Is Russia Mentioned in Ezekiel?

March 5, 2014 | PhilipFreneau

[BeadCounter]

Not the word Russia, if that’s what you mean.

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>Not the word Russia, if that’s what you mean.<<<

No. That is not what I mean. What I mean is: nothing in the scripture that has anything to do with Russia.

[stars & stripes forever]

The comming four blood moons as well as an eclipse in 2014 and 2015 may shed light on why theologians elude to Russia.
Very interesting. (3 sermons in 1)

FOUR BLOOD MOONS
(Passover) 4/15/2014, (Sukkot) 10/8/2014 Nison 1 ( 3/20/2015 (Passover) 4/04/2015 (Sukkot) 9/28/2014

The Coming Four Blood Moons (3 sermons in one)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VK8NKXDinlE

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>The Coming Four Blood Moons (3 sermons in one)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VK8NKXDinlE<<<

John Hagee? No thanks.

Philip

[Former Fetus]

I agree that Rosh is a title, not a name for Russia. That said, I don’t think Eze 38 was fulfilled with the Maccabean Revolt. Eze 38 follows Eze 37, the rebirth of the State of Israel which took place in 1948. In fact, it is not time for Eze 38 yet, since God promised in Eze 39:28 that no Jew would be left behind. Another reason I don’t think the Maccabean Revolt was Eze 38 is that Israel was not “a land of unwalled villages; [...]a peaceful people, who dwell safely, all of them dwelling without walls, and having neither bars nor gates” (Eze 38:11). When do I think Eze 38 will take place? Well, not before Israel lives at peace, which makes me think that another war with Israel’s neighbors have to take place first. Psalm 83? Isa 17?

[Verginius Rufus]

In the Septuagint translation of 38.1, the name "Mesoch" could be "Mosoch" (both forms are found in the manuscripts--the Alfred Rahlfs edition prints Mosoch in the text and mentions the variant reading in the notes).

The word applied to Rhos, arkhonta, is a general word for "ruler" or "commander." It is the participle form of the verb arkho maning "to be first," "to lead the way,' "to begin," "to rule, be leader of."

[righttackle44]

No. That is not what I mean. What I mean is: nothing in the scripture that has anything to do with Russia.

Then, Brother, I ask you to again look at verse 15 in the 38th chapter: 15 You will come from your place out of the remote parts of the north, you and many peoples with you, all of them riding on horses, a great assembly and a mighty army;

Where would the remote part of the north be? Any further north would be in the Arctic. And unless we're talking about mighty herds and collections of sea lions and polar bears, we're kind of stuck with Russia.

[jimbobfoster]

Take Google Earth & draw a line due north from the center of Jerusalem to the most northern city & see where you end up.

[MuttTheHoople]

Turkey, the Black Sea, and then Russia.

[boatbums]

I agree. There are too many things left unfulfilled for the Maccabean Revolt to have been what Ezekiel, Psalms and Isaiah, not to mention Daniel, Zechariah, Jeremiah and other prophecies say will happen. To presume that ALL these are only figurative or allegorical instead of some being literal, fails to answer WHAT they were all supposed to represent. Clearly, there are many yet-to-be-fulfilled prophecies. God is not yet done with the Jewish people or Israel.

[Seven_0]

Israel was not “a land of unwalled villages;

It may be that Israel will not have peace until after the tribulation, this would mean Gog and Magog would still be around at the end of the thousand years as is suggested by Revelation 20:7-8. Maybe a big time gap in Ezekiel 37-38.

[Vermont Lt]

The problem with the acceptance of the word of God is the translations of the writers.

The bible might be the word of God, but man translates translations. And then we translate it into English. And then we translate into modern English.

It is ridiculous.

We should read the bible for its purpose. Anyone taking the words as literal is wasting their time and kidding themselves.

Lets focus on the parts where it says to love each other, as we would be loved.

The rest is pretty much secondary.

Just my opinion. I am prepared for most everyone around here to go all fundamentalist on me.

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>Eze 38 follows Eze 37, the rebirth of the State of Israel which took place in 1948.<<<

How did you get that out of Ezekiel 37? That is quite a stretch.

