The typology of the tabernacle as presented by the authors of Hebrews and Revelation at first seems to be in direct conflict.
In Hebrews, the first tabernacle, or Holy Place, was manifest only to emphasize that man, specifically the priests, could not enter into the Holy of Holies. The signification of this is that man could not enter into the true Holy of Holies, Heaven. But Jesus Christ, through his personal sacrifice and blood and torn flesh (Hebr 10:20) has made a way for us to enter (Hebr 10:19). The Holy of Holies is the place of the presence of God. Therefore the ability of man to enter into the Holy of Holies, the very presence and throneroom of God, occurred at the death (the lamb sacrifice), resurrection and ascension (to act as High Priest) of Christ.
Revelation, in contrast, paints a significantly different picture of Heaven. It is at first very similar to the temple and tabernacle. It has an altar, a sea of glass (laver), a holy place, lamp of fire (menorah), altar of incense, throne / ark of covenant, & four beasts (cherubim). But at the end of Revelation the picture of Heaven is quite different. There “is noTemple,” for the Lamb is the temple. This is further confirmed, for it is only at the seventh trumpet that the temple in heaven is opened and the ark is seen inside (Rev 11:19).
After the parousia, heaven is compared instead to the Garden of Eden where Adam walked freely with God. But all this occurred after the Parousia (Rev 19-22). NOT when Christ ascended. It is only after Christ’s Parousia that the is the Bride presented (Rev 21:2), implying that she can be one with Christ in the bridal chamber, the Holy of Holies.
So in Hebrews, heaven was represented as the Holy of Holies, and the way to God is made manifest sometime after the ascension of Christ. In Revelation, the heavenly tabernacle included the inner court, the holy place and the Holy of Holies. Although saints are seen in the inner court at the altar (Rev 6:9) and sea of glass (Rev 15:2) and the holy place (Rev 7:15), but cannot enter into the Holy of Holies until the Parousia (the door is closed before the parousia, Rev 11:19).
In Hebrews the Heavenly tabernacle never had a holy place, only the Holy of Holies. In Revelation, the Heavenly tabernacle contained all three compartments, until the Parousia when the ‘new heaven’ only contained the Holy of Holies (or that all compartments were removed).
The two accounts seem in direct conflict. Surely the way could not have been manifested at the accension of Christ, just to be closed off again before the Parousia. Why are the typologies so different?
But notice this from Revelation as John addresses his audience:
Reve 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, [who is] the faithful witness, [and] the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
Reve 1:6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him [be] glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
Reve 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they [also] which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.
First we are given the timing…the phrase “was, and is, and is to come” places us somewhere between Christ’s death/resurrection and his return (Rev 1:7). So this in every way, shape, and form is the transitory time in which sections of heaven are cordoned off. But notice that the theology of John’s is similar to the author’s of Revelation. They both emphasize that the washing of sins (and the purchase of man – see Rev 5:9) occurred at the cross. In this they agree perfectly.
But the question is ‘how did the author of Revelation interpret how this affects the individual,’ versus how the author of Hebrews, and do they conflict? Notice that in Revelation those composing the seven churches are made kings and priests (or kingdom of priests depending on the translation). And yet they are not in heaven yet. In other words, after receiving the blood and being bought by Christ are now considered priests. Priests are set apart. Priests perform the duties of God. Priests worship and serve God. But also, priests can enter into the Holy Place. Now I call to the remembrance of the reader that in the typology of the book of Revelation, the holy place is a part of Heaven (as opposed to the typology of the book of Hebrews). So in essence, what the author of Revelation is conveying is that we (whether Jews or Gentiles, see Rev 5:9) no longer need a priest to enter into heavenly places. But the author of Revelation stills sees that there are degrees of separation, as in the earthly tabernacle.
Is the author of Hebrews mistaken? Absolutely not. His typology is different because he is addressing a different audience for a different purpose. Revelation was addressed to the Church regarding the last times. Although never explicitly stated, it is assumed that the book of Hebrews was addressed to the Hebrews, showing why the sacrifice and person of Jesus Christ was superior to their sacrifices and priesthood. Thus the author of Hebrews is not concerned with the details of Heaven, but desired to show the Hebrews that their own tabernacle emphasized their ultimate separation from God. He was showing why their priesthood and sacrifice would never be permanent and how Christ’s was both perfect and permanent. In his typology, the mere fact that they had two tabernacles (the holy and holy of holies) testified that they would always be separated from God. It was only through the person of Jesus Christ that the separation could be removed.
If we stop the story there, then we would conclude that after the great High Priest Jesus Christ entered the Holy of Holies with his own blood, that man could now enter into the very precense of God. But here the author of Revelation makes a distinction, not a contradiction. He follows the typology of the tabernacle in perfect parallel to the earthly. In the book of Hebrews, the Holy of Holies was “Heaven” as a whole. The author of Revelation confirms that man, through the blood of Christ, can enter into “Heaven,” but that “Heaven” was further compartmentalized into the same division as the tabernacle. In addition, that the saints could only enter up to the Holy Place within this heavenly tabernacle. Both agree that the man could now enter ‘heaven’ through the blood of Christ, but they simply describe heaven differently. To force them in the same typology is to commit error and engender confusion.
You may ask why does the analogy break down (why can’t the holy of holies by consistent in both)? It is because that ultimately John was using a different analogy than the author of Hebrews. In Revelation, Christ is the bridegroom who prepares the home and bridal chamber for the bride. The bride certainly cannot enter the bridal chamber until they are married, ie: after the marriage supper. Once they are married, the bride and Christ are one, no longer needing the separate divisions in Heaven.
So are the two typologies in conflict? No. Different Audience. Different Purpose. Different Analogies. But the conclusion is simple. The author of Revelation saw Heaven as divided as in the earthly tabernacle, thus there was a degree of separation between God and man until the Parousia. It was at the Parousia that the bride was taken to the bridal chamber to become one with her husband, Jesus Christ. It was then that heaven was finally opened up to become the new Garden of Eden, the New Heavens, the New Jerusalem. And it was then that man could truly enter into the Holy of Holies.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Monday, September 1, 2008
The Two Witnesses of Revelation
In the 11th chapter of Revelation we read of two mysterious prophets whose identities have been a matter of debate among all major interpretations of Revelation.
