Announcement

Collapse

Eschatology 201 Guidelines

This area of the forum is primarily for Christian theists to discuss orthodox views of Eschatology. Other theist participation is welcome within that framework, but only within orthodoxy. Posts from nontheists that do not promote atheism or seek to undermine the faith of others will be permitted at the Moderator's discretion - such posters should contact the area moderators before posting.


Without turning this forum into a 'hill of foreskins' (Joshua 5:3), I believe we can still have fun with this 'sensitive' topic.

However, don't be misled, dispensationalism has only partly to do with circumcision issues. So, let's not forget about Innocence, Conscience, Promises, Kingdoms and so on.

End time -isms within orthodox Christianity also discussed here. Clearly unorthodox doctrines, such as those advocating "pantelism/full preterism/Neo-Hymenaeanism" or the denial of any essential of the historic Christian faith are not permitted in this section but can be discussed in Comparative Religions 101 without restriction. Any such threads, as well as any that within the moderator's discretions fall outside mainstream evangelical belief, will be moved to the appropriate area.

Millennialism- post-, pre- a-

Futurism, Historicism, Idealism, and Preterism, or just your garden variety Zionism.

From the tribulation to the anichrist. Whether your tastes run from Gary DeMar to Tim LaHaye or anywhere in between, your input is welcome here.

OK folks, let's roll!

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Russia, the king of the North, the Bear

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 3 Resurrections
    replied
    Originally posted by Ted Noel View Post

    We've all been taught things we had to unlearn. One item I forgot to list in my OP is that "rosh" does not exist in the Bible as a place name or people group. The Hebrew of Ezekiel 38:2 must be translated badly to get that result, and no other source uses it as a place name or people group.
    How true that is about having to "unlearn" things from our past. And it is also true that "Rosh" does not exist in scripture as a proper noun title of a nation or a specific people group. "Ros" just means "chief" or "head" of something. It acts as a descriptive adjective in Ezekiel 38:2 - not a proper noun in that text.

    The word "Ros" was used for the peak of the Mount of Olives which King David passed over as he fled Jerusalem from Absalom's approaching forces. This is found in the LXX for 2 Samuel 15:30,32 and 2 Samuel 16:1. "And David went up by the ascent of the mount of Olives, ascending and weeping...And David came as far as Ros, where he worshipped God... And David passed on a little way from Ros..."

    In this text, "Ros" is simply descriptive of the highest point of the crest of the Mount of Olives - the chief part or the head of the mountain King David was ascending. (As a brief aside, this was the "head" part of the Mount of Olives where Christ was crucified - the "place of the skull". What is a "skull" but the head of a skeleton? Christ was crucified on the head of the Mount of Olives - the "ros" part of the mountain overlooking Jerusalem and the temple below.)

    In Ezekiel 38:2, Gog is the nickname for the leading "chief (ros) prince of Meshech and Tubal", not the prince of Ros, Meshech, and Tubal. And none of this is at all related to our modern-day nation of Russia. Gog's battle is not a threat for our future. It is ancient history long past.

    Leave a comment:


  • Faber
    replied
    It gets worse. I've heard some interpret Meshech and Tubal as Moscow and Tobolsk.

    But the passage seems ambiguous. I've heard some commentaries suggest that it referred to Antiochus IV Epiphanes, or maybe to the emperor of Babylon.

    Anyway, welcome to TWeb. But beware, there are a few detractors lurking on this site. You'll recognize them by their fruit. And watch out for those pirates.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ted Noel
    replied
    Originally posted by Esther View Post
    Russia, Turkey and Iran.

    Have been looking at these countries for a few years now because they were highlighted in some of the prophecy teachings I have read/listened to over the course of about 20 years. About 2 years ago I saw for myself how these 3 countries were behind the same podium somewhere, with their country's respective flags depicted on Aljazeera news. Putin, Erdogan and Rouhani all shaking hands together at one time.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu5k...VoiceofAmerica

    I believe these countries are the end times players to watch out for.
    We've all been taught things we had to unlearn. One item I forgot to list in my OP is that "rosh" does not exist in the Bible as a place name or people group. The Hebrew of Ezekiel 38:2 must be translated badly to get that result, and no other source uses it as a place name or people group.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ted Noel
    replied
    Originally posted by Esther View Post
    Russia, Turkey and Iran.

