Posted on 04/05/2014 11:10:17 AM PDT by PhilipFreneau
Is Russia Mentioned in Ezekiel?
A careful and literal reading of Ezekiel 38 and 39 reveal that modern-day interpretations that allude to Russia are misleading, at best. Oddly, most of those interpretations seem to come from those who claim to be "literalists.
As an example of the kind of misleading statements Christians have to contend with is this statement by Jennifer Rast in an article listed on the Contender Ministries website
"As we read the headlines in the newspapers of today, and witness the conflict in the Middle East, it's not hard to imagine that this invasion prophesied over 2600 years ago, could be fulfilled in our lifetime."
The key word is "imagine." What Jennifer didn't say is that it is easy to imagine the scriptures to mean anything, but generally difficult to prove.
Ms. Rast goes on to list some of the modern-day theories. This is #4:
"4. Russian Theory: The Hebrew word 'rosh' in verse 3 is identified with Russia, 'Tubal' with Tiblisi or Tobolsk and 'Meshech' with Moscow, therefore Gog and Magog refers to Russia. This is one of the most commonly held views and is based on a different interpretation of the Hebrew word Rosh (used as a noun rather than adjective), similarities in the pronunciation of words, and the Greek translation of Rosh referring to a tribe of people found in what is now Russia."
Let's examine the word "rosh'" in the Old Testament. Strong's Concordance lists the word as:
{7218} ro'sh, roshe; from an unused root apparently meaning to shake; the head (as most easily shaken), whether literal or figurative (in many applications, of place, time, rank, itc.): — band, beginning, captain, chapiter, chief(-est place, man, things), company, end, X every (man), excellent, first, forefront, ((be-)) head, height, (on) high(-est part, (priest)), X lead, X poor, principal, ruler, sum, top.
From all appearances, the correct translation for rosh would be: the chief, head, ruler, or similar adjective. For direct usage, the Septuagint provides the following:
"And the word of the Lord came to me, saying, Son of man, set thy face against Gog, and the land of Magog, Rhos, prince of Mesoch and Thobel, and prophesy against him, and say to him, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I am against thee, Rhos prince of Mesoch and Thobel:" (Eze 38:1-3 SEP)
In that translation the word "rosh" (Rhos) is used ambiguously the first time; but is used as, what appears to be, an adjective in the second part. Now compare with the King James Version:
"And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Son of man, set thy face against Gog, the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him, And say, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal:" (Eze 38:1-3 KJV)
Therefore, it is safe to conclude that the Hebrew word "ro'sh" means "the chief" in this instance; Gog would be the chief prince of Magog; and the King James Version is translated correctly.
The Strong number 7218 for the Hebrew word "rosh" is used over 500 times in the Old Testament, and the usage in the verses I examined was to define a "leader" (e.g., the chief baker;) as one's actual head (e.g., upon my head;) or as the highest point (as in, the top of a mountain.)
Rast said common interpretations of Meshech and Tubal are Moscow and Tiblisi (or Tobolsk) respectively. Let's examine an earlier Ezekiel reference to those two cities:
"And say unto Tyrus, O thou that art situate at the entry of the sea, which art a merchant of the people for many isles, Thus saith the Lord God; O Tyrus, thou hast said, I am of perfect beauty … Tarshish was thy merchant by reason of the multitude of all kind of riches; with silver, iron, tin, and lead, they traded in thy fairs. Javan, Tubal, and Meshech, they were thy merchants: they traded the persons of men and vessels of brass in thy market. They of the house of Togarmah traded in thy fairs with horses and horsemen and mules. " (Eze 27:3, 12-14 KJV)
Tubal and Meshech are listed as two of the many merchants of Tyre. Guess who else was listed as a merchant?
"Judah, and the land of Israel, they were thy merchants: they traded in thy market wheat of Minnith, and Pannag, and honey, and oil, and balm." (Eze 27:17 KJV)
It does not appear that Meshech and Tubal are modern-day Russian cities.