Reve 11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall
prophesy 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth.
Among futurists, these witnesses have been variously identified as Enoch & Elijah, or Moses & Elijah, or simply two future Jewish-Christian converts.
For the preterist, though, the identity of the two witnesses can be a little more troubling. According to the preterist interpretation of Revelation (both partial and full preterism), the vision of the two witnesses has already taken place. They must be identified within the period from 30 – 70 AD, that is, between the ascension of Jesus Christ to the fall of Jerusalem forty years later.
Although many excellent suggestions have been made for the identity of the two witnesses, most interpretations come short of explaining all the criteria required by the vision. The number of criteria is obviously subjective, but the chart below gives a reasonable breakdown of the vision.
Obviously no one from the first century meets all the requirements of the vision. If the text can be taken as figuratively or symbolically, though, some individuals do come close.
To resolve this problem, the two witnesses are often understood to be symbolic, representing either a body of people (for example the body of witnessing Christians) or possibly a relative duality (The Law & The Prophets, The Old & New Testaments).
Moses Stuart does an excellent job of summarizing many of the interpretations of the two witnesses up to his time [A Commentary on the Apocalypse, p.219-240]. (My comments in italics)
This pair was also a popular solution to the identity of the two witnesses, primarily because neither saw death (Genesis 5:24; 2Kings 2:11) making them the only ones ‘in heaven’ who could come back and die. This is a weak conjecture since the vision never says that the witnesses came from heaven. Jude also identifies Enoch as a prophet who predicted the final return of the Lord with 10,000 saints (Jude 1:14, 15).
This ultimately was the opinion held by the great Moses Stuart.
Besides Moses Stuart, Stuart Russell offers yet another possibility:
I can find little evidence that Peter and James meet the requirements of the vision besides being murdered by their enemies. Although James was probably murdered in Jerusalem, Peter probably was not.
The proposals for the identity of the two witnesses are myriad, and I do not justice to them here. I will, though, turn my attention to one interpretation, namely the one by David Chilton in The Days of Vengeance, I believe comes the closest to properly identifying these two witnesses.
Chilton, unlike Moses Stuart, recognizes that the similarities between the two prophets and Moses/Elijah (p274-278), John the Baptist (p276, 280), and Joshua/Zerubbabel (p276-277) are by no means coincidental, but critical to the interpretation. Chilton concludes
Many interpreters like Moses Stuart and Stuart Russell force the identity of the two witnesses to be (only) Christian witnesses, which completely misses the Old Testament analogies woven into the vision.
Chilton also recognizes that the analogies do not end at references to Old Testament saints. He correctly surmises that the ministry of Jesus Christ draws a much closer parallel to the several passages regarding the two witnesses, especially those near the end of the vision (e.g.: their death, resurrection, and ascension; see also the chart at the beginning of this article).
It is here that Chilton sides with Moses Stuart with his final conclusion that the two witnesses (p284) are Christian witnesses:
How can the Two Witnesses be both Old Covenant saints as well as the witnessing Church? Chilton explains this later in his interpretation of the Woman in Revelation 12, for she is
In other words, Chilton saw the Woman and the Two Witnesses as embodying both Old Covenant Israel and the Church, since, of course, the Church and Christ himself came out of Old Covenant Israel. I personally disagree with his final conclusions here on both the Woman and the Two Witnesses (how can the Woman be both the mother and the child’s soon to be wife?). This may be influenced by my dispensationalist background, but I believe a much clearer and consistent interpretation can be made.
Chilton makes three errors in his interpretation. First he fails to recognize the parallels between the two Witnesses and the high priests Ananus and Joshua who were persecuted and killed during the Roman-Jewish war (see above). My final conclusions are not dependent on this argument (in other words, one can make the same conclusion using sola scriptura) but by including these martyrs along side John the Baptist/Jesus, Moses/Elijah, and Zerubabbel/Joshua, the vision becomes simpler to interpret.
After all, Ananus and Joshua died over 30 years after the death of John the Baptist. So Chilton’s conclusion that the Two Witnesses summarized
does not hold. More correctly the Two Witnesses were the Old Covenant witnesses during the period between Christ’s death and second coming, as opposed to the Church which was Chilton's conclusion.
One may justifiably question how we can place Ananus and Joshua beside so great a “cloud of witnesses” as Moses and Elijah? As already explained, Ananus and Joshua were high priests who defended the Temple, their city, and their people to their deaths. It is their role as priests, as religious and civil leaders, and ultimately as martyrs that makes them perfect representatives of the two witnesses alongside the others.
I should also draw close attention to the duality seen in everyone of these examples. It is a duality seen throughout scripture, both the Old and New Testament. It is of course seen in the Two Witnesses. It is seen in John the Baptist, the Forerunner of Christ, and his cousin Jesus Christ. It is seen in Moses and Elijah, who also represent the Law and the Prophets. It is seen in Moses and Aaron, Joshua and Zerubbabel, and others. So it is fitting that we find TWO Old Covenant witnesses, Ananus and Joshua, would give their lives for their cause during this time period.
Utilizing all the analogies (John/Jesus, Moses/Elijah, Joshua/Zerubbabel, Ananus/Joshua) we see that ALL the original requirements of the vision as laid out in the beginning of this article are fulfilled.
Reve 11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall
prophesy 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth.
Among futurists, these witnesses have been variously identified as Enoch & Elijah, or Moses & Elijah, or simply two future Jewish-Christian converts.
For the preterist, though, the identity of the two witnesses can be a little more troubling. According to the preterist interpretation of Revelation (both partial and full preterism), the vision of the two witnesses has already taken place. They must be identified within the period from 30 – 70 AD, that is, between the ascension of Jesus Christ to the fall of Jerusalem forty years later.
Although many excellent suggestions have been made for the identity of the two witnesses, most interpretations come short of explaining all the criteria required by the vision. The number of criteria is obviously subjective, but the chart below gives a reasonable breakdown of the vision.
Obviously no one from the first century meets all the requirements of the vision. If the text can be taken as figuratively or symbolically, though, some individuals do come close.
