Gog and Magog
Most of you all who visit Joel’s Trumpet regularly know that I only occasionally have time to really engage in deep discussion to the degree that many subjects here really deserve. In this instance, a poster popped in and made some comments that are right in line with what I am working on right now for an upcoming speaking engagement. Gog and Magog is often a very controversial subject, but I believe that understanding what it means and where it belongs is crucial for several reasons. I do not believe that it should be a controversial passage. In fact, I believe that the only reason that some have had a difficulty with this passage is because it does not line up with the Roman End Time Paradigm. Thus many have been forced to inflict all sorts of violence upon it in order to make it fit into the Roman End Time Paradigm. In any case, I have been enjoying the conversation below and thought that it would interest many of you as well, so I’ve actually turned it into a full post. This poster does not hold to the Roman End Time Paradigm, but instead believes that the war described in Ezekiel 38,39 should strictly be interpreted as taking place at the end of the Milennium. Below is the full discussion as it has gone down over the past couple of days. Thanks Michael!
Michael Says:
December 13th, 2008 at 1:19 am e
Joel,
I truly enjoyed your “Antichrist” book, which I consider one of the most revealing works on Islam in circulation today. It was given to me recently by a friend who said “read this…this guy sounds like you”. It did.
Having said that, I believe your fears about Iran are warranted. The beast in Revelation 13 has the “feet of a bear”, clearly identifying Persia. If we use what we learned from Nebuchanezzar’s statue, then the feet represent the final form of this beast. As we watch Iran attempt to dominate the region, this vision takes on real meaning. More on that some other time perhaps.
I’d like to offer another view of Gog & Magog that you may have covered on this site before, but maybe not. It begins with Revelation 20:7-8, which is the only verse in the Bible other than Ezekiel 38 & 39 that speaks to a battle of ‘Gog & Magog’. This passage clearly identifies a post-millennial Gog & Magog battle, so to place Ezekiel 38 & 39 anywhere else seems to require a great burden of proof. Instead, I find additional support for the post-millennial theory in Ezekiel 38 & 39.
Using a few primary verses from Ezekiel, It seems unlikely that “all of them” living in Israel will live “in safety” or in “unwalled villages” any time in the near future, since they are building even more walls and barriers in our day. Also, I can’t imagine Israel becoming a “peaceful and unsuspecting people”, since out of necessity they are the most wary people in the world, having been attacked in every decade since their return in 1948. Certainly this does not gel with the statement that they have “recovered from war”, since war is ongoing. Additionally, we have to be careful when assuming that Israel has already been “brought out from the nations”, since most of the world’s Jewry still lives outside of the Holy Land. But in contrast, all of these things can be expected of Israel during and after the 1,000 reign of Jesus Christ.
The fact that Israel will gather wood from a defeated Gog & Magog army also suggests a post-millennium battle. Since implements of war will not be available in the millennium (Isaiah2:4) these hordes will create their makeshift weapons from actual wood. In our day, wood is the last thing that an army would use for weaponry….but it’s probably all that will be readily available in that day.
While many commentators feel the “horses and riders” are symbolic for tanks and other mechanized weaponry, this does not square with the statement that the carrion birds and wild animals will “eat their fill” of these horses and riders. Birds and animals can’t eat tanks. But they can eat actual horses and riders. The next attack on Israel will undoubtedly include tanks, so it seems unlikely that it could be this particular attack on horseback.
Also compelling is that God will supernaturally destroy these hordes. For now, one final persecution is looming in Israel’s future, and God not only will allow it, He has planned for it. He will not destroy them when they come.
Still, the most compelling evidence for a post-millennial Gog & Magog battle may rest in the roll call of the nations involved. They are much farther afield than we would anticipate, given todays Middle East politics. But they make a great deal of sense if one places the battle of Armageddon in our age, then Psalm 83 within the Millennium, and finally Gog & Magog after the end of the millennium where the Revelation pegs it.
For instance, we know that Armageddon will claim Babylon as an eternal casualty, and that Egypt and Assyria (Isaiah 19) will then be absorbed into the greater Israel during the Millennium. So any subsequent attacks should find these nations missing in action.
Then along comes Psalm 83, which is mid-millennial in all likelyhood, and this list of attackers is now headed by Edom. Egypt indeed is not included, nor would we expect them to be, as stated above. But surprisingly we do find Assyria on the list, which God appears to lament when He says “even Assyria has joined them.” The Psalm then suggests that God will supernaturally destroy the attackers as He did to several Old Testament characters listed in the Psalm.
Psalm 83 also has a parallel in Ezekiel 35, which similarly describes Edom attacking Israel “even though I the Lord was there” (35:10). Oce again, this suggests the same Millennial context where Christ will rule from Jerusalem, and once again it appears that God destroys them with his own hand.
When we finally get to the Gog & Magog attack after Satan’s release from the Abyss, the roll call of attacking nations becomes even more remote in location. Again, this is expected.
Armageddon will have claimed Babylon, and Psalm 83 will have claimed Edom, so they are naturally not in the list. And Israel will have absorbed most of the remaining Islamic nations all the way to the Euphrates, so they cannot be listed either. So now the attacking nations can come only from the more remote regions that indeed constitute this final updated list in chapters 38 and 39.
Since Turkey is not a noted player in either the battle of Armageddon or Psalm 83, they will be the only Islamic nation remaining with the population and proximity to lead such an assault in the battle of Gog & Magog.
This progression is very linear and logical, and I find nothing else that can reconcile all of the various conditions noted in the various prophecies. That is why the Gog & Magog coalition still cannot be found in our day, try as we may. I believe it is for another time.
All this said, I admire what you have done in your body of work, and I pray that you continue to research and write on the Islamic end-times paradigm. Unless this understanding shifts soon, the western church will pay dearly for clinging to the revived Roman Empire model. The faith of millions will fall away as events unfold contrary to those teachings.
As far as our differing conclusions on this issue, I would only ask that you consider this alternative. It could be wrong, but it could also be right. It provides explanations that I have not found elsewhere. I understand if this post is too long for the website, but I would still welcome your feedback.
God Bless.
————————————————————————————————
Joel Says:
December 13th, 2008 at 6:39 am e
Michael,
Thanks for your saying hello and for your post. The notion that Ezekiel 38 is simply something that occurs at the end of the millennium is an option that has been battered around by some. There are some problems with this however. The worst of course is God’s fairly direct statement that Gog is indeed the same one that is spoken of by the former prophets. What most modern translations word as a rhetorical question is really even more direct in the Septuagint. There it is simply “you are the one - that I have spoken of through my former prophets”. It would seem that this verse should pretty well settle the issue, but it somewhat seems to get ignored. What we need to realize is that despite the fact that many of we modern day Christians have tried to divorce the Ezekiel 38 invasion from the Antichrist invasion, it bears far too many very clear resemblances and internal clues to do so responsibly. What few Christians are aware of is that the Jewish position on this is and has been universal down throughout the centuries: Gog is the Anti-Messiah that the Messiah fights that is spoken of by all of the prophets. In fact, when the Jews speak of the coming “Antichrist” invasion, they do not say Armageddon, but rather “Gog and Magog”. For the Jews, “Gog and Magog” is simply a reference to the hordes of God’s enemies. I liken this to a news reporter referring to the economic meltdown as “Armageddon”. In this culture, the word somewhat loosely is understand to mean “the end of the world.” In the same way, to a 1st Century Jewish, Old Testament literate crowd - as the early Church was - the words Gog and Magog would simply mean the gathering of God’s enemies. So first they are defeated before the millennium and then there is one last very vague assault again at the end of the millennium but one final time they are dealt with. There is much more that could be said, but I think that this touches on the most important reasons why I personally reject this position. But as you said, and as I always say, God knows best, I could be wrong.
Bless you! Joel
——————————————————————————————————–
Michael Says:
December 13th, 2008 at 9:47 pm e
Joel,
Gog certainly was spoken of by the prophets, but I’m not tracking on why this would necessarily settle the issue and point to a pre-millennial battle. The prophets wrote of many judgments against ‘the nations’ that have a variable range of chronological possibilities. Could you expand on this please?
As far as the resemblance between Ezekiel 38 & 39 and Armageddon, I personally see few parallels. Instead, I see immense polarity, with Armageddon portraying the more likely conditions in our day. I believe a comparison would look something like this;
Ezekiel’s Gog & Magog:
1) All Israel living in safety (not in our day)
2) Israel peaceful and unsuspecting (not in our day)
3) Israel living in ‘unwalled villages’ (not in our day)
4) Israel has recovered from war (not in our day)
5) Attackers have wood weapons (not in our day)
6) Attackers on horseback (not in our day)
7) Attackers in distant proximity (not in our day)
All of these things mentioned above are not consistent with the conditions for Israel in our day, or in the foreseeable future, but they would be typical of Israel during and after the Millennium. But the conditions that will lead to Armageddon do seem to be consistent with Israel today;
1) All Israel living under persecution, not in safety
2) Israel is quite wary, not peaceful and unsuspecting
3) Israel is ‘walling’ their villages as we speak
4) Israel has ongoing war every decade since 1948
5) Attackers today would have steel weapons, not wood
6) Attackers today would ride in vehicles, not on horses
7) Attackers today would be in close proximity (P.A.), not far away
From this it would seem improbable that the conditions of Gog & Magog could occur simultaneously with the run-up to Armageddon, or before it. If Gog & Magog was fought prior to Armageddon, there would be very few left to gather for Armageddon only a few years later. They seemingly must be at different points in time. But if you see something that would disect these very points listed above, I would listen.
Additionally, there is still the issue of the systemic winnowing of the nations in the various prophecies that seemingly can only be explained with the Armageddon-to-Psalm 83-to-Gog & Magog progression. This is entirely ignored in virtually everything I’ve read on this subject.
In regard to the Jewish understanding, it seems logical that they would see only Gog as the coming antichrist, since they reject the NT, and rely on the OT. Their view of the antichrist would naturally be of either Gog, or the beast of Daniel, since these are the two best snapshots of the AC in the OT. And since some Jews feel that the AC in Daniel was fulfilled with Epiphanes in 168 B.C., that leaves only Gog as their primary candidate.
In the end, I believe we are looking at two very different time frames, you and I. But it wouldn’t surprise me a bit to find that both of us have a little more work to do. That’s the problem with eschatology. It’s easier to understand it once it’s fulfilled.
