Position Papers 2018

Israel’s Next War?

An eTPL28 Position Paper #35

March 2018: The Islamic military concentration in Lebanon is reaching enormous levels according to current Israeli Intelligence reports – and by the admission of the leaders of Hezbollah in that country. Its numbers of installed and targeted rockets are increasing by magnitudes; the installations are largely in civilian properties (homes, businesses, and hospitals) for protection (they opine) from Israeli attack.

And in addition, many of these assets consist of Russian forces (said by Russia to be peacekeepers and not a threat) near the Golan Heights, as well as Iranian-sponsored troops (admitted by all to be a threat to Israel) now installed there.

Russia claims that its forces stationed there are insurance that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard (IRG) forces that are also in Lebanon and Syria are clearly separated from encroaching on Israel’s border.

It is a “guarantee” which President Putin has ostensibly made to Israel regarding Russia’s ally, Iran.

Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu has repeatedly warned Syria and Lebanon as well as Russia, that Israel will not tolerate Iran’s establishment of its forces on the doorsteps of Israel, and has repeatedly attacked the IRG as it attempted to move personnel closer and to move its weapons closer to the Jewish State in the recent past.

Notably, the Prophet Zacharias, the father of John Immerser, prophesied that Israel would be delivered from its enemies and “those who hate us” by Messias, the object of John Immerser’s ministry within Judaea of the day. Luke 1: 71, 74; God’s word which proclaim the same fact are recorded in Psalm 106:47; Isaiah 14:1-3; Isaiah 44:24-26; Isaiah 54:7-17; Jeremiah 23:6; Jeremiah 30:9-11; Jeremiah 32:37; Ezekiel 28:26; Ezekiel 34:25; Ezekiel 34:28; Ezekiel 38:8; Zephaniah 3:15-20.

We cite just a limited number of references which point to the PHYSICAL salvation (saving) of Israel from their enemies in addition to their SPIRITUAL salvation which shall result from the coming of Messiah to them.

These references have real meaning; they are not metaphors or similes; they have to be taken into account as applying to Israel's hazards at the time of the final ingathering, for otherwise, they are irrational and incomprehensible.

Some observers have expressed the opinion that Israel does not need physical “saving” from anyone as their prowess in battle has proven since 1948 – that Israel is far stronger than the armies of any of its enemies, and its air force (and navy, with its nuclear submarine fleet) is simply incomparable to those enemies.

This is true at the present time and of present threats to their existence – and has been true since the Second Restoration of Israel began in 1948 (Isaiah 11: 11, q.v.), the first pitched battle that “Israel” has fought with anyone in modern time.

Israel trusts implicitly in its army of reservists coupled with its standing army of 18-20 year-olds!

But the fact remains that the war described in Psalm 83 is to be fought with “Israel” as such, and is doubtless a conflict of the end time, because “Israel” has existed for only 70 years, before which “Israel” could not have fielded an army or air force because there WAS no “Israel” until that time and for nearly 2600 years previous to that time.

Our thinking has been that Israel of today – although recently strong in battle and always a hands-down winner of all conflicts with the Proximal Arabs and their terrorist organizations – that Israel may see a time in the near future which will seem to be overwhelmingly aggressive ... and certainly a real threat to the Commonwealth.

Once before, during the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Israel’s situation seemed momentarily hopeless. On that occasion, with the Islamic forces advancing on all fronts seemingly unchecked by Israel, General Moshe Dayan visited Prime Minister Golda Meir and gravely reported to her that “The Third Temple is about to fall!”

This meant that their abject defeat seemed to him inevitable and near at hand.

Ms. Meir’s response was to order Israel’s fighter-bombers to be armed with nuclear weapons and to prepare for a massive retaliation ... one which might have meant the beginning of WWIII.

Russia’s satellites noted this nuclear war-slanted activity and notified the USA, whose K-11 satellites had noted the same activity. Those two nations issued “code red” conditions placing their stand-by naval forces in the Mediterranean Sea at battle stations.

Inexplicably (think of the protective hand of Michael the Archangel, here: Daniel 12: 1-3) the tide of battle turned abruptly on all fronts; Israeli forces soon were within 60 miles of Cairo, and within eyesight of Damascus, Syria! Their enemies’ air forces had been entirely wiped out; their armored forces (tank corps) had been decimated; multiple tens of thousands of their troops had been taken captive in the Sinai and the Golan.

A UN-brokered truce was then entered into by all the combatants, and a peace treaty later eventuated as Israel and Egypt signed a peace accord. Later Jordan followed with its own such capitulation.

If the claims of recent reports are true, that Hezbollah could have a quarter million missiles emplaced in Lebanon and south Syria by next year, it would pose a threat that Israel’s forces would not be able to absorb or survive alone. Such an attack in our opinion would absolutely require the assistance of "some great friend of Israel" to resist.

Some observers point to the presence of the United States who has troops stationed in the region – and claim that the US would come to Israel’s aid.

But the Scriptures deny that possibility, however improbable it may look at the present time.

We believe the 63^rd of Isaiah to be an account of perhaps the next war which will overtake Israel. It pictures Messiah suddenly observed by Israelis and the world in a fierce battle with an enemy called Edom at a place called Bozrah. Isaiah 63: 1-6.

Edom was the name of a major enemy of Israel throughout the ages, with Bozrah as its capital city – and describes the descendants of Esau, Jacob’s twin brother, who has always been at enmity with Jacob (Israel) throughout the ages.

For this reason, YHVH has stated, Esau have I hated ... Romans 9: 13.

John Thomas stated the obvious conclusion that enemies of the end time are named by their ancient names and that modern expositors must determine the location of presently-named enemies by the location of those ancient entities, in order to identify His enemies of the end time.

In other words, the modern people who live in the territory of the ancient enemies as named in end time prophecies ARE the identity of their enemies of today.

Thusly, Edom today is the people who live in the land of ancient Edom: southern Jordan and the Negev area, including Petra, and the Arabah which stretches from the Dead Sea to the Red Sea at Eilat.

Others mentioned in Psalm 83 can likewise be accurately identified and include Iraq/Syria (ancient Ashur, or Assyria), Moab and Ammon (Jordan), Tyre and Zidon (Lebanon), the Ishmaelites and Hagarenes (Saudi Arabia), Gebal (Lebanon), Amalek (the Negev and Sinai Peninsula), and the Philistines (the Gaza Strip).

These enemies are unitedly arrayed against Israel, the State, today as they have never been in past centuries.

Thus Psalm 83 is decidedly an end-time prophecy which we will soon see fulfilled.

But Isaiah 63 seems to be the initiating conflict of this final war of Israel with its neighbors “round about.” We hear the words of the LORD Jesus Christ describe His battle circumstances in this beginning conflict as ... I looked, and there was none to help (“help” is from Strong’s H5826, azar, to surround, protect, or aid); and I wondered that there was none to uphold (“uphold” is from Strong’s H5564, samak, to prop, to lean upon, or to take hold of - both or which are references to physical deliverance): therefore mine own arm brought salvation unto me; and my fury, it upheld me. And I will tread down the people in mine anger, and make them drunk in my fury, and I will bring down their strength to the earth. Isaiah 63: 5, 6.

It is our studied opinion that the One Man (the returned Christ along with His immortalized Saints) wages this portion of the war alone – unaided by any military force either of Israel (“the people” of verse 3) or any others of the nations.