To resolve this problem, the two witnesses are often understood to be symbolic, representing either a body of people (for example the body of witnessing Christians) or possibly a relative duality (The Law & The Prophets, The Old & New Testaments).
Moses Stuart does an excellent job of summarizing many of the interpretations of the two witnesses up to his time [A Commentary on the Apocalypse, p.219-240]. (My comments in italics)
A) “Conjecture”
1) The Old and New Testament
2) Preachers instructed by
the Law & the Prophets
3) Jesus Christ & John the Baptist
4) Several individuals identified by the Historicist interpretation
5) Jewish and Gentile Christians
Although Moses Stuart classifies the identity of the two witnesses as Jesus and his forerunner John the Baptist “incongruous & irrelevant,” there are actually several parallels between the two pairs.
John the Baptist was said to come in the spirit of Elijah (Luke 1:17) and was said to fulfill the prophecy that Elijah “must first come [before the day of the Lord]” (Malachi 4:5; Matthew 17:10-13). John the Baptist wore sackcloth as part of his ministry (Matthew 3:4). He was also murdered at the end of his ministry by Herod (Matthew 14). The daughter of Herodias gave the head of John the Baptist to her mother as a present.
Jesus Christ’s ministry, like those of the two witnesses’, lasted about 3 ½ years (see Jack Finegan’s Handbook of Biblical Chronology). He was murdered at the end of his testimony in Jerusalem. He lied in the grave 3 days and was resurrected (Matthew 28, Mark 16). At his resurrection as well as his death, there was an earthquake (Matt 27:51; Matt 28:2). The Roman guards who saw him at his resurrection cowered in fear (Matthew 27:54; Matthew 28:4). After his resurrection he ascended to heaven in cloud (Acts 1:9). Although only his disciples witnessed his ascension, even his enemies will see him at his return (Revelation 19:11-15).
Moses Stuart continues with what he calls "better claim(s)" for the identity of the two witnesses.
B) “A Better Claim”
1) Ananus & Joshua. (Herder &
Eichhorn, see Moses Stuart – A Commentary on the Apocalypse, p 220)
Ananus was a former high priest and leader [TJW 2.20.3] in Jerusalem during the time of the Roman-Jewish war. Joshua was an acting high priest during this same period. Both promoted peace and vied for the safety of Jerusalem in direct opposition to the Zealots who promoted rebellion and war. Their life and deaths closely parallel the vision of the two witnesses both figuratively and literally.
For example, Revelation 11:4 makes a direct reference to a prophecy by Zechariah (Zech 4) which most scholars acknowledge refers to Joshua, the High Priest, and Zerubbabel the Davidic Governor who led the Israelites back from captivity from Babylon in the sixth century B.C. Since Ananus and Joshua also represented civil and religious authority, they certainly can be said to fulfill this portion of the prophecy.
More literally, the record of their deaths makes a striking parallel to those of the two witnesses in Revelation (excerpts from The Jewish War, Josephus).
[TJW 4.4.5] For there broke out a great storm in the night, with the
utmost violence, and very strong winds, with…rain, with continued lightnings,
terrible thunderings, and amazing concussions and bellowing of the earth, that
was in an earthquake.
[TJW 4.5.1] And that day, as it came on, they saw 8,500 dead bodies there.
[TJW 4.5.2] But the rage of the Idumeans was not satiated by these slaughters…but they sought for the high priests..and as soon as they caught them they killed them, and standing upon their dead bodies, in way of jest, upbraided Ananus with his kindness to the people, and Joshua with his speech made to them…Nay, they proceeded to that degree of impiety, as to cast away their dead bodies without
burial.
[TJW 4.5.2] I should not make a mistake if I said that the
death of Ananus was the beginning of the destruction of the city…
Before proceeding, I should make comment regarding Moses Stuart’s argument against Ananus and Joshua as the two witnesses. According to Josephus, this same Ananus orchestrated the death of James the brother of Christ. This would, in fact, make it very difficult to accept him as one of the two witnesses. It seems likely, though, that this “record” was nothing more than a redaction by a Christian redactor since it is unlikely that Josephus, a staunch Jew, would acknowledge Jesus as the Christ in his writings [JA 20.9.1].
Shown below is how closely the ministry of Ananus and Joshua parallel the vision of Revelation 11. I have included “Yes” for Revelation 11:3 even though the earthquake recorded by Josephus occurred BEFORE the deaths of Ananus and Joshua. Recapitulation is common literary device within the visions of Revelation, so the order of the events is not as critical as the events themselves. The number of deaths is different, but very close. John’s record of 7000 may simply be a symbolic rounding of the higher number 8500. Although a tenth of the city did not literally fall, when the Idumeans breached the walls of the temple, it could be said that roughly a tenth of the city figuratively fell.
Stuart futher continues with one of the oldest claims to the identity of the two witnesses:
2) Moses & Elijah
That Moses & Elijah are the two witnesses is a commonly held belief among Futurists. The miracles performed by the two witnesses closely parallel those performed by the two Old Testament prophets. Elijah’s prayers caused drought for over three years (1Kings 17:1, James 5:17). The final two miracles of turning water to blood and striking the earth with plagues recalls the miracle of Moses and the ten plagues. Both men called fire from heaven to slay their enemies (Moses - Exodus 9:23; Elijah - 2Kings 1).
In addition, Elijah was said to were sackcloth (2Kings 1:8), had a showdown with his enemies after a period of roughly 3 ½ years (James 5:17, 1Kings 18), and ascended to heaven in a whirlwind (2 Kings 2:11). Moses was the leader of the Israelites during the Exodus from Egypt, fulfilling in part Revelation 11:4.
Besides their similarity to the two witnesses, Elijah was said to come before the “day of the Lord” (Malachi 4:5; Matthew 17:10, 11). These same two same prophets also appeared together with Jesus Christ on the day of his transfiguration (Matthew 17:3).
Moses Stuart finally concludes his list with another ancient conjecture and of course his own analysis.
3) Elijah & Enoch
This pair was also a popular solution to the identity of the two witnesses, primarily because neither saw death (Genesis 5:24; 2Kings 2:11) making them the only ones ‘in heaven’ who could come back and die. This is a weak conjecture since the vision never says that the witnesses came from heaven. Jude also identifies Enoch as a prophet who predicted the final return of the Lord with 10,000 saints (Jude 1:14, 15).