Other claimed scriptural references for a modern interpretation are these which use the word "north:"
"And I will turn thee back, and put hooks into thy jaws, and I will bring thee forth, and all thine army, horses and horsemen, all of them clothed with all sorts of armour, even a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords: Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya with them; all of them with shield and helmet: Gomer, and all his bands; the house of Togarmah of the north quarters, and all his bands: and many people with thee ... 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 38:4-6, 14-15 KJV)
It should be noted that multiple invasions of Israel came from the north; for example, by Syria, Babylon, and Rome.
The land of Togarmah is mentioned in Ezekiel 27:14 as a merchant of Tyre for horses, horsemen and mules. Note also that in Ezekiel 38:4-6, the soldiers are not only riding horses; but are clothed with armour and carrying shields and swords. That sounds like an ancient army.
In verse 16 the Lord explains that He is bringing Gog against Israel:
"And thou shalt come up against my people of Israel, as a cloud to cover the land; it shall be in the latter days, and I will bring thee against my land, that the heathen may know me, when I shall be sanctified in thee, O Gog, before their eyes. " (Eze 38:16 KJV)
So, who is this mysterious Gog? Adam Clarke, in his commentary, stated it was Antiochus IV, king of Syria, who invaded Israel around 168 BC and defiled the temple. Antiochus was defeated during the Maccabean Revolt which, incidentally, marked the beginning of the feast of Hanukkah.
Some key fulfilments mentioned by Clarke include:
"And I will call for a sword against him throughout all my mountains, saith the Lord God: every man's sword shall be against his brother." (Eze 38:16-18 KJV)
Clark: "Meaning Judas Maccabeus, who defeated [Antiochus'] army under Lysias, making a horrible carnage."
"So will I make my holy name known in the midst of my people Israel; and I will not let them pollute my holy name any more: and the heathen shall know that I am the Lord, the Holy One in Israel." (Eze 39:7 KJV)
Clarke: "This defeat of Gog is to be in Israel: and it was there according to this prophecy, that the immense army of Antiochus was so completely defeated. Ands I will not let them pollute my holy name any more— See on 1 Macc. 1:11, etc., how Antiochus had profaned the temple, insulted Jehovah and his worship, etc. God permitted that as a scourge to his disobedient people; but now the scourger shall be scourged, and he shall pollute the sanctuary no more."
Note that Daniel 11 & 12 also prophesied of Antiochus' profanation of the temple. Read Clarke's entire commentary on Ezekiel 37-39, for more information.
Another commentary that mentions Antiochus is Matthew Henry Volume IV. Henry's comments for Ezekiel 38:5-6 include this statement:
"Antiochus had an army made up of all the nations here named, and many others."
I am of the opinion that Gog is not a modern figure, but an ancient king or ruler: most likely Antiochus IV.
Philip
I've just moved and my books are still packed in boxes, but I believe the first time I read about it was in a commentary by Jimmy Swagart.
What happens to those who decide not to return?
I don't know. But my lack of understanding in no way invalidates the prophecy.
Josephus would have written about it
Maybe... I'm just thinking that minor skirmishes may not make it into Josephus's writings, but the conditions would not have been peaceful.
Do you have any scripture to support your opinion? Also, archaeology is not an exact science.No, I don't. And there is a lot of "constructive deduction" in archaeology, but the remnant of walls are hard to miss.
So if everything has already taken place, all prophecy fulfilled, we must be living in heaven...I gotta say I am sorely disappointed...And you don't want to listen to John Hagee???
Is Ezekiel mentioned in Russia?
It is not out of the realm of speculation and likelihood that while the verse is literal that a word or two can be symbolic...In this case it's possible the term horse can just be a form of transportation...Or, it really could be factual...
You even had it bolded out...With whoever is in Christ Jesus there is no respect of persons...Outside of Jesus Christ there definitely is respect of persons...
Did Jesus eliminate the Master/servant relationship??? Nope...Did Jesus eliminate the distinction between the Jews and the Ethiopians??? Nope...Did Jesus eliminate the distinction between dogs and horses and just call them all animals??? Nope...
It is only in Christ where there is no distinction between bond and free, Black and White, Jew and Gentile, circumcision and uncircumcision...
