Keil and Delitzsch Commentary - Ezekiel 38:1 - 38:1

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com

Keil and Delitzsch Commentary - Ezekiel 38:1 - 38:1


(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)

This Chapter Verse Commentaries:

Introduction

Preparation of Gog and his army for the invasion of the restored land of Israel. - Eze 38:1. And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, Eze 38:2. Son of man, set thy face toward Gog in the land of Magog, the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal, and prophesy against him, Eze 38:3. And say, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I will deal with thee, Gog, thou prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal, Eze 38:4. And will mislead thee, and will put rings in thy jaws, and lead thee out, and all thine army, horses, and riders, all clothed in perfect beauty, a great assembly, with buckler and shield, all wielding swords; Eze 38:5. Persian, Ethiopian, and Libyan with them, all of them with shield and helmet; Eze 38:6. Gomer and all his hosts, the house of Togarmah in the uttermost north with all his hosts; many peoples with thee. Eze 38:7. Be prepared and make ready, thou and all thine assembly, who have assembled together to thee, and be thou their guard. Eze 38:8. After many days shalt thou be visited, at the end of the years shalt thou come into the land, which is brought back from the sword, gathered out of many peoples, upon the mountains of Israel, which were constantly laid waste, but now it is brought out of the nations, and they dwell together in safety; Eze 38:9. And thou shalt come up, come like a storm, like a cloud to cover the land, thou and all thy hosts and many peoples with thee. - Eze 38:1 and Eze 38:2. Command to prophesy against God. גֹּוג, Gog, the name of the prince against whom the prophecy is directed, is probably a name which Ezekiel has arbitrarily formed from the name of the country, Magog; although Gog does occur in 1Ch 5:4 as the name of a Reubenite, of whom nothing further is known. The construction גֹּוג אֶרֶץ מָגֹוג, Gog of the land of Magog, is an abbreviated expression for “Gog from the land of Magog;” and 'אֶרֶץ מג is not to be taken in connection with שִׂים פָּנֶיךָ, as the local object (“toward Gog, to the land of Magog”), as Ewald and Hävernick would render it; since it would be very difficult in that case to explain the fact that גֹּוג is afterwards resumed in the apposition 'נָשִׂיא וגו.

מָגֹוג, Magog, is the name of a people mentioned in Gen 10:2 as descended from Japhet, according to the early Jewish and traditional explanation, the great Scythian people; and here also it is the name of a people, and is written with the article (הַמָגֹוג), to mark the people as one well known from the time of Genesis, and therefore properly the land of the Magog (-people). Gog is still further described as the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal. It is true that Ewald follows Aquila, the Targum, and Jerome, and connects רֹאשׁ with נְשִׂיא as an appellative in the sense of princeps capitis, chief prince. But the argument used in support of this explanation, namely, that there is no people of the name of Rosh mentioned either in the Old Testament or by Josephus, is a very weak one; whilst, on the other hand, the appellative rendering, though possible, no doubt, after the analogy of הַכֹּהֵן רֹאשׁ in 1Ch 27:5, is by no means probable, for the simple reason that the נְשִׂיא occurs again in Eze 38:3 and Eze 39:1, and in such repetitions circumstantial titles are generally abbreviated. The Byzantine and Arabic writers frequently mention a people called ̔Ρῶς, Arab. Ru=s, dwelling in the country of the Taurus, and reckoned among the Scythian tribes (for the passages, see Ges. Thesaurus, p. 1253), so that there is no reason to question the existence of a people known by the name of Rosh; even though the attempt of Bochart to find a trace of such a people in the ̔Ρωξαλᾶνοι (Ptol. iii. 5) and Roxalani (Plin. h. n. iv. 12), by explaining this name as formed from a combination of Rhos (Rhox) and Alani, is just as doubtful as the conjecture, founded upon the investigations of Frähn (Ibn Foszlan, u. a. Araber Berichte über die Russen älterer Zeit, St. Petersburg 1823), that the name of the Russians is connected with this ̔Ρῶς, Arab. ru=s, and our רֹאשׁ. Meshech and Tubal (as in Eze 27:13 and Eze 32:26), the Moschi and Tibareni of classical writers (see the comm. on Gen 10:2), dwelt, according to the passage before us, in the neighbourhood of Magog. There were also found in the army of Gog, according to Eze 38:5, Pharas (Persians), Cush, and Phut (Ethiopians and Libyans, see the comm. on Eze 30:5 and Eze 27:10), and, according to Eze 38:6, Gomer and the house of Togarmah. From a comparison of this list with Gen 10:2, Kliefoth draws the conclusion that Ezekiel omits all the peoples mentioned in Gen 10:2 as belonging to the family of Japhet, who had come into historical notice in his time, or have done so since, namely, the Medes, Greeks, and Thracians; whilst, on the other hand, he mentions all the peoples enumerated, who have never yet appeared upon the stage of history. But this remark is out of place, for the simple reason that Ezekiel also omits the Japhetic tribes of Ashkenaz and Riphath (Gen 10:3), and still more from the fact that he notices not only the פָּרַס, or Persians, who were probably related to the מָדַי, but also the Hamitic peoples Cush and Phut, two African families. Consequently the army of Gog consisted not only of wild Japhetic tribes, who had not yet attained historical importance, but of Hamitic tribes also, that is to say, of peoples living at the extreme north (יַרְכְּתֵי צָפֹון, Eze 38:6) and east (Persians) and south (Ethiopians), i.e., on the borders of the then known world. These are all summoned by Gog, and gathered together for an attack upon the people of God. This points to a time when their former foes, Ammon, Moab, Edom, Philistines, and Syrians, and the old imperial powers, Egypt, Asshur, Babel, Javan, will all have passed away from the stage of history, and the people of God will stand in the centre of the historical life of the world, and will have spread so widely over the earth, that its foes will only be found on the borders of the civilised world (compare Rev 20:8).