4) Christian witnesses during the Roman-Jewish war (p 226, A Commentary on
the Apocalypse)
“God would raise faithful and well endowed preachers among the Jews, at the
period when the nation was ready to perish; that those preachers would be
persecuted and destroyed; and after all, that the Christian cause would be
triumphant.”
This ultimately was the opinion held by the great Moses Stuart.
Besides Moses Stuart, Stuart Russell offers yet another possibility:
1) Peter & James the brother of Christ
I can find little evidence that Peter and James meet the requirements of the vision besides being murdered by their enemies. Although James was probably murdered in Jerusalem, Peter probably was not.
The proposals for the identity of the two witnesses are myriad, and I do not justice to them here. I will, though, turn my attention to one interpretation, namely the one by David Chilton in The Days of Vengeance, I believe comes the closest to properly identifying these two witnesses.
Chilton, unlike Moses Stuart, recognizes that the similarities between the two prophets and Moses/Elijah (p274-278), John the Baptist (p276, 280), and Joshua/Zerubbabel (p276-277) are by no means coincidental, but critical to the interpretation. Chilton concludes
“the two Witnesses, therefore, summarize all the witnesses of the Old Covenant,
culminating in the witness of John [the Baptist].” (p 282)
Many interpreters like Moses Stuart and Stuart Russell force the identity of the two witnesses to be (only) Christian witnesses, which completely misses the Old Testament analogies woven into the vision.
Chilton also recognizes that the analogies do not end at references to Old Testament saints. He correctly surmises that the ministry of Jesus Christ draws a much closer parallel to the several passages regarding the two witnesses, especially those near the end of the vision (e.g.: their death, resurrection, and ascension; see also the chart at the beginning of this article).
It is here that Chilton sides with Moses Stuart with his final conclusion that the two witnesses (p284) are Christian witnesses:
“The story of the Two Witnesses is therefore the story of the witnessing
Church…”
“Through the resurrection of Christ, the Church and her Testimony
become unstoppable.”
How can the Two Witnesses be both Old Covenant saints as well as the witnessing Church? Chilton explains this later in his interpretation of the Woman in Revelation 12, for she is
“the Church in the form of Old Covenant Israel.”
In other words, Chilton saw the Woman and the Two Witnesses as embodying both Old Covenant Israel and the Church, since, of course, the Church and Christ himself came out of Old Covenant Israel. I personally disagree with his final conclusions here on both the Woman and the Two Witnesses (how can the Woman be both the mother and the child’s soon to be wife?). This may be influenced by my dispensationalist background, but I believe a much clearer and consistent interpretation can be made.
Chilton makes three errors in his interpretation. First he fails to recognize the parallels between the two Witnesses and the high priests Ananus and Joshua who were persecuted and killed during the Roman-Jewish war (see above). My final conclusions are not dependent on this argument (in other words, one can make the same conclusion using sola scriptura) but by including these martyrs along side John the Baptist/Jesus, Moses/Elijah, and Zerubabbel/Joshua, the vision becomes simpler to interpret.
After all, Ananus and Joshua died over 30 years after the death of John the Baptist. So Chilton’s conclusion that the Two Witnesses summarized
“all the witnesses of the Old Covenant, culminating in the witness of John [the
Baptist].”
does not hold. More correctly the Two Witnesses were the Old Covenant witnesses during the period between Christ’s death and second coming, as opposed to the Church which was Chilton's conclusion.
One may justifiably question how we can place Ananus and Joshua beside so great a “cloud of witnesses” as Moses and Elijah? As already explained, Ananus and Joshua were high priests who defended the Temple, their city, and their people to their deaths. It is their role as priests, as religious and civil leaders, and ultimately as martyrs that makes them perfect representatives of the two witnesses alongside the others.
I should also draw close attention to the duality seen in everyone of these examples. It is a duality seen throughout scripture, both the Old and New Testament. It is of course seen in the Two Witnesses. It is seen in John the Baptist, the Forerunner of Christ, and his cousin Jesus Christ. It is seen in Moses and Elijah, who also represent the Law and the Prophets. It is seen in Moses and Aaron, Joshua and Zerubbabel, and others. So it is fitting that we find TWO Old Covenant witnesses, Ananus and Joshua, would give their lives for their cause during this time period.
Utilizing all the analogies (John/Jesus, Moses/Elijah, Joshua/Zerubbabel, Ananus/Joshua) we see that ALL the original requirements of the vision as laid out in the beginning of this article are fulfilled.
The vision of the Two Witnesses embodies each of these pair of witnesses, justifying the conclusion that the witnesses are Old Covenant saints. Obviously Jesus Christ should be included in New Covenant saints, and will be explained below, but it is the duality here that is of importance.
The second error of Chilton’s is that he sees the Two Witnesses as the ultimately “the story of the church.” He interprets the Woman in Revelation 12 also as the Church in the form of Old Covenant Israel. It is completely unnecessary to require that the Two Witnesses or the Woman are both of these entities, even though the two are obviously related. How then should this vision be understood?
One of the keys to understanding the book of Revelation is to recognize that the entire book is about the transition from the Old Covenant to the New. The same key is needed to understand the vision of the Two Witnesses…that it describes the transition from the Old Covenant to the New.
But it is also the relationship between the Old & New Covenants that is critical, for BOTH Covenants were in effect simultaneously during the period between the ascension of Jesus Christ and his return. In other words, there were two methods of approaching God the Father, through the sacrificial system of the Israelites, or through faith in Jesus Christ. Of course, the first was nothing more than a shadow of the second, and was soon to pass away. In fact, as the writer of Hebrews states,
By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is
obsolete and aging will soon disappear. [Hebrews 8:13, NIV]
How does this apply to the two witnesses? The two witnesses are OLD COVENANT SAINTS, the saints of the Most High (Dan 7:25), and they are righteous Israel. The Old Covenant was aging and passing away to allow the complete and perfect establishment of the New. To do so, all the Old Covenant systems and establishments must also pass away including the Temple and the system of the priests and altar sacrifices (see also Hebrews 9:8). As predicted by Daniel (Dan 7:25, etc), the saints of God would also be persecuted and martyred. This is perfectly illustrated in the deaths of Ananus and Joshua near the beginning of the Roman-Jewish war.
