"And my holy name I will make known in the midst of my people Israel," and He will not let it be profaned anymore. The nations shall know that He is the Lord, the Holy One in Israel; "Behold, it is coming and it will be brought about," declares the Lord God; "That is the day of which I have spoken" (a paraphrase of Ezekiel 39:7–8).

Then they shall know that He is the Lord their God, because He sent them into exile among the nations and then gathered them into their own land, leaving none of them remaining among the nations; "I will not hide my face anymore from them, when I pour out my Spirit" on Israel, declares the Lord God (a paraphrase of Ezekiel 39:28–29).

There is a kind of finality in the language here, so that the events described seem eschatological and still future. Even today God's name is profaned, so I believe the time has not yet come when God has fully accomplished this prophetic word. Even today there are Jewish people living outside the land, so the time of their total return seems not yet. And although the Spirit came upon many at Pentecost, the Spirit has not yet been poured out on the whole house of Israel.

Friends, this expectation is not only a Jewish expectation but ours as well. Our destiny is intricately intertwined with Israel's, for we share in the New Covenant promises given through Jeremiah and Ezekiel. In Christ we have been brought into the community of God's people, so that we share in their blessings. This is Paul's argument in Ephesians. He reminds Gentile believers that they were once separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus they who were once far off have been brought near by His blood. He Himself is our peace, who has made the two one and broken down the dividing wall of hostility, abolishing the law of commandments in ordinances, to create in Himself one new man, and to reconcile both to God in one body through the cross. Through Him both have access in one Spirit to the Father. So they are no longer strangers and aliens, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of God's household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure grows into a holy temple, a dwelling place for God by the Spirit (a paraphrase of Ephesians 2:11–22).

Friends, Israel's hope is our hope. What God desires to do through them — ensuring that His name is profaned no more — He desires to do through us. So when we read of God's plans for Israel, we can embrace these promises as well. We should also embrace God's priority concerning Israel, namely, to honor His name. Let us do everything, as much as it depends on us, to honor the name of the Lord in our lives.

AI-Expanded Reflection

Ezekiel 38–39, the prophecy against "Gog, of the land of Magog," is among the most debated passages in the prophets. It describes a massive invasion of a restored and peaceful Israel by a coalition of distant nations, which God defeats decisively so that "the nations shall know that I am the Lord" (38:16, 23; 39:7). Revelation 20:8 takes up the names Gog and Magog for the nations gathered in a final rebellion. Interpreters read the prophecy in several ways: as a literal future event (often in dispensational interpretation, as the comment's reading suggests), as a symbolic portrayal of the final conflict between God and evil, or as partly fulfilled in history and ultimately in Christ's return.

Christians likewise differ on how God's promises to the nation of Israel will be fulfilled — some expecting a future national restoration and outpouring of the Spirit, others seeing the promises fulfilled in Christ and His church of Jew and Gentile together. The comment beautifully holds these together by emphasizing what all agree on: through Christ, Gentile believers share in Israel's covenant hope, and the goal of God's work in history is the honor of His holy name. The promise of 39:29 — "I will not hide my face anymore" — is the hope of every believer, awaiting the day when God's people "will see his face" (Revelation 22:4).

Ezekiel 38

21 I will summon a sword against Gog on all my mountains, declares the Lord God. Every man's sword will be against his brother.22 With pestilence and bloodshed I will enter into judgment with him, and I will rain upon him and his hordes and the many peoples who are with him torrential rains and hailstones, fire and sulfur. 23 So I will show my greatness and my holiness and make myself known in the eyes of many nations. Then they will know that I am the Lord.

I have held a premillennial view of the end times but over the past year I have started shifting towards Partial Preterism, which views many of the prophecies to have been fulfilled by 70 AD.

I am reading this year's reading with a perspective to not by default look at judgment references as premillennialism. So far I think it has been okay. I hope to look at my notes at the end of the 'year' and see what I think when I complete Revelation.