From this account alone we might conclude that the overwhelming danger to His People shall have become so great as to require His instantaneous intervention on their behalf because of the imminent and overpowering force which the People (the Jewish State) shall be facing at that precise moment.

That conviction is surely supported by the references cited in the fifth paragraph of this present article.

That circumstance could easily be the present imminence of Hezbollah’s launching simultaneously a quarter million missiles upon Israeli towns and villages in one last ditch effort to “reclaim Palestine,” as is their stated intent.

We believe the prophet’s words in Isaiah 31:5 may refer directly to such an event – viz., the skies being filled with deadly missiles. As birds flying, so will the LORD of hosts defend Jerusalem; defending also he will deliver it; and passing over he will preserve it.

There is no possibility that Israel has the defensive capabilities of warding off the many rockets incoming into just one sector of the country, let alone considering the multiple thousands which would come from Hamas in Gaza concurrent with this attack. The Iron Dome and David’s Sling installations of Israel would be overwhelmed by such a fiendish assault.

Israel could not possibly intercept and destroy more than a small percentage of such overwhelming incoming ordnance! The entire country would be shredded and laid waste.

But the Christ of the Second Advent and His “forces” could easily do it with time and resources to spare!

Much of the population of Israel could be killed or injured by such a heinous assault ... but that is NOT part of the Plan of the Christ.

His intent is spelled out in the words of Amos 9: 15, for we NOW (i.e.,today) see much of the condition in place in Israel as described by verses 12 – 14. The prophet was motivated to write, And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the LORD thy God.

Who among all today's observers can deny that the LORD has planted His People in His Land in these latter days, never to be “pulled up” again? ... that He has not planted them in enormous numbers ("an exceeding great army, as Ezekiel 37) in preparation for Messiah's second Advent?

As to the foreign forces now allied to Israel (mostly the US military) now embedded in Israel and the lands round about, they will have either been removed or neutralized in some way presently unforeseen by observers.

We have the sure word of God that they shall not participate in the liberation of Israel from its enemies round about, because, for one reason, such would detract from the sheer fact of the deliverance of His People by the returned Christ and the immortalized Saints.

Such “glory” will He not give to another: Isaiah 42: 8.

Another important detail of this conflict is that after the initial battles it is apparent that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) will enter the fray somewhat belatedly, once it assures itself that this newly-arrived Cohort is friendly to Israel and is destroying Israel’s enemies on a wholesale scale with efficiency and great rapidity!

The words of Obadiah must be taken into consideration in this regard in which the IDF is specifically named as combatants in that day ... And the house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau for stubble, and they shall kindle in them, and devour them; and there shall not be any remaining of the house of Esau; for the LORD hath spoken it (Obadiah 1:18).

Because you can easily see that Obadiah is addressing the same conflict as Isaiah, adding details, fleshing out the account for the enlightenment of end-time observers such as ourselves ... giving us the ground rules for our edification, and for the upbuilding of our faith in His Plan as it unfolds in perfect order – reassuring us that He does have a rational, orderly Plan which will bring about the ends which He has prescribed.

How great is our God, and how blessed is His name!

<HEL I28> ~2000 words. Published March 2, 2018.

Gog as Distinct from the King of the North

An eTPL Analysis

Position Paper #34

H E Lafferty

Our intention is to publish at least several short, pin-pointed scriptural discussions on this subject as we have come to several conclusions which disagree with some others who may not have studied it nearly as analytically.

This is the first installment …

Our contention is that Gog is NOT the King of the North as described by Daniel 11: 40-45, and that that account is entirely different from Ezekiel 38 and 39.

Please stay with us while we discuss the finer points which are given in the scriptures as to their distinct differences.

1. Note that Daniel specifically points out that Moab, Ammon and Edom (Jordan, on today’s map) “escape” the king of the north’s (KofN) invasion. Daniel 11: 41.

How is this account entirely different from the prophecy of Ezekiel?

One difference Ezekiel states is that in his narrative, no mention at all of these three entities (equivalent to modern Jordan). Some would claim that to argue from omissions is not strong; perhaps it is not, but it is a significant difference in any consideration.

We discuss some of the additional differences in this article, and intend to discuss others in future dispatches. The brethren of Christ above all people should be able to discern the differences – which are multiple.

Their ONLY similarity lies in that they both come from “the north.” That aspect is addressed below …

Every other aspect of these two accounts is mutually exclusive.

Just for clarity of this discussion, the author of this article holds that the invasion of the land in 1517 by the Ottoman Turks, combating Egypt (then king of the south), is the only account of the last king of the north – a conclusion of that prophecy having been reached when the British drove the Ottomans out of the Land of Promise in 1917.

Others disagree with this conclusion, still believing the older interpretation, that the account in Daniel 11: 40-45 is merely another narrative of Ezekiel 38 and 39, despite the MANY differences in the two accounts as to timing, premise, location, confederates, and ultimate outcome; and there are multiple other differences ...

That view in our opinion admits serious deficiency in analyzing and comparing the two accounts!

There are several huge inconsistencies with this notion.

If Daniel 11: 40-45 is identical with Ezekiel 38 and 39, then we must also admit that the accounts given as prophecy in many other locations depict the same events and must be included in the consideration, for they strongly infer the defeat of the nations “round about” Israel within this conflict – an admitted feature of Ezekiel 38 and 39 if they may be proven to be the same conflict.

So they too must be careful along with Gog and its destiny if that is true.

Instead, the author holds that these various campaigns cannot and will not occur simultaneously. If they are not parallel accounts of the same conflict then they must be mutually exclusive, for they cannot be fulfilled twice.

Yet, they MUST be bundled together if they be considered as the same conflict.

This necessity presents a conundrum.

This discussion is advanced for the consideration of some of these differences.

Daniel’s account of the (supposed) Gogian invasion partially reads …

Daniel 11:41 – He (the KofN, also considered by some as “GOG”) shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon. 42 He shall stretch forth his hand also upon the countries: and the land of Egypt shall not escape. 43 But he shall have power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt … and the picture of the KofN conquest is completed in the next phrase: and the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps.

But where is the involvement in this account of Moab, Ammon and Edom with the Gogian invader as clearly and unmistakably related in Ezekiel?

Hint: they are not mentioned at all!

[This author believes that is because that in that future day these entities no longer exist, but have become part of Greater Israel in an earlier conflict.[i] For the Gogian burial ground that is stated to be “in Israel” of that day demands that Israel conquer those territories “east of the sea,” a portion of which shall be designated Hamon-gog. Whether one believes this designation is east of the Sea of Galilee, or whether it is east of the Dead Sea, BOTH these areas today are in the hands of Islam – either Syria or Jordan. They are NOT in Israel. A great victory of Israel over her proximal enemies must therefore be in the offing prior to the invasion of Gog.]

2. Only three entities in the target region challenge Gog in any way according to the record: these are Sheba, Dedan, and the Merchants of Tarshish – which we understand occupy the lower eastern and southern districts of the Saudi Peninsula, adjacent to the Persian Gulf, the shipping portal (the mercantile aspect) for the preponderance of the petroleum output of the Saudis.

