Ezekiel 38 - Introduction

Special Note
THE INTERPRETATION OF Ezekiel 38-39

In Chapter s 38-39 Ezekiel is predicting an unparalleled invasion by a dreadful foe. It is generally conceded by commentators that these Chapter s contain an apocalyptic element. In apocalyptic literature the setting is usually the end of the age. This kind of literature is full of symbols, especially numerical symbols. Great catastrophes befalling God's people and dramatic rescues by divine agencies characterize this type of writing. Most of the characters are painted much larger-than-life in these word pictures. Deliberate vagueness and purposeful incongruities are further identifying marks of apocalyptic. One can note at least three incongruities in the God-Magog Chapter s: (1) In Ezekiel 38:4 the Lord brings God forth, but in Ezekiel 38:10 God himself devises the plan of attack; (2) in Ezekiel 38:18-22 God is overthrown by earthquake and storm, but in Ezekiel 39:1-2 God is still very much active; (3) in Ezekiel 39:4 God and company are devoured by birds and animals, while in Ezekiel 39:11-16 the bodies of the fallen host are buried; but again in Ezekiel 39:17-20 the carcasses of the fallen enemy are picked clean by birds and beasts. As in apocalyptic literature in general, the final catastrophe is looked at from various angles, without any attempt to trace a logical order in the sequence of events.[477] The purpose of apocalyptic writing such as this is the unveiling of the future, not in the sense of chronicling every event prior to its occurrence, but in the sense of showing God's lordship over the future. It serves the function of letting the faithful know that God knows where history is heading and that He is ultimately in control of the situation. Thus apocalyptic literature guides and strengthens God's people in dark days of uncertainty.

[477] Cooke in ICC cited by Blackwood, EPH, p. 228

Having recognized the apocalyptic elements within these two Chapter s, commentators are still divided as to the fulfillment of the prediction here made. Four major categories of conclusions have been formulated.

A. The Historical Views

Some commentators hold that the invasion of God was an actual event, future from the standpoint of Ezekiel, but ancient history from the present-day vantage point. God has been identified with every outstanding general from the time of Ezekiel to the time of Christ and even beyond. Among those suggested are Cambyses king of Persia, Alexander the Great, Antiochus the Great, Antiochus Epiphanes, Antiochus Eupator, and Mithridates king of Pontus. Within this general category of approach perhaps the strongest case can be made for equating God with Antiochus Epiphanes.
Antiochus Epiphanes was a bitter opponent of the Jews in the second century before Christ. The center of his kingdom was in north Syria, Antioch on the Orontes river being his capital. To the east his territory extended beyond the Tigris. To the north his reign extended over Meshech and Tubal, districts of Anatolia. In his excellent commentary on the Book of Revelation, William Hendriksen argues that Magog in the present prophecy represents Syria, and God, Antiochus. He comments as follows on the relationship between the God invasion of Ezekiel and that recorded in the Book of Revelation: .. The Book of Revelation uses this period of affliction and woe as a symbol of the final attack of satan and his hordes upon the church.[478] That Ezekiel's description of the defeat of God (Antiochus) would be an appropriate type of the final overthrow of the enemies of God can be seen in the following parallels pointed out by Hendriksen:

[478] Hendriksen, MTC, p. 233.

1. The last great oppression of the people of God under the Old Testament era was sufficiently severe to typify the final attack of anti-Christian forces upon the church in the New Testament age.

2. The armies of God and Magog were very numerous and came from wide-ranging territories. This would be most appro priate to symbolize the world-wide opposition to the church in the days just preceding the second coming.

3. The persecution under Antiochus was very brief but very severe. The tribulation through which God's people will pass toward the end of the present dispensation will apparently also be of short duration but extremely severe (cf. Revelation 11:11).

4. Defeat of God and Magog was unexpected and complete. It was clearly the work of God. So also will be the sudden over throw of the eschatological God and Magog of the Book of Revelation.
This position identifying the invasion forces of Ezekiel 38-39 with the hosts of Antiochus Epiphanes is not as easily over turned as some commentators seem to think. It will not do, for example, to argue that the time frame for the Ezekiel passage is the latter years or latter days (Ezekiel 38:8; Ezekiel 38:16) for these expressions are clearly used in the Book of Daniel to include events which transpired after the Babylonian captivity.[479] Nor will it do to argue that the apocalyptic character of these Chapter s necessitates a prophecy dealing with the end-time. Clearly Daniel uses highly symbolic (apocalyptic?) language to describe certain events in the intertestamental period (Daniel 8), as does Zechariah as well (Zechariah 9:11-17). Furthermore, the ruthless assault of Antiochus against Israel and the divine protection of God's people in the midst of that assault is a major theme in the prophecies of Ezekiel's contemporary Daniel (Daniel 8:9-27; Daniel 11:21-35). Why should it then be thought strange that Ezekiel would devote two Chapter s to describing in highly idealized language this same invasion?