I have not completed this site's reading (http://kloposmasm.com/2010/04/05/revelation-20-four-views-of-gog-and-magog/) but this presents nicely a case for a Partial Preterism interpretation of this passage.

In summary, rather than viewing Ezekiel 38 & 39 as an event yet to happen, I think a case can be made for a time that has already occurred.

Events:

38:4 There will be a great army called against Israel.

38:5–6 The army consisted of people from Persia, Ethiopia, Put (Libya), and people of the North.

38:8 Israel will be a recently scattered people and brought back together. At the time of the attack they will be dwelling in security.

38:9 When the called army advances it will be a cloud numerous and great.

38:11–12 The Israelites will have gold and possessions, even after their time of being scattered. It will be enough to be considered plunder by the aggressors

38:2–3 A 'Gog' connection must be present.

38:19–23, 39:1–6 A great upset! What was thought as sure will be undone, God will deliver his blow.

39:10 rather than being plundered the Israelites will plunder

A fitting story to this prophecy is set in the book of Esther.

A great army was set against Israel.

Esther 3:13, all 127 provinces of the Persian Empire received notice to kill all Jews.

Esther 8:9, An empire that produced an army spanning India to Ethiopia was called; an army consistent of people from Persia, Ethiopia, Put (Libya), and people of the North.

Recently scattered and secure for 150 years (Cyrus to Ahasuerus) the Jews were still under an authority, but doing well - presumed by the Persian reputation started by Cyrus the Great.

The Gog/Magog connection takes a little 'connecting the dots.' While I don't like these kinds of explanations since too many links makes for vulnerable points, the connection goes to Japheth, Noah’s son, who sired various children such as Gomer, Magog, Tiras, Meshech, Tubal, and Madai. King Agag, transliterated at Magog, has connections to the Agagites, ("Haman the Agagite" in Esther). I don't have a strong handle of the connections the link may better explain.

Haman, being an Agagite is of King Agag, who is of Magog. This is the only place in the bible that the Agagites are mentioned which the article points out as a reason why the writer points that out; that the enemy of the Jews once again comes from the line of King Agag, of the line of Gog and Magog.

Of course we have the great upset in Esther 9:1–2 & the Jews rather than being the ‘plundees’ are the plunderers in Esther 8:11.

AI-Expanded Reflection

The willingness to reread Ezekiel without automatically imposing a previously held timetable is a useful discipline. A theological framework can help organize observations, but it should remain answerable to the text. The original models an unfinished inquiry rather than a final pronouncement: it records a shift in perspective, lists possible correspondences, and acknowledges uncertainty about the proposed genealogy. That openness should be preserved. The next step is to distinguish a fruitful comparison from an identification strong enough to bear the claim of fulfillment.

There are broad similarities between Ezekiel 38–39 and Esther: a threatened Jewish people, a large hostile power, an intended seizure of wealth, and a dramatic reversal. Yet such motifs appear in more than one biblical deliverance. Ezekiel’s description includes an invasion of Israel’s mountains, supernatural devastation, extensive burial, and the disposal of weapons. Esther depicts a dispersed community defending itself throughout an empire under a revised royal decree. The resemblance of the central pattern does not remove the differences in setting and action. Each proposed correspondence must therefore be tested individually rather than allowing several general similarities to carry the whole argument.

Several details in the original need correction. Japheth is Noah’s son, not Methuselah’s brother; Genesis 10:2 includes Magog among his sons. The biblical genealogies do not establish that Agag is a transliteration of Magog or demonstrate a line from Magog to Haman. Haman’s designation as an Agagite evokes the opposition associated with Agag and Amalek, but that is not itself proof of the proposed Gog identification. Also, Ezekiel 38 has no verse 36; references to Gog occur in 38:2–3 and elsewhere. These are substantive checks on the argument, not objections to reconsidering a futurist reading.

