was stunned. I fell in love. Of course that's the reason why I never returned; I knew that me falling in love with the service did not necessarily make it right. So much chanting, singing, and praying. And when they chant, they are chanting portions of scripture from the Old and the New Testament.

If you think that is what the early church was all about, more power to you.
What you liked was the reverence and seriousness and the feeling of holiness which contrasts quite a bit with the goofiness in today's churches. That is why many of the people from the Jesus People era of the 60s and 70s have actually moved over to the Greek Orthodox church. It's not just you that fell in love with it and out of love with Charismatic goofiness.

The traditional Protestant services are geared for winning people over based on which Church as the best musical entertainment, and which preacher gives the most exciting sermon.

Many are geared towards increasing their numbers, which increases the tithes which brings in more money for the MLM, of course all the time "doing God's work."

But these are the wrong reasons to worship. To my, the Greek Orthodox Church has the most sincere style of worship; they worship as though Jesus were actually standing right there in front of them. Protestants...well, that's an entirely different story. Yea there are many Protestants who lift up there hands, and sing Alleluia! But that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about actually bowing down on their knees, chanting, meditating, and communion.

I get it. And that is exactly why many have left the craziness and looked from something more serious. But tell me, did you stay long enough to have relationship with any of these people. Did you get the sense that they knew each other, or just like the Catholics and Protestants, just show up on Sunday, get your ticket punched and go home? You see, there is no such thing as going to church, but there is a such thing as "being the church." I am not interested in going to church regardless how serious the people are, or how great the worship is if the focus is not Jesus Christ. And if Jesus Christ is not the focus, He won't be there, either! All those great things you mentioned can become an idol and if people are talking more about the worship, or the chanting or the meditating rather than Jesus Christ, then those things have probably become an idol. I don't look for the people of God based on what kinds of things (like you mentioned) that they have.

The Early Church practiced communion every time they gathered.

So do we. But it can become an idol, too.

Most Protestants only practice communion once a year, which is not enough if you ask me.

Well, it's not really about what you do or don't do is it?

These are the people that Jesus enjoys being with and they can be doing all the things you mentioned wrong.

The LORD is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart; and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit. (Psa 34:18)

The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise. Psa 51:17

These are the things I look for not worship teams, bands, chanting, meditating, etc, etc.

At any rate, don't put so much negative energy against the RCC my friend, for the Protestants have more than their fair share of hypocrisy.

Oh man, you don't know me Joe. I am being very, very mild.

But thanks for being concerned about me. I know what you mean. There are people that all they do is bash and they have nothing uplifting and encouraging to say. I am sure you know about the 22 "one anothers" in the NT. That's what we should be about. But, this is a forum not a church where ideas are discussed. So, you have to read everything with "a grain of salt."

But I do have my eyes wide open, Joe. I know that the Protestants broke away spiritually in some things (Just shall live by faith), but not structurally. They still have the hierarchical structure of clergy/laity. Which is a Nicolaitan spirit and Jesus said twice that He hated the Nicolaitans. Why? Because they usurp His authority and relationship directly with His sheep. There is no mediator between God and man except Jesus Christ. There are pews, lecterns, stained glass windows, Lectures from the Lectern, programs ad nauseum to keep the sheep busy thinking they are getting their money's (tithe) worth. Because, after all, the Clergy stand or fall according to those paying their bills.

I can be and am equally hard on the Protestant schisms and all the hirelings. Why start a church when the Church and it's Head already exist? Just gather unto Him as Brethren, and let the Holy Spirit orchestrate the meetings. It is a most amazing and blessed thing to allow Jesus Christ to be the Host and not just the Guest of Honor. In truth, most churches don't even invite Him as the Guest of Honor. Everyone always wants a physical, tangible leader (Israel and Saul). That's what we do. We are lazy spiritually and want to be spoon fed our whole lives. It is much to HARD to live by faith, so we need to live by sight.

Our meetings are "open" meetings and anyone down to a five year old can bring forth out of their heart whatever they want. Jesus is about freedom, brother. Jesus sat down and had conversations with His followers. He took questions. He did not scold anyone for interrupting His 3-point sermon. Jesus Christ, the same, yesterday, today and forever.

Not acting as "benefactors", but really, deep down wanting to lord over our brethren so we can make a living. If you want to make a living, get a job and then learn to be a brother like the rest of the brothers that work. Being a mature brother in Christ is not a means to making a living. Oh yes, Joe, I have equal disdain for both religious structures, Catholic and Protestant. One thing I have learned is that you cannot change the system. Better to be like David and flee from Saul.