[479] See Daniel 2:28; Daniel 10:4. Similar expressions clearly referring to the closing days of the Old Testament era time of the end (Daniel 8:17; Daniel 11:35; Daniel 11:40; Daniel 12:4; Daniel 12:9); end of years (Daniel 11:6).

B. The Literal Futuristic View

Some commentators believe that the invasion of God and Magog has not yet occurred. Ezekiel is describing the final invasion of the land of Israel by a ruthless coalition following the Millennium. Scofield popularized this view. He writes:
That the primary reference is to the northern, (European) powers, headed up by Russia, all agree -God-' is the prince, -Magog,-' his land, The reference to Meshech and Tubal (Moscow and Tobolsk) is a clear mark of identification. Russia and the northern powers have been the latest persecutors of dispersed Israel, and it is congruous both with divine justice and with the covenants that destruction should fall at the climax of the last mad attempt to exterminate the remnant of Israel in Jerusalem. The whole prophecy belongs to the yet future -day of Jehovah-' and to the battle of Armageddon, but includes also the final revolt of the nations at the close of the kingdom age. [480]

[480] SRB, comments on Ezekiel 38

A disciple of Scofield, John F. Walvoord cites two reasons for believing that a Russian invasion of Israel is being prophesied. First, he points out that three times in Chapter s 38-39 the invading armies are said to come from the extreme north (Ezekiel 38:6; Ezekiel 38:15; Ezekiel 39:2). Then Walvoord points to the fact that God is said to be the prince of Rosh. The nineteenth century lexicographer Wilhelm Genesius is cited as the authority for equating Russia with Rosh.[481]

[481] Walvoord, NP, pp. 106-108,

The geographical argument offered by Walvoord is weak. Jeremiah frequently speaks of armies coming from the uttermost parts of the earth by which he means no more than Babylonian.[482] In some sense Mt. Zion itself is said to be situated in the uttermost part of the north (Psalms 48:2).

[482] See Jeremiah 6:22; Jeremiah 25:32; Jeremiah 31:8; Jeremiah 50:41.

The etymological argument offered by Walvoord linking Russia with Rosh is also weak. For one thing, the precise translation of the Hebrew term rosh here is uncertain. Several modern versions render the word as an adjective modifying the word prince.[483] Even conceding that Rosh is a proper name[484] here (as in ASV and NASB) that by no means proves that Rosh is to be identified with Russia. For one thing, hard etymological evidence for this identification is lacking. Rosh is here connected with Meshech and Tubal now generally accepted as being regions in eastern Anatolia. Genusius was making an intelligent guess at the identification of Rosh in his lexicon, but he was writing at a time when Assyrian texts mentioning these places were not available. His etymologies are now generally disregarded. Even the dispensational writer Feinberg rejects the Rosh = Russia identification.[485] A cylinder text of the Assyrian king Sargon mentions a land of Rashi on the Elamite border. The same text speaks of Tabalum (Ezekiel's Tubal) and the land of Mushki (Ezekiel's Meshech).[486] Could this Rashi be Ezekiel's Rosh? In any case, the evidence seems to point to Rosh being a region of Anatolia far north of Israel, but far south of Russia.

[483] KJV, RSV, and NASB margin have chief prince of Meshech.

[484] The Greek Old Testament supports Rosh as a proper name.

[485] Feinberg, PE, p. 220,

[486] Luckenbill, ARAB, 11, 48.

Patrick Fairbairn does perhaps the best work in setting forth the arguments against any literal interpretation of Ezekiel 38-39. He enumerates six arguments which are here summarized:
1. It is impossible to identify God and Magog with any historical person or place.
2. It is improbable that such a conglomerate army as is here explained would ever form a military coalition,
3. The size of the invading force is disproportionate to that of Israel or any spoil which they might have derived from Israel.
4. The mind cannot imagine a situation in which it would take seven months to bury slain soldiers, much less the utilization of discarded weapons for seven years as fuel. Fairbairn conservatively estimates that the corpses would have to number over 300 million. How would any living thing survive the pestilential vapors arising from such a mass of corpses?
5. The gross carnality of the scene is inconsistent with Messianic times.

6. This prophecy was the same which had been spoken in old times by the prophets (Ezekiel 38:17). However, no prophecies concerning God and Magog are recorded elsewhere. However, prophecies of a final assault against God's people and the miraculous overthrow of the invaders is a constant burden of prophecy.[487]

[487] Fairbairn, EE, pp. 204-205.