Thanks for being a good sport.
——————————————————————————————
Hi Michael,
Gog certainly was spoken of by the prophets, but I’m not tracking on why this would necessarily settle the issue and point to a pre-millennial battle. The prophets wrote of many judgments against ‘the nations’ that have a variable range of chronological possibilities. Could you expand on this please?
This is very important. Where are these clear references to Gog that God would have expected the reader to be aware of? you are the first person that I have encountered that says, “Yes, Gog is spoken of by the prophets.” Could you explain where you believe these references are?
Now, there is a saying among the Jewish commentators that “Scripture does not speak unless it speaks of the Messiah” In other words, the message of the prophets has one general burden and emphasis, and that is the Messiah. It speaks to his first coming and his second coming with arguabley more emphasis on the second coming. Of course, there are other things that Scriptures do speak to, but in general this is the overwhelming prophetic burden and emphasis. So Jesus’ second coming (and the events that immediately surround that event) is the most primary thrust, and ultimate fulfillment of all of the prophetic books. So when we speak about the return of Christ / coming of the Messiah, the story is always the same throughout the prophets. Though they each present us with a different angle, each representing a different snap-shots, the general event is always in mind:
At the end of the age, a large horde of gentile nations would attack Israel and nearly destroy her. One final chastisement from God. But a remnant would be saved. God, through Messiah would deliver Israel and He would forever then be their king. That is the summary of what they are all talking about.
The highly Old Testament literate Jews of Ezekiel’s day would have immediately recognized God’s statement that “You are the one that I have spoken of by the former prophets” (emphasis plural) as pointing to the same thing that all of the other prophets constantly were speaking about: The coming invasion that leads to the coming of the Messiah.
As far as the resemblance between Ezekiel 38 & 39 and Armageddon, I personally see few parallels
I’m baffled by your statement here. Every passage in the Book of Revelation is founded on / rooted in an OT passage. Rev 19 is thoroughly rooted in Ezekiel 38 and Isaiah 63. Pick up virtually any commentary and it will highlight this fact. These two passages are inextricably linked in numerous ways. I’ll look at a few below. But the biggest error that most make is to try to compare Ezekiel and Armageddon in isolation. Instead, we need to compare Ezekiel 38 with all of the various passages about the Antichrist and his invasion, not just Rev 19. The passage in Revelation of Armageddon is only one snap-shot. The Scriptures give us many. When we try to isolate just one passage and draw such important conclusions, we are being irresponsible, in my opinion, as interpreters. We need to always take into consideration the full counself of Scripture. We cannot form doctrines or opinions on isolated passages. This reminds me of the cultists that I used to encounter in Boston shortly after I came to Christ. they were from the Boston Church of Chirst movement. They hold that you are saved only through Baptism (into their group). however, while there is one verse that says that “baptism now saves you.”, there are also 72 other verses that says that we are saved by faith. One must take all of relvant data into consideration before forming doctrines. That said, lets get back to the issue of parallels. Just a few quick comparisons to see if there are truly as you said, only a “few parallels”:
“The Call” - “The birds” - “The Feast of God” - “the flesh of kings”
Call out to every kind of bird and all the wild animals: ‘Assemble and come together from all around to the sacrifice I am preparing for you, the great sacrifice on the mountains of Israel. There you will eat flesh and drink blood. You will eat the flesh of mighty men and drink the blood of the princes of the earth… At my table you will eat your fill of horses and riders, mighty men and soldiers of every kind,’ declares Yahweh the Sovereign. —Ezekiel 39:17-20
And I saw an angel standing in the sun, who cried in a loud voice to all the birds flying in midair, “Come, gather together for the great supper of God, so that you may eat the flesh of kings, generals, and mighty men, of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, small and great.” —Revelation 19:17
“Plagues” - “Swords against each other”
This is the plague with which the LORD will strike all the nations that fought against Jerusalem: Their flesh will rot while they are still standing on their feet, their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongues will rot in their mouths. On that day men will be stricken by the LORD with great panic. Each man will seize the hand of another, and they will attack each other. -Zechariah 14:12-13
I will summon a sword against Gog on all my mountains, declares the Sovereign LORD. Every man’s sword will be against his brother. I will execute judgment upon him with plague and bloodshed. -Ezekiel 38:21-22
“The Great Earthquake” - “The Mountains fall down”
For in my jealousy and in the fire of my wrath have I spoken, Surely in that day there shall be a great shaking in the land of Israel; So that the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the heaven, and the beasts of the field, and all creeping things that creep upon the earth, and all the men that are upon the face of the earth, shall shake at my presence, and the mountains shall be thrown down, and the steep places shall fall, and every wall shall fall to the ground. —Ezekiel 38:19-20
Then they gathered the kings together to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon… And there was a great earthquake, such as was not since men were upon the earth, so mighty an earthquake, and so great… and the cities of the nations fell… And every island fled away, and the mountains were not found. —Revelation 16:18:-20
I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle… Then Yahweh will go forth and fight against those nations, as when He fights on a day of battle. In that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which is in front of Jerusalem on the east; and the Mount of Olives will be split in its middle from east to west by a very large valley, so that half of the mountain will move toward the north and the other half toward the south. —Zechariah 14:1-4
“Great Hailstones”
I will rain upon him, and upon his bands, and upon the many people that are with him, an overflowing rain, and great hailstones, fire, and brimstone. —Ezekiel 38:22
Then they gathered the kings together to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon… Then there came… From the sky huge hailstones of about a hundred pounds each fell upon men. —Revelation 16:16-21
“The King of the North”
“Therefore, son of man, prophesy and say to Gog: ‘This is what the Sovereign LORD says: In that day, when my people Israel are living in safety, will you not take notice of it? 15 You will come from your place in the far north, you and many nations with you, all of them riding on horses, a great horde, a mighty army. 16 You will advance against my people Israel like a cloud that covers the land. In days to come, O Gog, I will bring you against my land, so that the nations may know me when I show myself holy through you before their eyes. Ezekiel 38:14-16
“Son of man, prophesy against Gog and say: ‘This is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am against you, O Gog, chief prince of Meshech and Tubal. 2 I will turn you around and drag you along. I will bring you from the far north and send you against the mountains of Israel. 3 Then I will strike your bow from your left hand and make your arrows drop from your right hand. 4 On the mountains of Israel you will fall, you and all your troops and the nations with you. Ezekiel: 39:1-4
“At the time of the end the king of the South will engage him in battle, and the king of the North (Antichrist) will storm out against him with chariots and cavalry and a great fleet of ships. He will invade many countries and sweep through them like a flood. 41 He will also invade the Beautiful Land. Many countries will fall, but Edom, Moab and the leaders of Ammon will be delivered from his hand. 42 He will extend his power over many countries; Egypt will not escape. Daniel 11:40-42
“I will drive the northern army far from you, pushing it into a parched and barren land, with its front columns going into the eastern sea and those in the rear into the western sea. And its stench will go up; its smell will rise.” Surely he has done great things. Joel 2
“loot, wealth and plunder”
I will plunder and loot and turn my hand against the resettled ruins and the people gathered from the nations, rich in livestock and goods, living at the center of the land.” Sheba and Dedan and the merchants of Tarshish and all her villages [a] will say to you, “Have you come to plunder? Have you gathered your hordes to loot, to carry off silver and gold, to take away livestock and goods and to seize much plunder?” Ezekiel 38:12-13
Behold, the day of Yahweh cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee. For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city. Zechariah 14:1-2
“When the richest provinces feel secure, he will invade them… He will distribute plunder, loot, and wealth among his followers.” Daniel 11:24
“Woe to the Assyrian (the Antichrist), the rod of my anger, in whose hand is the club of my wrath! I send him against a godless nation; I dispatch him against a people who anger me, to seize loot and snatch plunder, and to trample them down like mud in the streets. But this is not what he intends, this is not what he has in mind; his purpose is to destroy, to put an end to many nations.” Isaiah 10:5-7
Now, I’m not trying to be snarky, but would you still really say that you see only a “few parallels”? I could list more of course.
Instead, I see immense polarity, with Armageddon portraying the more likely conditions in our day. I believe a comparison would look something like this;
Ezekiel’s Gog & Magog:
1) All Israel living in safety (not in our day)
2) Israel peaceful and unsuspecting (not in our day)
3) Israel living in ‘unwalled villages’ (not in our day)
4) Israel has recovered from war (not in our day)
All of these things will be precisely the case after the false “peace treaty” is signed. Israel will place her trust in this false treaty. In fact, this is precisely how Daniel describes the invasion motives of the Antichrist. Exactly: “When the richest provinces feel secure, he (the Antichrist) will invade them” (Daniel 11:24) As for any “immense polarity” I am certainly not seeing one lick of it yet.
5) Attackers have wood weapons (not in our day)
6) Attackers on horseback (not in our day)
7) Attackers in distant proximity (not in our day)
The issue of horsebacks etc is not a problem. Remember that this is Hebrew prophetic poetry. We cannot read it in a hyper-wooden literal fashion (pun intended). We need to remember that this is indeed poetry and that it is 2500 some odd years old. Ezekiel would not have said that they would come in Toyotas and Nissans etc. To give another example, there is an almost identical passage in Isaiah, that says that in the millenium, after the destruction of the Antichrist, the nations will “beast their swords into plow.” Now, is this verse to be taken literally - that there will be a call that will go out to find all antique and replica swords and bring them to the nearest smelter’s shop to be melted down and turned specifcally into plows? Or should we read this to mean that all weapons of warfare will be dimantled, and instead our efforts will be toward growing food etc? Likewise, in Ezekiel weapons will no longer be needed, instead people will expend their resources for the purpose of common life issues such as cooking, etc. Beyond this, we have no knowledge what the Millennium will be like. Who says that we will not have technology under Christ? Will we only ride horses etc.? Will the Millennium under Christ necessarily be a back to the garden / rainbow festival? That is a very broad assumption that lacks any real support.
From this it would seem improbable that the conditions of Gog & Magog could occur simultaneously with the run-up to Armageddon, or before it. If Gog & Magog was fought prior to Armageddon, there would be very few left to gather for Armageddon only a few years later.
