Chapter 38

1 The army, 8 and malice of Gog. 14 God’s judgment against him.

1. The word of the Lord. Chapters 38; 39 constitute a continuous prophecy. The whole passage has been the subject of much speculation. Many interpretations have from time to time been proposed. To evaluate these adequately it is necessary to be familiar with the basic purposes, methods, and scope of prophecy.

The problem is to find a means of adequately differentiating between that which has a local, immediate application and that which has an application more remote, perhaps in the Christian age, or at the end of time. Bible students who apply certain OT prophecies to the Christian age note frequently that these prophecies have interspersed among them references of obviously local and immediate application. They sought to explain this apparent blending of the immediate with the future on the premise that the prophet, while giving a message to the people of his day, took occasional prophetic excursions and projected his prophecies into the distant future. Although this premise appears to offer a partial solution to the problem, it provides no criteria for adequate differentiation between that which is immediate and that which is distantly future.

The answer to this problem of differentiation lies in the formulation of a principle, the method of which is exhibited in the Bible itself and is further substantiated in the Spirit of prophecy. It will be seen that this principle provides a safe method of discriminating between that which the Holy Spirit, in inspiration, intended to be of immediate import and that which has also a more distant application. The principle may be stated as follows:

Prophecies respecting a future glory of Israel and Jerusalem were primarily conditional on obedience (see Jer. 18:7–10; PK 704). They would have met a literal fulfillment in the centuries following had Israel fully accepted God’s purposes concerning them. The failure of Israel made impossible the fulfillment of these prophecies in their prophecies in their original intent. However, this does not necessarily imply that these prophecies have no further significance. Paul supplies the answer in these words, “Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel” (Rom. 9:6). Hence, these promises have a degree of application to spiritual Israel. But to what extent? This must be left to inspiration to determine. Thus we have, in the NT and in the writings of the Spirit of prophecy, numerous quotations from the OT writers showing how these ancient forecasts, which should have met glorious fulfillment in the literal seed, will ultimately be accomplished in the spiritual seed.

It is immediately apparent, however, that not all the details of the original prophecy could meet their fulfillment precisely, with conditions and environment now so different. In fact, it is a safe rule of exegesis to make only such applications as subsequent revelation specifies, as well as to note the limitations it imposes. What exceeds this boundary is at best but speculation, and thus should never be the basis for a dogma or the premise on which a whole structure of theological reasoning is reared.

The distinctly local mold in which these ancient prophecies were cast is explained on the basis that God originally intended these predictions to be fulfilled in the pattern indicated. Furthermore, what have been designated as excursions into the distant future largely detached from the general discussion, are seen also to be presented in the framework of God’s earlier purposes. Now, however, with these earlier purposes unrealized, later inspired writers disclose the unfolding of these forecasts in the setting of the Christian church (see pp. 25–38).

In the light of this principle it may be observed that chs. 38; 39 of Ezekiel would have met a literal fulfillment after the Jews returned from exile if they had accepted the conditions offered by the prophets. Because they persistently refused, the condition of prosperity here pictured was never realized. Consequently the combination of heathen nations could not come down upon a people dwelling in the prosperity indicated.

Will the prophecy have an application in the future? On the basis of the principle here enunciated, such an application can be established with certainty only by a subsequent revelation. There is only one direct NT reference to the imagery of this prophecy, that of Rev. 20:8. Here John tells us how this prophecy, which, under certain conditions, would have been literally fulfilled in an earlier day, will have a degree of fulfillment in the final struggle against God on the part of the vast hosts of the wicked, called “Gog and Magog.” The Spirit of prophecy gives no direct exposition of this chapter. Indirectly, of course, there may be seen a parallel between this struggle and the final struggle against the Israel of God when “the nations shall unite in making void God’s law” (5T 524) and the wicked fully unite “with Satan in his warfare against God” (GC 656). “As he [Satan] influenced the heathen nations to destroy Israel, so in the near future he will stir up the wicked powers of earth to destroy the people of God” (9T 231; cf. TM 465). This agelong controversy will ultimately be terminated by the destruction of Satan and his hosts (termed Gog and Magog, Rev. 20:8) at the end of the millennium. But by this time the conflict has reached worldwide proportions, and can no longer be confined to as narrow a sphere as is indicated in Eze. 38; 39, when it consisted of a military struggle against a politically restored Jewish state (see 6T 18, 19, 395).