Eze 38:3-9 contain in general terms the determinate counsel of God concerning Gog. - Eze 38:3-6. Jehovah is about to mislead Gog to a crusade against His people Israel, and summons him to prepare for the invasion of the restored land of Israel. The announcement of the purpose for which Jehovah will make use of Gog and his army, and the summons addressed to him to make ready, form two strophes, which are clearly marked by the similarity of the conclusion in Eze 38:6 and Eze 38:9. - Eze 38:3. God will deal with Gog, to sanctify Himself upon him by means of judgment (cf. Eze 38:10). He therefore misleads him to an attack upon the people of Israel. שֹׁובֵב, an intensive form from שׁוּב, may signify, as vox media, to cause to return (Eze 39:27), and to cause to turn away, to lead away from the right road or goal, to lead astray (Isa 47:10). Here and in Eze 39:2 it means to lead or bring away from his previous attitude, i.e., to mislead or seduce, in the sense of enticing to a dangerous enterprise; according to which the Chaldee has rendered it correctly, so far as the actual sense is concerned, אֲשַׁדְלִנָּךְ, alliciam te. In the words, “I place rings in thy jaws” (cf. Eze 29:4), Gog is represented as an unmanageable beast, which is compelled to follow its leader (cf. Isa 37:29); and the thought is thereby expressed, that Gog is compelled to obey the power of God against his will. הֹוצִיא, to lead him away from his land, or natural soil. The passage in Rev 20:8, “to deceive the nations (πλανῆσαι τὰ ἔθνη), Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle,” corresponds to these words so far as the material sense is concerned; with this exception, that Satan is mentioned as the seducer of the nations in the Apocalypse, whereas Ezekiel gives prominence to the leading of God, which controls the manifestations even of evil, “so that these two passages stand in the same relation to one another as 2Sa 24:1 and 1Ch 21:1” (Häv.). In Eze 38:4-6 the army is depicted as one splendidly equipped and very numerous. For לְבֻשֵׁי מִכְלֹול, see the comm. on Eze 23:12, where the Assyrian satraps are so described. קָהָל , as in Eze 17:17. The words buckler and shield are loosely appended in the heat of the discourse, without any logical subordination to what precedes. Besides the defensive arms, the greater and smaller shield, they carried swords as weapons of offence. In the case of the nations in Eze 38:5, only the shield and helmet are mentioned as their equipment, for the sake of variation, as in Eze 27:10; and in Eze 38:6 two other nations of the extreme north with their hosts are added. Gomer: the Cimmerians; and the house of Togarmah: the Armenians (see the comm. on Eze 27:14). For אֲגַפִּים, see the comm. on Eze 12:14. The description is finally rounded off with עַמִּים רַבִּים . In Eze 38:7, the infin. abs. Niphal הִכֹּון, which occurs nowhere else except in Amo 4:12, is used emphatically in the place of the imperative. The repetition of the same verb, though in the imperative Hiphil, equip, i.e., make ready, sc. everything necessary (cf. Eze 7:14), also serves to strengthen the thought. Be thou to them לְמִשְׁמָר, for heed, or watch, i.e., as abstr. pro concr., one who gives heed to them, keeps watch over them (cf. Job 7:12 and Neh 4:3, Neh 4:16), in actual fact their leader.