In my opinion, they are the same battle. Different accounts, different perspectives. Again, no need to overcomplicate the simple themes of the prophets. Gog Magog I believe is a very general overview of that whole final 3 and a half year time period. Lets put it this way: Even as the Gospel accounts vary greatly on some points, sometimes even seeming contradictory, they are simply different accounts, different perspectives. But if I used the somewhat rigid western literalism that some use when trying to divorce Gog from the AC, then I could actually far more effectively argue that each Gospel is telling about a different Jesus.
Additionally, there is still the issue of the systemic winnowing of the nations in the various prophecies that seemingly can only be explained with the Armageddon-to-Psalm 83-to-Gog & Magog progression. This is entirely ignored in virtually everything I’ve read on this subject.
Hmmm. Where is the Scriptures is there any “systematic winnowing” of the nations. I see wars and rumors of wars and nations rising up against nation, and then the final battle. But not a gradual winnowing. Where does Psalm 83 specifically describe an actual invasion in such a way to merit such a strong position? I see the plans, but no actual implementation. If you can find it, let me know. Also, why not also separate Joel 2-3, Zechariah 12-14, Psalm 2, Isaiah 63 as all separate battles as well?
In regard to the Jewish understanding, it seems logical that they would see only Gog as the coming antichrist, since they reject the NT, and rely on the OT. Their view of the antichrist would naturally be of either Gog, or the beast of Daniel, since these are the two best snapshots of the AC in the OT. And since some Jews feel that the AC in Daniel was fulfilled with Epiphanes in 168 B.C., that leaves only Gog as their primary candidate.
Hold up. First of all, the Old Testament is rife with descriptions of the Antichrist and his final attack. Micah 5 and Isaiah speak extensively for instance about the Assyrian. And I am unaware of any Jewish commentators who think that Antiochus fulfilled the all of Daniel’s prophecies. I am big on Jewish commentaries to get a fuller understanding and the various sages and Rabbis down through the ages, (I would argue including the Jewish believers in the 1st century) understood Gog and Magog to be the final evil ruler and his armies. Again, remember that Rev 19 the Battle of Armageddon is founded on Ezekiel 38. The whole passage about the birds feasting on the flesh of kings and the great feast of God is essentially ripped word for word right out of Ezekiel 38. Any Jewish interpreter would see a clear continuity between the two passages.
In the end, I believe we are looking at two very different time frames, you and I. But it wouldn’t surprise me a bit to find that both of us have a little more work to do. That’s the problem with eschatology. It’s easier to understand it once it’s fulfilled.
I fully agree.
Thanks for being a good sport.
I am on this right now, preparing for a message on it, so this is good for me to review. But truthfully I wish I had gone for a run this morning instead. 
Bless you, Joel
Update (after my short run):
There is another very important factor in this. God emphasizes the fact that it is only AFTER the destruction of Gog and Magog that the nations and Israel will actually know Him. To make such a statement after Christ has been literally ruling over the earth for a thousand years would make utterly no sense at all:
And so I will show my greatness and my holiness, and I will make myself known in the sight of many nations. Then they will know that I am Yahweh.’ I will send fire on Magog and on those who live in safety in the coastlands, and they will know that I am Yahweh… ” ‘I will make known my holy name among my people Israel. I will no longer let my holy name be profaned, and the nations will know that I Yahweh am the Holy One in Israel. It is coming! It will surely take place, declares Yahweh the Sovereign. This is the day I have spoken of. —Ezekiel 38:23-39:7-8
Clearly the nations and Israel would have all already known this quite well if they were living in the millennium under Christ’s rule. The millennium is the period afterall where “the knowledge of God will cover the earth as the waters cover the sea.” Habukuuk 2:14, Isaiah 11:9. So this also is another, in my opinion, clear reason not to see Ezekiel 38, 39 as an event that takes place at the end of the Millennium.
December 14th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
The reference to Gog and Magog at the end of the Millennium is so general as to demand metaphorical meaning. God uses metaphorical names frequently. For instance, the “Son of David” means, Jesus, the son of God. Isaiah’s use of “The King of Babylon” and “The Assyrian” clearly refer to someone to come, and not temporal rulers. Ans so on.
More importantly, who is this Messiah who rules from Jerusalem? In Michael’s interpretation he seems rather weak and ineffectual, if there is to be warfare both mid-Millennium, and at the end. Indeed, Michael says “Since Turkey is not a noted player in either the battle of Armageddon or Psalm 83, they will be the only Islamic nation remaining with the population and proximity to lead such an assault in the battle of Gog & Magog.”
Perhaps I misunderstand, but surely Michael is not saying Islam will be practiced in the Millennium? That would make Messiah little different than the Pope today. What sort of righteous world rule is that, when Islam (and who knows what else) continues? And since Islam’s key characteristic is to be violent and Antichrist in detail, that beggers belief.
Now Obama is already planning a “nuclear umbrella” and a peace treaty for Israel, as are the others of the Quartet (the Four Craftsmen?). He is planning his big speech from a Muslim capitol, as the signature foreign policy initiative of his “first 100 days.” Yes. by now everyone knows not to expect peace in the ME, yet the Bible says it will be so, and Islamic –and more importantly Christian –eschatology say there will be a seven year pact with the Jews. So there will be a pact, or the Bible is fallible. It will bring peace, which the nations will violate when Israel rests at peace.
December 14th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
I have had problems on this subject for many years. I have personally held to the pre-millennial view of Ez:38 but I find inconsistencies in my views…. In support for pre-mil. : The Rev:20 event seems to close out time and history so why burn weapons for seven years or bury dead for that matter in Ez. ? A reading of Ez. 39 seems to be a description of the ushering in of Christ’s millennial reign, a very strong description in my opinion. Inconsistency: The Anti-Christ takes Jerusalem but Gog doesn’t seem to in either of his references. The Ez. verses state that the people are unwalled and SAFE, not that they “feel” safe, they are safe per God’s statement. As far as everyone knowing God throughout the entire millennium, that’s disputable because in Rev.20 they number like the sand of the sea. Something has darkened their minds to the point that they attack The Mighty King at his Holy Mount. I don’t believe they will believe they are attacking the all-powerful God. Or maybe they all go insane like Satan himself?……Just a few thoughts.
December 15th, 2008 at 6:36 am
Hi Chris,
Exactly on the burning of weapons. This makes sense if it is pre-millennial, but not if it takes place at the end of the millennium, as the millennium is followed by the new heavens and new earth, which seems to be far less earthy than the millennium.
Again, simply because one snap-shot does not give a particular detail does not mean that it is not part of the story. We could do the exact same thing with the Gospels. One Gospel includes a detail or event that the other does not, but they are still speaking about the same event. Ezekiel 38-39 is speaking in a much more general way of the entire final 3 and a half year period. Revelation 19 is a bit more focused on the final campaign of that period. Lets look at another passage that serves well to explain how a passage present us with a very loose overview of a very broad period of time, leaving out vast portions of information:
1 Nevertheless, there will be no more gloom for those who were in distress. In the past he humbled the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, but in the future he will honor Galilee of the Gentiles, by the way of the sea, along the Jordan-
2 The people walking in darkness
have seen a great light;
on those living in the land of the shadow of death
a light has dawned.
3 You have enlarged the nation
and increased their joy;
they rejoice before you
as people rejoice at the harvest,
as men rejoice
when dividing the plunder.
4 For as in the day of Midian’s defeat,
you have shattered
the yoke that burdens them,
the bar across their shoulders,
the rod of their oppressor.
5 Every warrior’s boot used in battle
and every garment rolled in blood
will be destined for burning,
will be fuel for the fire.
6 For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given,
and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
7 Of the increase of his government and peace
there will be no end.
He will reign on David’s throne
and over his kingdom,
establishing and upholding it
with justice and righteousness
from that time on and forever.
The zeal of the LORD Almighty
will accomplish this.
Zero in on the last two verses. Using your same argument, let’s say that an unbelieving Jew entered the conversation. He says that Jesus is not this child because he was born two thousand years ago and his government did not increase and he does not now sit on the Throne of David (In Israel). In other words, because he reads this as one seamless event, it proves that it cannot be speaking about Jesus. A natural reading of the passage, ignoring the nature of prophecy would actually support his position. So while this passage gives us zero indication that there is at least a two thousand year time gap somewhere in-between the birth of the Child and the day when he will sit on David’s Throne, we know that it is there. Likewise, knowing what we know from the abundance of other passages that speak of the final three and half year period, we know that Ezekiel 38,39 also includes the taking of Jerusalem prior to the destruction of Gog and his armies. Simply because the passage does not mention this, in no way allows us to demand that it is not there. Make sense?
Not true. It is only a perceived safety. Ezekiel 38:12 specifically says that the people are “unsuspecting”.
You will say, “I will invade a land of unwalled villages; I will attack a peaceful and unsuspecting people—all of them living without walls and without gates and bars…. This is what the Sovereign LORD says: In that day, when my people Israel are living in safety, will you not take notice of it? Ezekiel 38:12,14
In order to assess whether the “safety’ is real or perceived, all we must do is look at the context of the passage. The simple fact that the Gog / Magog invasion happens pretty well answers the question, does it not? Obviously they thought that they were safe from invasion but were 100% wrong. So again, this is only a perceived safety as is made clear by verse 12, where it sates that they are “unsuspecting”.
I think that the juxtopositioning of these two passages is fairly enlightening as to the fact that these are the same two individuals:
You will say, “I will invade a land of unwalled villages; I will attack a peaceful and unsuspecting people—all of them living without walls and without gates and bars. I will plunder and loot and turn my hand against the resettled ruins and the people gathered from the nations, rich in livestock and goods, living at the center of the land. Ezekiel 38:12, 13
When the richest provinces feel secure, he will invade them Daniel 11:24
Thanks for sharing them bro. Like, I said, this is helpful for me right now as I am buttoning up this teaching. Obviously the Bible says that during the millennium, the knowledge of God will cover the earth in a vast way under Jesus’ reign. But at the end, Satan is loosed from his chains and he deceives the peoples one last time. This shows how reprobate we truly are and how deeply we really need the Lord. But it does not negate the reality of those other passages for the majority of the thousand years under Christ.
Bless you,
Joel
December 15th, 2008 at 11:12 am
Great discussions, Joel, thanks. I think you’ve hit the nail on the head regarding Gog/Magog.