With that said, there are godly men in the system, just like there are godly men that stayed with Saul. But as they began to see Saul's kingdom crumble, they left. And that is what is happening today. People are leaving Saul (Flesh, religion).

After Samuel finished telling the people of Israel that they have rejected God, this took place.

And Saul also went home to Gibeah; and there went with him a band of men, whose hearts God had touched. 1Sa 10:26

So, I have disdain for the religious structure and the false prophets and shepherds, yet realize the sheep are being taken advantage of and that there are men of God still with "Saul."

God's in charge Joe, not me. I'm just happy to have a part and I just want to do my part, my little part in His Body.

The Lord bless you too,
Rick

God bless.

Joe

[CWH]

The logistics of moving a 200,000,000 man army proves that that passage can not be taken literally.

Do you know that in WW2, more than 100 million military personells were mobilized? And that was excluding civilians supports? Therefore the logistics of moving a 200,000,000 man army is not an impossibility:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_w...ers_were_there

Excerpt:

In WW2 over 100 million military personnel were mobilised with even more serving and over 24,000,000 giving their lives. The civilian casualty's are far greater mounting up at over 49,000,000. This makes it the deadliest war in history killing up to 4% of the total human population!

Furthermore, it seems the 200 millions man army were already prepared and mobilized more than a year beforehand that killed a third of mankind (currently more than 2 billions):

Revelation 9:13 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.

The interesting thing in this passage is the breastplate of fiery red, hyacinth blue and sulphur yellow. And we also know that the army that crossed over the dried river Euphrates are probably from Gog and Magog (?Russia and ?China and ?Mongolia, whose combine forces could easily reach 200 million man army). The flags of Russia and China and Mongolia seems to have all these colors. BTW the number of the man army that crossed over the dried Euphrates may not be that huge number of 200 million man army as it wasn't stated in Revelation 16:

12 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. 13 And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs coming out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. 14 For they are spirits of demons, performing signs, which go out to the kings of the earth and[f] of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty....................
16 And they gathered them together to the place called in Hebrew, Armageddon.[g]

Interesting also to note that breastplates in the bible were "clothes" worned by priests and people of high status:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breastplate

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priestly_breastplate

Flags of Russia, China and Mongolia respectively:




May God Blessed us. Amen

[heb13-13]

Do you know that in WW2, more than 100 million military personells were mobilized? And that was excluding civilians supports? Therefore the logistics of moving a 200,000,000 man army is not an impossibility:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_w...ers_were_there

Excerpt:


Furthermore, it seems the 200 millions man army were already prepared and mobilized more than a year beforehand that killed a third of mankind (currently more than 2 billions):

Ok CWH,

For the sake of argument, let's say you are right about the 200million strong.

But then we have to ask ourselves how do they get to th Euphrates? And we have to assume that the river bed is pretty much like a highway. Nice and smooth and solid to drive vehicles on.

I see that the Euphrates goes up to Turkey and above Turkey, is Russia. That is still very far from China. And the terrain from the northern most point of the Euphrates to China is extremely rugged.

It sure is interesting to look at,

Blessings to you,
Rick



May God Blessed us. Amen

[TheForgiven]

I'm beginning to like our newcomer here. Interesting post Rick. Do you reside in the states? Or are you overseas? I hope you don't mind me asking.

Also, it would be easier for me in reading your replies if you not include your replies in a quote. I had a difficult time trying to discern what I wrote, and what your replies were. I figured it out of course, but some of the "black" writing was not mine.

You made a comment about the Roman Catholic Church when I said it was the original Church, and I'd like to reply to that, but this isn't the Thread to do so. So I'm going to start a topic on another Thread, but not in the eschatology forum. What I will say is in the beginning New Testament Church era, there was only one Church and it was called, "One Holy Catholic Church". These consisted primarily of Eastern and Western, but there were different Churches all over. And of course, none of them agreed as is seen in a few of their writings. After the Apostles left, some of the Early Church Fathers bickered over different things. Some were Jewish sympathizer's, while others recognized that the need for the Israeli based Tribal race had been abolished. OK, I drifting here. So the Church was still recognized as Catholic, which simply means "Universal" for all races.