The plunder comparison presents an especially important distinction between authorization and action. Esther 8:11 permits the Jews to take spoil, but chapter 9 repeatedly says that they did not take it (9:10, 15–16). Ezekiel 39:10 describes the formerly threatened people plundering those who intended to plunder them. Quoting the permission in Esther as though it reports what happened overlooks the narrator’s repeated emphasis on restraint. Esther 9’s account of the refusal of plunder. The proposed interval of 150 years from Cyrus to Ahasuerus also does not fit the usual identification of Esther’s Ahasuerus with Xerxes; that chronological claim should not be treated as supporting evidence.

These problems do not establish a particular competing account of Ezekiel’s fulfillment. They show why this specific identification needs more work. Partial preterism, moreover, should not be confused with the claim that every biblical promise has already been fulfilled; the question concerns which prophecies refer to which events. Fair discussion requires defining the view accurately before evaluating it.

The enduring theological center of Ezekiel’s vision is God’s public vindication of his holiness in the deliverance of his people. A careful reader can hold that center firmly while remaining provisional about historical correlations. The most valuable outcome of this exercise may be a more disciplined way of studying: list both matches and mismatches, verify names and dates, and permit contrary evidence to revise an attractive proposal. Humility is not the absence of conviction. It is the willingness to let the evidence govern the strength of the conviction we express.

I saw a great many bones on the floor of the valley, bones that were very dry... Then he said to me: “Son of man, these bones are the people of Israel... My people, I am going to open your graves and bring you up from them; I will bring you back to the land of Israel (Ezekiel 37:2,11–12).

Friends, what are these dry bones? And what does this vision of Ezekiel represent? I ask this because any grade-school person should know the answer. The text directly tells us. The dry bones are Israel. And the vision represents God's promise to restore them to the land. In the historical context Ezekiel is preaching to the exiles in Babylon a prophecy of hope, namely, that they will not be forever in exile but that in time God will return them to their own land.

I am afraid that the original meaning may have gotten lost. The reference to "dry bones" has been applied to America, to depressed or down-and-out Christians, to backslidden believers, and to any number of other things. While I suppose that if the reference is simply to remind believers of God's faithfulness to His promises, there is a cause; however, so often people have no sense of what the original context was and understand it only in its contemporary application. Thus, this reference merely becomes part of the mantra in a song, separated from the reality of the prophetic context with respect to the restoration of Israel to their land.

I bring this up because we have a song that we sing in church that mentions "dry bones." It is called "The Great I Am." The writer probably took this from Ezekiel, but I daresay, many, if not most, at church are not aware of the context in Ezekiel from which this reference is taken when they sing the song. I wonder sometimes if the writer himself was aware of the context or if he just thought it sounded cool to include in the lyrics. So, I looked up the song on the internet. I noticed that there are some variations. I found it fascinating how certain parts of the song are edited. Notice how between these two sites the highlighted portions are changed:

NewreleaseTuesday.com

I wanna to be close close to your side
So heaven is real and death is alive
I wanna hear voices of angels above
Singing as one
Hallelujah Holy Holy
God almighty Great I am
Who is worthy
None beside Thee
God Almighty
Great I Am
I wanna be near near to your heart
Loving the world hating the dark
I want to see troubles living again
Singing as one
Chorus
Hallelujah
Holy Holy
God almighty Great I am
Who is worthy
None beside Thee
God Almighty
Great I Am
He's the Great I Am Great I Am
The mountains shake before Him
The demons run and flee
At the mention of the name
King of Majesty
There is no power in hell
Or any who can stand
Before the power and the presence of the Great I am
The Great I am The Great I am
The Great I am The Great I am The Great I am
(Chorus)
The mountains shake before Him
The demons run and flee
At the mention of the name
King of Majesty
There is no power in hell
Or any who can stand
Before the power and the presence of the Great I am
The Great I am The Great I am
The Great I am The Great I am The Great I am