December 15th, 2008 at 11:17 am
Robert Shank, author of “Until He Comes”, takes the position that Jesus
does not reign in the Millennium in bodily form, but via the “Glory”.
…In the same way he ruled in Israel’s Glory Days…(When He lived
among them in the dessert) His presence would be obvious but He
would not be a literal touchable King.
December 15th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Not to be argumentative, but rather to illuminate other possible angles: …… “In order to assess whether the “safety’ is real or perceived, all we must do is look at the context of the passage. The simple fact that the Gog / Magog invasion happens pretty well answers the question, does it not? Obviously they thought that they were safe from invasion but were 100% wrong. So again, this is only a perceived safety as is made clear by verse 12, where it sates that they are “unsuspecting”.”……..Just because an enemy is attacking doesn’t mean they aren’t literally safe in God’s view: Psalm 2:4. If this Gog does not take Jerusalem and set up the abomination, but falls short, it can be argued that they were indeed safe from God’s perspective. On the contrary they may have even come to perceive themselves as unsafe while God’s statement remained true. Ez.38 is the most detailed version of an attack against Israel in the whole Bible in my opinion. To leave out the capture of Jerusalem and the abomination that causes desolation is to say in my opinion; interesting. I’m not saying it’s not possible it’s left out, but I’m just raising strong, legitimate, questions that come to mind.
December 15th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
“You will advance against MY PEOPLE ISRAEL…Ez.38″
(same Israel spoken of in Ezekiel 37…the combined Houses of Judah and
Ephraim)…That’s not present day Israel!!
This is clearly GOD’s complete Israel…regathered from all Nations
living in a “thousand year Peace”…no walls or gates or any other means
of defense. They feel completely secure.
Once again, present day Israel is always “Judah” in prophetic writing.
The only other explanation would be America as “spiritual Israel” and this
theory continues to cause me problems.
December 15th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
I don’t see any problem with interpreting the single stick as modern Israel undivided - north/south. Why think of America as a spiritual Israel when we have the real thing in control of Jerusalem? I love my country and deeply admire it’s relatively righteous history, but the Great King will rule from Jerusalem not Washington. I understand the reasoning and emotion behind what some call British/Israelism but I believe the Bible is talking about a literal Israel and we need to look at reality separate from our emotion. Sincerely, and I mean in love.
December 15th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Chris,
Yes…I’m not speaking of British/Israelism, I’m speaking of the “one stick”.
Forget America…let’s talk about Modern day Israel. When did the “one stick”
scenario take place? Has it already happened? Maybe an argument could be made for the “CHURCH” being the “one stick”, and I think spiritually it
probably is…but not the modern day Nation of Israel.
The real thing? What is the real thing? “My people Israel”….Is this a Nation of agnostic pagans? I can’t accept this!
The Israel of GOD are the people of GOD…those who belong to HIM!
I believe that eventually Modern day Israel/Judah will Believe and be
re grafted back into their “vine”, but It hasn’t happened yet. This is
still future. As for America, time will tell as to what role we will play.
The Israel of GOD in Ez. 37 and 38 are already “One” and at “Peace”
December 15th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
Deception is just that…It’s tricky…hard to see…Let’s pray for wisdom
and discernment and keep our hearts humble and open.
December 15th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
When the prophets spoke of Israel and Judah even during the times of their vilest behavior, they were still spoken of as God’s people. I see the one stick as Israel’s emergence as one nation undivided as it now exists…. Rev. chapter 12 clearly shows The Church and Israel as co-existent during the Anti-Christ’s reign. Israel comes to believe in Jesus as the Messiah when he finally returns to rescue them from total annihilation. See Zech. 12:10. All my opinions which could be wrong.
December 15th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Nancy, you wrote, “The Israel of GOD in Ez. 37 and 38 are already “One” and at “Peace” . “. In my opinion the later half of Chap.37 is farther a-future then the first half. But I’m still only about 70% convinced that Gog in Chap. 38 is a pre-millennial attack on Israel by the Anti-Christ. That is my view but I see many troublesome inconsistencies.
December 15th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Chris
The norhern Kingdom of Israel/Ephraim became “not MY People”(Hosea)
They were given a certificate of divorce and scattered to every corner
of the planet. Jesus came to Judah and said “I have other sheep”/I came
to regather the “lost sheep of Israel”.
Judah was never put away…Judah had to birth the KING…and
then Jesus via the CROSS widowed Judah.(this is important because it
explains how the New Covenant came to be)
Judah and Israel/Ephraim became “One” again in the JESUS.
Paul spends a lot of time on this…
Only the Israel that is “ONE IN JESUS” is a complete ISRAEL.
The EZ 37 and 38 Israel is You and me and all other BELIEVERS…
living in the Mountains of Israel, in the “Thousand years of Peace”
Blessings
December 15th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
I will not discount out of hand your statements, but neither can I discount the reality of fulfilled prophecy in the form of modern Israel and my inner recognition of their special relationship to God above the gentile nations which I believe the Holy Spirit has placed in my heart. Paul himself states that Israel will be saved, which implies they aren’t yet saved; therefore how could they be the Church which is saved?
December 15th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
Chris
I believe Paul is speaking of the Israel of his day and clarifying
the only way He can without being too confusing.
We are in agreement regarding Present day Israel…they are going
to be re-grafted in! (or at least a remnant will) What is the purpose of the “tribulation”, if not to help that process along?
But the CHURCH can’t be ignored either.
My position does not diminish anyone…GOD knows those who will
enter into eternity with HIM…and he calls them “HIS”.
December 15th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
…Also, Paul would say “In Christ there is no JEW or GENTILE”…when
are we going to accept this?
December 15th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
Hi again Joel,
I wasn’t going to post again on this topic since it was not my desire to be divisive here, but merely to engage in discussion. But after getting back into town and viewing your last post, I thought I’d better clear up a couple things. Then I’m going to just let this go. It has been enjoyable for my part. Sorry to keep you from your run, but that couldn’t have been much fun anyway (smile).
At the top of the list is that I’m not a ‘revived Roman Empire’ guy as you seemed to imply in your last post. I hope that wasn’t intended for me, but if so…ouch, that hurts. I’ve been on Islam for years, not the Roman Empire. Too many scriptures clearly defeat the Roman Empire model. I began to understand, as you did, that Islam was the only logical fulfillment for this beast. As a result, I’ve been teaching about an Islamic final empire for many years now, long before others began to examine this position, and I’ve suffered many of the same arrows you have. We really have significant disagreement only on this one topic, as far as I can tell. But it is an important disagreement because it speaks to the potential identity of the next leader of the Caliphate.
Switching gears now. Regarding the notion that “any commentary” would tie Revelation 19 to Ezekiel 38 and Isaiah 63, that does not necessarily mean the commentary is correct. That has been my point all along. Some of these very same commentators would also tell you that the AC will come through Europe and will be the head of a revived Roman Empire. Their books are sitting on my shelves.
If we return to the first century, “any commentary” from almost any Pharisee would also probably have told us that Jesus was not the Messiah. They had the same OT scriptures we have, but their interpretations were wrong. And if we read “any commentary” in the West today regarding the rapture, chances are real good that it will advocate a pre-tribulation position. But they don’t believe that in the East, as you must know. And yet, we all have the same scriptures to work from. It comes down to how we interpret the same data.
With regard to the line items I had listed, thank you for your list of similarities. I acknowledge those, and have always acknowledged those. I should have been more specific. My point was directed toward the primary issues that may distinguish one battle from another, rather than the points that they would all naturally have in common.
For instance, many epic battles would have certain things in common, regardless of their moment in time. Throughout history, the “carrion birds” and animals have regularly fed on the flesh of the vanquished on the abandoned battle field. Also, the Lord has often used confusion and self-slaughter as a means of defeating Israel’s enemies. This tactic has not been reserved only for one battle at the end of this age, or another battle at the end of the Millennium, but is noted elsewhere in the Bible as well, such as Joshua’s conquest at Gibeon. And as long as “hailstones” were mentioned as a similarity, the Lord also hurled immense hailstones upon Joshua’s enemies as they fled. So confusion and hailstones have both been used by the Lord before, and will be again, perhaps on many more occasions. In themselves, these parallels merely describe things that all of the Lord’s battles may have in common. I don’t believe that they simply must, out of necessity, link Gog with Armageddon.
As to the earthquakes, it would seem apparent to me that the earth has always, and will always, shake in God’s presence during times of judgment. Surely the earth shook wildly when He brought the flood, and the Revelation demonstrates that He will shake it several more times in increasing strength at the end of this age. So why would He not shake it yet again after the end of the Millennium during the Gog & Magog of that passage? It would seem logical that He will, so I’m not so sure that we can make an iron-clad case for letting earthquakes link these battles either.
With respect to the “without walls” condition of Ezekiel, Zechariah 2:4-5 also makes a play for Gog’s unwalled villages, placing them in a Millennial context;
“..Run, tell that young man, ‘Jerusalem will be a city without walls because of the great number of men and livestock in it. And I myself will be a wall of fire around it’ declares the LORD, ‘and I will be it’s glory within’.
His Glory departed from the Temple long ago, and will return only once this current age is over. In my mind, the time of unwalled villages here and in Ezekiel tends to point to the Millennium. And the massive barricade that Israel built to separate their territory from PA territory seems enough to qualify many of Israel’s villages as “walled” in this age, rather than unwalled, particular when one acknowledges the poetry of the Bible as you stated.
I would also not agree that the Syrian “King of the North” is synonymous with the prince from the “far north” described in Ezekiel, at least as far as their moment in time is concerned. They certainly have “north” in common, and they will both seek “plunder”, but then, isn’t that the goal of all despots? There are still as many variables as similarities, particularly with regard to the nations that are mentioned in their accounts, but just as important…..the nations that are not.
When I mentioned the gradual winnowing of the nations, I was speaking of how the list of attackers changes after each battle, if they were placed in the order that I propose. This is based on who is destroyed in each instance, and who is then absorbed into an expanding Israel. It provides a logical progression that explains why the attackers come from more distant regions each instance. The attackers listed in Ezekiel come from countries that are far more distant than the countries typically tied to Armageddon.
