Posted on 10/24/2007 8:18:14 AM PDT by topcat54
An article is circulating around the Internet that carries the title “Israel Warns World War III May be Biblical War of Gog and Magog.” It is written by Ezra HaLevi and was published in Israel National News.1 The article begins with the following prophetic claims, not unlike so many evangelical and fundamentalist end-time assurances about the end:
US President George W. Bush said a nuclear Iran would mean World War III. Israeli newscasts featured Gog & Magog maps of the likely alignment of nations in that potential conflict. Channel 2 and Channel 10 TV showed the world map, sketching the basic alignment of the two opposing axes in a coming world war, in a manner evoking associations of the Gog and Magog prophecy for many viewers. The prophecy of Gog and Magog refers to a great world war centered on the Holy Land and Jerusalem and first appears in the book of Yechezkel (Ezekiel). On one side were Israel, the United States, Britain, France and Germany. On the other were Iran, Russia, China, Syria and North Korea.
M. R. DeHaan, writing in 1951, identified “the sign of Gog and Magog” to be one of the “three most outstanding signs of the coming of Christ.”2 In 1972, Carl Johnson wrote Prophecy Made Plain for Times Like These.3 His chapter on “When Russia Invades the Middle East” includes a lengthy quotation from a message Jack Van Impe gave at Canton Baptist Temple in Canton, Ohio, sometime in 1969. Like so many who claim to know what’s on the prophetic horizon, Van Impe made his case for an imminent war with Russia on what the newspapers of 1969 were reporting. This war was so close, he charged, “that the stage is being set for what could explode into World War III at any moment.”4 In 1971, Ronald Reagan, then governor of California, followed a similar prophetic script:
Ezekiel tells us that Gog, the nation that will lead all of the other powers of darkness against Israel, will come out of the north. Biblical scholars have been saying for generations that Gog must be Russia. What other powerful nation is to the north of Israel? None. But it didn’t seem to make sense before the Russian revolution, when Russia was a Christian country. Now it does, now that Russia has become Cummunistic and atheistic, now that Russia has set itself against God. Now it fits the description of Gog perfectly.5
This familiar interpretation of Ezekiel 38 and 39 has been written about, talked about, and repeated so often that it has become an unquestioned tenet of prophetic orthodoxy. The question is, does the Bible teach it?
Ezekiel 38 and 39 has been interpreted in various ways over the centuries. The most popular view is to see the prophecy as a depiction of a future battle that includes an alliance of nations led by modern-day Russia in an attack on Israel. Chuck Missler writes in his book Prophecy 20/20 that “the apparent use of nuclear weapons has made this passage [Ezekiel 38 and 39] appear remarkably timely, and some suspect that it may be on our horizon.”6 Prophecy writers for nearly 2000 years have made similar claims, of course without the reference to “nuclear weapons.” In the fourth and fifth centuries, Gog was thought to refer to the Goths and Moors. In the seventh century, it was the Huns. By the eighth century, the Islamic empire was making a name for itself, so it was a logical candidate. By the tenth century, the Hungarians briefly replaced Islam. But by the sixteenth century, the Turks and Saracens seemed to fit the Gog and Magog profile with the Papacy thrown in for added prophetic juice. In the seventeenth century, Spain and Rome were the end-time bad guys.7 In the nineteenth century, Napoleon was Gog leading the forces of Magog-France.8 For most of the twentieth century, Communist Russia was the logical pick with its military aspirations, its atheistic founding, and its designation of being “far north” of Israel. In a word, identifying Gog and Magog with a specific nation or group of nations in the past is legion.9
As the above brief study shows, when the headlines change, the interpretation of the Bible changes. The failed interpretive history of Ezekiel 38 and 39 is prime evidence that modern-day prophecy writers are not “profiling the future through the lens of Scripture” but through the ever-changing headlines of the evening news.10
A lot has to be read into the Bible in order to make Ezekiel 38 and 39 fit modern-day military realities that include jet planes, “missiles,” and “atomic and explosive” weaponry. Those who claim to interpret the Bible literally have a problem on their hands.