>>>In fact, it is not time for Eze 38 yet, since God promised in Eze 39:28 that no Jew would be left behind.>>>

This is the context:

"After that they have borne their shame, and all their trespasses whereby they have trespassed against me, when they dwelt safely in their land, and none made them afraid. When I have brought them again from the people, and gathered them out of their enemies' lands, and am sanctified in them in the sight of many nations; Then shall they know that I am the Lord their God, which caused them to be led into captivity among the heathen: but I have gathered them unto their own land, and have left none of them any more there." (Eze 39:26-28 KJV)

What are the names of the enemy lands where Jews are held captive today? New York City? LOL!

The Lord sent Antiochus (Gog) against Israel (Eze 38:16) because they had become complacent after more than 300 years of peace: peace that began during the reign of Darius. Antiochus had taken captives (Dan 11:33,) and in this prophecy the Lord promised they would all be allowed to return. Regarding the captives, Josephus said:

"And when he had pillaged the whole city, some of the inhabitants he slew, and some he carried captive, together with their wives and children, so that the multitude of those captives that were taken alive amounted to about ten thousand." [Antiquities XII.5.4]

Recall that under Cyrus all were allowed to return, but many chose not to. I assume the same here. When the Lord says "he left none any more there," I would be hesitant to take that as if he dragged them back into Israel. Rather, I see it as simply releasing them from captivity.

Of course, if you insist on taking that literally, and you have exhausted all Hebrew and Greek translations and have assumed there is no ambiguity; then should you not also take 39:9-13 literally?

For example, imagine the size of the army where Israel would need no firewood for seven years, but the wood of the army's shields, bucklers, spears, handstaves, and bows and arrows (Eze 39:9-12.) Can you think of any army today that carries any kind of wood? Even rifle stocks are plastic these days. And does Israel even use firewood these days?

Now imagine the number of corpses from Gog's army that are scattered about that would require all the people of Israel (millions of Israeli's) a total of 7 months to bury (Eze 39:11-15.)

Either it is all literal, or it is all figurative. You can't have it both ways.

>>>Another reason I don’t think the Maccabean Revolt was Eze 38 is that Israel was not “a land of unwalled villages; [...]a peaceful people, who dwell safely, all of them dwelling without walls, and having neither bars nor gates” (Eze 38:11). <<<

I recall the walls of Jerusalem were rebuilt during Ezra, but I don't recall the villages having walls. Do you have scriptural references for that?

>>>When do I think Eze 38 will take place? Well, not before Israel lives at peace, which makes me think that another war with Israel’s neighbors have to take place first. Psalm 83? Isa 17?<<<

I understand there was a great period of peace for Israel, beginning in the reign of Darius, that lasted over 300 years, even during the reign of Alexander. That peace ended upon the invasion of Antiochus IV.

Philip

[Seven_0]

The rest is pretty much secondary.

Do you have a method to decide which parts are primary and which parts are secondary?

[PhilipFreneau]

Thanks. I notice both variations you listed are used in my translation, which is Brenton, 1851.

Philip

[Fraxinus]

Invaders from the north?

Possibilities include Hittites (empire long destroyed before David), Macedonians (considered rough country cousins at best by the Athenians and other southern Greeks), several empires governed from Damascus, I will also add groups like the Huns and Mongols who would have approached by crossing the Caucus region.

[PhilipFreneau]

>>>Then, Brother, I ask you to again look at verse 15 in the 38th chapter: 15 You will come from your place out of the remote parts of the north, you and many peoples with you, all of them riding on horses, a great assembly and a mighty army;<<<

>>>Where would the remote part of the north be? Any further north would be in the Arctic. And unless we're talking about mighty herds and collections of sea lions and polar bears, we're kind of stuck with Russia.<<<

It all boils down to what the "remote parts of the north" really means. The King James Version translates it as "out of the north parts," which is not the same as your New American Standard. One thing should be clear: it was mostly like not too far away since they were all riding on horses:

"Therefore, son of man, prophesy and say unto Gog, Thus saith the Lord God; In that day when my people of Israel dwelleth safely, shalt thou not know it? And thou shalt come from thy place out of the north parts, thou, and many people with thee, all of them riding upon horses, a great company, and a mighty army:" (Eze 38:14-15 KJV)

Philip

[ConservativeMan55]

bttt