But what of the analogy of the vision to Jesus Christ? The resurrection of the Two Witnesses is better interpreted as the resurrection of the Old Covenant people who died under the Old Covenant, but were resurrected under the victory and establishment of the New Covenant. It is through the death, resurrection and RETURN of Jesus Christ that this occurred. In other words, their resurrection was at the end of the Roman-Jewish war at the Parousia of Jesus Christ. This further confirmed by the fact that the enemies of the Two Witnesses beheld them in the heavens. At the ascension of Jesus and Elijah, only their friends beheld them (the disciples and Elisha, respectively). It is only at Christ’s RETURN that his enemies are said to see him (see above).
The vision of the Two Witnesses, in the same manner as the entire book of Revelation, tells us the story of the transition from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant. The Two Witnesses are Old Covenant saints, symbolized by references to Moses & Elijah, Joshua & Zerubbabel as well as John the Baptist, during the period between the ascension of the Jesus Christ and his return. The saints who died under the Old Covenant during this period were resurrected under the promise of the New Covenant at the second appearing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Saturday, May 24, 2008
The Identity of Gog and Magog
At the culmination of the Millennium, Satan is released and deceives the nations into attacking Jerusalem. These nations are subsequently consumed by fire from God.
Reve 20:8 And [Satan] shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom [is] as the sand of the sea.
Reve 20:9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.
These scriptures, along with several others in Revelation [Rev 19: 17-18], seem to be an obvious reference to Ezekiel 38-39.
Ezek 38:2 Son of man, set thy face against Gog, the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him,
…
Ezek 38:8 After many days thou shalt be visited: in the latter years thou shalt come into the land [that is] brought back from the sword, [and is] gathered out of many people, against the mountains of Israel…
Ezek 38:9 Thou shalt ascend and come like a storm, thou shalt be like a cloud to cover the land, thou, and all thy bands, and many people with thee.
…
Ezek 39:4 Thou shalt fall upon the mountains of Israel, thou, and all thy bands, and the people that [is] with thee: I will give thee unto the ravenous birds of every sort, … (cf: Rev 19:17-18)
…
Ezek 39:6 And I will send a fire on Magog (Rev 20:9), …
For the futurist, the identity of Gog and Magog can be very confusing. I say this being an ex-futurist. The reason is because most futurists believe the battle of Gog & Magog will occur AFTER the Millennium after the “second” return of Christ.
If you read Ezekiel 38-39, though, you will find that the Ezekiel’s battle of Gog and Magog is also very similar to the battle of Armageddon which occurs BEFORE the millennium. In fact, many futurists have even admitted this. (Others place Ezekiel’s Battle of Gog and Magog before or during the Tribulation.)
For example, we read in Revelation regarding the battle of Armageddon:
Reve 19:17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;
Reve 19:18 That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all [men, both] free and bond, both small and great.
Notice how similar this is to the description of Ezekiel’s battle of Gog and Magog:
Ezek 39:17 And, thou son of man, thus saith the Lord GOD; Speak unto every feathered fowl… Assemble yourselves, and come; gather yourselves on every side to my sacrifice that I do sacrifice for you, [even] a great sacrifice upon the mountains of Israel, that ye may eat flesh, and drink blood.
Ezek 39:18 Ye shall eat the flesh of the mighty, and drink the blood of the princes of the earth, of rams, of lambs, and of goats, of bullocks, all of them fatlings of Bashan
(Compare also Ezekiel 39:11 to Rev 14:20)
In Ezekiel, the forces of Gog and Magog are accompanied by many nations from across the known world [Ezekiel 38:1-6]. This is similar to both the Battle of Armageddon [Rev 16:14, 19:19] as well as the Battle of Gog and Magog [Rev 20:8] in which the armies are composed of many nations from the earth.
Unlike the battle of Armageddon though, Ezekiel’s battle of Gog and Magog seems to begin after period of peace [Ezek 38:8,11; compare Ezekiel 37]. Revelation’s Battle of Gog and Magog also occurs after a period of peace, the Millennium.
If you are a full preterist like myself, this confusion is easily resolved. The battle of Armageddon is one and the same as the battle of Gog and Magog. The vision of the battle of Gog and Magog is a recapitulation of the battle of Armageddon. Both visions contain specific references to Ezekiel 38-39.
The Millennium is the period of time between the death/resurrection/ascension of Christ and the Roman-Jewish war of 67-70AD. The Roman-Jewish war is the “Tribulation.” The battle of Armageddon / battle of Gog & Magog is the final judgment upon apostate Israel and the triumph of Jesus Christ & his Church.
But who then is Gog, Magog, and the remaining nations? As some preterists have suggested, Rome is certainly to be associated with those nations that attack Jerusalem/Israel in those last days. The Roman armies, as all three descriptions of the battle describe, was composed of nations from across the world. It has also been pointed out by Kurt Simmons that the borders of the Roman Empire closely match the borders of the nations mentioned in Ezekiel 38.
But there is one major problem. When compared to the events of Ezekiel 38-39, the fate of the Roman armies does not parallel Ezekiel’s prophecies regarding Gog and Magog. In both the book of Revelation and Ezekiel, the armies of Gog and Magog are destroyed and Magog is burned with fire. To put it simply, this does not happen to the Roman Armies that attacked Israel in 67-70 AD.
To sidestep this, Simmons explains that the attack of Gog and Magog is on the Church by Rome (ie: Nero) and their defeat is when the “church reigns supreme in Christ.” [To be fair, although Simmons also equates the battle of Armageddon with the battle of God and Magog, he believes that ”the Neronean persecution was the battle of Armageddon/Gog and Magog.” ]
Now I agree that the vision of Armageddon is fulfilled in part by the triumph of the Church, primarily in the spread of the Gospel and its complete establishment among the nations [Rev 14:6-8; the spread of the Gospel -> the fall of Babylon; Matt 24:14; Rev 19:15,21 (sword of his mouth = the word of God)]
But I am hard pressed to believe that this alone satisfies the prophecy of Gog and Magog. Starting in Ezekiel 39, it is clear that there is a literal destruction of the literal armies of Gog and Magog in the mountains of Israel:
Ezek 39:4 Thou shalt fall upon the mountains of Israel, thou, and all thy bands, and the people that [is] with thee: I will give thee unto the ravenous birds of every sort, and [to] the beasts of the field to be devoured. ...