The battle in Ezekiel 38 and 39 is clearly an ancient one or at least one fought with ancient weapons. All the soldiers are riding horses (38:4, 15; 39:20). These horse soldiers are “wielding swords” (38:4), carrying “bows and arrows, war clubs and spears” (39:3, 9). The weapons are made of wood (39:10), and it is these abandoned weapons that serve as fuel for “seven years” (39:9). Tim LaHaye describes a highly technological future when the antichrist rises to power to rule the world. “A wave of technological innovation is sweeping the planet. . . . The future wave has already begun. We cannot stop it. . . . [T]he Antichrist will use some of this technology to control the world.”11 How does this assessment of the near prophetic future square with a supposed tribulation period when Israelites “take wood from the field” and “gather firewood from the forests”? (39:10). There is nothing in the context that would lead the reader to conclude that horses, war clubs, swords, bows and arrows, and spears mean anything other than horses, war clubs, swords, bows and arrows, and spears. And what is the Russian air force after? Gold, silver, cattle, and goods (38:12–13). In what modern war can anyone remember armies going after cattle? How much cattle does Israel have? Certainly not enough to feed the Russians! The latest claim is that Israel will discover oil, and this is what will attract the nations to Israel. Where in the Bible do we find this claim?12
Chuck Missler attempts to get around the description of ancient war implements by claiming that the various Hebrew words “is simply 2,500-year-old language that could be describing a mechanized force.”13 The word translated “horse,” “actually means leaper” that “can also mean bird, or even chariot-rider.” He tells us that the Hebrew word translated “sword” “has become a generic term for any weapon or destroying instrument.” In a similar way, “arrow” means “piercer” and “is occasionally used for thunderbolt” and could be “translated today as a missile.” We are to believe that “‘Bow’ is what launches the [missile].”14 Is Missler trying to tell us that when Ezekiel wrote “bow” and “arrow” he really meant a launching pad for a missile? To follow his interpretive methodology requires us to believe that the meaning of the Bible has been inaccessible to the people of God for nearly 2500 years. Missler, like nearly all end-time prognosticators, breaks all the rules of exegesis.
2. M. R. DeHaan, Signs of the Times and other Prophetic Messages (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1951), 74.
3. Carl G. Johnson, Prophecy Made Plain for Times Like These (Chicago: Moody Press, 1972).
4. Jack Van Impe, The Coming War With Russia (Old Time Gospel Hour Press, n.d.). The quotation is taken from a message that Van Impe gave at Canton Baptist Temple, Canton, Ohio. The talk was recorded and available on a as an LP. Quoted in Johnson, Prophecy Made Plain for Times Like These, 82–83.
5. From an address that Ronald Reagan gave at a dinner with California legislators in 1971. Quoted in Paul Boyer, When Time Shall Be No More: Prophecy Belief in Modern Culture (Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University, 1992), 162.
6. Chuck Missler, Prophecy 20/20: Profiling the Future Through the Lens of Scripture (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2006), 155.
7. Francis X. Gumerlock, The Day and the Hour: Christianity’s Perennial Fascination with Predicting the End of the World (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 2000), 68.
8. T.R., “Commentary on Ezekiel’s Prophecy of Gog and Magog,” The Gentleman’s Magazine (October 1816), 307.
9. Wikipedia
10. Gary DeMar, Islam and Russia in Prophecy: The Problem of Interpreting the Bible Through the Lens of History (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 2005).
11. Tim LaHaye, “The Coming Wave,” in Ed Hindson and Lee Fredrickson, Future Wave: End Times, Prophecy, and the Technological Explosion (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2001), 7–8.
12. This claim will be discussed in a later chapter.
13. Missler, Prophecy 20/20, 165.
14. Missler, Prophecy 20/20, 165.
It would appear that The Lord has given Dispys wisdom that Replacementarians have not received/are not willing to consider remotely fair mindedly and logically.
One who cannot read the bible without having Schofield and others interpret it for him is different from the magicsterium how?
Who’s that?
Not me.