If Gog has come down into the land as in the narrative of Ezekiel 38 and 39, and be presumed to have occupied Turkey, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, and to have conquered Israel and Egypt as some have claimed, it would be highly unlikely that Gog would have ignored modern day Jordan (Edom, Moab and Ammon), with its abundance of oil shales – which are approximately six times the size of Israel’s deposits].

That single deposit of oil shales is more than six times greater than all the liquid reserves of petroleum known to be possessed by Saudi Arabia at the present time!

Why would “Gog” ignore that treasure?

Yet Daniel specifically says that the King of the North (whom we believe to have been the Ottomans) did ignore that region [because oil shale, had its existence even been known, would have had no significance for them at all]!

Another important point: The narrative given in Daniel 11 does not mention “Israel” at all, nor a people dwelling without bars or gates, dwelling in peace and security – a condition absolutely essential as almost inviting the Gogian invasion; it does not mention any wealth of the land of Palestine at all (for there IS NONE known at that time) – and almost NO population at all. Instead, Daniel’s prophecy focuses on the wealth of Egypt.

But when the text is examined critically, Gog’s objective is singular – it is specifically to “spoil the despoilers” (Israel: Ezekiel 38:12), a statement which relates to a power that has at that time taken, and at that time possesses, great wealth from other nations.

That specific achievement is described as applicable to Israel in one of the controversial (and necessary to be justified) texts: Zechariah 14:14 And Judah also shall fight at Jerusalem; and the wealth of all the heathen round about shall be gathered together, gold, and silver, and apparel, in great abundance.

How can this scenario be achieved if Gog has previously come down and conquered Israel, and driven their population into Egypt??

How can Israel be conceived to have that magnitude of power and such enormous, assembled wealth at that time and yet to have been overrun by the Gogian host?

The two accounts are entirely incompatible as occurring at the same time. [If all these accounts (and those referred to below) all occur at the same time, there is an impasse, with no explanation! Yet these various accounts, when their differences are admitted and catalogued, are perfectly compatible with the scriptural sequence of the campaigns of Israel and the Christ of the Second Advent conquering those nations well before the Gogian host assembles and invades Greater Israel.

There is not recorded even a peep of resistance or any manner of interrogation as to Gog’s intentions from Moab, Ammon and Edom (modern day Jordan) in the Ezekiel prophecy.

There is not one word of inquiry from them.

Why is this so?

We believe it is because those polities have already been erased by the events of the Second Advent.

At the same time, it is absolutely certain that Gog’s incursion into the northern fringe of the Saudi territories would cause great concern to Sheba, Dedan and the Merchants, as Gog would seem to be encroaching upon and threatening their own territories.

3. Now … further clarification of this point above: if the Gogian host indeed succeeds in conquering all the territory mentioned above, then the records of the conflicts of Psalm 83, Obadiah, Isaiah 63, Isaiah 11, Ezekiel 34-36, Zechariah 10-14, and others all must be concluded at the same time.

All of them will be imminently involved in the Gogian invasion if the prophecies depict the same war.

Once conquered, the group of nation-states of Psalm 83, for example, cannot be re-conquered in yet another invasion; such a proposal is folly!

This theorem is completely inconsistent with the Gogian invasion of Ezekiel 38/39 IF IT BE EQUATED WITH THE WARFARE pictured in all those separate (and distinct, in our studied view) accounts which pictures Edom’s destruction in full, along with ALL the powers that are presently located between the Rivers, and are actively fighting Israel at this present time!

Conclusion at this point: The invasion of the land of Palestine in 1517 by the Ottoman Empire in its battle with Egypt – and its total defeat in 1917 by Britain – completely fulfilled the last six verses of Daniel 11.

This account is now history; it is extremely valuable as an example of fulfilled prophecy, but cannot be expected to bear upon future events.

On the other hand, the account of the Gogian invasion must be justified with all the twenty-odd specific, unmistakable references to Gog’s demise within the confines of Ezekiel 38 and 39. The only definitive account that is given of the Gogian affair is found only in these two chapters, as well as one other brief mention, in Revelation 20.

4. Gog’s ambition is to “spoil the despoilers” (Israel of that day), but its stated destiny does not square with that ambition.

According to Ezekiel, Gog, contrary to its plans of “spoiling the despoilers,” almost immediately inherits graves “in Israel” at a location east of the Sea of Galilee (Young), in perhaps the valley of the Yarmouk River, which is at this time is NOT “in Israel,” but is the international boundary between Jordan and Syria.

The final conclusion that dedicated students of God’s word must make is that Gog achieves no success whatever in its attempt to conquer Israel of that day. [Our studied opinion is that this is fact because Israel’s Messiah is at that time occupying the Throne of David on Mount Zion, and cannot be assailed by a puny mob such as the Gogian host.]

We implore readers to pay attention to words of reason and logic, and to be more diligent in their studies – to recognize the vast differences in these prophesied events – and to “rightly handle the word of truth” as given for our admonition and edification. <HEL 11P> ~1600 words. November 25, 2016.

Gog as Distinct from the King of the North (2)

An eTPL Analysis

This is the second insertion in this short series on this subject. We urge readers to open their Bibles and follow the references for the best understanding of them.

Further differences between the two named entities are these …

5. There are Two Entirely Different Causes of the two conflicts.

The King of the South “pushes at” the King of the North in Daniel 11, prompting an opposite reaction from the latter. The KofN takes this opportunity to chase his enemy (Egypt) all the way back home and place Egypt under tribute. There is no nation of “Israel” in that day, and hardly any dwellers in the Land. In doing so, the KofN merely “passes over the glorious land” on his southern campaign toward Cairo.

On the other hand, the Gogian host of Ezekiel 38 and 39 is not aggressed by an enemy at all, but conceives an evil thought – that of going down upon a people regathered from the nations, one which is rebuilding its homeland from its former desolation, and which is dwelling without walls or gates, completely at peace and in visible safety (Ezek. 38: 8, 11, 14 being three separate statements of this fact).

Its stated objective is to capture great wealth and goods from Israel. ##

6. The Home Territories of the kings of north and south of Daniel 11, versus Gog …

What territories are occupied by the kings of the north? Turkey – the land of the Seleucids always, with no exceptions, sometimes including adjacent lands.

And by the kings of the south? Egypt – the land of the Ptolemies, always – n0 exceptions.

What territory is designated as being inhabited by the Gogian host? It is the uttermost north. If one follows the Jerusalem meridian northward it crosses the Moscow parallel about eight degrees east of that capital – and further north is only the polar regions. It is indeed the uttermost part of the north.

As a matter of direct interest, here are the exact figures: the GPS address of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem is 31 deg., 46.31 minutes North, and 35 deg., 14.07 minutes East. This eastern measurement is taken as east of Greenwich, England, the location of the Prime Meridian by man-made standards. Now … the Kremlin’s Moscow’s address is 55 deg., 45.04 minutes North, and 37 deg., 36.55 minutes East. The difference in the two longitudinal distances is the indicator of Moscow being just a scant 2.25 degrees east of Jerusalem – no statistical difference whatever. As a comparison, Constantinople (headquarters of the Ottoman Caliphate) is not directly north of Jerusalem, but is located only at 29 degrees East – a wide distance at its latitude. ## <HEL 11P> November 26, 2016

Gog as Distinct from the King of the North (3)

An eTPL Analysis

This is the third portion in this short series on this subject. We urge readers to open their Bibles and follow the references for the best understanding of them.