Somewhere along the line, the Church of Rome decided to enact a leader like Peter, who was one of the leaders of the Church in Jerusalem. Because of wide spread persecution in later centuries by the Muslims, the Christians wanted someone to turn to. And thus the creation of the Pope. The Greeks of course rejected this notion, and in the 10th century, they the Church split, with one side being called Roman Catholic and the other side Greek Orthodox Church. In the 14th century, the rise of the Heuganauts (Protestants) came about, thus creating even more confusion. Since the 10th century, the Greeks continue to reject any idea of a Pope. There have been good Popes and there have been bad Popes. But in my opinion, the Pope is not necessarily a bad thing. At the same time, I see no need for one. One thing I will say though. The Protestants have become so divided, so loud mouthed, and so undisciplined, that perhaps they too need a Protestant leader to get them back into check. There's too many doctrines floating around the Protestant world, and it's becoming quite intolerable. Quite frankly, some of them need to stop pointing their dirty eye-clogging fingers at the others; especially those of the 7th Day Adventist. I have never in my life met such a rude group of so-called Christians. They are the most naive, narrow minded, and big-headed group I've ever met. Everybody is going to hell if you don't believe and worship as they do.

As for me, I was raised Southern Baptist. But the only thing good about Southern Baptists are their cook-outs. Doctrine is fair, but far from perfect. Too much Calvinist influence with the false teaching of eternal security. And of course their rejection of Baptism. Other than that, they sure cook up a good meal.

OK, sorry for drifting folks. Just getting to know Rick a little better.

Now about the 200,000,000 man army. I've already informed Cheow that we don't ride horses anymore, nor do we fight with spears, and arrows. And the Euphrates river isn't going to stop anyone from invading Israel. We've got missiles, planes, jeeps, hummers, boats, you name it. A little river would not stop anyone from invading Israel...which is quite the distance from the Euphrates River I might add. So his reasoning that the Revelation has not been fulfilled based on the literal interpretation of the ER drying up is not wise. Christ expects His children to listen to what the Spirit is saying in these visions, and NOT what the literal word is saying.

Joe

[CWH]

[QUOTE]

I'm beginning to like our newcomer here. Interesting post Rick. Do you reside in the states? Or are you overseas? I hope you don't mind me asking.

How about beginning to like me and Henry, your favorite futurists?

Now about the 200,000,000 man army. I've already informed Cheow that we don't ride horses anymore, nor do we fight with spears, and arrows. And the Euphrates river isn't going to stop anyone from invading Israel. We've got missiles, planes, jeeps, hummers, boats, you name it. A little river would not stop anyone from invading Israel...which is quite the distance from the Euphrates River I might add. So his reasoning that the Revelation has not been fulfilled based on the literal interpretation of the ER drying up is not wise. Christ expects His children to listen to what the Spirit is saying in these visions, and NOT what the literal word is saying.

The horses in those verses are not literal. If I say computers are the workhorses of today, am I implying computers are work horses? Did God ride on horses?

In WW2, they fought over the harsh Sahara deserts, the impassable jungles and swamps, the snowfields of Ukraine and Norway, is anything so difficult for humans to mobilize their forces?

The drying up of the Euphrates have many strategic purposes such as creating a big dry area to move large number of troops and logistics, withholding water supply to many parts of the Middle East thus causing drought including Israel, diverting water supply away from the enemy for their own forces, create flash floods to drown the enemy, poison the waters of the Euphrates and divert them to the enemy etc.

May God's Grace, Mercy and Love be with everyone of you. Amen.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

The logistics of moving a 200,000,000 man army proves that that passage can not be taken literally.

Do you know that in WW2, more than 100 million military personells were mobilized? And that was excluding civilians supports? Therefore the logistics of moving a 200,000,000 man army is not an impossibility:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_w...ers_were_there


Excerpt:


Furthermore, it seems the 200 millions man army were already prepared and mobilized more than a year beforehand that killed a third of mankind (currently more than 2 billions):

Revelation 9:13 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.

That's interesting, but it's not what is being described in Revelation 9. In WWII, the "military personal" were from all the different countries that were fighting each other. So the soldiers in France had to be mobilized to fight the Germans who were invading. The French soldiers were not part of a 200 million man army riding horses towards another land. That's just plain nuts. And this shows the absurdiity of the so-called "literal" interpetation. It's not literal at all! You don't really expect an army of 200 million men on horseback, do you?

All the best.

[heb13-13]

I'm beginning to like our newcomer here. Interesting post Rick. Do you reside in the states? Or are you overseas? I hope you don't mind me asking.

