Gog and Magog (Ezekiel 38-39) Jeff Randolph November 2011 After foretelling the restoration of Israel (containing shadows of the ultimate restoration in Christ), Ezekiel is told to prophesy against a ruler called Gog. Unlike the other nations he speaks against (Ezek. 25-32, 35), who are fairly well known, the person of Gog from the land of Magog (Ezek. 38:2) remains rather mysterious, and as such has been a source of controversy in teachings pertaining to the “end times,” to which the prophecy in Ezekiel 38-39 is popularly applied. Because of the difficulty of applying this particular prophecy, we will briefly discuss several views on the subject, and perhaps come to a more general “big picture” interpretation while at the same time doing justice to the details in the prophecy. Concerning Millennialism The term millennialism refers to one’s beliefs as they pertain to the concept of the millennium, the period of 1000 years found in Revelation 20. Millennial views are fairly far-reaching, incorporating many different eschatological passages in which we will not have sufficient time to examine for the purposes of this discussion. However, because Revelation 20 and Ezekiel 38-39 both reference Gog and Magog, it is important to give a brief summary of the popular millennial paradigms to better understand how the prophecy is approached. System Summary Pre-millennialism The 1000 years are literal and are preceded by the return of Christ, as (Chiliasm) well as by various prophetic events foretold throughout the Bible Post-millennialism The 1000 years are symbolic of the present reign of Christ, wherein the kingdom of God will gradually triumph over the evil in this world preparing for the return of Christ Amillennialism The 1000 years are symbolic of the present reign of Christ, wherein evil will gradually grow worse and worse in this world until the return of Christ An Approach to Old Testament Prophecy Though some prophecies in the Old Testament are difficult to understand and/or apply to historical events, I believe the New Testament sheds some light on determining when and if an Old Testament prophecy was fulfilled. Jesus said that He came to fulfill the law and prophets, and that “one jot or one tittle will by no means pass away from the law till all is fulfilled” (Matt. 5:17-18). We also read that the law was considered dead, and ready to vanish away in the first century (Eph. 2:15; Col. 2:14; Heb. 8:13). Therefore, the law and prophets must have been fulfilled by the first century. More specifically, it seems the law and prophets were considered fulfilled as they passed away in the collapse of the old covenant order, namely the fall of Jerusalem and the temple (Lk. 21:20-22). If this is the case, then we should not look for the fulfillment of Ezekiel 38-39 (actually 36-48) past the fall of Jerusalem, which occurred in 70 AD. This position harmonizes nicely with statements at the end of the prophecy that seem to imply nearness to the restoration of Israel (39:21ff.). This concept alone should be sufficient to rule out pre-millennialism as a valid interpretative approach. Page 1 of 5 What about Revelation 20? The only other mention of “Gog and Magog” in the entire Bible is found in Revelation 20:8, in which it is revealed that after the millennium, Satan would be released to “deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea.” Since this occurs after the 1000 years, does this not show that the prophecy in Ezekiel 38-39 is to be fulfilled in our future? No, it does not. Just because Gog and Magog are mentioned in Revelation 20, does not mean they are the same exact Gog and Magog from Ezekiel. The Book of Revelation is loaded with Old Testament figures used as symbols, such as Jezebel (2:20), Sodom (11:8), Egypt (11:8), and Babylon (14:8; 17; 18), none of which refer to their ancient namesakes. There is good reason to view Gog and Magog as being used in the same way. So if the Gog and Magog of Revelation are symbolic, who or what do they symbolize? Specifically, I don’t know, but I do believe the general application is the same as the over-arching point in Ezekiel 38- 39 (which is why the symbolism is used). And that is no matter how big and strong and seemingly indestructible an army Satan can muster toward God’s people, they will never prevail. Different Views There are a variety of different views on this prophecy, all of which have some difficulties in fitting the text exactly. That said, there are four worth noting, some popular, others not so