My convictions on such issues were formed from long hours reading KJV as my only solace, comfort, friend . . .
plus somewhat a beloved pastor in Jr High who merely compared Scripture with Scripture. I don’t know that he even owned a commentary.
It’s the Replacementarian perspective that seems to inherently come from a committee of the magicsterical.
People who want to compare scripture with the daily news are in the business of scaring and amusing silly people with fortune telling. And it is a complete waste of time. Whether Christ comes today or in 10 000 years, Christians have a job to do that he gave to them. No amount of guessing will ever reveal it
Acts 1:7 And he said unto them,It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.
1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.
I rebuke that in the Name of Jesus The Christ. . . . who, Himself, instructed HIS FOLLOWERS to be alert and watchful of the signs of the times.
Reading Scripture without the Replacementarian tunnel vision goggles could be an enlightening experience.
Yes we are to be watchful and good servants, doing the work that he gave us to do, for we don’t know when he will come. That means studying His Word and fulfilling the Great Commission, not running here and there at each new thing, seeking a sign.. What the other is is putting faith in signs and wonders and as you well know, no sign will be given except the resurrection and if they won’t believe that they won’t believe anything. Only an evil adulterous generation seeks a sign.
no sign will be given except the resurrection
= = =
That’s NOT what The Scripture says.
Are you accusing me of running here and there at each new thing?
If so, You are wrong—again.
Mangling Scripture is not admirable nor attractive.
= = =
You DO realize, don't you . . . ??? . . .
CHRIST WAS ACCUSING THE PHARISEES WHO WERE DEMANDING A SIGN ABOUT HIS
drum roll . . .
FIRST Coming!
And Replacementarians act incredulous when we notice how horrid their Biblical interpretations are! Sheesh!
Artfully said!
"That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been; and God requireth that which is past."
To us, time is a chain of sequenced events. To the Eternal, time is an animate object viewed in the whole.
I might have tended to agreed with you on that point, all things being equal. However, I don't think that the Lamb that came to John to be baptized in John 1:29 had "seven horns and seven eyes".
Don’t deny the accuracy of the description of crucifixion, but could you explain the unicorn reference? in King David’s terms, of course. Plain and simple language?
You mean a vision not a dream, and a vision that God gave him and told him to write down literally what he saw.
Anything recorded in words, be it poetry, fiction, prophecy, allegory, vision or dream recorded in words must first be interpreted literally before one can understand what the author meant by those words, right. If you symbolize what the author meant to be taken literally, then you will not understand what the author is saying, right. And if you assign to the symbol a meaning different from that of the author, then you're off course again, right. That is why the hermeneutical rule of interpretation is to seek the literal meaning first, and if the literal meaning makes sense then seek no other sense.
Unless you get the literal meaning of words that describe what John saw right, you won't get the meaning of those words right, and the meaning of those strange things that John saw right.
Unless of course, you ascribe to the philosophy of the one who gave rise to more of the forces of apostasy than any other in early church history, Father Origen, who wrote: "The scriptures are of little use to those who understand them as they are written". Read some of his expositions of scripture some time -- one wonders if he was reading the same words that everyone else was.
Sorry, the text does not support your eisegesis.
You mean "exegesis". You misspelled that word. Here are the words from Acts once again:
"Until the day in which he was taken up ... being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God ... When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power."
Are you going to tell us that for 40 days Jesus misled the apostles with what He was saying? or that these disciples of His weren't listening to Him those 40 days?They clearly equated the kingdom of God with the restoration of the kingdom to Israel.
Show us where Jesus said "No" to their question???
You mean every one of your rules.
The parallel between Matthew and Luke is undeniable.
Jesus' first and second comings have parallels as well -- but they are not identical. Let's read Luke 21 to see what it really says:
"And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is near. Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled .... for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations:"
All of that above happened in 70 AD and is past history without a doubt, but Luke continues with what would happen after 70 AD, and what has been going on for the last 1937 years:
"And Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled."
When were the times of the Gentiles fulfilled??? in 70 AD?? Is that what preterists claim? There sure is a lot of Gentile foot traffic over there in Jerusalem and has been for some 1937 years. So just when were those times of the Gentiles fulfilled again??? Because Luke says that when the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled:
"And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory."