Hey Joe,


Sorry about my editing. You guys are quite an eclectic lot yourself.

Yes, I reside in the states. Texas to be exact. Moved to Tennessee for 18 months after 10 years in Connecticut, then got transferred by my company to Oklahoma. Nine years in OK and then accepted a job in Texas. Raised in a military family. Longest stints were 5 years in Germany, 5 years in Kansas and 6 years in the SF Bay Area and 2 years in Northern VA. I was in the Navy myself and will share with you how I became a Christian.

Also, it would be easier for me in reading your replies if you not include your replies in a quote. I had a difficult time trying to discern what I wrote, and what your replies were. I figured it out of course, but some of the "black" writing was not mine.

You made a comment about the Roman Catholic Church when I said it was the original Church, and I'd like to reply to that, but this isn't the Thread to do so. So I'm going to start a topic on another Thread, but not in the eschatology forum. What I will say is in the beginning New Testament Church era, there was only one Church and it was called, "One Holy Catholic Church". These consisted primarily of Eastern and Western, but there were different Churches all over. And of course, none of them agreed as is seen in a few of their writings. After the Apostles left, some of the Early Church Fathers bickered over different things. Some were Jewish sympathizer's, while others recognized that the need for the Israeli based Tribal race had been abolished. OK, I drifting here. So the Church was still recognized as Catholic, which simply means "Universal" for all races.

Yep, I know Catholic means "Universal." A lot of people don't know that.

Somewhere along the line, the Church of Rome decided to enact a leader like Peter, who was one of the leaders of the Church in Jerusalem. Because of wide spread persecution in later centuries by the Muslims, the Christians wanted someone to turn to. And thus the creation of the Pope.

It wasn't quite that simple, but I know where you're coming from.

The Greeks of course rejected this notion, and in the 10th century, they the Church split, with one side being called Roman Catholic and the other side Greek Orthodox Church. In the 14th century, the rise of the Heuganauts (Protestants) came about, thus creating even more confusion. Since the 10th century, the Greeks continue to reject any idea of a Pope. There have been good Popes and there have been bad Popes. But in my opinion, the Pope is not necessarily a bad thing.

What? Any man wearing a dress, red slippers and wanting people to kiss his ring is a bad thing! (A little levity Joe).

At the same time, I see no need for one. One thing I will say though. The Protestants have become so divided, so loud mouthed, and so undisciplined, that perhaps they too need a Protestant leader to get them back into check.

Don't worry about them. They are all coming back to Rome. The Anglican Church in England which was at great odds with Rome has just about done an about face. There was a lot of animosity when John Henry Newman led about 100 Anglican Bishops into Rome in the 1900s. He recently was canonized when the Pope came back to England. Actually canonized in England!! That was a ceremony of victory for Rome. Plus, England has never welcomed a Pope back with the pomp and ceremony that this one came back with. The Queen of England basically abdicated her throne by allowing a state reception of the Pope.

During the Reformation Rome started the Counter Reformation and it has never stopped. It has morphed through the years and the Jesuit arm of Rome has their tentacles into every aspect of religious life not only in their denomination but others and even in Protestant Bible Colleges and Churches. They are extremely clever and like the Chinese they are willing to wait centuries to achieve their objectives. Remember, the Pope believes he has both temporal and spiritual authority on earth and that all Kings, Presidents, Dictators, and religious leaders will eventually bow to him.

Even the Office of the Inquisition was never abolished. In 1542 Pope Paul III established the Congregation of the Holy Office of the Inquisition as a permanent congregation staffed with cardinals and other officials. It had the tasks of maintaining and defending the integrity of the faith and of examining and proscribing errors and false doctrines. One of the most famous cases tried by the Roman Inquisition involved Galileo Galilei in 1633.

In 1908 the name of the Congregation became "The Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office", which in 1965 further changed to "Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith", as retained to the present day.

So, the Congregation of the Holy Office of the Inquisition was never actually abolished, just went through a couple of name changes. The present Pope was head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith before being picked as the new Papa.

Anyway, back to my point. Many protestants are heading back to Rome. Here is a good article to read.

The Catholics Exploitation of Pentecostalism

The Counter-Reformation continues and is being very successful. There was Vatican II, then the Ecumenical Movement which continues and even the Emerging Church Movement further blurrs the lines between Protestants and Catholics. There will be a day when you will be considered strange if you are a Christian and not in the Holy Roman Catholic Church.