    Have been looking at these countries for a few years now because they were highlighted in some of the prophecy teachings I have read/listened to over the course of about 20 years. About 2 years ago I saw for myself how these 3 countries were behind the same podium somewhere, with their country's respective flags depicted on Aljazeera news. Putin, Erdogan and Rouhani all shaking hands together at one time.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu5k...VoiceofAmerica

    I believe these countries are the end times players to watch out for.
    Once again, please provide biblical evidence that fits the understanding of the author and points to Russia. As noted before, and from Wikipedia, "Russia" came into the language about 1,500 years after Ezekiel.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by tabibito View Post

    Other countries did use the bear to depict Russia, yes.
    Wiki actually has a pretty good write up concerning it

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Ted Noel View Post

    The OP begins with a curious emphatic declaration: "In the Bible, Russia is the king of the North." I rise to ask the OP to present evidence for this assertion. In particular, I note that this Ezekiel 38 "Rosh" = "Russia" argument is ubiquitous in the community that is not well versed in languages and the ancient near east, as well as the history of "Russia."

    In Ezekiel 38, the names come from Genesis 10, the table of nations. At Babel (Gen 11), YHWH split the peoples up into smaller groups with individual languages and they were dispersed. The names in Ezekiel 38 are all dispersed into Anatolia, which is basically modern Turkey and some of northern Syria. A bit of Greece is included for good measure. It should be noted that the Black Sea is north of Turkey, and the Bible text is completely unaware of the land mass north of it (Russia).

    Next, we must note a fundamental hermeneutical fact. ALL of scripture was inherently understandable to its original audience. That does not mean that it was interpreted identically by everyone. A quick read of Mishna and Talmud will show that the rabbis would argue at length over the meaning of a passage. At the same time, they all understood all of the words. The place and person names were familiar. Continuing on, we must note that the name "Russia" derives from the name "Rus' " that was brought into the northern part of modern Russian by the Vikings (farther north!) between 800 and 1200 AD. Thus, when Ezekiel wrote in the 6th century BC, not only did Russia not exist, the name did not exist. This means that Rosh=Russia is at least 1,500 years in the future as Ezekiel wrote. And that means that it is virtually impossible to have a biblical equation between the two terms. Both Herodotus (7.78) and Josephus (Ant 1.124) place Meshech (Moschoi) in E Asia Minor.

    BTW, identifying "rosh" as a person is problematic. The Hebrew of Ezek 38:2 is probably best translated as "Son of man, set your face against Gog, of the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal..." (CJB, ESV, KJV, NET, NIV, NLT) Only the NAS (in my brief survey) renders it as "Magog the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal." The Hebrew word order makes the "chief prince" rendering much better. I would refer you to a much more complete discussion of this at https://nakedbiblepodcast.com/podcas...-38-39-part-1/ . Download the transcript and search for "Russia."

    As a final step, I spent some time searching the Jewish sages for "Russia." I came up empty. This leaves us with a simple challenge. If Ezekiel intended "Rosh"="Russia," bring your evidence. Until then, any interpretation that depends on Russia must be considered unbiblical.
    Welcome to Tweb.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ted Noel
    replied
    Originally posted by Esther View Post
    In the Bible, Russia is the king of the North (North of Israel) also understood to represent the Bear. I heard such an interesting observation on one of the Christian channels, that an injured bear is far more dangerous than one that is not. Putin is injured I think. The Ezekiel 38 war could well be on its way.
    The OP begins with a curious emphatic declaration: "In the Bible, Russia is the king of the North." I rise to ask the OP to present evidence for this assertion. In particular, I note that this Ezekiel 38 "Rosh" = "Russia" argument is ubiquitous in the community that is not well versed in languages and the ancient near east, as well as the history of "Russia."

    In Ezekiel 38, the names come from Genesis 10, the table of nations. At Babel (Gen 11), YHWH split the peoples up into smaller groups with individual languages and they were dispersed. The names in Ezekiel 38 are all dispersed into Anatolia, which is basically modern Turkey and some of northern Syria. A bit of Greece is included for good measure. It should be noted that the Black Sea is north of Turkey, and the Bible text is completely unaware of the land mass north of it (Russia).

    Next, we must note a fundamental hermeneutical fact. ALL of scripture was inherently understandable to its original audience. That does not mean that it was interpreted identically by everyone. A quick read of Mishna and Talmud will show that the rabbis would argue at length over the meaning of a passage. At the same time, they all understood all of the words. The place and person names were familiar. Continuing on, we must note that the name "Russia" derives from the name "Rus' " that was brought into the northern part of modern Russian by the Vikings (farther north!) between 800 and 1200 AD. Thus, when Ezekiel wrote in the 6th century BC, not only did Russia not exist, the name did not exist. This means that Rosh=Russia is at least 1,500 years in the future as Ezekiel wrote. And that means that it is virtually impossible to have a biblical equation between the two terms. Both Herodotus (7.78) and Josephus (Ant 1.124) place Meshech (Moschoi) in E Asia Minor.