Further differences between the two named entities are these …

7. The Time Slot of the invasion of the last king of the north of Daniel 11: prior to the “resurrection” of Israel from the nations as described in the prophet’s next chapter: Daniel 12. This prophecy occurs before there is a nation of “Israel,” before there was any large influx of Jews back to the land. The Turk is called the “desolator” because that caliphate forbade any significant number of Jews from entering Palestine of the day. The Balfour Declaration was not issued until about five weeks before Allenby captured Jerusalem.

Only AFTER the end of the king of the north’s hegemony over the desolated land of Israel could the Land be opened for the initial and early resettlement of the Jews under the auspices of the World Zionist Organization (WZO).

The time slot of the Gogian invasion is clearly AFTER the regathering of Israel in large part from the Diaspora, and not at its birth at all. Only by that feature of its having become mature is there an “Israel” present (and possessing great wealth) as the capable and desirable object of the attack of Gog. ##

8. The Goals of the Two Invaders are Entirely Different. The Ottomans are not said to be coming after any monetary or even territorial reward from “Israel,” as there IS NO ISRAEL when he invades the land. The Ottoman king of the north, contrary to the later-arriving Gogian host, “overflows the land and passes over” it, unhindered by any force whatever, and enters into Egypt, extending its hegemony even to the western territories of Libya and the southern regions of Ethiopia (Kuwsh). The Ottomans occupied Palestine and Egypt for 400 years.

On the other hand, while the Gogians intend to “cover the land,” their efforts are prematurely cut off by a great earthquake which is followed by the six terrible, divine plagues which shall shower down upon the Gogian host. The Gogian host never occupies (in the sense of controlling) ANY of Israel at all. Instead, it inherits an enormous burial ground “in Israel.” ##

<HEL 11P> November 27, 2016

Gog as Distinct from the King of the North (4)

An eTPL Analysis

Further differences between the two named entities are these …

9. Consider also The Level of Maturity of the nation of Israel, as it exists during these two (widely separated) events. The humanistic “mother” of Israel was the World Zionist Organization (WZO). It was this particular Jewish group, obviously under the divine control of the Almighty, that brought the Israeli infant to birth in 1948. Micah 5 directly speaks of this rebirth of God’s people in verse 3, forecasting that “WHEN she who is to give birth (actually) gives birth, THEN shall the remnant of his brethren return unto the (land of) the children of Israel.” It could not occur beforehand.

There is a sure order of procession in this affair … and it leads from the neonatal state to the nation’s certain future development of maturity, toward the Second Coming of the LORD from heaven.

This birth-event could only follow on the events of the liberation of the land at the time of the last end of the king of the north (the Ottoman empire of Daniel 11) – opening it to the marvelous development (their “resurrection” from the nations) that we have experienced; it was an event which saw Israel grow from its earliest uncertain beginnings into the mature nation that one views today.

Indeed, when the Ottomans invaded Palestine in 1517, passing through the Land in its pursuit of the Egyptian army, there was NO Israel, no significant population, no “spoil and prey” as magnet for the covetous Gogians, and no People gathered back from the nations, dwelling in peace and safety, without bars or gates … just as it is described in Daniel 11.

The glorious land was a prize of no consequence to the Ottomans as clearly shown in this chapter.

But, when the Gogian host invades Israel, the State of Israel is pictured as already mature, strong and viable – as “an exceeding great army” (Ezekiel 37:10) having emerged from the Valley of Dry Bones, having had its bones joined to each other, sinews laid upon them, standing upon their feet, and breathing the breath of life into their lungs – a living, functioning, successful polity among the other nations. It is a formidable nation among the other nations.

These widely-separated assaults are clearly conducted …

… at different times, and

… for different reasons,

… resulting in different endings,

… accomplishing different purposes,

… and with the attacking forces suffering entirely different ends.

These distinctive differences illustrate again, that these entities are entirely separate and distinct from each other! ##

10. The Levels of Resistance Against these Two Invaders is also not comparable. When the King of the North (the Ottoman KofN of Daniel 11) attacked the King of the South (Egypt), what comparative resistance did the Ottomans receive as compared to the Gogian host? As one reads in Daniel, there was not any observable (or recorded) resistance to the invasion of the Land by the Ottomans – none whatever – because the Land was almost uninhabited. It lay desolate, forgotten, forlorn, untilled, untended, strewn with rocks and debris, gullied, fallow and useless.

The prophecy of Daniel dealt with that condition in its sparse, almost-aside, almost passive reference to the Ottomans’ actions: Daniel 11:40 … he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over. 41 He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon.

The mien of the Gogian host is markedly the opposite!

It is specifically against … the mountains of Israel … a people brought forth out of the nations … dwelling safely, all of them … as specified in 38:8. Its goal is to “spoil the despoilers” of their newly acquired wealth. Egypt does not enter the picture at all, not even being mentioned in the text.

Two of Gog’s allies at that time are Libya and Ethiopia (Cuwsh). These two nations are listed in Daniel 11, as well, but in that conflict are said to be “at his steps,” which means under his feet – his footstool – his avowed conquests … who paid, as did Egypt, tribute to Constantinople for hundreds of years. ##

<HEL 11P> November 28, 2016

Gog as Distinct from the King of the North (5)

An eTPL Analysis

This is the fifth portion in this short series on this subject. We urge readers to open their Bibles and follow the references for the best understanding of them.

Further differences between the two named entities are these …

11. The Entities’ Final Status is Markedly Different: The Ottoman King of the North “comes to his end with none to help,” and is driven back inside his Anatolian homeland and is not destroyed at all, as indicated by Daniel’s account, comparable to that of Ezekiel’s account of Gog’s complete destruction.

Also, Turkey was allowed by the Allies to remain as an intact nation, but was rapidly changed into a republic by its newly arisen leader, Gemal Ataturk – the only sense in which it disappears.

There is NO record of any huge or excessive number of Turkish casualties – the greatest number would have been at Megiddo – but their hands-down defeat in all their battles is indicated. There was certainly no great mound of rotting corpses lying unburied for consumption by the birds of the air and the beasts of the field.

On the other hand, the fate of the last King of the South (Egypt) is clearly described in Daniel 11. His ill-considered, fatal movement against the Ottoman King of the North caused an equal and opposite reaction of the King of the North.

For nearly three verses, the King of the North vigorously conducted a pell-mell pursuit of Egyptian forces southward as described – and ends with Egypt being placed in tribute to Constantinople, and with Ethiopia and Libya being “at his steps” (meaning, subservient to him; and indeed, both did also pay tribute to Constantinople for many years on pain of having the Turks re-invade and destroy them outrightly.

No massive destruction of these southern forces is indicated – and no central burial ground “in Israel” as is said of Gog.

In extreme contrast, the final end of the Gogian host is decisively and utterly clear: it is destroyed IN Israel of the day, and is buried in a designated burial ground (Hamon-gog), “east of the sea” of Galilee (Young).

The obvious conclusion is that Ezekiel’s prophecy does not take into consideration ANYONE called “the king of the south.” That phrase is confined completely to Daniel 11, as is the phrase “king of the north.” Students must assign no such certain identity to any such entity in any other context (such as Ezekiel’s account) for it does not concern such an entity. ##

In Ezekiel 38/39, Just Who is the King of the South? For several years we have heard many suggestions as to the identity of an un-referenced Resistance – a “King of the South” in the Ezekiel account.

