Ezekiel 38

[Guest]

Thanks for the reply Sean. I will definitely have to tread lightly when dealing on this subject.

I remember one time in our sunday school class we were talking about Revelations. Well, the 1000 years came up and it was the typical pre-trib theory. Before I continue, this was before I found out about all these other theories from you folks. Anyways, I asked the teacher a question;I said, "What is the need for a 1000 years? Why not end it all right after the great tribulation?" Well the teacher didn't have a response, but someone in the class did. Now when he answered it wasn't really the answer that he gave, it was the tone in which he answered it. He stated his answer in a very sharp and intense tone as though how could I even question the 1000 year reign.

Maybe he thought I was a amillenialist who was trying to throw doubt on the pre-trib theory. Who knows? It was just interesting to see the emotion behind it.

By the way his answer was that Jesus was trying to show that even if he reigned with an iron scepter, man would still want to rebel. Meaning that we need his saving grace.

I know I could have refuted his statement, but I don't think I could have pushed it any further than I already did.

[Guest]

Just thought I would chime in with a possible historical fulfillment of Ezekiel 38. Preterist Gary DeMar suggests that the fulfillment of Ezekiel 38's prophetic language is described in a narrative form in the book of Esther. Thus, the War of Gog and Magog is prophetic apocalyptic language which described a future event (preservation of the Jews in Esther). For more information, see http://www.tidings.org/studies/ezekiel38200503.htm

I got this from listening to a radio show clip of DeMar and dispensationalist Joel Rosenburg, which can be found at americanvision.org. It was a very interesting discussion and I thought Rosenburg was one of the more intellectually honest dispensationalists I've heard. Of course, as a preterist, I still found the arguments espoused by DeMar to be more convincing. There is one thing that DeMar says for which I would like to find corraboration. He said that the term translated "in the last days," in Ezekiel 38:16 is actually, "In the future," according to most commentaries he has read. If this is true, I wonder how often "last days" simply means in the future elsewhere in the Old Testament. Haven't found this said anywhere else, but I'll admit the extent of my research has been Google searches. Any thoughts?

[Guest]

I listened to this "debate" when it was first aired and came away with frustration. I like to hear debates, and I agre with a lot of Gary's take on eschatology and disagree with some small paticulars, but the biggest frustration I had when listening to Gary was the lack of equal time he was alotted and thus his incomplete answers.

[Guest]

Allyn,

I completely agree with you concerning the equal time, I felt the same way the whole time. Poor DeMar had to go back and finish his answers when asked another question because they kept going to commerical in the middle of his answers. I'm really glad he did that though, because otherwise it would seem as though he conceded the point. Rosenburg sure took his time even when the host was trying to politely cut him off, though I'm sure he just has a slower method of speaking.

You may have noticed that I never referred to this as a "debate" because, like you, I felt it only a discussion, but one that was cordial and edifiying. Rosenburg is an interesting speaker, he spoke at my church this morning. While I don't feel that he brings any new dispensational arguments to the table, I still find his demeanor and persuasiveness to surpass dispensationalists I've heard in the past. I think a debate with Rosenburg and Steve on the matter of eschatology would be fascinating...at least Rosenburg seems respectful and realistic.

JJR

[Guest]

Hey folks,

Just a reminder, not all who would be called "dispensationalist" believe in a pre-trib rapture. I would probably be called a "dispy", but I am a post-tribber. The fact that certain things need to happen before Jesus' return is not a problem for me and it wasn't a problem for the early church, who knew nothing of the pre-trib rapture or the doctrine of an "imminent" return of Christ.

I wanted to ask, is there a commonly-held understanding of Ezekiel 38 (and 39) among amillennialists? In your school of thought, are these passages normally understood as referring literally to past historical events (as per the article posted by JJR) or allegorically to the church age?

[Guest]

I wanted to ask, is there a commonly-held understanding of Ezekiel 38 (and 39) among amillennialists? In your school of thought, are these passages normally understood as referring literally to past historical events (as per the article posted by JJR) or allegorically to the church age?

Hello?

[Guest]

Ely, although I can't answer your question about the ammilinialist view, because Sean, Steve, and others can do a better job than I can.

I'm in the middle of the book, Epicenter by Joel Rosenberg where he lays out a tremendous case for Putin rising up as a potential dictator in Russia but I still fail to see any real scriptural backing to render him being 'Gog' of 'Magog'. We should watch him closely as a country. Joel goes to great pains to explain how he fills the bill.

On page 81, he explains this senerio on Capital Hill when he was asked to breaks out the original text, Ezekiel 36-39, where he opens the scriptures for them. This is a scary situation since he would be influencing those individuals that make our foriegn policy.

Anyone else find this disturbing?

Michael

[Guest]

I wanted to ask, is there a commonly-held understanding of Ezekiel 38 (and 39) among amillennialists? In your school of thought, are these passages normally understood as referring literally to past historical events (as per the article posted by JJR) or allegorically to the church age?

Hello?

Hi. How ya doin?

To be honest, I'm not real concerned about thses passages right now. They are hard enough to interpret anyway.

Sorry, I hope someone can give you a better answer.

[Guest]

Just thought I would chime in with a possible historical fulfillment of Ezekiel 38. Preterist Gary DeMar suggests that the fulfillment of Ezekiel 38's prophetic language is described in a narrative form in the book of Esther....

HERE's a little more from Gary Demar on the Esther fulfillment that brother Brody pointed out to me today. It's a book review, but he talks a bit about the Esther fulfillment. There are certainly some parallels. Does anybody know of anyone else that believes this?

God bless!

[_Dolphin]

././..l