    BTW, identifying "rosh" as a person is problematic. The Hebrew of Ezek 38:2 is probably best translated as "Son of man, set your face against Gog, of the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal..." (CJB, ESV, KJV, NET, NIV, NLT) Only the NAS (in my brief survey) renders it as "Magog the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal." The Hebrew word order makes the "chief prince" rendering much better. I would refer you to a much more complete discussion of this at https://nakedbiblepodcast.com/podcas...-38-39-part-1/ . Download the transcript and search for "Russia."

    As a final step, I spent some time searching the Jewish sages for "Russia." I came up empty. This leaves us with a simple challenge. If Ezekiel intended "Rosh"="Russia," bring your evidence. Until then, any interpretation that depends on Russia must be considered unbiblical.


    Leave a comment:


  • Esther
    replied
    Russia, Turkey and Iran.

    Have been looking at these countries for a few years now because they were highlighted in some of the prophecy teachings I have read/listened to over the course of about 20 years. About 2 years ago I saw for myself how these 3 countries were behind the same podium somewhere, with their country's respective flags depicted on Aljazeera news. Putin, Erdogan and Rouhani all shaking hands together at one time.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu5k...VoiceofAmerica

    I believe these countries are the end times players to watch out for.

    Leave a comment:


  • Thoughtful Monk
    replied
    Originally posted by Rushing Jaws View Post
    It is as old as the 1917 edition of the Scofield Bible. Whether it is in the first, 1909, edition, I do not know.

    The interpretation is at least as old as 1855: https://www.google.co.uk/books/editi...sec=frontcover
    That's interesting. Thanks for sharing.

    Leave a comment:


  • tabibito
    replied
    Originally posted by Rushing Jaws View Post
    Victorian cartoons show the Russian Bear - selection here: https://victorianweb.org/history/forpol/russia.html
    Other countries did use the bear to depict Russia, yes.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rushing Jaws
    replied
    Originally posted by tabibito View Post

    Seems not. Medieval times, starting with cartographers then adopted by cartoonists. Russia didn't actually adopt the bear as symbolic of anything to do with the nation until 1980.
    Victorian cartoons show the Russian Bear - selection here: https://victorianweb.org/history/forpol/russia.html

    Leave a comment:


  • Rushing Jaws
    replied
    Originally posted by Thoughtful Monk View Post

    I've been hearing that interpretation for decades. Wonder if the interpretation occurs prior to the Cold War?
    It is as old as the 1917 edition of the Scofield Bible. Whether it is in the first, 1909, edition, I do not know.

    The interpretation is at least as old as 1855: https://www.google.co.uk/books/editi...sec=frontcover
    Last edited by Rushing Jaws; 06-10-2022, 01:06 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Esther
    replied
    The Talmud[11] also draws parallels between the Shmita (Sabbatical) year and the seventh millennium: For six 'years', or millennia, the earth will be worked, whilst during the seventh 'year', or millennium, the world will remain 'fallow', in a state of 'rest' and universal peace.

    This is interesting Darfius !

    Leave a comment:


  • Darfius
    replied
    Originally posted by Darfius View Post

    Scripture Verse: Hebrews 4

    1 Therefore, since the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us be careful that none of you be found to have fallen short of it. 2 For we also have had the good news proclaimed to us, just as they did; but the message they heard was of no value to them, because they did not share the faith of those who obeyed. 3 Now we who have believed enter that rest, just as God has said,

    “So I declared on oath in my anger,
    ‘They shall never enter my rest.’”



    And yet his works have been finished since the creation of the world. 4 For somewhere he has spoken about the seventh day in these words: “On the seventh day God rested from all his works.” 5 And again in the passage above he says, “They shall never enter my rest.”

    6 Therefore since it still remains for some to enter that rest, and since those who formerly had the good news proclaimed to them did not go in because of their disobedience, 7 God again set a certain day, calling it “Today.” This he did when a long time later he spoke through David, as in the passage already quoted:

    “Today, if you hear his voice,
    do not harden your hearts.”



    8 For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day. 9 There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; 10 for anyone who enters God’s rest also rests from their works, just as God did from his. 11 Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will perish by following their example of disobedience.

    © Copyright Original Source



    I have mentioned the "1000 years to a day" statements found elsewhere in Scripture that support the obvious claim being made here that there remains a Sabbath day of rest for creation to mirror the Sabbath God took in His creation week, that day being 1,000 years. After redeeming us, Christ came to reverse the curse, and to flaunt His authority and power over "the nations". By giving Him a "secret" return and saying the world will remain as crap as it is until God just destroys it one day to "take us to heaven" is insulting to Him on the order of blasphemy. The meek will inherit a restored and glorified earth, not symbolism.