Any exposition that goes beyond the bounds of the NT and the Spirit of prophecy interpretation is without a “Thus saith the Lord.” It must not be assumed, of course, that there can be no further knowledge without additional revelation. But this much is certain, that apart from the specific confirmation of inspiration there exists a high probability of error in any such exposition, especially with regard to unfulfilled prophecy, as is evident from the whole history of prophetic interpretation.

2. Gog. This is the name chosen by Ezekiel to designate the leader of the heathen hosts who would attack the restored Jewish state after the return of the exiles (see vs. 14–16). Efforts to identify him with any historical character have so far proved fruitless. The root from which the name is derived is unknown. The word occurs 13 times in the Scriptures, but none of the references throws any light on its meaning. Gog appears in 1 Chron. 5:4 as the name of one of the sons of Joel of the tribe of Reuben. In Rev. 20:8 it is used in connection with Magog to symbolize the nations of the wicked, whom Satan assembles after the millennium to attack Christ and to seize the New Jerusalem. The 11 occurrences in Ezekiel (chs. 38:2, 3, 14, 16, 18; 39:1, 11, 15) describe the leader of a vast coalition of heathen nations. Gog is also the reading of the Samaritan and the LXX for Agag in Num. 24:7. A compound form, Hamon-gog, the “multitude of Gog,” is used in Eze. 39:11, 15, which name is applied to the valley in which the multitudes of Gog would be buried. All these Bible references shed no light on the identity of Gog, and the only indication as to his origin is in ch. 38:15, where the statement is made, “Thou shalt come from thy place out of the north parts.”

In secular sources, contemporary with Ezekiel or earlier, no character by the name of Gog is found. Several names resembling it have been found. One of them is that of Gyges, king of Lydia (c. 600 b.c., see Vol. II, p. 66; see on 1 Chron. 1:5). Because of the slight similarity between Gyges and Gog, some commentators have attempted to equate the two. An examination of the historical evidence shows that Gyges was not a king of outstanding military genius. In the records left by Ashurbanipal, Gyges is called Guggu. The story is told of how Guggu sent ambassadors to Ashurbanipal for aid against the Cimmerians. Ashurbanipal states that with the help of the Assyrian gods, Ashur and Ishtar, Guggu was able to overcome his enemies. However, later, in a war between Assyria and Egypt, the treacherous Guggu joined with Egypt. Guggu was later rewarded for his perfidy when the Cimmerians overran his country and killed him. Such is the story of Guggu. But there is no evidence whatsoever to prove that Gog is the Hebrew form of Guggu. Similarity of sound seems to form the only connection, and such evidence is largely valueless without further confirmatory proof.

Another suggestion connects Gog with the barbarian country of Gagaia, which is mentioned in the Tell el-Amarna Tablets (see Vol. I, p. 169; cf. pp. 105, 106). However, Gagaia is a country and not a person, as the Gog of Ezekiel is represented to be.

Actually it is not necessary to find a Gog in the historical records. Gog is most probably an ideal name by which Ezekiel describes the leader of the heathen hordes who make a final onslaught upon Israel after their restoration, and at a time when they are enjoying the prosperity promised by God upon condition of their obedience.

The land of Magog. Or, “of the land of Magog.” The “Magog” of Ezekiel was the homeland of Gog, and like “Gog” its meaning is obscure. The title was probably formed by Ezekiel himself, by prefixing ma to the name gog. “Magog” occurs five times in the Scriptures. It is used twice in Ezekiel (here and in ch. 39:6), as the land of Gog; once in Rev. 20:8, of the nations of the wicked; and in Gen. 10:2 and 1 Chron. 1:5, of one of the sons of Japheth. Some, having identified Gog as Gyges, king of Lydia, suggest that Magog must necessarily be Lydia. There is no historical proof of this, however. The barbaric tribe called Gagaia, usually understood to refer to Magog, is mentioned in a letter of a Babylonian king (see on Gen. 10:2).

These two names, Gog and Magog, have occasioned much speculation. Early Jewish tradition identified Magog with the Scythians (Josephus Antiquities i. 6. 1). The same is suggested by Gesenius (see his Hebrew lexicon).

However, this identification of Magog with the Scythians still rests only on conjecture. Like Gog, the name is probably idealistic, too close identity probably having been purposely avoided, as is often the case in predictive prophecy, lest such identity in prediction defeat its fulfillment.