Eze 38:8 and Eze 38:9 indicate for what Gog was to hold himself ready. The first clause reminds so strongly of מֵרֹוב יָמִים in Isa 24:22, that the play upon this passage cannot possibly be mistaken; so that Ezekiel uses the words in the same sense as Isaiah, though Hävernick is wrong in supposing that הִפָּקֵד is used in the sense of being missed or wanting, i.e., of perishing. The word never has the latter meaning; and to be missed does not suit the context either here or in Isaiah, where יִפָּקֵד means to be visited, i.e., brought to punishment. And here also this meaning, visitari (Vulg.), is to be retained, and that in the sense of a penal visitation. The objection raised, namely, that there is no reference to punishment here, but that this is first mentioned in Eze 38:16 or 18, loses all its force if we bear in mind that visiting is a more general idea than punishing; and the visitation consisted in the fact of God's leading Gog to invade the land of Israel, that He might sanctify Himself upon him by judgment. This might very fittingly be here announced, and it also applies to the parallel clause which follows: thou wilt come into the land, etc., with which the explanation commences of the way in which God would visit him. The only other meaning which could also answer to the parallelism of the clauses, viz., to be commanded, to receive command (Hitzig and Kliefoth), is neither sustained by the usage of the language, nor in accordance with the context. In the passages quoted in support of this, viz., Neh 7:1 and Neh 12:44, נִפְקַד merely signifies to be charged with the oversight of a thing; and it never means only to receive command to do anything. Moreover, Gog has already been appointed leader of the army in v.7, and therefore is not “to be placed in the supreme command” for the first time after many days. מִיָּמִים רַבִּים, after many days, i.e., after a long time (cf. Jos 23:1), is not indeed equivalent in itself to בְּאַחֲרִית הַשָּׁנִים, but signifies merely the lapse of a lengthened period; yet this is defined here as occurring in the אַחֲרִית הַשָּׁנִים. - אַחֲרִית הַשָּׁנִים, equivalent to אַחֲרִית הַיָּמִים (Eze 38:16), is the end of days, the last time, not the future generally, but the final future, the Messianic time of the completing of the kingdom of God (see the comm. on Gen 49:1). This meaning is also applicable here. For Gog is to come up to the mountains of Israel, which have been laid waste תָּמִיד, continually, i.e., for a long time, but are now inhabited again. Although, for example, תָּמִיד signifies a period of time relatively long, it evidently indicates a longer period than the seventy or fifty years' desolation of the land during the Babylonian captivity; more especially if we take it in connection with the preceding ad following statements, to the effect that Gog will come into the land, which has been brought back from the sword and gathered out of many peoples. These predicates show that in אֶרֶץ the idea of the population of the land is the predominant one; for this alone could be gathered out of many nations, and also brought back from the sword, i.e., not from the consequences of the calamity of war, viz., exile (Rosenmüller), but restored from being slain and exiled by the sword of the enemy. מְשֹׁובֶבֶת, passive participle of the Pilel שֹׁובֵב, to restore (cf. Isa 58:12); not turned away from the sword, i.e., in no expectation of war (Hitzig), which does not answer to the parallel clause, and cannot be sustained by Mic 2:8. מֵעַמִּים , gathered out of many peoples, points also beyond the Babylonian captivity to the dispersion of Israel in all the world, which did not take place till the second destruction of Jerusalem, and shows that תָּמִיד denotes a much longer devastation of the land than the Chaldean devastation was. וְהִיא introduces a circumstantial clause; and הִיא points back to אֶרֶץ, i.e., to the inhabitants of the land. These are now brought out of the nations, i.e., at the time when Gog invades the land, and are dwelling in their own land upon the mountains of Israel in untroubled security. עָלָה signifies the advance of an enemy, as in Isa 7:1, etc. שֹׁואָה, a tempest, as in Pro 1:27, from שָׁאָה, to roar. The comparison to a cloud is limited to the covering; but this does not alter the signification of the cloud as a figurative representation of severe calamity.