What does SCRIPTURE say without our added interpretation?

Recently I have seen a lot of people claiming that we all “interpret” scripture because we all approach it with a particular bias. But is that really the case and to what extent do we “interpret” scripture?
As far as possible I take scripture at face value, accepting what is written without trying to redefine its clearest meaning, as long as its context does not suggest that it should be taken as being symbolic. (Regarding biblical symbolism – rarely is the reader left in ignorance about the meaning of a symbol. The interpretation is usually revealed in the text.)

Let me give you an example of accepting God’s word AS WRITTEN compared to God’s word “INTERPRETED”

BIBLICAL TEXT:

Revelation 20: 1-10 And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.
I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony for Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or his image and had not received his mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy are those who have part in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years.

When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God's people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them. And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

How do we address this passage:

AS WRITTEN: After Jesus’ return Satan will be imprisoned and his deceptive power over the nations will be totally removed from the earth. Jesus will reign with his saints for 1000 years. After the 1000 years Satan will be released and will gather an army to oppose the rule of Jesus. Satan will be defeated and thrown into the lake of fire. There will be a thousand year gap between Jesus’ return (and the resurrection of the saints) and a second resurrection (that of the unsaved) which will precede the judgement.

AS INTERPRETED: This 1000 years is a symbolic period representing the church age, Satan was bound by Jesus at the cross and the saints are now ruling with Christ who is seated on His throne in heaven. Jesus’ return will be immediately followed by the judgement because there is no literal 1000 year earthly reign.

This is an extreme example – but it is one that is very WIDELY applied. Am I guilty of “interpreting scripture” because I choose to believe what is actually written instead of trying to explain why it doesn’t really mean what the passage actually says?

Another example:

When scripture tells me that

“God our Savior, … wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ
Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men”

And

“The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is
patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.”

Why should this mean anything different to what it says?

And yet many add to, change or reinterpret the meaning of these verses because taken according to their literal meaning they totally discredit their favoured doctrines.

When scripture tells me that God desires all to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth and that God doesn’t want any to perish – then I don’t try to “interpret” or explain those statement away to make them fit other doctrines.

When I read statements that refer to election – those references to election do not negate the truths about who God desires to be saved. Instead of ignoring or redefining the statements about God’s desires, we should look further and see WHO is said to be elected and under what conditions. Again, when we find the answer to that it would be foolish to ignore that answer because it contradicts a doctrinal bias. Especially when that answer is totally consistent with other references through scripture

Is it “INTERPRETING” these verses when we accept that they mean that God wants ALL MEN to be saved, that Jesus gave Himself as a ransom for ALL MEN, that God does not want ANYONE to perish but wants EVERYONE to come to repentance?

Is there anything in the context of these statements that would indicate that a literal meaning should not be applied?

Sometimes the intended meaning of a few verses isn’t always immediately apparent from the content of the verses themselves. If that is the case we must allow scripture to interpret scripture . In other words, what does scripture elsewhere say that will open our understanding?

For example, what are we to make of John 1?

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
He was with God in the beginning.

What would this mean to us if we were reading it for the first time? There is nothing in these first two verses to tell us what or who this “Word” is. We have to read further into the chapter to see:

The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, "This was he of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.' "

From this we get a better idea of what the first two verses are about. The “Word”, from the context of the following verses can be seen to be Jesus. This truth becomes even more apparent when we continue into John’s writing.

This is also the case with Ephesians 1 – one of the favourite proof text passages regarding unconditional “election”. Not only is it the case that nowhere in this chapter does it indicate that “election” is unconditional, the chapter actually spells out the condition continually.
That election and every benefit available to “the elect” are THROUGH HIM (Christ) and IN HIM. And the passage also includes the revelation of how people come to be IN HIM.

And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession—to the praise of his glory.

So to be in Christ someone has to hear the gospel and believe. And then being in Christ we are included in the elect. This is also totally consistent with other parts of scripture that reveal that believing or having faith in Jesus is a primary condition of salvation. (A well known example being John 3:16 – “Whoever BELIEVES will not perish…”).

