Posted on 09/13/2009 11:48:38 AM PDT by GiovannaNicoletta
(This is an update of a study I first posted in Nov. 2003)
Those who labor to understand the nuances of the battle described in Ezekiel 38-39 quickly identify two major puzzles. One is the timing of the battle and the other is the identity of Gog, from Magog. Suffice it to say here that almost no scholar, certainly none I’m aware of, believes the battle of Ezekiel 38-39 has already taken place. Some believe it will occur just before the beginning of Daniel’s 70th Week, while others believe Ezekiel is actually describing the Battle of Armageddon, which would put it at the end of the Great Tribulation. But all place it sometime in our future.
In my opinion, there are several reasons why Ezekiel 38 can’t be part of the Armageddon scenario. First, only some nations are involved in Ezekiel 38. For example, Saudi Arabia and Western Europe are said to be on the sidelines observing and others you would expect to see, like Egypt and Jordan, are not mentioned at all, although both appear later on. But Zechariah 12:3 says that in preparation for the Battle of Armageddon all the nations of the Earth will come against Jerusalem.
Second, how is Israel going to burn the left over weapons for 7 years as Ezekiel 39:9 indicates unless there are 7 years left in which to burn them? Rev. 21:24. says the nations will walk by the light of the New Jerusalem in the Millennium, so they won’t need fuel for energy then. And then you have Ezekiel 38:11 telling us that Israel will be a peaceful and unsuspecting people when the Moslem coalition strikes. Could that be possible near the end of the Great Tribulation when all the nations are gathering to attack? I don’t think so.
But most importantly, Daniel’s 70th week can’t start until Israel is back in covenant with God and the battle of Ezekiel 38 is what causes the covenant to be re-instated. (Ezek. 39:22) Armageddon comes at the end of Daniel’s 70th week, not the beginning.
As for Gog and Magog, the first thing to note is that while Magog is listed in Genesis 10, Gog is not. The list of 70 names in Genesis 10 is often called the Table of Nations because each of the men named there was the original ancestor of an ethnic group that grew to become a nation of people. For instance, Magog was the 2nd son of Japeth, one of Noah’s three sons, and bore the children who in time became known to the ancient world as the Scythians. They lived in central Asia and are believed to be the forefathers of today’s Russians. Many historical references support this view. For example, Josephus Flavius wrote “Magog founded the Magogians, thus named after him, but who were by the Greeks called Scythians.” And in some ancient Arabic documents, the Great Wall of China is called the Ramparts of Gog and Magog. It was built to keep the Scythians out of China.
So while the Russian people of today are likely descended from Magog, there is no such biological connection for Gog to either Magog or any other ethnic group. There is an unrelated mention of a man named Gog, a grandson of Reuben, in 1 Chronicles 5:4 but there doesn’t seem to be any connection between him and the land of Magog either. Clearly, while Magog refers to the millions of his descendants in today’s Russia, Gog remains a single individual.
Some say he’s a king or leader, and in a real sense I think that’s true but I don’t believe he’s of the human variety. The time spanned by his three appearances in scripture make that impossible.
The first one is in the first verse of Amos 7, but you have to be reading Amos from the Septuigent translation to see it. There, Gog is identified as a king, but of a swarm of locusts. To further shroud him in mystery Proverbs 30:27 states that locusts have no king, and observers of locust swarms agree that no obvious leader directs them, as a queen would direct a hive of bees for example. The swarm of locusts led by Gog in Amos 7:1-2 was symbolic of a judgment that was to come upon the Northern Kingdom, but the Lord relented because of Amos’ intercession.
(This hint also lends insight to another appearance of locusts, by the way. I’m referring to the one in Revelation 9, where a swarm of locusts comes out of the Abyss to afflict those on Earth who lack the seal of God on their foreheads. These locusts have a king named Abaddon in the Hebrew or Appolyon in the Greek. Here again, the Proverbs passage would indicate that these locusts are of supernatural origin like the ones in Amos 7, not ordinary locusts.)
The next time Gog’s mentioned is in Ezekiel 38:1, where he is called by name as the leader of a coalition of what are now primarily Moslem nations attacking Israel. His final mention comes from the Book of Revelation where he again leads the people from Magog against the Lord’s army at the end of the Millennium (Rev. 20:8).
Even if you’re among those who place the battle of Ezekiel 38 at the end of the Great Tribulation, the span of time between Gog’s last two biblical appearances is at least 1000 years, and while I believe that some born in that era will have long life spans, there isn’t any indication that natural humans born before the Millennium begins will live to see its end. This is especially true of God’s enemies, since all surviving unbelievers are removed from Earth at the beginning of our Lord’s reign.
So I’ve come to the conclusion that Gog is a supernatural figure. The Bible clearly states that behind the human seats of government stand supernatural figures manipulating the thoughts and actions of the world’s leaders. These figures are in Satan’s employ, helping in his effort to wrest ownership of Planet Earth from its Creator. Gog is at least the supernatural figure behind the throne of Russia, and perhaps is even Satan’s counterpart to the Archangel Michael, who commands the Lord’s armies.
