-Interestingly enough, as already introduced above in the verse 1 commentary, God had brought Ezekiel to this manifestly same valley back in Ezek 3:22, 23, where this present war would take place. Therefore God had brought him there, and that to give him warring instructions against Israel, (that indeed if not heeded would result in this present state of utter defeat), long before any hint of a major war had become evident. (Amos 3:7). Also/Thus, by sequitur implication, seeing/understanding the Glory of God (Ezek 1:1ff), as Ezekiel did in that valley, pivotally had much to do with that coming major war. (COL 69:1-2; 414.1-416.1; cf. Rev 14:7).
-“Breath” is indeed understood as a “spirit”; here the Spirit of God. This does come to bring life.
-The term “noise” = “sound/voice” (=Rev 11:12 “voice”; i.e., as with other mentions below, same applicable message as it has been for prior Two Witnesses).
-And the sequencing is key here, prior to being filled with God’s Spirit, they have to be bodily “re-organized”, culminating in the putting of flesh on their rejoined bones and inner organ or else they are (indeed) no better than what the (Eschatological) Babylonian Mark of the Beast Camp will become after God has ‘“strongly” (Rev 18:8ff), warringly, judged it’ (Rev 19:17-21 -see here). Once that ‘bodily re-organization’ (LDE 189.3b) has been completed then God can fill that “body” with the full measure of His (Latter Rain) Spirit. (=LDE 189.1-196.1).
 It is rightly understood that the mention of, accurately, “Har-Megiddo” (a.k.a. Armageddon) in Rev 16:16 involves a major conflict, and this relatable allusion in Zech 12:11 (=2 Chr 35:20-25) can cast much light on that obscure eschatological mention/application. First of all, unlike what is normative for a major war involving large and “sophisticated” armies, the eschatological war does not take place in a “valley”, but involves a “mountain”. Secondly, the context of Zech 12, which dovetails into the Divine Judgement of Chapter 13, doubly involves: ‘God warring against those who have assembled against Jerusalem’, but also ‘against those in Jerusalem who are bringing/holding His people down’, namely the defective/deficient leaders. The prime symbolism of this is seen in the fact that in that epic and memorable battle of 2 Chr 35, ultra good king Josiah had lost his life because he had refused to obey what was actually God’s will and word. (2 Chr 35:20-22ff). So God’s main concern in this war, on top of also bringing utter defeat to enemies of His Israel, was/(still) is to (a) preserve the house of David, and (b) spare all those who are faithful in Jerusalem. In fact it is those “spared ones” who go on to, almost supernaturally, inflict defeat upon Israel’s enemies (see Zech 12:8, 9; = Rev 11:13). So the key here is to grasp what is meant by the opposite symbol of a “mountain” in Rev 16:16 vs. the expected/normative “valley”. (See in this post for the explanation of that symbol. See in this post at Rev 16:16 comments section for more on Har-Mageddon.).
 In thematically prophetic relation to this post on the Two Witnesses, non-accidently with one of them being representative of the Elijah work and his
 See the common, and latest, exegetically glib/surface SDA understanding of this prophecy in this, late December 2010, sermon by Derek Morris for a GC Revival and Reformation Week series. See also this similarly, exegetically glib recent (ca. March 19, 2011) sermon ([video] [audio]) by Doug Batchelor on this prophecy. As both, stemming from various inculcated, capitalistic/individualistic, artificial limitations, fail to recognize the real and depth of, practical and sectarian pivotal problems of the Church, they both fail to properly interpret and apply this prophecy, settling for surface, spiritually vacuous/teethless and “wall plastering”, understandings. (= Ezek 13:10-16)
On the other hand, see the February 2-5, 2012 ‘Revival and Latter Rain’ series preached by Mark Howard on the Andrews University Campus, which is the best exposition and exhortation on this issue which I have heard from amongst SDA, pointedly because it is not ‘glossingly and indifferently, “watering-downly” apologetic’ as other SDA attempts (typically) have been.