I don't know how you can miss that...Even if you aren't a born again Christian that much is very clear in the Scriptures...
That wasn't it...That's not nearly long enough...
Amo 9:14 And I will bring again the captivity of my people of Israel, and they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them.
Amo 9:15 And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the LORD thy God.
When peace comes to Israel, and it will, it will be for a long, long time...
Things should get much better when the nations are no longer deceived by Satan:
"In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations." (Rev 22:2 KJV)
>>>And you don't want to listen to John Hagee???<<<
No, but I do try to warn people about him. You don't believe that charlatan, do you?
Philip
I was asking a serious question about those commentators.
>>>I don't know. But my lack of understanding in no way invalidates the prophecy.<<<
All prophecy is valid. Nearly all is misinterpreted. Recall what Jesus said to his disciples about the things he revealed to them, and you will understand how few people understood prophecy when Jesus began his ministry. Things are no different today.
>>>Maybe... I'm just thinking that minor skirmishes may not make it into Josephus's writings, but the conditions would not have been peaceful.<<<
He was not the only historian. Do you know of any historian who said times were not peaceful during that period?
>>>>>>>And there is a lot of "constructive deduction" in archaeology, but the remnant of walls are hard to miss.<<<
Those would have to be very large walls to repel an invasion; and generally there were multiple walls that were filled in with dirt to resist battering rams and catapulted stones. That costs money, and lots of it. What city in Israel could afford such walls after the return from Babylon, except Jerusalem?
Philip
>>>Is Ezekiel mentioned in Russia?<<<
Probably on a regular basis. It is a Christian nation.
Philip
One of the northern countries allied against Jerusalem was a horse and mule merchant for Tyre, which was a city on the coast of, what is today, southern Lebanon:
"Tarshish was thy merchant by reason of the multitude of all kind of riches; with silver, iron, tin, and lead, they traded in thy fairs. Javan, Tubal, and Meshech, they were thy merchants: they traded the persons of men and vessels of brass in thy market. They of the house of Togarmah traded in thy fairs with horses and horsemen and mules." (Eze 27:12-14 KJV)
Judah and Israel were also merchants for Tyre.
Philip
I didn't miss it. Outside of Jesus are only those who are against him:
"He that is not with me is against me: and he that gathereth not with me scattereth." (Luk 11:23 KJV)
Those against Christ do things contrary to Him, such as show respect of persons. I'm not sure what your point is. Take this verse from the same post:
"For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him." (Rom 10:12 KJV)
Note that for there to be NO difference between the Jew and Gentile, they have to call upon him (the days of election are long past.) And if we don't call on him, we don't have (how should I say it) a prayer. Paul gave this sequence for calling upon the name of the Lord:
"For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent?" (Rom 10:13-15 KJV)
Again, I don't understand your point. Help me out.
Philip
Amos is a hard book to follow in that it jumps around a lot. You will notice that two chapters earlier Amos was referring to a priest who complained to Jeroboam, king of Israel, about Amos' dire prophecies against Israel. The key point is, there was still a king of Israel, Jeroboam II, who reigned until the 750 BC era, which was prior to Israel's captivity by Assyria. That prophecy continues through chapter 8.
In chapter 9 there is an entirely new theme where Amos prophesies the upcoming punishment and captivity of Israel. In a span that projects forward over 700 years, the prophecy in chapter 9 then refers to:
1) the "sifting" of Israel from all the nations (gathering of lost sheep by Jesus and disciples,) and
2) the raising of the tents of David (see Acts 15:14-17) which allows for the conversion of the Gentiles.
Then, in verse 13, in a complete reversal, the scene reverts back to the days of Amos with Lord promising to eventually bring Israel out of captivity and back into its own land (as it turned out, those that chose to return.)
The time period covered in those three chapters are from about 750 BC to (briefly) approximately 33 or 34 AD, and finally back again to the days of Amos.
Philip
Prov 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.What if God has concealed treasure in scripture?