Joel, you believe they are simply different snapshots of the same event, and you may be correct. But I believe they may be snapshots of different events, and that may also be correct. Only time will tell. Again, it is only important to me in that we need to properly identify the head of the next Caliphate. In this it may be better to consider more than one possibility. If we peg only Turkey and it ends up being Iran, then we are worse off for it. The feet of “a bear” on the Revelation 13 beast speaks volumes, and it speaks of Iran (Persia).
Joel, I have enjoyed the exchange. That we disagree on this point is not unusual. How many people studying the end times would agree on every point? None, I would think. But I wish continued success for you. Defending your work in a blog is one thing, but Inter-faith dialogue is a particularly tough arena that I would not enjoy, and you seem to carry the burden well. I won’t bother you on this again. It’s your website, and the last word is yours.
God bless you and yours this Christmas.
December 15th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
Paul also says ‘to the Jew first’ more than once therefore delineating a difference between Jew and gentile. I believe that there will eventually be no difference but as of now there is. There’s too much scripture delineating a difference between The Church and Israel concerning this present era for me to recognize them as one in the same. That’s not to say one can’t describe The Church as a type of Israel, but I’m talking of Israel as the descendants of Jacob in the flesh. And on this matter I personally don’t have any doubt, nor do I observe any serious inconsistencies. Only my opinion and sincere thanks for your thoughts.
December 15th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
Yes…I agree. I believe that there will also be a physical (not spiritual)
fulfillment of Ez. 37 and 38. That brings us back to the “one stick”.
When does literal Judah and Ephraim become “one”?
December 15th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
also…Chris, modern day Israel knows they are Judah. They came within
a hair of taking the name Judah…(for some reason, at the last minute
they chose Israel).
The spiritual teachers are also looking for “the one stick” fulfillment.
December 15th, 2008 at 5:10 pm
Michael,
Just got in and read the first few paragraphs of your post. I hope that I do not come across as too argumentative or rude in my posts. I find that I tend to learn the most when I “wrestle” through things with other sharp minds. My wife often warns me that I come across as argumentative. I rarely see it that way, but I need to remember that not everyone has the same disposition as myself. So I apologise if I came across as wrong-spirited in any way. I was enjoying this enough to share it with everyone. Also, I didn’t view you as a Roman End time guy at all. Nor did I intend to infer that. This is just normally who is in disagreement with me on this one, but yours is a different angle altogether. And as for the last word, this is the Internet and no one is entitled to that. I try to be as open here as I can. I’ll go through what you wrote in better detail later. But please don’t think that your comments represent you bothering me at all. Just the opposite. Iron sharpens iron. Bless ya! Joel
December 15th, 2008 at 5:18 pm
Even though I spoke of the one-stick as physically fulfilled by the present day unity of Israel, the possibility of a spiritual side to the prophecy can’t be discounted either. The possible meaning of one-stick as a unity of Jew and Gentile is something I can see as a possible spiritual side of the prophecy, but I see the current nation of Israel as a physical fulfillment for now.
December 16th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Nancy and Chris,
I agree with you, Nancy - the two sticks are not yet rejoined in the literal sense. God promised to regather both houses, He said He’d “save the tents of Judah first” and He is doing just that through the Jewish reformation of the modern state of Israel, but the house of Israel is not yet rejoined to Judah, and the blindness of which Paul spoke is over both houses - right now Judah is mostly blind to her messiah but aware of her heritage while Israel is mostly blind to her heritage but aware of her messiah. One day the eyes will open on both sides and no longer will there be jealousy between the two, and “all Israel will be saved.” As believers - regardless of genetics - we are one body Israel, we are grafted into THEIR tree through Messiah’s gospel and the new covenant is all about Israel’s revival, both physical and spiritual, and includes both houses and their “companions” (Gentile believers).
I think that this rejoining will take place during the 70th week, and that quite possibly by the middle of the week, much of the house of Israel will be regathered into the literal land in fulfillment of Ez 38, as Judah awakens to her messiah and Israel awakens to her heritage. I believe that the house of Israel will come from all the nations and we’ll be stunned at the sheer numbers. I believe through much study that the scriptures, both OT and NT, are full of promises and prophecy and allusions to all of the above. It is, in my opinion, a spiritual key that, once turned, illuminates much of prophetic scripture like never before. I’d be more than happy to cite as many verses as I can - there’s a ton!
This view is NOT British Israelism, it is NOT Armstrongism and it is NOT replacement theology. In addition, this view is not at all compatible with the popular concepts of dispensationalism or the pretrib rapture, so in essence it overhauls large chunks of modern eschatology. But hey, we’ve already done that here by throwing out the traditional Roman model…
With regard to the Gog War and its timing, I agree with Joel - we can look at the whole of prophecy and glean many details and facets that make up the expanse of its tapestry - here a little, there a little, til the picture is complete.
With that in mind, I believe that the events of Ez 38-39 encompass the entire last half of the seventieth week, starting with the abomination of desolation (which is the capstone of the Gog invasion) and the war continues until the second coming and Armageddon. Many support scriptures can be found for this. Read Joel, for example, with Ez 38-39, the A of D, and Armageddon in mind - he likely describes the 70th week’s 2nd half from start to finish, beginning with a surprise invasion from the north, a cessation of sacrifice, and ending with divine intervention.
Very interesting discussion - I had never read such detailed defense of the post-mil position as effectively outlined by Michael, although I believe that the mid to end of trib position makes more sense. The pre-trib position, however, is easily discarded when one realizes the ultimate result of God’s defense of Israel in that He will allow His holy name to be profaned no longer - if Gog occurs before the 70th week, this certainly doesn’t happen as His holy name IS profaned throughout the 70th week.
December 16th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
agrace,
We will have to disagree(on a few points), but I love your Spirit!
Joel’s position is your preferred…Michael’s rings truer to me…
As time reveals more of our future, we’ll all see clearer.
I’m so thankful to find fellow Believers who care enough to
watch and observe. I know I’m in GOOD company!
Blessings
December 16th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
Michael,
I have been enjoying the interchange between you and Joel, and am disheartened that you are dropping out of the dialog.
Alas, it seems that all too many in the camp of the faithful regard debate and the intricate practice of trading point and counterpoint as necessarily adversarial, and therefore, somehow, a breeding ground for evil wherein the saints ought not tread.
I am rarely as frustrated in my Christian life as I am when a sharp mind such as yours chooses to disengage from an invigorating and deeply detailed discussion of some important point as you and Joel have been. I greatly lament that so often the will to remain engaged seems to fail as if overcome by some fear that continuing the dialog would beget antagonism, or that the effort to continue is too great.
If the discovery of the Truth is important, then does it not warrant the investment of perseverance sufficient to bring it to birth?
And if fear be the dissuading force, know that God has not given us a spirit of fear, so it must be coming from someone else.
Michael, I would not that you allow me to change your mind, but I would that you pray, fast, and seek the wisdom of God in this. In fact, I would that all participants be continually fasting and in prayer, that their input would be the more suffused with The Spirit; that the very mind of Christ would be made know among us.
Consider, therefore, that the sticking point in a debate is not a personally owned thing, but an external object that all may examine who come to the table. Viewed objectively, all may freely make their observations, and that without prejudice to any other present. This is, I think, the critical mental construct the ignorance of which kills sound debate: that the substantive issues must be wholly divorced from our persons; we do not own them, but set them at arms’ length and subject them to the stringencies of unstinting scriptural testing as things independent of our selves. ONLY with this mindframe can a thoroughgoing argument hope to remain amicable among all parties present. If any at the table takes too great an ownership of his position, he risks becoming too greatly one with that which is being examined and tested, and will too sharply feel the pricks and prods of the other arguments being made against that which he owns. All too soon, then, he will lose his ability to remain objective, become provoked, and may well turn needlessly adversarial.
I’ve seen it happen time and time again, and — even if the negative emotions are recognized, put in check, confessed, and forgiven all the way around — 99% of the time, the debate dies where it stands. In this way, much that might have been edifying to the citizens of The Kingdom has been abandoned “on the operating table,” so to speak.
Michael, if you will entertain it out of love for the Truth, fast, pray, wrestle with God, and see whether He will call you to perseverance with Joel in this debate. In Christ I am confident that it can be carried forward without animosity, but I leave it to Him to convince you and Joel of the same.
Contending, I remain by Him pwn3d,
Infinite EMF
December 16th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Michael, please provide a website or forum where you post. I’d like to read more of your analysis. I like how you approach the subject quite a bit.
December 16th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
I wish you would continue here Michael. You have something here that needs to be shared.
I would like to point out that even though the events of the feast in Ezekiel 39 and Revelation 19 are, I believe, speaking of the same thing. I tend to think the feast only occurs AFTER after Satan is loosed from the bottom pit (abyss) after 1000 years. Afterwhich THEN he is cast into the lake of fire and tormented forever.
I would also throw out 34 for your consumption when it comes to why Israel will think themselves safe even in unwalled cities when Gog attacks in 38 & 39.
They will have already a Shepard watching over them
I also will save My flock, and they shall no longer be for a prey. And I will judge between lamb and lamb.
And I will raise up over them one Shepherd. And He shall feed them. My servant David, He shall feed them, and He shall be their Shepherd.
And I, Jehovah, will be their God, and My servant David shall be a ruler among them. I, Jehovah, have spoken.
And I will cut a covenant of peace with them and make evil beasts cease out of the land. And they shall live in the wilderness securely and sleep in the forests.
And I will make them and the places around My hill a blessing. And I will bring down the shower in its season, there shall be showers of blessing.
And the tree of the field shall give its fruit, and the earth shall yield its increase. And they shall be securely on their land. And they shall know that I am Jehovah when I have broken the staffs of their yoke, and have rescued them from the hand of those who enslaved them.
And they shall not any more be a prey to the nations, and the beast of the land shall not eat them. But they shall live securely, and no one shall terrify them.
And I will raise up for them a noted planting place, and they shall not any more be of those gathered by famine in the land. And they shall not any more bear the shame of the nations.
And they shall know that I, Jehovah their God, am with them, and they are My people, the house of Israel, declares the Lord Jehovah.
And you, My sheep, the sheep of My pasture, you are men. I am your God, declares the Lord Jehovah.
Ezekiel 34 22:31
December 16th, 2008 at 11:25 pm
Now looking at what I write is another reason you would be appreciated here Michael. I don’t put thoughts on paper well. Too many afters
December 17th, 2008 at 6:20 am
David,
You did a fine job articulating your point!