Other fanciful interpretations from time to time have identified Magog with various nations or with individuals. A large library of legends concerning Gog and Magog could be collected. In many of them the story concerns a wall to keep out Gog and Magog. This wall has been situated in many countries, from Greece to China, depending on the nationality of the legend. The breaking of the wall paved the way for the destructive forces of Gog and Magog to do their work. In some of the legends these events were connected with the appearance of the Antichrist, at which time Gog and Magog (the wild peoples north of the Caucasus Mts.), formerly shut behind gates by Alexander the Great, would be let loose (see L. E. Froom, Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Vol. I, pp. 555, 583, 584, 586, 662).

The chief prince of. Heb. nesЊiХ roХsh. NesЊiХ means prince. RoХsh may mean “chief,” as here. However the LXX renders it as a proper name Roµs, as does also the RV by its translation “Rosh.” The RSV follows the KJV. Whatever translation is adopted, the general teaching of the prophecy remains the same. If roХsh is taken to represent a nation, we still have the problem of identifying that nation.

However, the propriety of translating the Heb. roХsh as a proper name “Rosh” is questionable. The word is very common in the Hebrew, occurring more than 600 times in the OT. Its basic meaning is “head,” and in the KJV is nowhere translated as a proper name except in Gen. 46:21, where it is the name given a son of Benjamin. Of course, the possibility exists that a word occurring more than 600 times with the basic idea of “head” could actually in one or two instances become a proper name. Perhaps the strongest evidence claimed in support of the translation “Rosh” is the testimony of the LXX. The LXX was translated in the 3d and 2d centuries b.c., and for some reason its translators adopted the reading Roµs. Whether in their day they knew of a land called Roµs, we cannot tell.

There is a syntactical consideration that tends to favor a proper name here. If the word roХsh is used as an adjective, it would normally be expected to have an article, inasmuch as it would modify “nesЊiХ,” which in the Hebrew is definite by reason of being in the construct state with a proper noun, in this case, “Meshech.” Examples of such constructions, where the adjective modifying the noun in the construct state is definite by the affixing of the article, are Jer. 13:9, “the great pride of Jerusalem”; Ezra 7:9, “the good hand of his God.” The adjective stands in Eze. 38:2 without the article, providing a pretext for translating it as a proper name, since proper names do not take the article. But the evidence is by no means conclusive. At times such an adjective is itself placed in the construct state, and is hence without the article in the Hebrew (see, for example, 2 Sam. 23:1; 2 Chron. 36:10). A notable exception to the foregoing rule is also found in 1 Chron. 27:5, where the expression hakkohen roХsh, “chief priest,” occurs. There “priest” has the article and the adjective “chief” is without the article. However, this is considered by editors of the Hebrew text to be an error, the article naturally belonging to the adjective.

A study of the secular sources in search of a country by the name of “Rosh” yields very little. Several names with a sound similar to “Rosh” appear in Assyrian inscriptions, but there is no certainty that any of them is identical with “Rosh.”

From the 10th century until the present day, attempts have been made by various exegetes to identify “Rosh” as “Russia.” According to Gesenius, the Byzantine writers of the 10th century identified “Rosh” under the name of hoi Rhoµs, a people inhabiting the northern parts of Taurus, who, he claims, were “undoubtedly the Russians” (see his Hebrew lexicon). He also mentions an Arabian writer of the same period, Ibn Fosslan, who speaks of these people as dwelling upon the river Rha (Volga).

However, historical evidence shows that the term “Russia” did not come from “Rosh.” Among the Slavs who lived in what is now Russia were groups of Vikings called Varangians, who migrated from eastern Sweden. Although there are different views concerning the role of the Varangians, it is the prevailing scholarly opinion that these non-Slavic warrior-traders and military leaders gave the name “Rus” (whence “Russia”) to the territory they ruled. Russian tradition says that Rurik, a Varangian, took the title of Prince of Novgorod (the leading city of northern Russia at that time) about a.d. 862. His descendants ruled, even through the Mongol domination, until the death of Feodor (Theodore), the last ruler of the Rurik dynasty, in 1598. After a number of years of turmoil, during which several claimants ruled by force, a new czar was elected, Michael Romanoff, whose dynasty continued until the revolution of 1917 (see J. B. Bury,A History of the Eastern Roman Empire, 1912, p. 412; Bernard Pares, A History of Russia, 1944; Encyclopedia Britannica [1974 ed.] art. “Russia”).

Thus it can be seen that any similarity of sound between “Rosh” and “Russia” is obviously purely coincidental. There seems to be no evidence that the name was applied to that country until about the 10th century. a.d.