During many doctrinal discussions I find myself repeating “But what does SCRIPTURE say. What are the words on the page telling us – not how can I manipulate those words to make them fit my doctrine.
Too often we are prone to “interpreting” scripture instead of submitting ourselves to its clearest and plainest meaning because that clearest meaning can be more challenging than we like. Recognising the clearest meaning would require some kind of change, whether in doctrine or behaviour. It is much more comfortable to find a way of “interpreting” the text so that uncomfortable change is not necessary.

God's Future for Israel

Some disagreements in doctrine are understandable. None of us have perfect knowledge or understanding of scripture and there are some parts of scripture that are ambiguous enough for us to come up with vastly different interpretations until further understanding is gained.

However, some truths could not be made clearer and I don’t know how wide sections of the Christian community can dismiss them.

One of these relates to Israel’s place in God’s purposes and in particular their future.

I don’t have to the time to go through all of the evidence, but scripture could not be more clear about the issue.

One day in the future Israel as a nation will recognise that Jesus is their Messiah and they will be saved under the new covenant in the same way that every other believer becomes saved under the new covenant.

When the future of Israel is revealed in prophecy, scripture is not referring to a “spiritual” Israel – meaning the church, as replacement theology insists.
Those prophecies are referring to NATIONAL Israel, physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, to whom the physical land of Israel was promised.

If there was no other prophecy in scripture related to this matter, Ezekiel 36 should establish this truth once and for all.

This portion makes it absolutely clear of whom the Lord is referring.

“24 " 'For I will take you out of the nations; I will gather you from all the countries and bring you back into your own land. 25 I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your impurities and from all your idols. 26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws. 28 You will live in the land I gave your forefathers; you will be my people, and I will be your God. 29 I will save you from all your uncleanness.

He is referring to a people who have been scattered among the nations and whose forefathers had been given a land. They will be returned to that land and live in it. And they will be cleansed and given a new heart and a new spirit. This clearly refers to the new birth – a fact recognised even by the replacement theologians who apply those references to themselves but ignore the fact that the context here in Ezekiel is specifically and CLEARLY referring to Israel.

Paul also makes Israel’s ultimate future clear when he writes in Romans 11:

26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written:
"The deliverer will come from Zion;
he will turn godlessness away from Jacob.
27 And this is my covenant with them
when I take away their sins."

“But”, say the replacement theologians, “Paul has already said that ‘not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.’” As if this statement is enough to deny that ANY descended from Israel are Israel and that the statement overturns all prophecy that promises Israel a future with God.

What does that statement mean? I think it is explained towards the end of Amos (chapter 9):

9 For I will give the command,
and I will shake the house of Israel
among all the nations
as grain is shaken in a sieve,
and not a pebble will reach the ground.
10 All the sinners among my people
will die by the sword,
all those who say,
'Disaster will not overtake or meet us.'
11 "In that day I will restore
David's fallen tent.
I will repair its broken places,
restore its ruins,
and build it as it used to be,
12 so that they may possess the remnant of Edom
and all the nations that bear my name, "
declares the LORD, who will do these things.
13 "The days are coming," declares the LORD,
"when the reaper will be overtaken by the plowman
and the planter by the one treading grapes.
New wine will drip from the mountains
and flow from all the hills.
14 I will bring back my exiled people Israel;
they will rebuild the ruined cities and live in them.
They will plant vineyards and drink their wine;
they will make gardens and eat their fruit.
15 I will plant Israel in their own land,
never again to be uprooted
from the land I have given them,"
says the LORD your God.

This section of scripture echo Ezekiel’s prophecy about Israel being returned to the land and adds NEVER AGAIN TO BE UPROOTED* (obviously referring to a time AFTER the destruction of Jerusalem and the dispersal and exile of Jews from the land for almost 2000 years).
It also gives us a hint of who God considers to be the true Israel. Firstly taking into account OT prophecy there should be no doubt that Israel is ALWAYS national Israel because of the references to the land of their forefathers. Secondly we take into account Paul’s statement that not all descended from Israel are Israel. Thirdly we see in Amos that a shaking of Israel will take place in which sinners among God’s people of Israel will not survive. Therefore it will be the remnant of national Israel who will survive the shaking who will be that “All Israel” who will be saved in the end times.

