UNBIBLICAL GARBAGE
Seems to be SUCH
a chronic habit
with so many
REPLACEMENTARIANS et al
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
CRUCIAL POINTS WELL MADE.
THX.
INDEED.
AMEN.
SUCH AS . . .
AVOIDING
—IDOLATRY OF . . .
. . . OBJECTS
. . . PESONS
. . . RELIGION
. . . GROUPS
. . . LEADERS
. . . !!!!TRADITION!!!!
. . . IN-GROUP VS OUT-GROUP
. . . RITUALS
. . . APPEARANCES
. . . RELIGIOUS PEDIGREES
. . . ELITISM, SNOBBERY, HAUGHTINESS, ARROGANCE
. . .
2. HAVING A FORM OF RELIGION BUT DENYING THE AUTHENTIC HOLY SPIRIT POWER OF AUTHENTIC RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD
3. THE NEGLECT OF HUMILITY AND BROKENNESS BEFORE GOD.
Assumed? On what basis? Solid biblical interpretations, esp. of things like prophecy, are not built on assumptions.
Not at all - What I am saying is that Luke may be referring to "all the trees" in the same way that God is referring to "all my mountains"... He is giving an extra clue, perhaps, compared to the other Gospels.
The non sequitur was that simply referring to the phrase “all my mountains” does explain how the phrase, "Look at the fig tree, and all the trees. When they are already budding, you see and know for yourselves that summer is now near” allegedly refers to future Israel. Specifically, what does it mean for “all the trees” to be “budding” at the end times? You have not told us that. Luke 21:29 is about the futurist end times, isn’t it?
Why is it that we are not to take the statement as a simple parable that Christ was using to explain to His disciples that, just as you can tell the seasons by inspecting the condition of trees, that you can tell the time of the coming of the kingdom of God? That is certainly the way it reads. “Then He spoke to them a parable … .” Yet some folks wish to force it to mean something that the text does not require.
Besides, it is not clear that the phrase “all my mountains” is referring at all to nations. Why don’t we just take them as mountains?
Perhaps that is due to your preconceptions on the topic, rather than the text itself.
Revelation 15:3 Two songs, one for the Jews, and one for the Church.
One of the frustrations here is that it is impossible to critique this style of presentation because the unstated assumptions and presuppositions that leads one to interpret (I use that phrase loosly in this case) the passages in the way you suggest. After all, you have not actually quoted the passage and done a word by word or phrase by phrase walk through in order to come to your conclusion. You have moved from the given to the conclusions without doing any real work. It’s as if the conclusion is so obvious that no real work is necessary to prove the conclusion. While the conclusions may be obvious to the adherents to your system, they are not so obvious to everyone else.
For example, take the passage above, Rev. 15:3 and explain how you come to your conclusion. This will demonstrate to all what presuppositions we must adopt in order to arrive at your conclusions.
That the most important part, no?
What a grandiose example of another huge pile of stinking REPLACEMENTARIAN et al rationalized hypocrisy.
Most of the Dispies hereon for any serious length of time have learned the hard way that REPLACEMENTARIANS et al VIRTUALLY NEVER bother with doing a shred of the above AT ALL.
And on the rare occasions when they hint in that direction, they never use authentic UNRUBBERIZED BIBLES OR AUTHENTIC UNRUBBERIZED DICTIONARIES OR AUTHENTIC UNRUBBERIZED HISTORIES OR AUTHENTIC UNRUBBERIZED LOGIC TEXTS.
Obviously, roamer, the above protestation is a pile of stinking paper mache dogs.
Evidently it's also an example of another wild haired REPLACEMENTARIAN et al fantasy that OTHER FOLKS SHOULD PLAY BY THEIR RULES but they don't have to bother in the least. REAL IMPRESSIVE, that.
You'll note that the list of Scriptures I posted just above has only resulted in a garbage can gif. Cute.
We should certainly avoid holding our breaths waiting for the kind of response to those Scriptures that you've been chided about failing to 'measure up to.' Gag me with a very big spoon.
Ahhhhhhhhh . . . another post
vividly demonstrating REPLACEMENTARIAN et al’s broken mirrors and wholesale compulsion to misperceive reality.
Looked, to me like the REPLACMENTARIAN et al’s posts have been landing square in the middle of their garbage cans over and over and over!
Goodness!
SOMETHING we can agree on?!
Shocking.
Blow the man down!
Praise God!
Rim shot ...
BTW, THANKS AGAIN
It’s always a joy when
a REPLACEMENTARIAN et al
PARADOXICALLY and obviously MOST UNwittingly
confirms the UNRUBBERIZED BIBLICAL TRUTH
by a derisive post.
And by “et al” do you mean anyone who's not an inarticulate, ufologist, charismaniac, zionist-type?
But anyway ... three ... two ... one ...
Your curiously
paradoxical obverse derisive confirmations
of the
UNRUBBERIZED BIBLE,
UNRUBBERIZED DICTIONARY,
UNRUBBERIZED HISTORY,
UNRUBBERIZED LOGIC
TRUTH
remain quite welcome encouragements.
Thanks.
However, my post below should NOT be construed as any ENCOURAGEMENT to lie. Note to those in Rio Linda: Lying is spiritually hazardous.
Your curiously
paradoxical obverse derisive confirmations
of the
UNRUBBERIZED BIBLE,
UNRUBBERIZED DICTIONARY,
UNRUBBERIZED HISTORY,
UNRUBBERIZED LOGIC
TRUTH
remain quite welcome encouragements.
Thanks.
BTW,
I MUCH appreciate the very persistent
sequential DEMONSTRATION that
REPLACEMENTARIANS et al
are not bothered at all by any pretended inarticulation
yet
ARE bothered significantly be obviously very very clear articulation.
That’s a WONDERFULLY humorous thrill and comfort.
Thanks tons.
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.