OnlyLyrics.com

I wanna to be close close to your side
So heaven is real and death is a lie
I wanna hear voices of angels above
Singing as one
Hallelujah Holy Holy
God almighty Great I am
Who is worthy
None beside Thee
God Almighty
Great I Am
I wanna be near near to your heart
Loving the word hating the dark
I want to see dry bones living again
Singing as one
Chorus
Hallelujah
Holy Holy
God almighty Great I am
Who is worthy
None beside Thee
God Almighty
Great I Am
He's the Great I Am Great I Am
The mountains shake before Him
The demons run and flee
At the mention of the name
King of Majesty
There is no power in hell
Or any who can stand
Before the power and the presence of the Great I am
The Great I am The Great I am
The Great I am The Great I am The Great I am
(Chorus)
The mountains shake before Him
The demons run and flee
At the mention of the name
King of Majesty
There is no power in hell
Or any who can stand
Before the power and the presence of the Great I am
The Great I am The Great I am
The Great I am The Great I am The Great I am

The "loving the world" line always made me a bit uncomfortable, especially because there are so many more verses commanding us not to love the world (1 John 2:15; James 4:4; 2 Timothy 4:10; Romans 12:2). Now, I know John 3:16 reads, "God so loved the world," but God's loving the world is somewhat different from our loving the world. I also recognize that the writer intends the line to mean for us to love people and not so much the world system, but I still find this a poor choice of words. Thus, I like the changed version (see above): "Loving the word, hating the dark." Also, the contrast between God's "Word," which is often described as light, and the "dark" is much better than between "loving the world" and the "hating the dark."

I imagine that, like me, there are others being thoughtful about what they are singing. I encourage you to do the same. If what you are singing is either unbiblical or radically unorthodox, then I encourage you not to sing it or perhaps modify the words. I also encourage praise leaders to study the songs before they present them to the congregation, so that what is presented not only sounds good but is also biblically sound.

AI-Expanded Reflection

Ezekiel supplies his own interpretation of the bones: they represent the house of Israel, whose exile has generated the conviction that its hope is lost (37:11). The vision answers that national despair with God’s promise to restore his people and bring them into their land. Beginning with this explanation protects the passage from becoming a collection of inspiring images available for any purpose. The scattered bones are not originally a metaphor for a modern nation’s political fortunes or an individual’s disappointing week. They belong to a particular people’s covenant history and to God’s announced act of restoration.

That original meaning does not eliminate broader Christian reflection. The vision displays God’s power to create life where human resources have failed, and the wider biblical witness connects life with his Spirit and with resurrection. Such connections are strongest when their steps remain visible: first we hear the promise addressed to Israel; then we consider how its revelation of God’s faithfulness relates to the larger scriptural story; finally we make an application appropriate to our own circumstances. The problem is not every use beyond the first historical setting, but an application that erases that setting or converts its details into promises God has not made to us.

The comparison of two internet lyric transcriptions raises a related question about evidence. The differences preserved in the original comment show that online copies may disagree; they do not by themselves establish which wording the songwriter approved or what the songwriter understood about Ezekiel. A theological criticism should therefore distinguish the text being sung locally, an unofficial transcription, and a claim about the author’s intention. This is an opportunity to practice the same contextual fairness toward another writer that we desire when someone interprets our own words.

The concern about loving the world also benefits from contextual distinctions. John 3:16 presents the world as the object of God’s saving love, while 1 John 2:15–17 warns against desires and pride opposed to the Father. Compassion for people and allegiance to a rebellious pattern of life are different actions, even when English uses the same noun. A lyric about love for the world may therefore be sound or misleading depending on its intended sense and surrounding language; counting favorable and unfavorable occurrences of the word cannot settle the meaning.

The constructive aim is congregational understanding. Leaders can explain a biblical allusion, choose a clearer wording where appropriate, and welcome thoughtful questions without making worship an exercise in fault-finding. Singers can unite heart and understanding rather than surrendering either. A well-taught song does more than produce enthusiasm: it helps the church remember who God is, what he has promised, and why its hope rests in him.