It is probably not surprising that those who reject Israel’s future place in God’s plans, also deny the literal millennial reign of Jesus from Jerusalem. And to deny that its necessary to ignore or distort what is clearly revealed throughout the majority of scripture, in particular the Old Testament prophets and the writings of the apostles.


----
* I think it would be a mistake to assume that the establishment of Israel as a nation in 1948 HAS to be the return being prophesied in scripture. It could well be - but personally I wouldn't take it for granted. I see the possibility of a further exile (possibly short term) in which Israel is again subjected to extreme persecution (possibly the sifting mentioned by Amos) after which the final and permanent return occurs.

2010: A Race Idiocy

Some thoughts about the last decade and the "millennial" year that started it.

2010.
I recall a film of that title, the sequel to 2001 A Space Odyssey. I think it was made in the mid 1980s and it gave a very “optimistic” outlook for man’s progress as a space travelling species. But then again, in the world Arthur C Clarke created for that series of novels and films, mankind was being helped along by a mysterious alien race represented by a large matte black monolith.

Is it mere irony that a similar featureless block is the focal point of the prayer room in the United Nations building? As members pray to their various gods they kneel or sit facing the block and are able to use it as a representation of the god to whom they are praying. A featureless block intended to be inoffensive to the variety of religions followed by the diverse membership of the UN. In other words it was a compromise solution which showed no favouritism to any of the millions of gods worshipped by man.

2010. A year that was given little if any thought for most of my life. It lacks the mystique of the year 2000, that false millennial year (A C Clarke got the timing right with 2001).
2000 was a year I dreamt of as a child. A year so far away I couldn’t imagine reaching it. After all I would be 42 if the world (and I) survived that long. Be aware that my childhood saw the Vietnam War, the threat of nuclear annihilation, the first seeds of terrorism, with both Islamic groups and the IRA starting their campaigns…
The world didn’t seem such a friendly place and the future seemed… well, unlikely.

But that most anticipated “millennial” year did arrive and I was here to see it. A year celebrated with the Olympic Games literally on my doorstep, the Stadium visible from the street outside my home. People stood in the streets to watch one of the firework displays that have become part of Sydney’s identity. It was the cities second major celebration for that year.
The first was to openly welcome the "millennium".

A whole decade has now passed. 10 years more than my childhood imagination could reach and what has the world learned?

Well, it has learned to change fiction into fact, taking the example of Clarke’s fictional world the leaders of the “real” world also turn to a featureless block for enlightenment. And while their representaives pray to that idol, visitors to the building containing it can see another monument at its entrance. One that speaks of beating swords into ploughshares and about man learning war no more… surely an admirable goal to work towards.

Except: that monument promoting peace has taken its motto from scripture, and it omits the most important part of the scriptural statement. It ignores the ONE responsible for that promised peace and that ONE is NOT an impersonal man-made block.

The One who will bring peace is revealed in the full text that SHOULD have been included on that monument at the UN building. And that peace will only occur when the TRUE “millennium” is established. The only one who will bring peace to this world is Jesus Christ, the Prince of Peace and He will do it when His earthly reign of 1000 years is established from His throne in Jerusalem.

Many peoples will come and say,
"Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD,
to the house of the God of Jacob.
He will teach us his ways,
so that we may walk in his paths."
The law will go out from Zion,
the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
He will judge between the nations
and will settle disputes for many peoples.
They will beat their swords into plowshares
and their spears into pruning hooks.
Nation will not take up sword against nation,
nor will they train for war anymore

Now THAT is a millennium to get excited about – but the best news is that it will be only a foretaste of even better things to come.

Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. 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."

Gospel of the Kingdom: What about Israel?

"Your Kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven".

“…they asked him, "Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?"
He said to them: "It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority”


The teaching of “replacement theology” is not new. It was stirring in the very early years of the church and it is possible that the book of Romans was written to address this issue with the climax of Paul’s argument coming in chapters 9-11 and particularly in chapter 11.

“Did God reject His people? NEVER!!!”