    A "Sabbath" is not some indeterminate period of time or eternity. It's one day out of seven. And in the context of Scripture speaking of the Sabbath-rest of the millenium, that one day is one thousand years.

    You also ignored Esther's point about people living over 100 being considered "young". When in history has that happened? It only happened immediately after the beginning of the curse in the days of Adam when the effects of the curse were only beginning to be felt. It will happen again on God's Sabbath day of rest when the effects of the curse are being reversed.
    According to classical Jewish sources, the Hebrew year 6000 (from sunset of 29 September 2239[2] until nightfall of 16 September 2240[3] on the Gregorian calendar) marks the latest time for the initiation of the Messianic Age. The Talmud,[4] Midrash,[5] and the Kabbalistic work, the Zohar,[6] state that the date by which the Messiah must appear is 6,000 years from creation. According to tradition, the Hebrew calendar started at the time of Creation, placed at 3761 BCE.[7] The current (2021/2022) Hebrew year is 5782.

    The belief that the seventh millennium will correspond to the Messianic Age is founded upon a universalized application of the concept of Shabbat—the 7th day of the week—the sanctified 'day of rest'.

    One translation of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:8-11) reads

    Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

    For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.[8]

    This tradition maintains that each day of the week corresponds to one thousand years of creation: Just as the six days of the work week culminate in the sanctified seventh day of Shabbat, so too will the six millennia of creation culminate in the sanctified seventh millennium (Hebrew years 6000–7000) — the Messianic Age.

    Just as Shabbat is the sanctified 'day of rest' and peace, a time representing joyful satisfaction with the labors completed within the previous 6 days,[9][10] so too the seventh millennium will correspond to a universal 'day of rest' and peace, a time of 'completeness' of the 'work' performed in the previous six millennia.

    The Talmud[11] also draws parallels between the Shmita (Sabbatical) year and the seventh millennium: For six 'years', or millennia, the earth will be worked, whilst during the seventh 'year', or millennium, the world will remain 'fallow', in a state of 'rest' and universal peace.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_6000

    Leave a comment:


  • Darfius
    replied
    Originally posted by Esther View Post

    No, love covers a multiple of transgressions which include different views about end times @ Darfius. I do agree that the teachings of Preterism are heresy though.
    I admire your compassion, Esther, and may God bless you for it. But in this instance your compassion--while not misplaced--is mistakenly expressed. Imagine if instead of killing the prophets of Baal, Elijah had said, "No, love covers over a multitude of sins". He might have temporarily felt warm and fuzzy inside, but then Jezebel would have killed him, the nation would have irrevocably sunk into paganism and the world would have fallen into a darkness that perhaps not even the Lord's coming could have saved us from. Recall that if the future Elijah is unsuccessful at "turning the hearts of the fathers to the children and the children to their fathers", God will destroy the earth, so what I am saying is not blasphemous, but accurate.

    Also, here is the other instance of "cover a multitude of sins" in Scripture:

    Scripture Verse: James 5:20

    consider this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and cover over a multitude of sins.

    © Copyright Original Source



    Now we can't pick and choose what Scripture to heed, we have to make sense and reconcile all of them. Can the "love" of the first instance mean indulging a sinner in the error of his [or her] way? Certainly not. In fact, by turning a sinner from the error of their way, one is saving their soul from death [both the first death and the second death (Rev 20:14)] and thereby loving them.

    It also bears mentioning that Peter is speaking of love between Christian brethren, something which you admit 3 Resurrections is not when you admit she is espousing heresy. In fact, it is a modern heresy which suggests we simply accept what comes out of people's mouths when they say they are Christians and pay no attention to their actions (judge by their deeds as Christ commands us to do).

    So when I say I will forgive and extend courtesy to 3 Resurrections when she repents, I am following the Biblical mandate to show covenant love to the brethren by extending her the offer of actually becoming my Christian brethren by obedience to Christ. Until then, the only love I am even allowed to show her is the rod of correction and "handing her over to Satan" to (hopefully) compel her to salvific sanity in her misery.

    It can be hard to be--or be perceived to be--"mean" to people, but it helps to understand that when Jesus said He came to give us life, He didn't mean the extension of our physical subsistence. He meant what Job had--his integrity. Job prayed to die several times during his ordeal, but he never let go of his integrity. Meanwhile his wealthy and comfortable (and self-righteous) friends couldn't understand that he was more alive than they were. And once Job had displayed that he cared more for life than the dressings of life, God also blessed him with those. I want 3 resurrections to have integrity, because I know that without it she is dead and will die. So if I make her uncomfortable, I hope thereby to "goad" her into seeking the only real comfort available to any of us--a true relationship with God as made a reality by integrity.

    Leave a comment:

widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Working...
X