John used a lot of old testament imagery (the best example is, "great Babylon came in remembrance," in Rev 16:19;) but they are completely separate events. The first "Gog-Magog" defeat occurred about 165 BC, and the other will occur in the future: soon, I hope. A quick analysis reveals that the event in Revelation 20 uses "armies" that come from the "four quarters" of the earth: not merely from the "north parts" as in Ezekiel 38:15. The armies of Satan go up on the "breadth" of the earth, which means the entire "width" of the earth. This is the definition of breadth in Merriam-Webster:
1. distance from side to side: width
2. something of full width
3. comprehensive quality: scope
The term "beloved city" is not used anywhere else in the Bible. But the "beloved people" are the Christians and the Saints, as Paul mentioned several times:
"To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ." (Rom 1:7 KJV)
"As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved." (Rom 9:25 KJV)
"Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering;" (Col 3:12 KJV)
"But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:" (2 Th 2:13 KJV)
The following passage from the Hebrews explains the components of the Church of the firstborn, which is the Church of God's beloved Son:
"But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant..." (Heb 12:22-24 KJV)
Therefore, it is safe to conclude that the beloved city is the heavenly new Jerusalem, which is the Church!
The term "camp of the saints" is also not found anywhere else. But there is a significant reference to the Saints in this passage in Ephesians which explains the Holy Temple:
"Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit." (Eph 2:19-22 KJV)
Note that Christians are fellowcitizens with the Saints, as well as the prophets; and are also a part of the Holy Temple.
Therefore, I have no alternative but to believe that Satan is coming after the Church, worldwide, and the final war is a spiritual war. I also believe that the war is happening now, and that it began when Christians started accommodating other religions about a century ago.
Philip
I believe everything has been fulfilled, in every way, until Revelation 20:8. The difference in our interpretations seems to seems to be our interpretations of the old testament. Many of those who attempted to take it literally in the past paid a heavy price. Therefore, I rely on the new testament, first, for interpretation of events. If the old testament doesn't match the new, then I assume I am misinterpreting the old.
Another major difference in our interpretative methods is I believe scriptures on the coming of Christ, which he and his apostles mentioned in many different ways, all pointed to a time during the lifetime of his disciples: during their generation. I see no need to explain that away to fit any pre-conceived notions about the future.
>>>Too many things haven't happened yet to believe it ALL has already happened.<<<
All I see remaining is the defeat of Satan, the final judgement, and everyone living happily ever after.
Philip
I don't believe we are interpreting the words "respecter of persons" the same way. That term, as I understand it, only applies to His and our judgements, and must always be devoid of any notion of race, wealth, position of authority, etc..
That was not true before the days of Christ. For example, when the Peter saw the vision of the beasts, and was instructed to eat, he eventually understood it to mean that God was no respecter of persons in the sense that the Gentiles were now included in the kingdom. This is how Peter explained it:
"Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him." (Acts 10:34-35 KJV)
Therefore, Peter saw that God now considered the Gentiles as equals to the Israelites in the kingdom, and his continued exclusion of them in his ministry would be a sin.
That in no way implies that God does not distinguish between the evil and the good; nor does it imply that some are not more righteous that others. Those of the small elect: the remnant of Israel, were certainly more righteous than their fellow Israelites. Therefore, they received the promise, and the other Israelites were rejected. Some within the ranks of the elect, such as the apostles, received special and permanent positions within the kingdom. But that has nothing to do with showing respect of persons. James explained it this way:
"For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool:" (Jam 2:2-3 KJV)
Recall that the apostles avoided any appearance of respect by wearing simple clothing, and taking the position of servant, rather than master, as did Jesus by example.
Jesus also showed how we can show respect of persons in other ways by his parable of the Good Samaritan. I personally believe that anyone who claims that the Israelites as a race are still God's chosen people are showing respect of persons.
Philip
Philip,
I agree with you, everything in the Bible has been fulfilled, except the second coming of Jesus, the final judgement and casting of Satan into hell forever.
question for you:
what did the two witnesses of revelation represent?
Rev 20:9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.Notice that they were on earth. The New Jerusalem does not come down from heaven until after the second death.
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.