Romans was written to a church that had for a time been made up totally of gentile believers after all Jews had been forced out of Rome by the emperor Claudius. When Nero came to power he allowed the Jews to return, and Jewish believers had difficulty being accepted back into a church that considered their exile had been evidence that God had forsaken the Jews.

The idea that the church has replaced Israel as God’s people because of Jewish disobedience is categorically refuted by Paul in Romans. When he wrote NEVER in Romans 11, the word used was the strongest possible negative exclamation available to him in the Greek language (meganoita!).
Paul also clearly attacks the smugness of those who considered themselves as being those people who had allegedly replaced Israel in God’s affections. (“Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either”).

While Romans addresses a very early incarnation of “replacement theology” there can be no doubt that it is a belief system that refuses to go away, and it is widely held today; despite the historically unprecedented “resurrection” of a long dead nation (Israel) and its language (Hebrew) only 50 years ago.

Why should there be such contention over Israel and its continuing role in God’s purposes? Why are so many determined to dismiss Israel’s relevance despite the events of recent history in which a nation, totally dead and gone as a political entity, returned against the odds to become one of the world’s most powerful military forces; and to become a nation constantly at the centre of world attention. Has there ever been a time since 1948 when Israel, a tiny nation, has not been in the news? Would there be such a continuing obsession with a mere political entity, no matter how unlikely the renewed existence of that entity after 2000 years may seem?

In a previous post I addressed the matter of the “millennium” in Old Testament prophecies. Almost every Old Testament prophet foretold of a time when the nations would be ruled by a King from the throne of David in Zion. The issues of Israel’s continuing importance and the rule of this King are very much linked. It is therefore not surprising that “replacement theology” often goes hand in hand with “amillennialism” - a theology that denies the literal earthly reign of Christ after His return.

Israel is very much tied up with end time events and Satan knows that. He thought he could prevent fulfilment of Gods purposes by leading men to crucify Jesus – but his “victory” was short lived. Satan knows that Gods plans for THIS creation are heading towards an earthly kingdom ruled by God’s Son from the throne of David. Satan knows that the establishment of that earthly kingdom begins with him (satan) being imprisoned and stripped of his deceptive power, and will end with him being thrown into the lake of fire. It’s not surprising that he would try to prevent the establishment of that kingdom by removing Israel. And its not surprising that he would cause so much confusion about the events that mark his final destruction.

I tend to think that Satan’s attempt to destroy Jesus was to prevent the establishment of the Kingdom of Israel under the rule of the Messiah. By killing the Messiah, Satan thought he could stop the kingdom. But God’s plan involved an unexpected twist. The Messiah would come twice, first as a sacrifice then secondly as King to rule over the nations from His throne in Zion.

Satan’s misunderstanding played right into God’s hands. Instead of destroying God’s plans, the death of Jesus FULFILLED them. Satan knows he can no longer prevent God’s Kingdom by destroying the King, so his attention becomes focused on the nation from which the King will rule over the earth.
By turning the church against Israel Satan is trying to kill two birds with one stone. It turns the church away from God’s purposes while trying to rid the world of Israel. The final part of that attempt will come when the beast launches a massive “final solution” to rid the world of both church and Israel.

Paul made it clear that Israel has not been replaced by anyone. There are many statements in Romans 11 that should dismiss any doubt about Israel’s continued importance to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob: the God of Israel.
But true to form, one of the clearest promises made specifically to Israel about its ongoing part in God’s purposes is most often quoted and applied to the church in a most inappropriate way.

“…for God's gifts and his call are irrevocable”. Instead of applying this to Israel, it is usually applied to disobedient “Christians” who still SEEM to be displaying Spiritual gifts. Implying that disobedient Christians can’t lose what they have been given – while Israel is portrayed as having lost their inheritance because of their disobedience. What a complete twisting of the context and the intended application of that promise regarding God’s relationship with Israel.

So what are we to do with Israel? Should Christians throw unconditional support behind the current political incarnation that goes by that name? Is that what God would have us do? Or does God require that we expect the same standard of righteousness that HE demands from His Israel?

It is clearly the latter - and the only way they can attain that standard of righteousness is through faith in His Son, their Messiah.

I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written:

"The deliverer will come from Zion;
he will turn godlessness away from Jacob.
And this is my covenant with them
when I take away their sins."