Ezek 39:9 And they that dwell in the cities of Israel shall go forth, and shall set on fire and burn the weapons, both the shields and the bucklers, the bows and the arrows, and the handstaves, and the spears, and they shall burn them with fire seven years: ...
Ezek 39:11 And it shall come to pass in that day, [that] I will give unto Gog a place there of graves in Israel, the valley of the passengers on the east of the sea: and it shall stop the [noses] of the passengers: and there shall they bury Gog and all his multitude: and they shall call [it] The valley of Hamongog.
Ezek 39:12 And seven months shall the house of Israel be burying of them, that they may cleanse the land.
I simply cannot identify this with the triumph of the church. Neither can I associate it with the Roman armies who were VICTORIOUS in Israel. It was Israel’s armies who were destroyed, not the Romans. Granted, many Roman soldiers died upon the “mountains of Israel” but it would be an extreme stretch to say their deaths were the fulfillment of Ezekiel 39.
How is this to be resolved? Are we to read the text figuratively? Are we to stretch the meaning of the text?
There is actually a very interesting solution to this “mystery” (you’ll see why I call it a mystery later). First, let’s begin by identifying the Gog and Magog of Ezekiel 38-39. In other words, who would contemparies of Ezekiel identify them as? Magog, along with several other nations listed, is a direct reference to the table of Nations in Genesis 10. Gog, though, seems to be a derivation from the word Magog itself. Regardless of what anyone says, no one knows for sure where the “Magog” of Genesis 10 is located, although it is probably north of Israel. [NOTE: Josephus records that Magog refers to the Scythians.]
Why then does Ezekiel use this mysterious location?
The first step in solving this riddle is to realize that Ezekiel’s prophecy against Gog is actually one of a series of prophecies against several nations or groups including Ammon (Ezek 25:2-7), Moab (25:8-11), Edom (25:12-14), Philistia (25:15-17), Tyre (Ezek 26,27,28:1-19), Zidon (28:20-24), and Egypt (Ezek 29-32), the “shepherd’s of Israel” (Exek 34), and mount Seir (Ezek 35).
At the time of Ezekiel’s prophecy, Israel was in captivity to Babylon. Babylon had destroyed their country, their capital, their people and their temple. But notice who is conspicuously missing from Ezekiel’s prophecies of doom! Babylon. Of course Babylon is mentioned in the prophecies, but only favorably (Ezek 26, Babylon against Tyre; Ezek 29-32, Babylon against Egypt…). It makes perfect sense that if Ezekiel wanted to prophecy against the very nation in which he was captive, he would have tried to make it less obvious by calling Babylon by another name, in this case, Magog.
But why Magog? Although it is only conjecture, it has been proposed (http://www.metrocast.net/~moza/atbash.htm) that Magog is “code” for Babel. The Hebrew letter mem (M) immediately follows the letter lamed (L). In addition, the Hebrew letter gimel (G) follows beth (B). Beginning with “BBL,” and substituting the Hebrew letter which immediately follows it in the Hebrew alphabet yields “GGM.” Reversing the order, you have “MGG” or Magog.
It has been proposed by others that Jeremiah used a similar scheme to disguise the name Babylon. His term “Shishak” can be similarly translated to Babel.
Like Babylon, Gog and Magog is the world power at the time, conquering and subduing other nations. In addition, Gog and Magog will not attack until Israel returns from captivity and is at peace. Afterwords, when Gog and Magog attacks, they will be destroyed. The implication is simple. Israel was currently in captivity to Bablyon, but after their release, Babylon would one day attack again and be destroyed on the mountains of Israel. This was the judgment upon the nation that destroyed Jerusalem and held its citizens captive.
But if Magog is Babylon in Ezekiel, who is the Magog of Revelation? If we equate Rome = Magog = Babylon, we run into the same problem as before…Rome was not conquered by Israel. How then is the mystery solved?
Actually a very simple solution is possible. John the Revelator actually uses the city Babylon in his prophecies. It is proposed that the “Babylon” of Revelation [Reve 14:8, 16:9, 17:5, 18:2, 18:10, 18:21], is identical with Magog. If the Magog of Ezekiel is in fact Babylon, then John’s use of Magog as synonym with the MYSTERY BABYLON makes perfect sense.
In fact, the Babylon of Revelation is completely destroyed and burned with fire (Reve 17:6, 18:8-9) just as Magog is in Ezekiel’s prophecy (Ezek 39:6) and the Magog of Revelation (20:9). But what of the remaining nations?
According to the vision found in Revelation 17, Mystery Babylon is seen together with a dragon with seven heads and ten horns. The seven heads, represent the Roman Empire (which sits upon seven mountains). The ten horns are the “kings of the earth” of Reve 17:2, who later betray Mystery Babylon and burn the city with fire. The ten horns include all the nations that conquered by Rome and which also made up their army.
The final question remains. Who is Magog? According to most preterists (both Full and Partial), Mystery Babylon of Revelation represents apostate and rebellious Israel. The destruction of the "Babylon" symbolizes the literal destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.
Following this hermeneutic, Ezekiel’s prophesy can be deciphered with no contradictions:
1) Ezekiel 38:1-3. Gog and Magog refers to apostate and rebellious Israel. Magog = Babel = Babylon = Mystery Babylon = Apostate Israel. (Gog refers to its deceptive leadership of the time including the false prophets, antichrists, …see also Ezekiel's prophecy against the shepherd's of Israel).
2) Ezek 38:4-18. The armies that descend upon the mountains of Israel like a cloud are those of Rome and the nations they conquered. At this point Mystery Babylon sits upon the dragon with 7 heads (Rome) and 10 Horns (Roman conquered nations). Therefore they are a “system” or one entity. It is only later that the 10 Horns betray and attack Israel.
3) Ezek 38:19. This imagery is identical to that used in the book of Revelation to describe the Tribulation period. It describes the Roman-Jewish war of 67-70AD.