C. Future Idealistic View

Since there are no clearly identifiable historical events to which the prophecy can be attached, it is possible that this invasion is yet future. The commentators holding to the future idealistic view would distinguish between what is of primary and what is of secondary significance in the two Chapter s. The primary significance is that the ruthless enemies of God's people will attack with the avowed intention of utterly destroying them. God will rescue His people by divine agencies. The secondary or representative elements in the two Chapter s are the place names, the weapons used, the chronological statements and the like. In other words, Ezekiel 38-39 teaches that God's people will face implacable enemies; the leader of the enemy will not necessarily have the name God, nor will he fight with bows and arrows.[488] By his use of the same names, and a short summary of the same description, the Apostle John has shown that he regarded Ezekiel's vision as typical, and its fulfillment as in his time still future. Thus the commentators holding the future idealistic view see in Ezekiel 38-39 the final climatic struggle between the forces of good and evil. With the help of God, His people will ultimately be victorious in this struggle.

[488] Hall, WBC, p. 470.

D. The Prophetic Parable View

The parabolic view of Ezekiel 38-39 is very popular among conservatives as well as liberals. These Chapter s illustrate a great truth, but refer to no specific event in time and space. Israel can have assurance from these Chapter s that once restored the power of God would protect her from the worst foe. At the same time, the church can gain strength from this passage in that here is a promise of God's deliverance from the most severe attacks. Gardiner sets forth this view when he states that
.. there are several clear indications that he did not confine his view in this prophecy to any literal event, but intended to set forth under the figure of God and his armies all the opposition of the world to the kingdom of God, and to foretell, like his contemporary Daniel, the final and complete triumph of the latter in the distant future.[489]

[489] Gardiner, OTC, p. 352.

Blackwood adds these words:

If the passage is apocalyptic, the identity of God becomes meaningless. He represents every force of evil that is marshaled against God. It is immaterial whether or not Ezekiel had in mind a historical prototype[490]

[490] Blackwood, EPH, p. 227.

From the more liberal camp Allen writes:

The Chapter s should be treated as an elaborate piece of symbolism, an attempt to portray some of the ultimate problems of human life with the help of figures and incidents borrowed from the repertoire of mythology. [491]

[491] Allen, IB, pp. 272, 274.

Thus according to this view, Ezekiel 38-39 speaks of concepts, not events; the clash of ideologies rather than armies. Those who seek to identify God with some ancient tyrant, and those who seek here specific predictions of some imminent attack upon the Zionist state of Israel are equally wide of the mark. This apocalypse deals with every threat to faith in every time and every nation.[492]

[492] Blackwood, EPH, p. 228.

In criticism of the parabolic view three points need to be made. (1) Many of those holding this view fail to take the oracle as a serious teaching of the Word of God. However, within these two Chapter s there are seven distinct claims to inspiration. This is a divine revelation and not Ezekiel's speculations. (2) The parabolic view does not unite the interpretation of these Chapter s with a real return of God's people to their land. Yet history records the fulfillment of many items in the background and setting of this prophecy. (3) Those holding this view do a rather poor job of correlating the predictions of Ezekiel with the God Magog prophecy of Revelation 20:9.

Ezekiel's prophecies regarding the invasion of God are enigmatic and difficult. Honest and capable expositors will continue to have differences of opinion regarding the specific fulfillment of the prediction. The present writer believes that Ezekiel is speaking about a specific event which has not yet transpired. That he employs hyperbole, symbolism and apocalyptic imagery is readily admitted. That the passage has an application to any situation in which God's people are under trial may also be readily admitted. But that which Ezekiel had in mind was an eschatological event the final showdown between God's people and their enemies.

REVIEW QUESTIONS

1.

In what time-frame should one place the invasion by Cog?

2.

What various suggestions have been made about the identity of God and Magog?

3.

What connection is there between the invasion by God and the numerous threats in the Old Testament of an invasion by an enemy from the north?

4.

With what events does John in Revelation associate the invasion of God?

5.

How would God's ultimate plan be advanced through the invasion of God?

6.

By what means would God destroy God?

7.

By what figures does Ezekiel underscore the completeness of God's destruction?

8.

What is the connection between the promise of restoration in Ezekiel 39:25-29 and the preceding material promising the over throw of God?

9.

What are the characteristics of apocalyptic literature?

10.

Why do some scholars feel that the God invasion was fulfilled in the persecution by Antiochus Epiphanes?

11.

What are some indications that Ezekiel did not intend for Chapter s 38-39 to be taken literally?

12.

What evidence is there here which is supposed to point to a modern day Russian invasion of Zionist Israel? How would you refute this evidence?

13.

What weaknesses are there in the parabolic view of Ezekiel 38-39?