Rom 11:25-27

Millennial Questions

Here are a selection of questions “amillennialists” have asked me in their attempt to discredit belief in a literal millennial rule of Christ.

---

“Will immortal humans (the saved) live among mortal humans?”

Since the saved are changed at Jesus’ return and since the scriptures states clearly that the saints will rule with Him during the millennium it certainly seems that immortal humans will live among those unbelievers who are still alive after Jesus’ return
——-
“While the redeemed live for the whole 1000 years will those not saved die?”

Yes there will be death during the millennium. Isaiah speaks of lives being extended at that time, but that sinner’s lives will be shortened. So there will also be sin in the earth during the millennium.
———
“I mean can someone explain to me what exactly is going on during this future 1000 year reign of Christ on earth?”

Christ is ruling over the earth in justice. Life is going on in a world that is totally just. There are many descriptions of this period scattered throughout scripture, in particular throughout the OT prophets.
——–
“What is the purpose?”

Speculation alert: maybe it’s merely to show humanity what life can be like when true justice is applied and also that it’s NOT the devil making us do it – that mankind has ultimate responsibility to for his own actions. With the devil out of the way he can’t be blamed for man’s sin.

Also see:
Millennium: Failed Prophecies and Lost Faith

————
“Why does God continue the conflict between Himself and the devil for another 1000 years?”

He doesn’t. The devil is out of the way for those 1000 years. There is no conflict with the devil. The devil is released at the end of that time for a brief period. Again there is no conflict – when God determines that enough is enough, the devil is thrown into the Lake of fire.
The idea of conflict gives the impression of God struggling with the devil. There is no struggle. Satan is dealt with when and how God determines. Note that Satan’s imprisonment at the beginning of the 1000 years is carried out by an angel. God doesn’t even need to do that Himself. He sends a servant to do it.
————-
“And seeing Jesus return according to prophecy, how can those still alive on earth not bow and put their faith in Him?”

1) Because mankind is rebellious and sinful.
2) Who says that the majority still alive on earth don’t immediately do that but later when complacency takes over they slip back to their old ways.
3) Those generations born during the Millennium have no prior knowledge of what the world was like prior to the rule of Jesus and will be ruled by the same passions that have affected mankind throughout history.
————–
“How can MOST of the world be deceived after the 1000 years when they have had the wonderful loving most kind and gentle King Jesus leading humanity?”

Because mankind is sinful and selfish and doesn’t like being told what to do, even when it is in their best interests.
Judas lived with Jesus for three years. He saw the miracles and heard the teaching, yet he remained a thief and later betrayed Jesus.
——–
“Do the wicked get raised before the millennium or wait till after the 1000 years?”

That is a question that is specifically and clearly answered in scripture. Read the sequence of events from Rev 19 onwards, and for the sake of this exercise assume that the millennium is exactly where scripture places it – in between the return of Jesus and the great white throne judgment.
———-
“When the mortals see the righteous have been raised, won’t that bring conversion?”

Not necessarily. Some saw Lazarus raised from the dead and planned to kill him again! While resurrection has a much more glorious and permanent outcome than a mere raising from the dead, the heart of unrepentant man remains the same.
———–
“If there are unbelieving mortals living on the earth during His reign do they have a chance to be saved and become immortal?”

I’m not aware that scripture makes this clear – but that does not nullify the reality of a literal 1000 year reign.
———–
“Does Jesus return and then rule over this world as it is or does He make it perfect first?”

He starts ruling it as it is – I suppose that is why swords have to be beaten into ploughshares and spears into pruning hooks (which scripture describes as happening when the Lord rules in Zion – as He does in the Millennium!)
———–
“It seems the nations still exist during the 1000 years so do we go about and clean up the pollution and mess or do we wait until Jesus creates a new heaven and new earth after the 1000 years?”

People still have to live here for that 1000 years so it is likely that the earth’s mess is progressively cleaned up.
———-

The Millennium: Failed Prophecies and Lost Faith

For most of my Christian life “The Millennium” was a mysterious 1000 year period beginning after the Great Tribulation. The religious tradition to which I belonged paid lip-service to the reality of a future “millennium”, but never offered any teaching about it.
Therefore the only thing I knew was what I read in Revelation and that didn’t say very much. Even the word “millennium” seemed to take on a mystical character that took it outside the realm of concrete reality.