The problem is, no such power is named in the prophecy at all; and neither is any “king of the north;” instead, Gog is said to be from the “north parts.”

There is no indication of any pitched battles as Gog approaches Israel of that future day as is prominently noted in the prophecy of Daniel 11 – so where is there any indication of a resisting King of the South?

There is none whatever.

Some readers will grasp at the bruised reed of a Resistance movement by citing the question posed by “Sheba, Dedan and the merchants of Tarshish,” about which we have already commented. Some have gone as far as to label these as “king of the south!”

How could they possibly be?

Can anyone be serious in claiming that this interrogation by these three (really two) puny entities of the South are any valid source of resistance at all to Gog?

Theirs is a question of frightened uncertainty –not of steadfast resistance to Gog – and does not even receive a cited answer!

It is quite evident that these south-dwellers of the Saudi Peninsula are earnestly inquiring whether Gog intends to come down and take their wealth as well as that of Israel. These have no army or navy of any consequence today, and no prospect of having such in that future time.

Besides that, what level of resistance could these mount against an enemy as enormous as the Gogian host is described to be?

So, Who is Ezekiel’s “King of the South” (as above referenced), if Ezekiel and Daniel are parallel accounts?

A common suggestion is that Britain will be King of the South in that conflict.

That is one of the means by which adherents to that theory try to make the two accounts equivalent to each other, although the text of the prophecy does not mention or even infer still another king of the south!

But when we study closely all the detailed movements of the kings of the north and south in Daniel 11 (again, we stress that ONLY this prophecy utilizes these labels), are all conducted on only these premises …

1. The King of the North was always located to the north of Jerusalem.

2. The King of the South was always located to the south of Jerusalem.

3. They were certifiably labeled as one or the other after they had overrun Jerusalem – the focal point of the prophecy. It has nothing to do with Cairo or Constantinople – just Jerusalem and its remnant of Jews who always persisted there; the Land and its People are the object of conflict and contention in this exhaustive prophetical-historical account.

4. Each of these powers ALWAYS had their own imperial interest in mind when they attacked the opposite power which was at any time holding the Holy Land. (Note that the “treasure of Egypt” was the interest of the last king of the north in Daniel 11.) However, those who hold these accounts to be different versions of the same invasion will point to a (much different) “treasury” cited by Ezekiel – that is, the massive “spoil and prey” which shall then be owned by Israel, which draws Russia’s attention. This is obviously not the same accumulation of wealth being sought by the King of the North.

Incidentally, this notable difference of premises for the attack also bears heavily upon the solution to the confusion. Please see details in insertion #2, above.

But the following details relate to that feature of the prophecy as well; please consider …

A reasonable evaluation of the intentions of Britain as it purposed to liberate Palestine from the Ottoman Turk, was NOT stated by their officials as being for its own imperial interests. We make this claim because of the issuance of the Balfour Declaration which had been issued just weeks prior to the conquest of Jerusalem as British forces from Egypt under Lord Allenby moved northward.

Britain was certifiably about to conquer Palestine in order to establish a Jewish homeland in it for the Jews of the world – not for British interests at all.

The almost immediate turnabout of Britain against this written intention has no bearing upon the original invasion and conquest. It was not undertaken for British imperial interests.

Our conviction is that Britain’s rapid demise was initiated immediately after it turned its back upon the Jewish people and their great desire for an homeland. It was a modern day expression of the blessing given by YHVH to Abram in Genesis 12: … I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee …

Our conclusion to this point is that Britain cannot possibly have fulfilled any role as “king of the south,” for that entity had, in the last six verses of Daniel 11, been erased from history never again to raise its unattractive head!

There had been given no prophetic “place” for a future king of the south.

Once the Land came under the control of a restored Israel, the possibility (even under the older scheme) would have obviated any further king of the south, because these always threatened the Jews when they were NOT in control of their own affairs – NOT present in the Land.

The steadfast promise of YHVH to Israel OF OUR DAY through Amos is certain and undeniable: Amos 9:14 And I will bring again the captivity of my people of Israel, and they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them. 15 And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the LORD thy God.

In our earnest opinion, based on this and several other prophecies spelling out the same level of concern for His People by YHVH, we state conclusively that NO power on earth shall ever again be able to successfully war against Israel. Although this does not amount to their presently dwelling “in the peace and security” of Ezekiel’s prophecy, their future is assured and protected by their Father – although His people are not yet convinced that that is so. ## <HEL 11P> November 29, 2016

Gog as Distinct from the King of the North (6)

An eTPL Analysis

This is the sixth portion in this short series on this subject. We urge readers to open their Bibles and follow the references for the best understanding of them.

Further differences between the two named entities are these …

12. The Invasion Route of Both Entities is Identical? Yes, it is indeed identical as being “from the north,” although we are aware that the Turkish troops who were sent to Palestine in 1917 (two entire Armies, by historical account) probably arrived mostly by steamship. Some apparently did come overland from their bases in Syria, passing down the coastal region of Lebanon.

From the prophecy of Ezekiel, it appears that the Gogian host assembles in the south of what is Syria today, and is attempting to enter the country which is Jordan today, by crossing the River Yarmouk, which is today the international boundary between Jordan and Syria. The qualifying word “today” is editorial on our part, because the Ezekiel account takes special pains to point out that the burial ground of Gog is “in Israel,” a condition which TODAY does not apply to the territories east of either the Sea of Galilee or the Dead Sea.

An extremely slender slice of land is controlled by Israel east of the Galilee, but within a few hundred meters one crosses over into Syria of today. It goes without proof (being clearly evident) that all the land east of the Dead Sea is now claimed by Jordan; so both parcels of possible burial grounds are presently (today) in the hands of Israel’s enemies – not in Israel’s hands.

Now. it is not uncommon for two different enemies to approach Palestine/Israel from the north, given that neither the Mediterranean Sea (west) nor the Jordanian-Saudi desert (east) offer an hospitable route. Only a southern entry is otherwise feasible – not applicable in this case because the enemy is approaching from the opposite direction. Even the far-eastern Babylonian assault upon Judea came from the north due to those armies’ necessity to follow the Fertile Crescent. ##

13. The Military Presence of the Two is Entirely Different: As to the named King of the North, Daniel 11:45 states according to the A.V.: And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain … a translation that may be better rendered, “And he shall pitch his palatial tents between the sea and the glorious holy mountain;” (RSV)

The meaning is greatly changed by this translation (contrasting to the A.V.), and reflects precisely how the Ottomans positioned their military headquarters when the threat from Britain came into their awareness. The Porte moved two entire armies into Palestine; he placed his military headquarters (his palatial tents is a military term for a military field headquarters according to authorities) not in the mountainous, relatively inaccessible Jerusalem, but in Ramle – which is located near Tel Aviv-Jaffa today. That command post was maintained for several months as the Turks awaited the British invasion from the south.

That venue perfectly fits the RSV location of being between the (Mediterranean) sea and the glorious holy mountain (Jerusalem).

But now consider the actions of the Gogian host as to this requirement.

In our opinion, the prophecy of Ezekiel allows no opportunity for Gog to establish any permanent accommodations in Israel at all – and certainly none is specified.