December 17th, 2008 at 8:14 am
My take on Ezekiel on a whole is, it tells us of the history and future of Jerusalem in the order by which it occurs though not all that clear at times. Chapter 34, I think, tells us Christ has already returned as the good Shepard. Gog/Magog in Ezekiel 38 & 39 line up with Revelation 19 & 20 great feast but read to the end of these chapters notice in Revelation Satan is loosed from the bottomless pit before this happens. When he goes into the lake of fire he is NOT coming back out, it is over. Only then can anyone say never more. Next stop in both books the new Jerusalem coming down.
December 17th, 2008 at 11:19 am
Im making pasta right now but I wanted to also add that maybe Ezekiel 32 and 33 is speaking directly of the last half of the last week and the period immediately after the tribulation as spoken of in Mathew 24
December 17th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
Done with lunch
.
Though I think 38 & 39 speaks of what happens after the 1000 years still doesn’t negate the findings we can agree on as to who will be involved in the end time scenario right around the corner which includes Gog (1). Because at the beginning of 38 & 39 it speaks of God turning Gog back which I believe implies he visited a certain place once before and God is bringing him back to it.
So Turkey IMHO could still play a very important role in leading a peace plan as many including myself believe.
I also I think the question Nebuchan-ezzar asked before he went to bed was one that inquired specifically what would happen to his kingdom in particular. This United Islamic union could very well be the answer to what fourth kingdom to rule over Nebuchad-nezzers land is. Again it doesn’t mean Babylon will be the capital it just means someone is going to rule over it. did that make sense?
December 18th, 2008 at 12:24 am
Infinite EMF,
You have given me something to think about. Perhaps I need to reassess. My wife believes I do, and she is usually right about these things.
For the record, I don’t see Joel and I as adversaries. Frankly, I have rarely found an author with which I have so much agreement. “Antichrist” was a breath of fresh air. Since my passion is in researching and teaching the symbolism and sequencing of the last days, only limited time was available to continue examining Islam. Since Joel’s book provided the much needed documentation to support my prior conclusions, I was thrilled.
One reason for my reluctance to pursue extended debate is that it often leads to endless debate, and all too frequently, heated debate. I simply don’t have the time to engage at this level for very long due to my job and other commitments, and it is difficult to engage an accomplished scholar with this limitation. Even as I write this, somewhere around midnight, I really should be fast asleep. So your comment about the effort being too great is, in part, true for me at this moment. I have a related project that I’ve been working on for several years that requires more than I’ve been able to give it recently, and I need to get back on the horse before it rides away without me.
Your comment about taking undue ownership of a position fascinates me, as that is indeed the major problem in all debates that go bad. For my part, I will think about what you said. Perhaps there is more to discuss.
If you’re not a preacher, you should be. I feel thoroughly convicted (smile).
Merry Christmas
December 18th, 2008 at 12:31 am
Armageddon,
Thank you for the thought, but I do not post anywhere. This is the only forum on the net that I have ever participated in. Others that I have monitored are generally too heated, or often a little ‘out there’. I seem to find more fulfillment in dedicated quiet time with an assortment of biblical resources. Perhaps that will change if time allows.
Merry Christmas
December 18th, 2008 at 12:37 am
David,
Thank you for your sentiments. I have some thoughts about your ordering of Ezekiel, as you make a few good points. But it’s late and I’m exhausted. Long day today, and it’s already well past midnight. I will try to return-post in the next day or so as time allows.
Merry Christmas
December 18th, 2008 at 11:23 am
Michael sometimes endless debate occurs when we find ourselves arguing the merits of another mans opinion. If we keep the Holy Bible as our common ground for discussion rather than a commentary, I believe debate will soon wane and the truth will be is revealed.
The great thing I like about Joels website is there are no gurus here only people with strong convictions hungry for truth. God will provide.
Does my heart good to see you back.
Merry Christmas
December 18th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Sorry for going in reverse but when I said Ezekiel is the life and times of Christ’s beloved bride for better or worse. I would also like to point out her birth in Chapter 16. We read of her beauty, her wickedness, God anger at his bride, the sun darkened and the moon turning red, His wrath poured out against the nations, His gathering of His sheep tthe Good Shepard. Then the Gog/Magog wars and the New Jerusalem.
I wish had better words to elaborate but I don’t, so just read the book
December 18th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Michael,
After re-reading through my discussion with you, I think it did come across as bit too territorial or argumentative. Again, sorry about that… really was not my intention. And believe me when I say that I understand the difficulty in carrying on a discussion over the internet as it can become an immense time sucker. Anyway, always feel free to share your thoughts when you have time. I appreciate your input.
Bless You, Joel
December 18th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
Joel,
Is it within the realm of possibility that the “answer” to all of this “before or after” discussion is not either/or, but both/and?
Cosider that the same evil bound in the abyss for 1000 years is set free at the end to make more of the same kind of trouble; not to undertake a new goal, but to resume pursuit of his original goal.
In view of that, could not the accounts being referenced speak not of a single war that happens at one time OR another, but of two “campaigns” — if you will — of a single war spaced roughly 1000 years apart? And might that not explain why it seems so difficult to clearly discern the timing of this event?
If this is tha case, then you and Michael would not be in conflict, but in unwitting harmony; you would both be speaking of the two widely-spaced campaigns of a single war led by a single, evil leader.
I must admit that, owing to the ever-popular “constraints of time,” I haven’t yet dug into this angle, so it’s rather a half-baked idea, at this point, but do you see any insurmountable arguments against it that present themselves immediately to your mind?
Curiouser and curiouser,
Infinite EMF
December 18th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
Infinite,
Although it may not always seem like it, I’m actually very open to any and all ideas. That said, I am not so open so as to accept anything without wrestling through the various pros and cons. and as far as Ezekiel 38,39 taking place at the end of the Millennium, I am not at all convinced by the arguments. But as for your question, ultimately this is one of those questions that cannot be answered. Its impossible to answer. Clearly there is a “Gog / Magog” event at the end of the millennium. Revelation 20 makes this clear. So, could Ez. 38-39 be speaking to another event as well in a dual sort of fulfillment? Never say never, but the application of that would mean very little to me now. If this event is about to take place shortly (within the next decade or so) than that is all that matters to me. Ultimately if this event is both/and, then I am only concerned with what is just before me and not a thousand years away. For me, the study of the end times is not about Bible Trivia and understanding things that mean little to me on a practical level, but instead about understanding what lies just ahead. From a pastoral perspective, (although I am far from being a pastor) I am very concerned with preparing the Church for that which she will soon face. Make sense?
Bless You, Joel
December 19th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Joel,
Oh, yeah, you make complete and total sense, and I am in wholehearted agreement as to your focus on near-term events that we may very well actually face, and will require preparation on our part.
The essential thrust of my question was to introduce a “third way” into a discussion that was trending in a “this way” or “that way” direction.
There had been, essentially, two interpretations “on the table”, and no clear path to agreement as to which interpretation was valid. If the interpretation I introduced is valid, then you and Michael also, necessarily, have valid interpretations. At that point, the only interpretation that would be INvalid would be one that specifically EXCLUDED Gog and Magog from one time period or the other, unless scriptural support for that exclusion can be discovered.
This condition transforms the debate from one where each interpretation is tasked with proving itself correct, into one where BOTH interpretations are accepted as correct as part of a broad view that encompasses events before and after the Millennium, and the task becomes a MUTUAL search — beginning at a point of agreement — for whether any scripture exists that would disallow Gog and Magog from one time period or the other.
If no such passage(s) exist, then I think it entirely possible that you and Michael are BOTH right; the Gog and Magog passages describe an event that takes place prior to the Millennium, is ended by God, and then is resumed when The Evil One gets off his 1,000-year-long “time out”; and the debate about whether the event is before or after those 1,000 years is reduced to a simple “Yes.”
In that case, those who have been focusing on this topic with a very long-range perspective are set at liberty to recognize a near-term impact that will reqiure some preparation, which comports with the practical value of the nearer-term focus you just expressed.
Holy pwn3d,
Infinite EMF
December 19th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
Infinite,
What are your thoughts regarding the fact that I pointed out earlier that it is only AFTER the defeat of the Ezekiel 38,39 Gog and Magog that the nations and Israel will know that Yahweh is the Holy One IN Israel? How could this be if the millennium is specifically the period that both Isaiah and Habakkuk describe as that time when “the knowledge of God would cover the earth as the waters cover the sea. Or alternately, why would the passage describe the burning of weapons for seven years when at the time of the defeat, immediately thereafter, God is said to cleanse the universe with fire? Or when God says, “This is the day I have spoken of.” what is THE day that He so often speaks of? Is it not The Day of The Lord, that correlates to the day that He returns? Notice here that He does not say, is this not the DAYS that I speak often of? In other words, if it were speaking of two events separated by a thousand years, then it would seem odd to refer to it as a “day” would it not? Just a few thoughts.
December 19th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
Joel,
“For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the GLORY of
the LORD…”
The knowledge will be of HIS GLORY. This has happened before in
Israel’s history. (The thousand years of peace will partly be because
Satan is locked up…But even then, men can be evil without any
help from Satan!) When the GLORY filled the Temple earlier…Men still
went to war…
As for “time”, you know your self that this is slippery.
Two thousand years ago, was considered the “last days” according
to scripture.(I’m aware of the theories)
The point is, there is room for other possibilities.
December 19th, 2008 at 10:21 pm
2000 years ago was in “the last days” and it actually kicked off the 5th day or 5th 1000 year period. If you were on a week long trip and were entering into the 5th day you would clearly be in “the last days” of your 7 day schedule…
December 19th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
Scot,
I agree…but there are those who don’t…And how many understood
this 2000 years ago?
December 20th, 2008 at 12:04 am
David,
Sorry for the delay in returning your post. Time has been short.
As you stated, chapter 34 of Ezekiel seems to describe the beginning of the 1,000 year reign of Christ, and this chapter contains some of the same key phrases that appear in 38 & 39. 34 states “they will live in safety” at that time, and “the people will be secure”. 38 & 39 then are logical extensions of this theme, stating “when my people Israel are living in safety”. Seems to me that when the Lord says they ARE safe, then they are. I don’t see this as an illusion or an unfounded feeling on Israel’s part.