Ezekiel 37–39 speaks of a future restoration for Israel to its former greatness, as the people respond to God's word being preached to them. This future restoration is even more remarkable because it's pictured as a resurrection from death to life, one that will last forever. God will subdue and destroy Israel's enemies (compare Revelation 20:7–9). Some see this prophecy corresponding to the future establishment of a Millennial Kingdom, where a redeemed Israel joins Gentile believers reigning with Christ for a thousand years (see Revelation 20:4–6). At the same time, a reasonable case can be made that these chapters also had a more immediate reference to events in Ezekiel's own era, particularly Israel's deliverance from her enemies in the time of Esther — which wouldn't necessarily rule out a further, more ultimate future fulfillment as well, especially regarding the restoration of David's throne. Many Old Testament prophecies function this way, carrying both a nearer historical fulfillment and a further future one. That layered reading seems like the most responsible way to approach this particular text. That said, this passage — especially the vision of the valley of dry bones — is also sometimes read as a picture of individual spiritual renewal or the need for a fresh experience of the Holy Spirit. Readers and interpreters land in different places on how much weight to give a purely spiritual application versus the passage's more immediate national and historical context; I'd simply encourage watchfulness and discernment whenever any biblical passage gets applied in a way that seems to serve someone's excitement more than the actual meaning of the text itself.

AI-Expanded Reflection

The layered reading this comment proposes — near historical fulfillment and far future fulfillment coexisting in the same prophecy — reflects one common approach within evangelical interpretation, though it's worth noting that Christians hold a range of views on how Old Testament prophecies concerning Israel's restoration relate to the church and to end-times events more broadly, from more literal, futurist readings expecting a distinct national fulfillment, to more symbolic or already-fulfilled readings that see these promises accomplished in Christ and the church. That range of views is a long-standing, respectful disagreement among faithful readers of the same text, not a matter of some readers simply not taking Scripture seriously. What's less disputed is this comment's closing caution: any reading, spiritual or literal, should be tested against what the passage's own context can actually support, rather than being shaped primarily by what feels most emotionally compelling to preach.

Some remarkable prophecies are recorded in today's chapters. I'm honestly not sure whether they've already been fulfilled or are still to come. Growing up in my hometown church, we were taught that "Gog" represents Russia, since it seemed like the only nation capable of carrying out what's described in Ezekiel. Who knows for certain — but one way or another, it will surely come to pass if it hasn't already. I was like those dry bones in the valley — no one, not even I myself, could possibly bring me back to life. God is the one who predestined, called, and justified me. His grace is amazing not simply because He offered an invitation to be saved, but because He planned our salvation before the foundation of the world and overcame our own sinful resistance so that we could actually receive it. Many Christians believe nothing on earth happens by chance, citing Jesus's own words that not even a sparrow falls to the ground apart from the Father's will (a reference to Matthew 10:29) — yet when it comes to our own salvation specifically, some react strongly against the idea that God's sovereign choice, rather than our own decision, is what ultimately accounts for it. Did salvation come to us because we happened to be present when someone preached the gospel, or because we had believing parents, or because we were somehow better than others at choosing God? I believe it's His choice, not ours — dry, dead bones have no power to respond to any external influence on their own; they remain dead unless God's own breath of life is breathed into them. We are God's elect, for His glory — no longer our own, but His. So let's work out our salvation daily, with a humble and contrite heart.

AI-Expanded Reflection

The specific identification of "Gog" with a particular modern nation is worth noting as one interpretation among several genuinely held by careful readers of Ezekiel — other interpreters read Gog and Magog more symbolically, as representing the full array of nations opposed to God rather than any one specific country, an approach with its own long history in Jewish and Christian interpretation and reflected in how the same names are used differently again in Revelation 20. That's worth holding loosely, since identifying specific modern nations with ancient prophetic names has a long, mixed track record across church history. The comment's theological point about salvation being entirely God's initiative touches the broader Calvinist-Arminian debate discussed elsewhere in this project — a real, ongoing disagreement among faithful Christians, distinct from the Gog identification question, which remains open even among those who agree on the doctrine of grace.