It appears that, as soon as the movements of the Gogian host have progressed far enough into the Land to make its intentions clear to the world’s press and the world’s diplomats (who shall be observing this invasion with great interest), that the Gogian host is destroyed by the actions of the Almighty in Bashan (northern Jordan of today) at the central location of its forces. There is no hint whatever that the Gogian host progresses beyond that point – and certainly not to Jerusalem itself, for in our opinion, the Anointed Saviour is then occupying the Throne of David upon Mount Zion, and is going forward with the development of the infrastructure of His nascent kingdom. ##

<HEL 11P> November 30, 2016

Gog as Distinct from the King of the North (7)

An eTPL Analysis

14. The Survivors of Each Group are Entirely Different:

Since Gog is distinctly said to be destroyed completely (no other textual version of which we are aware specifies that a sixth part will be left), in an extremely short period of time (24 hours? – one day? Ezekiel 39:11), there shall be NO survivors of this group of aggressors.

What about survivors of the King of the North of Daniel 11?

They are not even mentioned. Historical accounts indicate no huge number of dead Turks in Palestine – and certainly no slaughter even similar to that of the Gogian host (again, indication that these are separate and distinct from one another).

This description is therefore markedly different from the fate described for the Gogian host, to which several verses of the prophecy are devoted – the enormous destruction of war materiel, the massive loss of life, the carnage of that great day of destruction – probably in one twenty-four hour period (in contrast to the king of the north, whose demise is not only different, but takes a much longer period), and the extended period over which the dead are either interred or consumed by the raptors and the carnivorous vultures of that day.

The matter-of-fact statement that, as to the King of the North, “he shall come to his end with none to help” tells the entire story – in greatly diminished degree from the account of the Gogian dead. Historically, the Turkish army was routed completely after the Battle of Megiddo, and fled northward through today’s Syria, and home to Anatolia. ##

15. The Home Territories of These Two Northern Powers is Dissimilar.

The King of the North is identified in its historical context with eastern Turkey, Iraq and Babylon – the Seleucid inheritance from Alexander the Great’s empire. Seleucus 1 Nicator was the first regent of this territory to the immediate north of Palestine. He later expanded it to the far east. But when Daniel wrote, he was awarded the initial allotment as stated, in our understanding.

Gog, on the other hand, is named Rhos in the Septuagint, which we know always to have been located in the far distant north – so far north that nothing lies between it and the north pole.

Thus the home territories of these two distinct enemies of God’s People are defined by their names in both historical and scriptural contexts! ##

16. The Actual Name of Gog is Revealed in Ezekiel; the Name of the King of the North is not Given.

The word “rosh” in Hebrew means “chief, or head.” But there is widespread recognition that the use of Rosh in Ezekiel indicates the proper name of a race of men.

The Hebrew lexicographer Gesenius says, "Rosh is the proper name of a northern nation mentioned along with Tubal and Meshech; without much doubt the same as the Russians, who are described by the Byzantine writers of the tenth century under the name, the Rhos, as inhabiting the northern parts of Taurus; and also by Ibn Fosslan, an Arabian writer of the same period, under the name Rus, as dwelling upon the river Rha, that is, the Volga." (noted from a Church of God website)

We may note in this comment that the names Rosh, Rhos and Rus are the same name in three different languages.

Here is the LXX translation of Ezekiel 38: 1-3 - 1 And the word of the Lord came to me, saying, 2 Son of man, set thy face against Gog, and the land of Magog, Rhos, prince of Mesoch and Thobel, and prophesy against him, 3 and say to him, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I am against thee, Rhos prince of Mesoch and Thobel:

It is shown here that the translators (Jewish scholars) of the Torah into Greek as the Septuagint, regarded the term Rhos to be a proper name rather than an appellative: it actually names the Rhos as the identity of Gog.

This designation is distinctly different from the designation of the King of the North of Daniel 11. He is given no scriptural name at all, but by historical context, scholars have concluded that the King of the North is always either the Seleucids or a later derivation thereof, and never indicates a power or powers much further north.

The geographical locations of the capitols of these two entities has already been discussed in earlier sessions, and their widely dispersed locations shown to be factual. ##

<HEL 11P> December 1, 2016

Gog as Distinct from the King of the North (8)

An eTPL Analysis

17. “My Fury” of Ezekiel 38:18 as Compared to the End Prescribed for the Troops of the King of the North.

The specific reason for the exhaustive and extremely sudden destruction of the Gogian host is given in two words from the Almighty: “MY FURY shall come up in My face …” Ezekiel 38: 18.

The sentence is parallel to that voiced upon Nineveh: Nahum 1:2 - God is jealous, and the LORD revengeth; the LORD revengeth, and is furious; the LORD will take vengeance on his adversaries, and he reserveth wrath for his enemies. 3 The LORD is slow to anger, and great in power, and will not at all acquit the wicked: the LORD hath his way in the whirlwind and in the storm, and the clouds are the dust of his feet.

It appears that the reigning King of Israel of the day – Yeshua Messiah in our opinion – holds His anger in check as the massive forces of the Gogian host cross the boundaries of His Kingdom, the Lands between the Rivers, and forges southward through today’s Iraq and Syria (these are no longer in existence at that time) to the vicinity of the River Yarmouk – at the present time the international boundary between Syria and Jordan, and the presumed location of the future burial ground at Hamonah (Hamon-gog).

At that exact place His fury is unleashed against the unwashed masses of the Gogian host, and they are destroyed immediately and without quarter. The details of this slaughter require several verses of the prophetic record; they are extremely detailed.

On the other hand, the end of the last of a long series of Kings of the North is almost tacitly dismissed in the phrase, “he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.”

The two accounts are so markedly different as to severity and completeness we cannot conceive that they are parallel accounts of the same event. ##

18. The Treasures Sought by Each Aggressor is Different.

The King of the North’s entry southward into the “glorious land” is treated by Daniel as being almost circumstantial, or an annoying necessity.

That venue held no reward for the King of the North at all! Can anyone cite ANY treasure at all taken from Palestine in the Ottoman’s day?

No!

There was no available treasure of any sort there! And not even an “Israel” in existence.

But the treasury of Egypt was constantly drained for about 400 years!

But what “treasure” is said to be sought by the Gogian host of Ezekiel?

Is is stated quite clearly that Gog’s greedy intention is to invade ISRAEL of his day, which consists of people regathered from all the nations, dwelling safely, and possessing at that time enormous WEALTH which it has taken from others!

This was an impossibility for the King of the North of Daniel 11.

The specifically stated intention of Gog – to “take a spoil and a prey” – is said to be better translated as : to spoil the despoilers.

This statement places an entirely different “spin” on the nature of the spoils that Rhos seeks to obtain: it is not valuable goods which a nation has produced by its own sweat and toil! Instead, it is valuable goods which a nation has acquired from others – the exact subject of the text of a precursory action of Israel revealed by Zechariah 14: 14 … and the wealth of all the heathen round about shall be gathered together, gold, and silver, and apparel, in great abundance.

This is a summary statement given at the end of the earlier conflict of Israel and Christ with the indigenous Islamic people …

This enormous heap of wealth includes all the territories south of the Euphrates – those of Iraq and Syria, of Lebanon, of Jordan, of (at least) northern Saudi Arabia, of Kuwait, of the Negev and the Sinai Peninsula westward to the Nile River.