My first informed introduction to the topic came a few years ago through teaching by David Pawson. At first I thought that most of what he was saying was based on speculation like the majority of popular teaching on end times. But if that was the case it would be out of character for him. He always makes a strong issue out of sticking with the clearest and simplest meaning of the biblical text. Was he abandoning this approach while tackling this topic?

Pawson rarely gives convenient chapter and verse bible references for his hearers to “look up”. He encourages the practice of searching the scriptures rather than checking references; and over time I started to find confirmation of his teaching as I read through the Old Testament prophets. I was surprised how much of their writings applied to the promise of an earthly rule by Israel’s Messiah.

Recently I came across a former believer (and now professing atheist) who claimed that Jesus had failed to fulfil many OT Messianic prophesies. It seemed that this understanding might have played a part in him losing his faith. An honest assessment of his view would see the legitimacy of his conclusion, but ONLY on the condition that Jesus’ time on this earth was over and that there was no further opportunity for the prophecies to be fulfilled.

Most Christians look forward to a “second-coming” of Jesus, but how many have given any thought to WHY He will return to earth? Why is it necessary? What will it achieve that could not be achieved by him remaining in heaven? Is He returning merely to bring everything to an immediate end prior to judgement? If that is the case, then what about those unfulfilled Messianic prophecies? Has God given up on them? Was He lying when He gave those words to the prophets? Or are those events still pending?

Many try to spiritualise John’s prophecy about a 1000 year period in which Jesus rules with His saints. But is it merely coincidence that John describes the very same situation that almost all of the prophets predicted? If the prophets’ predictions were valid (which believers MUST accept if we deem that they were prophetic messages from God) then could those prophets have been predicting the very same thing that John foresaw? If so, the events they describe in their prophecies will give us a picture of life during the millennium period, filling in the detail missing from John’s account in Revelation. And the former believer’s claim of failed Messianic prophecies would be clearly premature. There is still plenty of time for the Lord to fulfil His prophesied Messianic promises.

GOG – MAGOG, Ezekiel Prophecy and the New Testament?

The basic framework of end time prophecy isn't too hard to grasp - but when we try to narrow it all down to specific timetables we are guaranteed to get it wrong. This is MORE likely if we try to read and understand scripture with a bible in one hand and a newspaper in the other.

We need to be wary of allowing our preconceptions to mislead us from the truth. The Gog-Magog prophecy in Ezekiel is one example to consider. This has often been interpreted as referring to Russia invading Israel, but what is the prophecy really about and what is its significance in the end time program? To gain understanding without being misled by speculation, it is important that we don’t deviate from what scripture itself reveals.

I tend to think it is not prophesying a single event. OT prophecies can predict separate events as if they are one. OT prophecies about Jesus were like this, in which there was no distinction made between His first and second comings.

I have heard this combining of two events into one prophecy being described with the illustration of an observer looking at two distant mountains one behind the other. The distant mountains seem to be one peak because the valley between can not be seen by the observer. Likewise two events (two mountain peaks) separated by time (the valley) are seen as a single event (mountain) by the prophet (the observer).

A battle involving Gog and Magog is mentioned only twice in scripture. There’s an extensive account in Ezekiel and a brief one in Revelation 20. Despite the brevity of the Revelation reference there are several similarities that indicate it is possibly describing the same event as the Ezekiel references.
But, while parts of the prophecy match this event in Revelation 20, there are also aspects that don't fit that scenario, but they do fit descriptions given in Revelation 19 of Armageddon.

So could Ezekiel be describing the events of Revelation 20?
Is he describing Armageddon? (Rev 16 & 19)
Is there possibly a combination of the two?
Or is it an event that the NT ignores? (I personally think this last option is unlikely)

Following is a comparison of the Ezekiel prophecy with the two different events in Revelation. Because the Ezekiel account spreads over three chapters I’ll note the relevant verses but won’t quote the text here. The Revelation accounts are much shorter so I’ll quote the whole relevant sections at the end of this article.