Meshech. The name appears nine times in the Scriptures. In Gen. 10:2 and 1 Chron. 1:5 Meshech is listed as one of the sons of Japheth. In 1 Chron. 1:17 a likely scribal error lists Meshech as one of the sons of Shem, but doubtless “Mash” was intended, in harmony with Gen. 10:23. The other six occurrences refer to Meshech as a nation. Three of these are in Eze. 38, 39; two are in chs. 27:13; 32:26, and the remaining reference is in Ps. 120:5. According to the LXX, “Meshech” should also be read in Isa. 66:19 instead of “that draw the bow.” In all five of its occurrences in Ezekiel (as well as in Gen. 10:2 and 1 Chron. 1:5) it is coupled with Tubal, indicating that the descendants of Japheth are intended. Ezekiel speaks of them as merchants trading with Tyre, in “vessels of brass,” as well as in slaves (ch. 27:13). In Psalms they are described as inclined “for war” (Ps. 120:7).

Historically, Meshech is believed to represent the Moshians of the Greek classical writers (see Herodotus iii. 94; vii. 78), the Mushku of the Assyrian inscriptions (see on Gen. 10:2).

Some writers, who find Russia in the sound roХsh, also find Moscow in the sound “Meshech,” or Mushku, and believe that the city may have been founded by descendants of the Mushku. However, according to the Encyclopedia Britannica, 1974 edition, Moscow was not established until the 12th century, by George Dolgoruki. No trace of connection between the two names can be found.

Tubal. This name appears eight times in the Scriptures. In Gen. 10:2 and 1 Chron. 1:5 Tubal is listed as one of the sons of Japheth. It occurs in Isa. 66:19, where the LXX has Meshech also (see the foregoing discussion of Meshech). In Ezekiel it is mentioned five times (chs. 27:13; 32:26; 38:2, 3; 39:1), in every case coupled with Meshech. The compound, Tubalcain, appears twice in Gen. 4:22 as the name of the son of Lamech and Zillah.

Historically, Tubal has been identified with the Tibarenians (Gr. Tibareµnoi) mentioned in Herodotus iii. 94 and with Tabal of the Assyrian inscriptions (see on Gen. 10:2).

Those who hold that RoХsh represents Russia attempt to find in Tubal a reference to Tobolsk. The only basis of equating the two is similarity of sound, and such a basis is scarcely tenable. Tobolsk was not founded until 1587, by the Cossacks, and is an unimportant town.

The fact that there were other countries that occupied a much greater place in history than those mentioned in ch. 38 suggests the thought that exact identity is perhaps not the object of the prophecy. Israel was to know that a vast concourse of people would oppose its future rise to national and spiritual greatness. Precisely who the nations were that would play a leading role in the immense confederacy was more or less beside the point, since virtually all heathen powers in opposition to God were to be included. The selection and enumeration of certain nations was probably no more than a of poetic imagery. Similarly, in its application to the present time, inasmuch as all nations will join with Satan in his final struggle against the government of Heaven, no special point is achieved by attempting to identify only a few of the nations.

4. I will turn thee back. Not from Palestine, but rather from some purpose impelling Gog, in order to bring him against the Holy Land. This is made clear by the context here and in ch. 39:2. The figure is that of an unruly beast that is bent on taking its own way, but is directed by a superior power. The power is here represented as that of the Lord, since frequently in the Scriptures, God is said to do that which He permits Satan to do (see on 2 Chron. 18:18; Eze. 38:10).

Hooks into thy jaws. Compare ch. 29:4.

All thine army. This vast concourse of peoples comes against Israel fully equipped. Their plans appear to have been carefully laid. Adequate preparations have been made. From a military point of view all the advantages seem to be with the attackers. But with Yahweh against Gog, Israel has nothing to fear.

5. Persia. Earlier the prophet had summoned the nations living generally to the north. The second group of nations lived to the east and south. No immediately neighboring nations are mentioned. Only those living in the confines of the known world are summoned to this battle; for possible reasons see on v. 2, concluding paragraph under “Tubal.” For a sketch of the history of Persia see Vol. III pp. 51–64.

Ethiopia. Cush (Heb. Kush) was the son of Ham (Gen. 10:6). His descendants settled in the south of Egypt in what was later Nubia—now southernmost Egypt and northern Sudan (see on Gen. 10:6).

Libya. Heb. Put (see on ch. 27:10).