There's too many doctrines floating around the Protestant world, and it's becoming quite intolerable. Quite frankly, some of them need to stop pointing their dirty eye-clogging fingers at the others; especially those of the 7th Day Adventist. I have never in my life met such a rude group of so-called Christians. They are the most naive, narrow minded, and big-headed group I've ever met. Everybody is going to hell if you don't believe and worship as they do.

I agree. They are really insecure and fearful. The staunch Protestants are fearful because the Catholic Church is having so much success. Doesn't matter to me anymore what the religious world does. We really don't have anything to fear, do we? The Gates of Hell will not prevail against the Church of Jesus Christ. (and I don't mean a 501(c)3 organization)

As for me, I was raised Southern Baptist.

Sorry to hear that. Actually, believe it or not I have some good friends that are Baptists and Calvinists.

But the only thing good about Southern Baptists are their cook-outs.

Love the barbecue!!

Doctrine is fair, but far from perfect. Too much Calvinist influence with the false teaching of eternal security.

Eternal security is a recipe for spiritual slumber and self-righteousness. It is a false security. There is no teaching of walking in righteousness. See the series on "Can You Be Righteous", (halfway down the page). Their TULIP philosophy actually messes with their minds, big time. I have met so many Calvinists that are just screwed up in their beliefs constantly having spiritual identity crises. Calvin adored Augustine and actually went to the same Catholic University as Ignatius Loyola. There was an influence of Rome in his life. Calvinists hate it when I tell them he was a Catholic "plant." And be sure not to mention Michael Servetus to them.

But, why do you need a systematic theology to be a Christian? Why do you need a system? Have you seen the Catholic Catechism? And then you have the "Institutes of Christian Religion", by John Calvin. You also have Witness Lee's systematic theology and the only Bible he allows in his sect is the one that has HIS annotations in it. Everyone wants to systematize the Word of God. Then there is Scofield and on and on it goes. I guess people feel better when their denomination has a systematic theology that no one can understand and it is thicker than the IRS manual.

Doctrines and commandments of men nullify the Word of God. What did Satan say to Eve? "Let me tell you what God really means."

"For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had our conversation in the world, and more abundantly to you-ward" 2Co 1:12

"But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ" 2Co 11:3

And of course their rejection of Baptism.

They can tell you where everything they do today, began in the 1st century, even infant baptism. Of course they have never re-written history books, banned books or destroyed historical books so they must be right.

Other than that, they sure cook up a good meal.

They can sure eat!!

OK, sorry for drifting folks. Just getting to know Rick a little better.

Now about the 200,000,000 man army. I've already informed Cheow that we don't ride horses anymore, nor do we fight with spears, and arrows. And the Euphrates river isn't going to stop anyone from invading Israel. We've got missiles, planes, jeeps, hummers, boats, you name it. A little river would not stop anyone from invading Israel...which is quite the distance from the Euphrates River I might add. So his reasoning that the Revelation has not been fulfilled based on the literal interpretation of the ER drying up is not wise. Christ expects His children to listen to what the Spirit is saying in these visions, and NOT what the literal word is saying.

Back to you, Joe.
Rick

Joe

[Silence]

Just a few observations -

Whether the "army" is meant to be literal or not it seems that the number associated with this army is important.
16 Now the number of the army of the horsemen was two hundred million; I heard the number of them.


If this army is literal, then maybe John adds that he heard the number of them to assure the readers that he is not exaggerating. If it is not literal, there is something about the number 200 million that must be important.

I don't know Greek, so I am not sure if the text says that the army is made up of 200 million men on horseback, or if there are some men on horseback leading an army of 200 million. Since there are 4 angels being released, perhaps they are the ones riding horses? Hearkens back to the 4 horsemen found earlier on in the book.

The text also doesn't say that the army does any destroying. That is done by the fire, smoke and brimstone. The breastplates seem to be associated with these three plagues by the use of the words translated as "red" and "yellow" in some versions. The KJV doesn't translate them as colors, but as "fire" and "brimstone". The third color, Jacinth, could be associated with smoke, since according to many, it denotes a dark blue shade, bordering on black, which is a common hue for smoke.

The mention of 1/3 of mankind reminds me of the third part of the angels that rebelled. It is also the same ratio of the Godhead that died to redeem mankind.

No matter how you look at this passage, literally or figuratively, it is hard to definitely pin down what it is saying.