I believe a case can be made for a chronological progression from chapters 34 to 39. 34 describes millennial conditions, as you said. Then 35 describes the final destruction of Edom (”desolate forever”), who will attack Israel “even though I the Lord was there” This dovetails with the Psalm 83 attack, which coincidentially is also led by Edom, and also implies the presence of the Lord, and also implies Edom’s destruction by his hand. It seems that they could be the same attack, and right now I am persuaded that they are indeed just that.
As you know by now, I feel this attack occurs within the Millennium itself, for all the reasons mentioned in earlier posts. But there is other supporting evidence. For instance, if for a moment we ignore this possibility, and instead place the destruction of Edom within an Armageddon setting around the end of Daniel’s 70th, then why would Daniel 11 tell us “Edom, Moab, and the leaders of Ammon will be delivered” from the AC’s hand around that time? This wouldn’t make any sense….unless Edom is delivered because they have another divine appointment awaiting them in the Millennium.
Chapters 36 & 37 have content that alludes to the millennium also, and it is entirely possible they are part of an intended sequence. Portions of each of these prophecies telescope backward and forward in time, as though providing needed perspective. The “dry bones” passage is often thought to be fulfilled, but it seems that it will be ongoing, even into the millennium.
Probably no need to get into 38 & 39 again, as we’ve covered much of that ground already, but there is more that can be said about the millennial age itself that would make a post-millennial 38 & 39 more feasible. There are hints within scripture that tell us that this time may not be entirely without rebellion.
For instance, why will Jesus Christ need to rule “with an iron scepter” during his 1,000 year reign? Psalm 2 states “You will rule them with an iron scepter; you will dash them to pieces like pottery.” If the Lord is going to dash the nations to pieces while he is ruling, then the Psalm 83/Ezekiel 35 attack within the Millennium would make even more sense.
Notice that the Psalm does not say you MAY dash them. It says you WILL dash them.
As Christians, we tend to think of the millennial age as all peaches and cream, due to the prophesied array of wonderful conditions that Christ will usher in during that time. It will be a time of rest for the saints, and a time of long life and prosperity. All that is true. But we lose sight of the other side of this coin. We have to remember that the older brother will serve the younger brother during that time. When one grows weary of servitude, it fosters rebellion.
Zechariah 14 also alludes to the potential reluctance of some of the nations to attend the Feast of Tabernacles during the Millennium, when it states; “If the Egyptian people do not go up and take part, they will have no rain. The Lord will bring on them the plague he inflicts on the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.”
Now this could be a mere warning to the nations, since their reluctance is only imputed, not confirmed. But isn’t it interesting that this even needs to be said at all? If all will be bliss at that time, there should be no need for an iron scepter, the dashing of nations, the withholding of rain, or a warning or a judgment of any kind.
Many also believe there can be no rebellion in the coming age since Jesus Christ himself will preside. But consider what man has done in the past while in the presence of God; Cain killed Abel though the Lord was there, Israel rebelled at Sinai though the Lord was there, Korah rebelled in the desert though the Lord was there, Solomon fell into paganism though the Lord was there, and so on. This speaks to the depravity of the human heart. So it is not counter-intuitive to believe there will still be some in the millennium that will profane God’s name and rebel. After all, at the very least they will attack again - Gog & Magog - when the Millennium is over.
I also find it rather intriguing that the Revelation and Daniel reveal that spiritual forces will drive the rebellion that leads to Armageddon. But in contrast, when you read Psalm 83/Ezekiel 35, it suggests no such spiritual influence. Could it be because these spirits will be in the Abyss at that time? Seems logical.
Man has always been tested in every prior age, yet many people born within the 1,000 years will not see war or judgment or testing of any kind, if these things don’t take place. Since God tests our hearts to see who is truly committed to Him, then it makes sense that the Millennium could provide it’s own trials.
God Bless and Merry Christmas
December 20th, 2008 at 9:13 am
Michael,
The rebellion of Satan and one third of GOD’s angel’s also takes place
in the divine presence.
You really need to write a book!
Blessings
December 20th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
Hi Michael,
Thanks for not disappearing. You and I are in full agreement that many are not redeemed during the millennium. The verses that you highlighted from Zechariah, the iron rod, as well as the fact that there is one final rebellion pretty well establishes this fact. So I’m in full agreement with you on this issue. Nevertheless, this does not flat out negate the reality pointed to in the two verses that speak of the knowledge of God covering the earth during the millennium. This certainly speaks of an age where degree and influence of “the knowledge of God” is radically different than today. We cannot ignore the fact that Jesus will be here on the earth ruling from Jerusalem. So although not everyone on the earth is fully in union with Christ, your position still claims that after Jesus has ruled over Israel for a thousand years, Israel still does not know that their God is Yahweh. That’s a HUGE pill to swallow. For according to the Ezekiel 38,39 passage, it is only after the defeat of Gog Magog that Israel knows their God. Personally I cannot get past that issue. Do you see what I’m saying on this?
I am also in full agreement with you regarding the fact that even during the millennium God will one more time test men’s hearts. The earth has existed in various phases. There was the garden. Yet we rebelled. There was the age of the Law. Yet man rebelled. There was the cross and the age of grace. Yet man still rebels. Then Jesus himself will rule over the earth. Yet one last time, mankind will rebel. The way that I understand this is that God allows us to know the measure of our depravity and our need for him. After all of this, we will all finally be forever fully reliant on Him.
As for Edom, you bring up a good point. I’ve wondered about that myself. Here’s my take: Edom can be used in a general sense referring to the whole of Israel’s end time enemies or it can be used in a more specific sense, referring specifically to the region of Jordan / Northwestern Saudi Arabia or Jordan specifically. Throughout the Talmud - picking up on the commonly used biblical usage - Edom is a euphemism for Israel’s end time enemies in general. A few verses that clearly portray Edom, Moab, Bozrah, Seir, Midian, etc (essentially all synonyms) being destroyed at the time of the return of Christ are:
Another end time passage:
Jesus is portrayed with his hand of blessing on Zion and his foot on Moab’s neck as he lay face down in the manure. Israel is no longer a disgrace. This is a reference to the Messianic age. Another return of Christ passage:
So when Daniel 11 refers to Edom, Moab and Amman, I believe that that is referring to Jordan specifically. Jordan will not be conquered by the Antichrist. But they will be judged by Christ. When Jesus is portrayed as destroying Edom, this is a reference to the whole of the end time armies that come against Israel. By when it speaks of Edom, Moab and Amman, it is a more specific reference. This is similar to the use of the word Terra or Eretz (land or earth). It can mean the land of Israel specifically, or it can mean the whole Middle East, or it can mean the whole earth. One cannot know from the word alone, but must figure it out individually based on the context of the passage. Many other words have a similar specific and then general usage. All data considered, this is the only way to resolve the tension that you pointed out. Otherwise we end up with prophetic chaos, increased contradictions and only conjecture on too many issues. But God knows best.
Bless you, Joel
December 22nd, 2008 at 5:40 pm
Hi Again Joel,
I do certainly agree that the knowledge of God will be radically different in the millennial age than it is today, and thank goodness for that. It’s sometimes difficult to stay hopeful for this world after watching the 24 hour news cycle each day. The time is very short now. I have some direct thoughts on just how close, but that is for another day. Good thing we’ve read the book and know the ending.
“FROM THAT DAY FORWARD…”
It does seem impractical to assume that Israel will not know their Lord during the millennium. Yes, I think they will know him, just as you say. The question is, does this phrase “From that day forward the House of Israel will know that I am the Lord their God” create the definition we need to successfully define this entire passage? I think there is something additional to consider before drawing that conclusion.
The book of Ezekiel alone contains 54 occasions where a form of this phrase “Then they will know that I am the Lord” is used. These examples begin in chapter 6 and conclude in chapter 39. The point is, these statements were intended for Israel and the nations not only in Ezekiel’s day, but also through the Diaspora and the end times. They cover the whole board, front to back. And the primary thing they have in common is that this statement often accompanies an act of God. This strong theme is employed throughout Ezekiel. For instance, Ezekiel 6:7-8 states
“Your people will fall slain among you, and you will know that I am the LORD. But I will spare some, for some of you will escape the sword when you are scattered among the lands and nations.”
If we didn’t know history, we may have deduced that Israel would “know” their God during their dispersion, then repent and be healed. But history tells us a different story. God would periodically intervene to bring Israel back to Him, only to have later generations fall away due to their lack of direct contact with the experiences of those ancestors. This is human nature. This is the difference between hearing and believing on one hand, and seeing and ‘knowing’ on the other. When you see the Lord’s hand in something, you don’t just believe - you know.
For instance, I believe in God, I accept Jesus Christ as my savior, and I believe I will be redeemed on that day. But I have a friend who died and came back at the hospital, and in the interim had a near-death experience where he met who he believes was Christ. Based on this powerful experience, which after 40 years he remembers like yesterday, he doesn’t fear death in the least. He longs to return to that place since He knows what awaits him. Though I ‘believe’ what awaits me, my friend ‘knows’. It’s an entirely different perspective that only an act of God can provide.
If I can be this bold for a moment, it seems to me that this may be the message God is trying to convey, that only by experiencing God’s hand directly will we ‘know’ the Lord. So when He says in Gog & Magog “From that day forward the House of Israel will know that I am the Lord their God”, it seems to me that many in Israel will see His powerful hand at work for the first time, hence the statement. And this is true whether we place Ezekiel 38 & 39 pre-millennial, or post-millennial. But if intended as post-millennial, we seem to agree that the millennial age will be full of inhabitants who will not see the Lord’s hand of judgment, aside from one of these potential battles.
For additional perspective, this statement “Then you will know that I am the Lord” is also made throughout the Old Testament in many passages that cover a wide range of history. Israel “knew” their God many times, from the Exodus all the way through the prophets writings, and yet later generations would rebel openly. In Exodus 6:7 we read this example;
“I will take you as my own people, and I will be your God. Then you will know that I am the LORD your God, who brought you out from under the yoke of the Egyptians.”
From this we could deduce that Israel would know their God after the Exodus and obey him. But they didn’t. A little further along in Exodus 7:17 we find the same declaration contained in God’s warning to Pharaoh, as given through Moses;
“This is what the LORD says: By this you will know that I am the LORD. With the staff that is in my hand I will strike the water of the Nile, and it will be changed into blood.”