Similarities between Ezekiel and Rev 20 (end of millennium)

1) Gog and Magog are involved.
2) Their attack is directed upon on Israel
3) The attack is at a time when Israel is at peace (Eze 38:11) (Rev 20. end of the millennium, after 1000 years of Christ’s rule on earth)
4) It involves “the nations” or “many nations”.
5) The battle is ended before it begins by fire from God. (Eze 39:6)


Similarities between the Ezekiel account and Revelation’s description of Armageddon.

1) Attack directed on Israel.
2) Many nations join the attack
3) Massive earthquake and mountains thrown down (Eze 38:20)
4) Great hailstones fall (Eze 38:22)
5) Dead are left for the birds of the air to eat (Eze 39:4)


Those are the similarities but what about the differences?

The latter three events are not mentioned with regard to the post millennium battle.
Gog and Magog are not mentioned in the Armageddon account.
Will Israel be at peace and living in safety leading up to Armageddon?
The Antichrist’s army at Armageddon is not destroyed by fire from heaven – but by Jesus who has returned to earth.
The leaders of the battle at Armageddon are thrown alive into the lake of fire. The leaders in Ezekiel are given a grave.(Eze 39:11).

Other questions raised:
The aftermath of the Ezekiel battle leaves a battleground strewn with weaponry that is gathered and used for fuel. If this is after the millennium, it would mean that life continues on this earth for several more years prior to the second resurrection and the judgment. This is not suggested in Revelation – but then again it is not ruled out either.

If the Ezekiel battle does not fit anything described in Revelation, then the NT is entirely silent about a major event that happens in the end times. I don’t see this silence is likely but I suppose it is possible.

Armageddon, before millennium


Rev 16:16 -21
Then they gathered the kings together to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon.
The seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air, and out of the temple came a loud voice from the throne, saying, “It is done!”
Then there came flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder and a severe earthquake. No earthquake like it has ever occurred since the human race has been on earth, so tremendous was the quake.
The great city split into three parts, and the cities of the nations collapsed. God remembered Babylon the Great and gave her the cup filled with the wine of the fury of his wrath.
Every island fled away and the mountains could not be found.
From the sky huge hailstones, each weighing about a hundred pounds, fell on people. And they cursed God on account of the plague of hail, because the plague was so terrible.

Rev 19:17-21
And I saw one angel standing in the sun. And he cried with a great voice, saying to all the birds that fly in mid-heaven, Come and gather together to the supper of the great God, so that you may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of commanders, and the flesh of strong ones, and the flesh of horses, and those sitting on them, and the flesh of all, both free and slave, both small and great.
And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth and their armies, being gathered to make war against Him who sat on the horse, and against His army.
And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet doing signs before it, (by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast), and those who had worshiped his image. The two were thrown alive into the Lake of Fire burning with brimstone.
And the rest were slain by the sword of Him who sat on the horse, it proceeding out of His mouth. And all the birds were filled from their flesh.

Scriptural account of Battle After the Millennium

Rev 20:7-9
And when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be loosed out of his prison. And he will 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 them is as the sand of the sea. And they went up over the breadth of the earth and circled around the camp of the saints, and the beloved city. And fire came down from God out of Heaven and devoured them.

LINKS TO RECOMMENDED SERMONS

Good preaching and teaching can often be very hard to find. The following sermons have been helpful to me.


The following are links to recommended sermons on the SERMONINDEX website


Art Katz – Holiness or Blessing This seems to date from the mid 1990s when the Toronto phenomenon had its highest public profile. Art Katz preached this message during a visit to Australia.

The following are part of a ten sermon series on the book of Revelation. All ten sermons can be heard on the sermonindex site. I recommend these two in particular because they cover potentially contentious issues with a calm and Bible based approach.

David Pawson – “Rapture” Mr Pawson gives a historical and scriptural overview of teaching on the future event known as “the rapture”.
David Pawson- Millennium This sermon follows the talk on the rapture in the 10 part series, and examines the scriptural evidence regarding the 1000 year reign of Christ mentioned in Revelation 20.