Have we seen that yet or did that also occur in 70 AD as well??? How did everybody miss it?? Did they have their eyes closed??
But according your scenario which we have discussed before, the 70 weeks of Daniel would have ended in 33-34 AD, 3 and a half years after the 30 AD Crucifixion.
So then what event happened in 33-34 AD that could have fulfilled this verse from Daniel 9:
"Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy."
Was everlasting righteousness brought in in 33AD? How about the sealing of the vision and prophecy? Were any prophecies still being fulfilled after 33AD? How about the prophecy about the destruction of Jerusalem? Was that fulfilled in 33 AD??? Ohhh and the anointing of the most holy??? Just when and where was that anointing ceremony held???
I believe the seventy weeks ended. However, all that was specified in the prophecy was set in motion within the timespan of the seventy weeks.
Was everlasting righteousness brought in in 33AD?
It says "bring in everlasting righteousness". Since Christ is the subject of the prophecy, one can certainly say that He established everlasting righteousness for His people. Perhaps you are adding more into the text than was intended.
How about the sealing of the vision and prophecy?
Again, Christ is the subject. In Hebrew 1:1,2 we are told, "God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;"
All the OT prophets pointed to Jesus Christ. When Jesus spoke He was the final Word from God.
Ohhh and the anointing of the most holy???
Obviously this is a reference to Christ, the Anointed One (Messiah) of God.
Unless you see Christ entirely in the prophecy, you will miss the boat.
Is that an RSV or an ASV that goes from Acts to Hebrews???
In my Bible there's a bunch of books in between those 2 books and one of the things it says is that Christians will know the 'times' and the 'seasons' for Jesus return...
That must not be in your bible...
That’s your theory, but it is not supported by the text and context.
"Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all things take place." (v. 32)
The context makes it clear that all these events, as symbolized by cataclysmic language reminiscent of the OT prophets (cf. Isa. 13:10) would fall upon "this generation". The plain sense of the text is Jesus was referring to His first century contemporaries. The futurist/literalist makes the mistake of ignoring the OT and assuming that "sun, moon, stars" are a reference to physical things. They are not. They are consistent with the OT language used to describe temporal judgments that would fall upon nations at various times.
Futurists don’t wish to deal with this truth. They are content to ignore the rest of the Bible and invent their own theories out of whole clothe. You yoursef cannot muster any other text of Scripture to support your theories.
If you interpret Matthew 24 and Luke 21 by the standard of the OT prophecies, and not by the theories of modern pop futurists, then you will see that all is consistent with an AD70 fulfillment.
Abomination in 70 AD??? Cmon let's all read Daniel 12 again:
"And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand. And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days."
Let's see: Preterists say that the sacrifices ended at the Crucifixion in 30 AD. So then 1290 days from the Crucifixion in 30 AD brings us to about 33.5 AD which is nowhere close to 70AD. Your abomination of desolation would have to have happened around 33.5 AD. Tell us all then what event qualifies for that abomination of desolation in 33.5 AD????
And of course then there is this promise to Daniel at the end of that chapter:
"But go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days".
Hmmmm -- Did Daniel get to stand there in Jerusalem in 33.5 AD??? How about in 70 AD??? Anyone see Daniel??? or was he still resting back then through today -- snoring away, as the preterists struggle in vain to misinterpret his words.
The text does not say anything about Him teaching that that the kingdom would ever be restored to national Israel. That is your eisegesis.
It’s apparent that the disciples did not always "get it" on the first attempt. They asked questions that made sense to them in their limited understanding. Jesus gives them the answer of how the kingdom will be expanded in Acts 1. I twill start in Jerusalem and Judea and works its way out from there,. It will go into all the nations, and no longer be confined to one nation as the disciples were expecting. They were wrong. Jesus sets them straight by His teaching.
As I said, they finally "got it" insofar as they never again mentioned the notion of the kingdom being restored to national Israel in the rest of the NT. Not once!
That’s a fact.
Show us where Jesus said "No" to their question???
I did, but you are not paying attention.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.