6. Gomer. Gomer was one of the sons of Japheth (Gen. 10:2; 1 Chron. 1:5). A second Gomer is mentioned as the wife of Hosea (Hosea 1:3). The only other Biblical occurrence of the name is this remark regarding Gomer and all his bands. None of these references throws much light on who these people were that joined Gog against Israel.

In the secular sources frequent mention is made of the Gimirri, or the Cimmerians (see Homer Odyssey xi. 14), who are believed to be the same people as Gomer and his bands. They were a barbaric horde of Aryans, who poured down from what is now southern Russia, in the 8th century b.c., over the land of Assyria and its neighbors, causing trouble and bloodshed (see Herodotus i. 15. 16). See further on Gen. 10:2.

Togarmah. Togarmah was the son of Gomer, the grandson of Japheth, and the brother of Ashkenaz and Riphath (Gen. 10:3; 1 Chron. 1:6). Outside of these two references the name occurs only here and in Eze. 27:14, where Togarmah is said to trade in horses and mules in the Tyrian market. Historically, these people have been identified with the Tilgarimmu of the Assyrian inscriptions (see on Gen. 10:3).

7. Be thou prepared. The prophet seems ironically to encourage Gog to make all his warlike preparations and muster all his forces together to the end that all the enemies of God may perish together. Gog himself is to be their guard, to control and direct the assault.

8. Visited. Heb. paqad, which may here be translated “to muster,” as in Isa. 13:4 (see RSV). In the form here found, paqad may also mean “to summon.”

Latter years. Compare Gen. 49:1; Num. 24:14; Dan. 10:14; Micah 4:1; see on Isa. 2:2. How long a period of time is here comprehended is not known. Many years of captivity still lay ahead, and a considerable period would be involved in the reestablishment of the Jewish state, to bring it into the condition here described.

Many people. Better, “many peoples,” or “many nations.”

Always. Heb. tamid, “continually” (see on Dan. 8:11). The mountains of Israel had not perpetually been waste, but during the Captivity had been so constantly. Even after the return from bondage the rehabilitation would be a gradual process, and the full restoration would not come until after the destruction of the enemies of the new state.

9. Like a storm. Compare Prov. 1:27; Isa. 21:1; 28:2; Eze. 13:11.

Like a cloud. Some, in applying this prophecy to events of the now immediate future, have applied this symbolism to the modern air forces. This is purely conjectural. Whether Satan will employ air power in his final, postmillennial campaign (Rev. 20:9; see on Eze. 38:1) cannot be known.

10. Think an evil thought. Or, “devise an evil scheme” (RSV). Verses 4–16 present God as the one bringing Gog upon the land of Israel. Here it is observed that God will do this, in the sense that He will permit Gog to carry out devices of his evil heart.

11. Unwalled villages. Compare Zech. 2:4, 5. This would lead Gog to expect an easy victory.

12. The midst of the land. Literally, “the navel [height] of the earth.” The figure is used elsewhere only in Judges 9:37, but there applied presumably to a hill near Shechem, probably from its central location with respect to the Jordan and the Mediterranean. Here Palestine is represented as in the center of the earth, perhaps in the same way as Jerusalem was set “in the midst of the nations and countries” (Eze. 5:5).

13. Sheba. The prophet now adds three more names to his list of nations. These three are not mentioned as joining with the advancing hosts, but as asking about the spoil that may be taken. Perhaps they hope that some of it would be traded into their hands. For the identification of Sheba see on ch. 27:22.

Dedan. See on ch. 25:13.

Tarshish. Believed to be the Phoenician colony of Tartessus in Spain. Attempts have been made to identify it with countries around Palestine, but from the description in the Scriptures it was at some distance across the sea. The minerals that were secured from Tarshish are still produced in Spain. Tartessus seems to fit all the details we have concerning it (see on Gen. 10:4). The “merchants of Tarshish” are possibly the Phoenicians.

16. I shall be sanctified. Verses 14–16 largely repeat what has already been said concerning the peaceful security of Israel, and of God’s permitting the mighty confederacy of Gog to come against His people. In the destruction of Gog the character of God will stand fully vindicated. So again, in the destruction of Satan and of the vast multitude of the wicked at the end of the millennium, God’s wisdom, justice, and goodness will stand fully vindicated. From the lips of all creatures, both loyal and rebellious, will be heard these words, “Just and true are thy ways, thou King of saints” (Rev. 15:3; cf. GC 668–671).