4) Ezek 38:23. This scripture refers to the establishment of Jesus’ church (verse 23) among the gentile nations.
5) Ezek 39:1-20. Again Gog and Magog refers to apostate and rebellious Israel, who along with the city of Jerusalem, is destroyed at the culmination of the Roman – Jewish war in 70 AD.
6) Ezek 39:21-29. This is a reference to the establishment of Jesus Christ’s Church among all the nations.
If the battle of Gog and Magog in Revelation is equated with the battle found in Ezekiel 38-39 of the same name, one can run into any number of complications and contradictions. By identifying Magog as Babylon and the battle of Armageddon with the battle of Gog and Magog, all the inherent complications simply disappear.
Reve 20:8 And [Satan] shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom [is] as the sand of the sea.
Reve 20:9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.
These scriptures, along with several others in Revelation [Rev 19: 17-18], seem to be an obvious reference to Ezekiel 38-39.
Ezek 38:2 Son of man, set thy face against Gog, the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him,
…
Ezek 38:8 After many days thou shalt be visited: in the latter years thou shalt come into the land [that is] brought back from the sword, [and is] gathered out of many people, against the mountains of Israel…
Ezek 38:9 Thou shalt ascend and come like a storm, thou shalt be like a cloud to cover the land, thou, and all thy bands, and many people with thee.
…
Ezek 39:4 Thou shalt fall upon the mountains of Israel, thou, and all thy bands, and the people that [is] with thee: I will give thee unto the ravenous birds of every sort, … (cf: Rev 19:17-18)
…
Ezek 39:6 And I will send a fire on Magog (Rev 20:9), …
For the futurist, the identity of Gog and Magog can be very confusing. I say this being an ex-futurist. The reason is because most futurists believe the battle of Gog & Magog will occur AFTER the Millennium after the “second” return of Christ.
If you read Ezekiel 38-39, though, you will find that the Ezekiel’s battle of Gog and Magog is also very similar to the battle of Armageddon which occurs BEFORE the millennium. In fact, many futurists have even admitted this. (Others place Ezekiel’s Battle of Gog and Magog before or during the Tribulation.)
For example, we read in Revelation regarding the battle of Armageddon:
Reve 19:17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;
Reve 19:18 That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all [men, both] free and bond, both small and great.
Notice how similar this is to the description of Ezekiel’s battle of Gog and Magog:
Ezek 39:17 And, thou son of man, thus saith the Lord GOD; Speak unto every feathered fowl… Assemble yourselves, and come; gather yourselves on every side to my sacrifice that I do sacrifice for you, [even] a great sacrifice upon the mountains of Israel, that ye may eat flesh, and drink blood.
Ezek 39:18 Ye shall eat the flesh of the mighty, and drink the blood of the princes of the earth, of rams, of lambs, and of goats, of bullocks, all of them fatlings of Bashan
(Compare also Ezekiel 39:11 to Rev 14:20)
In Ezekiel, the forces of Gog and Magog are accompanied by many nations from across the known world [Ezekiel 38:1-6]. This is similar to both the Battle of Armageddon [Rev 16:14, 19:19] as well as the Battle of Gog and Magog [Rev 20:8] in which the armies are composed of many nations from the earth.
Unlike the battle of Armageddon though, Ezekiel’s battle of Gog and Magog seems to begin after period of peace [Ezek 38:8,11; compare Ezekiel 37]. Revelation’s Battle of Gog and Magog also occurs after a period of peace, the Millennium.
If you are a full preterist like myself, this confusion is easily resolved. The battle of Armageddon is one and the same as the battle of Gog and Magog. The vision of the battle of Gog and Magog is a recapitulation of the battle of Armageddon. Both visions contain specific references to Ezekiel 38-39.
The Millennium is the period of time between the death/resurrection/ascension of Christ and the Roman-Jewish war of 67-70AD. The Roman-Jewish war is the “Tribulation.” The battle of Armageddon / battle of Gog & Magog is the final judgment upon apostate Israel and the triumph of Jesus Christ & his Church.
But who then is Gog, Magog, and the remaining nations? As some preterists have suggested, Rome is certainly to be associated with those nations that attack Jerusalem/Israel in those last days. The Roman armies, as all three descriptions of the battle describe, was composed of nations from across the world. It has also been pointed out by Kurt Simmons that the borders of the Roman Empire closely match the borders of the nations mentioned in Ezekiel 38.
But there is one major problem. When compared to the events of Ezekiel 38-39, the fate of the Roman armies does not parallel Ezekiel’s prophecies regarding Gog and Magog. In both the book of Revelation and Ezekiel, the armies of Gog and Magog are destroyed and Magog is burned with fire. To put it simply, this does not happen to the Roman Armies that attacked Israel in 67-70 AD.
To sidestep this, Simmons explains that the attack of Gog and Magog is on the Church by Rome (ie: Nero) and their defeat is when the “church reigns supreme in Christ.” [To be fair, although Simmons also equates the battle of Armageddon with the battle of God and Magog, he believes that ”the Neronean persecution was the battle of Armageddon/Gog and Magog.” ]
Now I agree that the vision of Armageddon is fulfilled in part by the triumph of the Church, primarily in the spread of the Gospel and its complete establishment among the nations [Rev 14:6-8; the spread of the Gospel -> the fall of Babylon; Matt 24:14; Rev 19:15,21 (sword of his mouth = the word of God)]
But I am hard pressed to believe that this alone satisfies the prophecy of Gog and Magog. Starting in Ezekiel 39, it is clear that there is a literal destruction of the literal armies of Gog and Magog in the mountains of Israel:
Ezek 39:4 Thou shalt fall upon the mountains of Israel, thou, and all thy bands, and the people that [is] with thee: I will give thee unto the ravenous birds of every sort, and [to] the beasts of the field to be devoured. ...
Ezek 39:9 And they that dwell in the cities of Israel shall go forth, and shall set on fire and burn the weapons, both the shields and the bucklers, the bows and the arrows, and the handstaves, and the spears, and they shall burn them with fire seven years: ...
Ezek 39:11 And it shall come to pass in that day, [that] I will give unto Gog a place there of graves in Israel, the valley of the passengers on the east of the sea: and it shall stop the [noses] of the passengers: and there shall they bury Gog and all his multitude: and they shall call [it] The valley of Hamongog.