In Daniel 10:13 Michael is identified as one of the Lord’s chief princes who in 536 BC came to Daniel’s aid in a supernatural struggle with the Prince of Persia, a nation barely emerging on the world scene having conquered Babylon just three years earlier. At its conclusion Michael told Daniel that he’d soon be battling the Prince of Greece, a nation that didn’t even exist at the time. In Daniel 12:1 we’re told he’ll protect Israel at the end of the age. And in Rev 12:7 he’s seen leading the angelic host in a great battle in heaven when Satan is defeated there and cast down to Earth at the outset of the Great Tribulation. Michael is clearly a supernatural warrior leaping across the pages of history in defense of the Lord’s interests. It makes sense that Satan would have a military commander leading his forces as well, since everything he does seems to mirror the actions of his Creator. With his multiple mentions in Scripture and the long span of time between appearances, Gog could easily be this commander.
Only time will tell if this view is correct. But one of the great advantages of living in our day is that we won’t have long to wait till we find out. You can almost hear the footsteps of the Messiah. 09-12-09
ROFL!!
I found the article worthy of reflection and an interesting take.
I haven’t forgotten that I presented a fully fleshed out interpretation of Biblical prophesies.It can be seen here: http://tiny.cc/rPSQc
So, is that your presentation? Are you "Donald Koenig"?
THANKS FOR THE LINK to that impressive presentation of Biblical prophecies.
I wouldn’t hold out for a comparable presentation by the other side.
Oh, they don’t lack for idiot piles of stinking words ad nauseum. However, they are grossly lacking in Biblical congruence—the UNRubberized Biblical congruence, for sure.
And, they are lacking in logical consistency by a trillion galactic clusters. . . . wellll maybe half a trillion.
And the authors virtually to a man, are dreadfully boring and full of themselves.
They read like their philosophical/theological progenitors . . . the so called ‘higher’ criticism clique of pseudo “Biblical” “Scholars” of a hundre years or so ago.
It’s shocking that Conservative Christian FREEPERS would touch such trash with a 100’ pole.
That they seem so glibly oblivious to their dragging unwitting young and potential believer lurkers into hell with such trash is beyond shocking.
I've only been reading his/her replies for a few months, but find they are well thought out, researched, not knee-jerk reactions or rubber-stamped phrases (like - that's YOUR interpretation).
Really?
Oh, they don’t lack for idiot piles of stinking words ad nauseum. However, they are grossly lacking in Biblical congruence—the UNRubberized Biblical congruence, for sure.
And, they are lacking in logical consistency by a trillion galactic clusters. . . . wellll maybe half a trillion.
We live in different worlds.
Thanks for the ping!
Poisoning the well. Do you have any reason to believe the items I quoted are historically inaccurate?
That aside, Chuck still doesn't demonstrate the clear and definite connection between the greek use of Scythian that Josephus was referencing, and the more modern use of the term that became a catch-all for more broad groups of peoples in certain places. He seems content with a rather simplistic view that the term Scythian has always meant the same thing, even over hundreds and thousands of years.
How true. They must read the Bible in a similar fashion.
Your Outership,
You did not present anything. You gave us a link to commentary by someone who is not here to defend his outrageously wrongheaded interpretations. (Which you can read about here and here.)
You have the perfect opportunity to back up you own ideas with your own words and interpretation of Scripture. I can't understand the reluctance to rely entirely on someone else to do your thinking.
If you are afraid of having your ideas honestly critiqued, I suggest you should not have sounded off in the first place, and then try to divert attention away by claiming I’m not responsive. You’re already wrapped abound the “Wormwood” axle for whatever reason, and, as I said, I’m perfectly happy and prepared to answer your questions directly WHEN you come forth with your own ideas in your own words.
But I’m still ready to dialogue (with you, not Mr. Koenig, unless he wants to signup for FR).
Actually, I was thinking of Psalm 22, which was most likely written quite some time (centuries?) before crucifixion as a method of punishment was widely in use.
Have you actually looked in the mirror?
Actually, I guess no one else could inform on the following so I’ll brazenly do it . . .
my professors;
my group therapy leaders
my classmates
my housemates
my bosses at all my internships etc.
overwhelmingly voluntarily asserted that my personal insight was way above that they had observed in virtually anyone else.
That’s pretty humbling. Nevertheless a joyful thing, for me.
Ooooops.
Should not have responded so personally, regardless of the personal affront.
My error.
VERY THANKFULLY.
It’s a moot issue.
UTTERMOST NORTH settles it.
. . . for those with eyes to see and ears to hear.
There’s a pile of evidence all indicating the same thing.
Of course, willful blindness tends to ignore whole libraries of evidence.
Right. Goodness! I agree again!
We live in the
NON Twilight Zone . . .
and the
NON-Alice’s Rabbit hole world . . .
and the
world of the
UNRUBBERIZED BIBLE.
in 180 degree contrast to the REPLACEMENTARIANS et al on this thread.
Actually
it has long appeared that
“dialogue”
is NOT even in the RUBBER DICTIONARY of the
REPLACEMENTARIANS et al.
I’ve seen little to no evidence of their having the least bit of familiarity with the term and certainly not with the behaviors involved.
I guess I’m not greatly surprised that
that post (#168)
was overly mystifying for some noggins.
Don’t let this thread become “about” individual Freepers. That is a form of “making it personal.”
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.