From this we could deduce that Pharaoh would know the true God and obey Him, or at least not openly defy him. But he did the opposite. So did the kings of Israel and Judah. During the time of the Kings we have this example in 1Kings 20:13;
“Meanwhile a prophet came to Ahab king of Israel and announced, “This is what the LORD says: ‘Do you see this vast army? I will give it into your hand today, and then you will know that I am the LORD.’ ”
From this we could deduce that Ahab would know his God from that day forward, and obey Him. But he didn’t. He was still a rebellious character. So for some, it seems that even seeing the direct hand of God is not enough. I don’t understand why, but it happens. This speaks to our fallen nature.
EDOM
I can’t pretend to know the precise context of each of God’s passages pertaining to Edom, or whether they are intended to include a larger cast of nations such as the three that constitute modern-day Jordan. Your point here is certainly appropriate. But I do have a general observation about Edom.
The verses you’ve noted all have one thing in common, and that is, that they don’t contain language that would infer a permanent desolation of Edom. Instead, they contain language that suggests only that they have been conquered or destroyed. The prophecy from Numbers in particular suggests Edom will be conquered at that time, which I agree would suggest an Armageddon-like setting. But there is no mention of it being “desolate forever” as mentioned in Ezekiel 35. That is one more reason why I tend to separate these events.
While the destruction of Edom at Armageddon seems to be a given in these passages, a prophecy by Malachi would suggest that this destruction may not be final, and that Edom would rebuild on multiple occasions;
“Edom may say, “Though we have been crushed, we will rebuild the ruins.” But this is what the LORD Almighty says: “They may build, but I will demolish. They will be called the Wicked Land, a people always under the wrath of the LORD.”
Along this same line, Jericho was completely destroyed in the days of Joshua, and yet rebuilt, and later re-destroyed. Babylon was also completely destroyed over time, and is only now being rebuilt again. But it will be destroyed again as prophesied in the Bible, depending on one’s view of scripture. Could it be that Edom is just another city of destiny like those? Perhaps.
Joel, it’s interesting that you mention Isaiah 25, since I may have a slightly different take on this passage that I believe lends support to my thoughts on Edom. While earlier chapters in Isaiah tend to suggest an Armageddon time line, they seem to conclude with chapter 24’s “devastation of the earth”. Then chapter 25 begins by describing the presence of the Lord in Jerusalem during the millennium, and making a reference to the Feast of Tabernacles. It is in this context that we read about the subsequent trampling of Moab, and only Moab. In this context it may indeed refer to the very grouping of Jordan that you mentioned, yet also support my proposal that this trampling of Jordan will occur during the millennium.
But there is another portion of Isaiah 25:8-11 that jumps out at me and muddies the waters for both of our positions, when it says “He will swallow up death forever” and “The sovereign Lord will wipe away the tears from all faces.” This seems to be one of those telescoping references that makes cross-referencing difficult, since if we attempt to reconcile it with the Revelation, we would have to stretch this fulfillment even further into the future in a post-millennial context. After all, only Revelation 21:4 also states;
“He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”
Although these are two primary passages that seem to link these events, one seemingly early millennial and the other clearly post-millennial, I don’t believe they were necessarily intended as parallel passages. It’s a bit like our “then they will know that I am the Lord” discussion. It’s the poetry you mentioned in a prior post, and confusing poetry at that. If we were to link these passages together in time, we would both be wrong.
I also think a case can be made that Isaiah 34 describes a millennial destruction of Edom. Consider for a moment that by the end of chapter 33, we have a picture being painted of the Messiah and the Millennium. Then, chapter 34 begins with the destruction of Edom, where “it’s smoke will rise forever”, suggesting the type of final desolation found in Ezekiel 35. It is plausible. Now this doesn’t mean that I believe all prophetic scripture occurs in order, but some of these potential orders are very interesting.
We know that these passages are difficult because they often shift emphasis and context. They may begin with a statement that pertains to Israel during the time of the prophet, then link to a warning about the future, then move back to the original context, and then make a reference to an event already fulfilled, and so on. It’s part of this end times jigsaw puzzle that I find very frustrating, albeit rewarding at the same time.
Joel, you have placed a great many pieces in this puzzle, more so than others I have read, and you’ve helped me provide a few more of my own with “Antichrist”. But we know this task is unbelievably difficult. So I guess we shouldn’t be surprised to find that you resolve the tension with one model, and I resolve it with another. Even the prophets didn’t know how these things would unfold, and they spoke these words themselves.
You mentioned that you couldn’t get past one the earlier points about “then they will know”, and I would not presume to ask you to. I would only ask you to continue to assess all the possibilities, as I believe you do. That is probably why you made the initial comment about Iran’s strength and possible role in the Caliphate that began this entire series of posts.
If the church is unprepared to answer the prophetic questions of tomorrow when they begin to unfold, apostasty won’t be far behind. This is why I’m considering the points you are making, though it may not seem so.
WHICH BEAST IS TURKEY?
Could you provide additional understanding about your position on the various beasts of Daniel and Revelation, since Turkey seems symbolically counter-intuitive to me. Daniel seems to equate the 10 horns with 10 toes and 10 kings and so on, as does the Revelation beast. But the Revelation 13 beast resembles a leopard, with the mouth of a dragon and feet of a bear. Is your position that Turkey would be represented by part of the leopard’s body here? They are presumably not the lion of Babylon or the Persian bear, if we can use Daniel’s symbolism, so that would leave only the Leopard of Alexander’s empire.
I am curious, as I don’t see how one would fit Turkey into this mold other than as part of Alexander’s Leopard, or as one of the 10 kings/10 horns. From either of these two positions, I don’t see a clear role for leadership from them. But I see clear leadership in the feet of the bear, as mentioned before. On Neb’s statue, the feet were the final form of the beast, so I assume that the Revelation 13 beast also identifies it’s final form with it’s feet.
Also, when taken in a progressive revelation, Daniel’s visions lead to a Syrian AC, or more probably, an AC that usurp’s the Syrian kingdom in the last days. This can be done from any country, admittedly, which includes Turkey. How would you fit Turkey in the “Kings of the South and the North”?
GOG & MAGOG:
Others on this site seem to have a better understanding of your take on Gog than I do. I only know what I’ve read here off and on since spring, and what you’ve posted in recent weeks. “Antichrist” speaks to it, but is there a more complete version of your analysis available in one of your other books?
ASSHUR?:
Also, which of your books speaks to the identity of the Antichrist most thoroughly, which I assume you believe is Asshur (the Assyrian). If that’s true, we would have some agreement on that, and perhaps even agreement on why the two beasts will not initially know their own prophetic identities. This of course speaks of the Abyss, and just who is currently in there, and who and what they were in their first ‘life’.
Anyway, I would like to compare notes on that topic some time. I only alluded to my inclination earlier since it contains so many layers, and kicks open an even larger can of worms than Gog & Magog. This could begin the interminable exchange (smile), but it may be fun to kick around in a few weeks if you have the time. I think only the rapture would draw more commentary.
Please take your time on responding. I didn’t mean to prattle this long, and this is a “time sucker” as you mentioned previously. I appreciate your willingness to openly engage people here Joel, as your time could be spent elsewhere.
God Bless, and again, Merry Christmas.
December 23rd, 2008 at 1:33 pm
Nancy,
You had mentioned in your post;
“The rebellion of Satan and one third of GOD’s angel’s also takes place
in the divine presence.”
This is a very powerful point that is often lost when examining Armageddon, the Millennium, and the end times overall. It is beyond my comprehension how this could take place, yet it will happen. It would seem God has given free will to all of his creation, not just man, and that bad decisions are inevitable in a fallen world. This is true regardless of one’s staus or position in life.
Paul spoke to a potential reason for this rebellion when he stated the saints will eventually judge not only the world, but angels as well. Perhaps some of these angels don’t like that arrangment, and seek to change it. After all, they are currently a rung above us on the spiritual ladder. Some may view this future arrangement as a demotion. Is Satan using this ‘hook’ to lure the ‘one third’ away? Perhaps.
The book of Enoch also speaks to the depravity of some of the angels and their reasons for the fall that led to the Nephilim. It seems that lust and ambition are not limited to just man. And while today’s church generally does not accept Enoch, the early church did, and quoted from it and referenced it in many Old Testament and New Testament passages. So I think it has some bearing on this issue.
You also said;
“You really need to write a book!”
I have written many modules on various end-times topics over the years, and eventually I intend to consolidate these things into several more sensible manuscripts. But for now, everything is still a work in progress. But thank you for your vote of confidence. It is appreciated.
Merry Christmas
December 23rd, 2008 at 1:33 pm
Nancy,
You had mentioned in your post;
“The rebellion of Satan and one third of GOD’s angel’s also takes place
in the divine presence.”
This is a very powerful point that is often lost when examining Armageddon, the Millennium, and the end times overall. It is beyond my comprehension how this could take place, yet it will happen. It would seem God has given free will to all of his creation, not just man, and that bad decisions are inevitable in a fallen world. This is true regardless of one’s staus or position in life.
Paul spoke to a potential reason for this rebellion when he stated the saints will eventually judge not only the world, but angels as well. Perhaps some of these angels don’t like that arrangment, and seek to change it. After all, they are currently a rung above us on the spiritual ladder. Some may view this future arrangement as a demotion. Is Satan using this ‘hook’ to lure the ‘one third’ away? Perhaps.
The book of Enoch also speaks to the depravity of some of the angels and their reasons for the fall that led to the Nephilim. It seems that lust and ambition are not limited to just man. And while today’s church generally does not accept Enoch, the early church did, and quoted from it and referenced it in many Old Testament and New Testament passages. So I think it has some bearing on this issue.
You also said;
“You really need to write a book!”
I have written many modules on various end-times topics over the years, and eventually I intend to consolidate these things into several more sensible manuscripts. But for now, everything is still a work in progress. But thank you for your vote of confidence. It is appreciated.
Merry Christmas
December 23rd, 2008 at 10:14 pm
Michael, if you also post your prophecy comments anywhere else, please e-mail me at armageddon.thru.to.you@gmail.com and let me know. I really enjoy reading your analysis.
December 23rd, 2008 at 11:14 pm
Armageddon,
I just dialed you up at your site.