Ezek 39:12 And seven months shall the house of Israel be burying of them, that they may cleanse the land.
I simply cannot identify this with the triumph of the church. Neither can I associate it with the Roman armies who were VICTORIOUS in Israel. It was Israel’s armies who were destroyed, not the Romans. Granted, many Roman soldiers died upon the “mountains of Israel” but it would be an extreme stretch to say their deaths were the fulfillment of Ezekiel 39.
How is this to be resolved? Are we to read the text figuratively? Are we to stretch the meaning of the text?
There is actually a very interesting solution to this “mystery” (you’ll see why I call it a mystery later). First, let’s begin by identifying the Gog and Magog of Ezekiel 38-39. In other words, who would contemparies of Ezekiel identify them as? Magog, along with several other nations listed, is a direct reference to the table of Nations in Genesis 10. Gog, though, seems to be a derivation from the word Magog itself. Regardless of what anyone says, no one knows for sure where the “Magog” of Genesis 10 is located, although it is probably north of Israel. [NOTE: Josephus records that Magog refers to the Scythians.]
Why then does Ezekiel use this mysterious location?
The first step in solving this riddle is to realize that Ezekiel’s prophecy against Gog is actually one of a series of prophecies against several nations or groups including Ammon (Ezek 25:2-7), Moab (25:8-11), Edom (25:12-14), Philistia (25:15-17), Tyre (Ezek 26,27,28:1-19), Zidon (28:20-24), and Egypt (Ezek 29-32), the “shepherd’s of Israel” (Exek 34), and mount Seir (Ezek 35).
At the time of Ezekiel’s prophecy, Israel was in captivity to Babylon. Babylon had destroyed their country, their capital, their people and their temple. But notice who is conspicuously missing from Ezekiel’s prophecies of doom! Babylon. Of course Babylon is mentioned in the prophecies, but only favorably (Ezek 26, Babylon against Tyre; Ezek 29-32, Babylon against Egypt…). It makes perfect sense that if Ezekiel wanted to prophecy against the very nation in which he was captive, he would have tried to make it less obvious by calling Babylon by another name, in this case, Magog.
But why Magog? Although it is only conjecture, it has been proposed (http://www.metrocast.net/~moza/atbash.htm) that Magog is “code” for Babel. The Hebrew letter mem (M) immediately follows the letter lamed (L). In addition, the Hebrew letter gimel (G) follows beth (B). Beginning with “BBL,” and substituting the Hebrew letter which immediately follows it in the Hebrew alphabet yields “GGM.” Reversing the order, you have “MGG” or Magog.
It has been proposed by others that Jeremiah used a similar scheme to disguise the name Babylon. His term “Shishak” can be similarly translated to Babel.
Like Babylon, Gog and Magog is the world power at the time, conquering and subduing other nations. In addition, Gog and Magog will not attack until Israel returns from captivity and is at peace. Afterwords, when Gog and Magog attacks, they will be destroyed. The implication is simple. Israel was currently in captivity to Bablyon, but after their release, Babylon would one day attack again and be destroyed on the mountains of Israel. This was the judgment upon the nation that destroyed Jerusalem and held its citizens captive.
But if Magog is Babylon in Ezekiel, who is the Magog of Revelation? If we equate Rome = Magog = Babylon, we run into the same problem as before…Rome was not conquered by Israel. How then is the mystery solved?
Actually a very simple solution is possible. John the Revelator actually uses the city Babylon in his prophecies. It is proposed that the “Babylon” of Revelation [Reve 14:8, 16:9, 17:5, 18:2, 18:10, 18:21], is identical with Magog. If the Magog of Ezekiel is in fact Babylon, then John’s use of Magog as synonym with the MYSTERY BABYLON makes perfect sense.
In fact, the Babylon of Revelation is completely destroyed and burned with fire (Reve 17:6, 18:8-9) just as Magog is in Ezekiel’s prophecy (Ezek 39:6) and the Magog of Revelation (20:9). But what of the remaining nations?
According to the vision found in Revelation 17, Mystery Babylon is seen together with a dragon with seven heads and ten horns. The seven heads, represent the Roman Empire (which sits upon seven mountains). The ten horns are the “kings of the earth” of Reve 17:2, who later betray Mystery Babylon and burn the city with fire. The ten horns include all the nations that conquered by Rome and which also made up their army.
The final question remains. Who is Magog? According to most preterists (both Full and Partial), Mystery Babylon of Revelation represents apostate and rebellious Israel. The destruction of the "Babylon" symbolizes the literal destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.
Following this hermeneutic, Ezekiel’s prophesy can be deciphered with no contradictions:
1) Ezekiel 38:1-3. Gog and Magog refers to apostate and rebellious Israel. Magog = Babel = Babylon = Mystery Babylon = Apostate Israel. (Gog refers to its deceptive leadership of the time including the false prophets, antichrists, …see also Ezekiel's prophecy against the shepherd's of Israel).
2) Ezek 38:4-18. The armies that descend upon the mountains of Israel like a cloud are those of Rome and the nations they conquered. At this point Mystery Babylon sits upon the dragon with 7 heads (Rome) and 10 Horns (Roman conquered nations). Therefore they are a “system” or one entity. It is only later that the 10 Horns betray and attack Israel.
3) Ezek 38:19. This imagery is identical to that used in the book of Revelation to describe the Tribulation period. It describes the Roman-Jewish war of 67-70AD.
4) Ezek 38:23. This scripture refers to the establishment of Jesus’ church (verse 23) among the gentile nations.
5) Ezek 39:1-20. Again Gog and Magog refers to apostate and rebellious Israel, who along with the city of Jerusalem, is destroyed at the culmination of the Roman – Jewish war in 70 AD.
6) Ezek 39:21-29. This is a reference to the establishment of Jesus Christ’s Church among all the nations.
If the battle of Gog and Magog in Revelation is equated with the battle found in Ezekiel 38-39 of the same name, one can run into any number of complications and contradictions. By identifying Magog as Babylon and the battle of Armageddon with the battle of Gog and Magog, all the inherent complications simply disappear.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)