The natural resources of these regions include over 60% of the known liquid petroleum reserves of the entire world, but the “spoil” also includes the chattels, the real estate, the accounts receivable, the customers, the real properties, all the bank accounts and hoarded wealth (gold, silver, valuable physical wealth), and all the other assets of all these countries between the rivers.

This, dear readers, represents the incomprehensible value of Israel and its King and His Saints when the commotion of the Second Coming settles down to a slow simmer – and the wealth of all the heathen (nations) of the Promised Land – now occupied by and under the complete control of Messiah – is brought in and accounted for.

Israel of that day becomes the wealthiest nation upon earth by several magnitudes. And there is no consideration of “giving back” that wealth to its former owners, as God’s word states clearly, that there shall then be NONE of the former enemies to which repatriation could be made.

It is said of the house of Esau, for example, that “there shall not be ANY remaining” of that polity in Obadiah 1: 18; the issue is underlined by the words of verse 16: “… they shall be as though they had not been.”

It is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God!

It is the beginning of the harvest of the earth for the Kingdom of Christ as we understand it. Nations and peoples always respect physical wealth and power; these assets shall be a significant part of the premise for their beginning to respect the supreme authority and sovereignty of the Anointed Savior of mankind as he begins to project His innate power among the nations.

There is much, much more of that to come after this initial phase is accomplished! ##

<HEL 11P> December 2, 2016

Gog as Distinct from the King of the North (9)

An eTPL Analysis

19. The Erroneous Translation of Isaiah 16:4 Bears Heavily Upon this Discussion:

The entirety of Isaiah 16 is concerned with the fate of Moab. It was written as the entire Levant was assaulted by Sennacherib of Assyria. We insert here a discussion of the first four verses of Isaiah 16 as illustration of how the misinterpretation of one verse can lead to catastrophic consequences of further interpretation.

Isaiah 16

The Burden of Moab, Continued

This records the first of seven Burdens upon the lands adjacent to Israel, c. 700BC.

Isa 16:1 Send ye the lamb to the ruler of the land from Sela (a city existing today as Petra) to the wilderness, unto the mount of the daughter of Zion.

We remember that Mesha had actually done this specific thing to Judah, recorded in 2Kings 3:4: he sent as tribute an hundred thousand lambs, and an hundred thousand rams, with the wool thereof, to Ahab. Now the return favour is commanded …

Isa 16:2 For it shall be, that, as a wandering bird cast out of the nest, so the daughters of Moab shall be at the fords of Arnon.

This information sets the stage for the next two verses; note carefully that the refugees are noted as being the daughters of Moab, at the fords of the River Arnon, which flows into the Dead Sea from the high tablelands of the east in Moab.

Here the language takes on a poetic mien, addressing the River Arnon, bidding it “take counsel, execute judgment.”

The valley of the Arnon is extremely deep and narrow. Only around midday is its stream lighted by the sun; otherwise its valley is dark with shadows. This river of Moab should be a covert for them, to hide them from the Assyrian invaders.

This intent is consistent throughout the next several verses of text in this poetic address to the Arnon, as if it were a personage, and capable of such acts to protect the Moabite refugees from the invaders.

Isa 16:3 Take counsel, execute judgment; make thy shadow (the murky depths of the River Arnon is addressed here) as the night in the midst of the noonday; hide the outcasts; bewray not him that wandereth.

And now we come to the erroneous translation of verse 4 … a statement that may be taken in either of two ways, but which has been averred to mean the outcasts of God’s people in the end time. Instead its textual meaning is not this at all.

Isa 16:4 Let mine outcasts dwell with thee, Moab; be thou a covert (a refuge, or hiding place) to them from the face of the spoiler: for the extortioner is at an end, the spoiler (Sennacherib) ceaseth, the oppressors are consumed out of the land.

Every other translation in the writer’s library states the precise opposite of the surface meaning of this phrase as translated in the AV. All of them indicate the prophet’s statement is “let Moab’s outcasts dwell with thee,” meaning the River Arnon, with its shadowy covert from the Assyrians.

This erroneous translation is a real conundrum.

How did it come about?

And why did not our esteemed early scholars who were schooled in Hebrew not recognize this egregious error and correct it – as they did so many others with less seeming import?

We cannot answer that question at this time; but it has been an unfortunate affair, because other erroneous suppositions have been based upon it.

For example, earlier prophecy students have relied on this one verse as a seeming basis for their entire interpretation of the end time invasion of Israel by the Gogian host of Ezekiel 38 and 39 – claiming that many in Israel shall escape the northern host by fleeing eastward toward Jordan! (That allegation, by the way, assumes that the Gogian host ever actually enters the Israeli heartland, thus threatening those inhabitants. Ezekiel allows no such thinking.)

They point to the verse as solidification of their view that the Prophet Daniel’s last six verses concern the invasion of Gog which obviously extends to Egypt and beyond.

Why so? Because of Daniel 11:41, which tells us that when the King of the North (whom they deem to be “Gog”) comes down into Israel, these areas are omitted from his attention: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon.

[Although maps of the Ottoman Empire usually include these areas of modern Jordan, historical facts indicate that the Ottomans paid little attention to establishing any police force or military troops, or even significant administrators in those areas. They were empty and desolate, and were inhabited by nomadic Bedouin, whose chief characteristic is anarchic behavior.

These jealously independent people are nearly unable to be ruled with any concrete authority. They do what they want and when they want.

Their activities include theft, smuggling, slave-trading, and many other unlawful activities. The Ottoman Turks were spread too thin to deal with the Bedouin of Moab, Ammon and Edom of the day!]

These “facts” do seem to fit together remarkably well, don’t they?

But there is a very large problem with this interpretation.

Not only is the meaning of Isaiah 16:4 the opposite of the stated language; at the time of the King of the North’s invasion there is NO “Israel” in existence. And “Israel” is the object of Gog’s intentions as stated by Ezekiel.

Historically, the Ottoman Turk (King of the North, by definition) in 1517 AD, after an earlier battle (a defeat) with Egyptian forces near Damascus, entered the coastal strip which is now Israel, and passes over it with great haste as it pursued the Egyptian King of the South, southward toward Egypt … which is specified as the target of his aggression (his target is not “Israel” at all, as is that of the Gogian host of Ezekiel 38).

At the time of the fulfillment of Daniel 11:41, as the text proves, there is no entity named Israel, and no treasures in the land of Palestine at that time. Indeed, there is hardly a population at all in the Land, for that land is desolate and barren – able to support hardly anyone except the few Bedouin who keep goats and sheep and a few resident Jews, whose subsistence comes from their brethren abroad!

Historical accounts reveal that the Ottomans had no significant military presence in Palestine until the British threat became apparent; at that time the Porte moved two Ottoman armies into Palestine as bulwark against Allenby, establishing his military pavilions (headquarters) at Ramle, near present-day Jaffa/Tel Aviv.

Therefore, these two prophecies are not identical at all, but depict two entirely distinct invasions of this area by two widely different armies and for two separate reasons, at widely separate dates in history, with two opposite endings!

This set of facts entirely destroys the theory that some of the Israelis may flee the Gogian invasion and seek refuge in Jordan of today. Isaiah 16 is not speaking of Israeli refugees at all, but is addressing the Moabite victims who are about to be overrun by Sennacherib, centuries before the birth of Christ!

This conclusion is quite evident by considering the chapter’s context within the book of Isaiah, and the details of every verse of the chapter.