17. Of whom I have spoken. An earlier prophecy mentioning the name Gog is not now extant, nor need we be concerned that any such may have been lost. Viewed in its larger aspects, the battle here described is but the culmination of the agelong struggle between the powers of evil and the people of God. Concerning this there is frequent mention in earlier prophecies. The earliest intimation comes from the Garden of Eden in the curse pronounced upon the serpent. God predicted that there would be a constant warfare between the seed of the woman, the church, and Satan. Ultimate triumph over evil was forecast in the clause, “it [the seed of the woman] shall bruise thy head” (Gen. 3:15). Other references to the controversy and the eventual triumph of right are found in the psalms and later prophetic books (see Ps. 2; 110; Isa. 26:20, 21; etc.).

Naturally, any success on the part of the people of God would meet with most violent opposition from the great adversary. The narrative of Gog in this chapter is a delineation of the type of resistance that would have been encountered in the post-exilic period by a regenerated people now at last fulfilling their divine mission. Inasmuch as the prophecy was conditional and the conditions were never met, the predictions were not fulfilled in literal Israel. Nor can all the details be projected into the future so as to have a fulfillment then. Only those features reiterated later by sacred writers can be taken positively to have future application (see pp. 36–38; see on v. 1).

18. In my face. Literally, “in my nostrils,” a figure reflecting human anger (see Ps. 18:8). Such figures that ascribe human attributes to God are called anthropomorphisms. God describes His acts in terms with which men are familiar. In reality, God is vastly above human reason. “My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord” (Isa. 55:8).

19. Great shaking. Here is a feature to which NT writers call attention. They tell of fearful convulsions of nature that will precede the coming of the Son of of man. Jesus mentions “the sea and the waves roaring” and “men’s hearts failing them for fear,” not so much because of some military threat to their security, but because all nature seems to be out of its course (Luke 21:25, 26; GC 636). John the revelator gives an even more graphic description of the tremendous upheavals in the natural world (Rev. 16:18–20). Men have always depended upon nature. Not once during the long history of the earth, except in connection with the events recorded in Joshua 10:12, 13 and 2 Kings 20:8–11, has the sun failed to move in its normal cycle. All natural law has operated with regulated consistency. Men have relied upon the permanence of these operations, forgetting Him by whom “all things consist” (Col. 1:17). They have chosen in His place the idol of science and, in reality, “the god of this world” (2 Cor. 4:4). The “great shaking” in the natural world will come to them as a fearful awakening to the fact that the god whom they have chosen, “the prince of the power of the air” (Eph. 2:2), has no power over the elements. Yet he claimed a position and power equal to that of the Son of God (see on Eze. 28:13) and asserted that, if given an opportunity, he would exercise a more equitable control over the world than Christ. He has been given an opportunity for such a demonstration. Now, in the midst of a reeling earth, all men see the falseness and arrogance of his claims and discover too late that probation’s hour has closed forever.

21. Every man’s sword. This also finds a parallel during the time of the fearful disillusionment, when the multitudes discover they have been deluded by their religious leaders, and in their rage turn against them. “The swords which were to slay God’s people, are now employed to destroy their enemies. Everywhere there is strife and bloodshed” (GC 656).

According to the OT record there were numerous occasions upon which God brought deliverance to His people by setting their enemies to fighting one another (see Judges 7:22; 1 Sam. 14:20; 2 Chron. 20:22–24).

22. Great hailstones. The parallel to this is the seventh plague, when hail of the weight of about a talent will add to the destruction already wrought (Rev. 16:21). The “fire” may find its counterpart in the “lightnings” of Rev. 16:18. Of these the application is made, “Fierce lightnings leap from the heavens, enveloping the earth in a sheet of flame” (GC 638).

23. They shall know. As Gog was to be utterly discomfited and men were to acknowledge the superiority of the God of heaven, so, as the controversy nears its climax, the carefully laid schemes of the great deceiver will be totally unmasked, and Satan will be unveiled in the weakness and falsity of his claims. Demons and men will be led to acknowledge that there is but One who is supreme, and that all His dealings in the great controversy have been conducted with respect to the eternal good of His people and the universe at large (see GC 671).

For further comment on this frequently recurring refrain of the book of Ezekiel see on ch. 6:7. It occurs twice here ch. (38:16, 23) and four times in ch. 39 (vs. 6, 7, 22, 28).

Ellen G. White comments

22      PP 509