much. They are summarized briefly below: View Summary Dispensational Pre-millennialism Ezekiel 38-39 correlates directly to Revelation 20, and is an “end times” battle that could break out at any moment. Gog is the leader of Russia. Antiochus Epiphanes Ezekiel 38-39 is largely historical and refers primarily to the Jewish triumph over the Syrians in 167 BC. Gog is the leader of Syria at the time, Antiochus IV Epiphanes. Esther Ezekiel 38-39 is largely historical and refers primarily to the events described in the book of Esther. Gog is Haman, “the enemy of the Jews” (Esther 3:10) Symbolic Ezekiel 38-39 is merely a symbol for any and all enemies who come against God’s people, emphasizing that evil will never ultimately prevail. Gog is no one in particular. The Esther View The pre-millennial view should be ruled out based on the New Testament teachings on Old Testament prophecy, as well as the context of restoration from captivity in which we find the prophecy. The symbolic view is certainly beneficial in applying certain aspects of the prophecy to our own lives; however, the context and details seem to require something more specific. For this reason, I believe the Esther view has too many strong points to dismiss, and so the following comments will make correlations with the events of Esther, as well as attempt to pull out the over-arching lesson of the text. Page 2 of 5 An Army of Nations (1-6) Ezekiel is told to prophesy against Gog, of the land of Magog. In many translations, Gog is referred to as “the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal” (38:2). Since “Rosh” cannot be mapped to any ancient land (though Benjamin had a son named Rosh, Gen. 46:21), those holding to the pre-millennial view assume that it is a reference to modern Russia. However, other translations, such as the NIV and ESV, refer to Gog as “the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal,” because the Hebrew word “rosh” actually means “chief” or “head.” In fact, it is translated this way every place else in the Old Testament except in this particular verse. While the name Gog (“mountain”) itself is only mentioned one other place in the Old Testament as a descendent of Reuben (1 Chr. 5:4), the other names of nations listed in Ezekiel 38:1-6 are mentioned multiple times throughout the Old Testament. Magog, Meshech, Tubal, Gomer, and Togarmah are all descendents of Japheth (Gen. 10:2-4; 1 Chr. 1:5-7). Meshech and Tubal are also mentioned a couple times in the book of Ezekiel in connection with the fall of Tyre (Ezek. 27:13) as well as their own judgment (32:26). Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya are well known today, and also were well known in ancient times as well (cf. Ezek. 27:10). Gog was to unite the armies across these various nations in attack against Israel (38:10-11). And so the pre-millennial view would attempt to map these ancient names to modern nations and have everyone look to those countries as intending to attack Israel at some point in the near future. Rosh is Russia, Meshech is Moscow, Persia is Iran, Gomer is Germany, etc. With the exception of Persia (Iran), this is little more than finding a modern nation or city that begins with the same letter of the transliterated Hebrew word. The fact is that Gog has been identified by many different nations over the centuries (DeMar, p. 46), none of which have proven accurate. Besides the argument for Old Testament prophetic fulfillment outlined above, the problem with trying to match these ancient lands to modern equivalents leads to the very common practice of “newspaper exegesis” where the latest headlines dictate Biblical meaning. Not only is this an unstable approach, it can cause a great deal of harm when predictions based on these assumptions fail time after time. It weakens the faith of those who buy into it, and pushes non-believers who may not distinguish between different Christian groups even further away. Since all these places (with exception possibly of Rosh) were in existence and well known at the time Ezekiel wrote, perhaps they mean exactly what they say. One of the strengths of the Esther view is that King Ahasuerus is said to have ruled a vast area from India to Ethiopia (Esther 1:1), which would have encompassed all of these places. Haman, being the “chief prince” (Esther 3:1), stands alone as to be described “enemy of the Jews” (Esther 3:10; 8:1; 9:10; 9:24), and in his evil plan, people from all over the empire were going to destroy the Jews (Esther 3; 38:10).