This understanding entirely destroys the earlier theory that Daniel 11: 40-45 is describing the Gogian invasion of Ezekiel.

And it absolutely demands that the serious Bible student recognize the facts of history as copiously and accurately recorded, which describes the last King of the North’s conquest (the Ottoman conquest) of the last King of the South (Egypt) in 1517 AD; because the historical fulfillment perfectly fits the prophecy as given!

And further, that it goes on toward its own conclusion by describing the last end of the King of the North (and not Gog) as well – a decisive conclusion which was fulfilled when the British forces from Egypt invaded Palestine in 1917 and brought to a full end the 400-year old occupation of the Ottomans in the entire Levant, thus “drying up the Euphrates” (ejecting the power that exerted hegemony over that famous river valley – the Ottomans) and made it possible for the establishment of the nation of Israel – “the fig tree” of Luke 21: 29 – and “all the trees,” which are the Islamic nations which sprang up in the same general timeframe, after World War I.

Thus the close analysis of the Biblical texts – and our resort to more exact translations of God’s word – have clarified a major error in interpretation of end time affairs, and thus greatly enhanced the faith and understanding of diligent students of the Word of God. It has contributed greatly to a rational understanding and appreciation of these end time affairs before they occur, based on a justified and rectified understanding of past events which bore directly upon these of the end time.

And it also demands a re-thinking of modern day students of the Word who continue to adhere to the disproven assumptions of the past – that the Gogian host is being described in Daniel 11: 40-45. ## An excerpt from Studies in Isaiah, by Editor and Publisher of eTPL.

<HEL 11P> December 3, 2016

Gog as Distinct from the King of the North (10)

An eTPL Analysis

20. Burial Details of the Two Aggressors are Relevant to this Inevitable Conclusion:

Gog’s burial place should give our intelligent scrutiny a clue as to the place at which it is destroyed: in the vicinity of Hamon-gog – the Valley of the Passengers – Ezekiel 39:11.

Our reasoning for this assumption is that nations do not transport huge numbers of dead soldiers hundreds of miles for burial; they are buried near where they fell in battle.

Consider Omaha Beach in Normandy, for example, where one discovers a massive cemetery containing the thousands of bodies of the men who fell there in battle. The same principle holds for Sword Beach, Chateau-Thierry, Belleau Wood, Flanders Field, etc., from past wars.

This great slaughter will require seven months to bury all the Gogian dead, by men of “continual employment,” an apt term for the Israeli Burial Society of today – those who are now appointed to sanitize the sites of terror attacks, for example, who take pains to scour each such scene for body parts – for evaluation, identification, and burial.

On the other hand, NO burial place is nominated for the King of the North’s dead soldiers; indeed no such activity is referenced at all. From the importance given the Ezekiel account of the burial of the Gogian dead, it would seem to be mandatory for Daniel also to mention this aspect of any identical battle at least, if not to comment upon it extensively .

Yet he does not do so.

Not only that: an exhaustive Internet search for Turkish burials in Israel yielded no significant results – even in the Jerusalem War Cemetery, almost all the dead are English, Australian or Indian nationalities. Ottoman dead are not worthy of any special comment in news sources, it seems – which will not be the case in the Gogian demise. It will be reported extensively by all the world press!

This is testimony to another significant difference in these two aggressors – that they ARE separate and distinct. ##

21. Melek (king – H4428) Versus Nasiy (prince – H5387) in the Two Accounts.

A correspondent has drawn our attention to the titles given the King of the North (it is always the Hebrew word melek, meaning king), versus the title of the Gogian leader, which is nasiy, which gives a different identity to that despot.

In Ezekiel 7:27 both terms are used – and are translated consistently as “king” and “prince.” This shows a consciously decisive difference in the sovereign status of these two leaders.

Yes, a prince is often a king in waiting; but reference to the usage of the word “prince” shows a consistent translation of five different Hebrew words as “prince,” and never as “king.”

A Strong’s Concordance search of the word “king” in the A.V. shows over 1900 occurrences of the word “king” in the A.V. Our personal detailed examination of the first 175 occurrences of the word (nearly 10%) shows that every one of them is translated from the word melek – and none of them are from any of the five most frequent Hebrew words for “prince.”

This clearly statistically-valid sample of the usage of melek would seem sufficient to prove that the translators in Daniel were correct in using the word “king” for the Kings of the North and the South, and the word “prince” for the ruler of Rhos, or Russia – for that word may also be applied to nearly any head of government other than a king.

In doing so, these scholars have indicated yet another difference in thidentities of these two entities.

Although the Hebrew word nasiy COULD mean “king.” it is never translated that way (per our examination of dozens of instances of its usage as well).

Any student may prove this fact for himself by consulting Young’s Concordance where the different terms should be grouped under various specific headings for easiest examination.

Our reasonable assumption must be that Gog is NOT a “king,” as is the King of the North of Daniel 11. The decisively different status of “president” or “prime minister” is reflected in the translations.

Therefore these leaders are different as to title and responsibility to their subjects. They are mutually exclusive of each other – therefore the two accounts are different even in this almost hidden aspect! ##

Conclusion: In view of such a great and irreconcilable contrast between these two prophesied conflicts, how could these possibly be two accounts of the same event???

Our rational and scriptural opinion is that they just cannot be the same account.

Their differences are clearly drawn by comparing the historical account of the Ottoman Turks’ conquest of Palestine with the prophesied (but unaccomplished) future assault by the Gogian horde.

This reasonable and scriptural conclusion is in our conviction, absolutely necessary to a more correct understanding (but admittedly not an understanding required for the salvation of Believers) of the events of the end time from this day forward. Otherwise, confusion reigns … and the reasonable expectations of the many casual readers of Bible prophecy are quite understandably perplexed as to what events are to be expected on the horizon.

At the same time, eTPL realizes that every one of our Father’s called and elected children are perhaps at different stages in his understanding of Bible prophecy. It is a subject unlike the doctrinal elements which we hold as a united body – thought to be necessary to be understood in order to be among those chosen for the kingdom.

Therefore let us make clear our thoughts on this subject: any mistaken understanding of identity in this imbroglio of the two entities is not a cause for the sharp division that we perceive in some parts of the brotherhood – because our differences of opinion on these matters are not a scripturally valid cause for some going their separate ways based upon prophetic matters.

Our exhortation to all is … relax and breathe deeply of the wonderful ruach of life which all of us have been given by our Father! The prophecies as given will come to pass as they have been foretold. Some of us will not understand them as well as some others in advance. And all should bear in mind that perhaps not one of us modern students of the subject may yet have all the correct answers. We can only do our very best to understand them, and all of us must await their fulfillment in order to be certain.

For now, we leave this absorbing and profitable study. Other points of difference may occur to us as we continue our perusal of things prophetic – and strive to understand more perfectly the order of the astounding and imminent events which are foretold for our profit and spiritual advantage.

Meanwhile, let us march determinedly ahead as conscripted, determined, and trained soldiers toward the mark of the prize of our high calling – and pray fervently that every one of our brethren will find themselves, by His mercy, seated upon the right hand of the Master when we are assembled before Him for judgment – and that every believer, at whatever stage of his or her development, and at whatever hour of service in the vineyard, will receive the rewards of his faith.

<HEL 11P> December 4, 2016 END of SERIES Piblishhed as Posiion Paper #34, in 2018