“The text has hitherto been misunderstood because the introductory colon of the verse is missing in Hebrew and is preserved only in Greek, where we must probably read “Gog” instead of “Og,” especially in view of the fact that the strange Hebrew [אגג (Agag)] in [bә-Mi•dәbar′] 24.7 appears as [Γωγ ("Gog")] in the Greek text” (EJ 4.123). This was certainly an error in the later Greek, added for explanation (as was also done in the Tar•gum•im′) rather than absent in Hebrew.
It may also be noted that other words beginning with the Hebrew ע (aiyin) have also been Hellenized or Anglicized to begin with “g”; e.g., עזה (Az•âh′) to “Gaza.”
In fact, the Hebrew term in bә-Mi•dәbar′ 24.7 is מאגג (mei-Agag), meaning “from Agag.” Since LXX Γωγ equates to אגג in bә-Mi•dәbar′ 24.7, this demonstrates thatGog equates to “Agag.” This, in turn, means that מאגג, the term actually found in bә-Mi•dәbar′ 24.7, equates to “from Gog” as well as “from Agag.” Thus, מאגג in bә-Mi•dәbar′ 24.7 is equivalent to מגוג in Yәkhëz•qeil′ 38.2.
Christian identifications of “Gog and Magog,” change to suit every historical event. Hence, Christian identifications of “Gog and Magog,” less than unreliable, are to be envied by the chameleon. “From the biblical sources and the tradition of the rabbis, the stories about Gog and Magog passed to the Church Fathers. At the time of the Gothic migrations it was customary to identify the Goths with Gog and Magog. An ancient Christian tradition also identified Gog and Magog with the barbarian peoples whom Alexander the Great locked away behind iron gates next to the Caspian Sea but who are destined to break forth in the end of days. During the Islamic conquests, Christians identified the Muslim armies with Gog and Magog.” (EJ 7.693).
As late as the 1980s, popular evangelists identified Gog as the leader of the USSR and Magog with the USSR. One “translated” the phrase in Yәkhëz•qeil′ 38.2, נשיא ראש משך ותבל (nәsi rosh Mëshëkh wә-Tuvâl) as “the prince of Russia—Moscow and Tubalsk”). “If you look in any Hebrew newspaper,” he brazenly claimed, “you’ll find that the word for Russia is Rosh“!!! He probably still hasn’t run into anyone who knows enough Hebrew to realize the statement is either tragi-comically ignorant or a brazen fraud. The word for Russia is רוסיה (Rusyâh), not ראש (rosh), which means “head” (or, by extension, chief or top). Readers can see that in the Hebrew they aren’t related or even close. This is typical of confabulated “Hebrew” which is employed by Christians to defend their Displacement Theology, the sole basis for their false claims of being “spiritual Jews” or “spiritual Israel.”
“Since, in the list of the sons of No′akh (bә-Reish•it′ 10.2), מגוג (Mâgog) is mentioned as the brother of Jomer and Madai , the most reasonable identification put forward is with Giges, also known as Gogo, king of Lydia, and Mâgog, with his country. That, however, does not affect in any way the symbolic nature of the name and the special character of Yәkhëz•qeil′‘s vision. Gog and his people are not historical enemies of Israel, like Babylonia and Assyria.” (EJ, “Gog and Magog,” 7.692).
“‘There is no longer any doubt that Gog is the same word for ‘barbarian’ which appears as Gagaya in Amarna and as Ggy in Ugaritic” (EJ 4, loc. cit.). Gog, in Biblical usage, is thus synonymous with heathen, goy•im′ and gentile, i.e. everyone outside of the people of Israel. For those gentiles who falsely claim that they are ‘spiritual Israel’—or Bәn•ei′-No′akh—and insist that they, therefore, aren’t goy•im′ / gentiles (e.g. Mormons and others) I must spell out here that “Gog” / barbarian refers to everyone outside of the historical genealogical people of Israel and geir•im′ whom the historical genealogical people of Israel, alone, recognize as having joined them.
In Tar•gum•im′ of the Holy Land, “the Mâ•shi′akh plays an active role in this war’ the whole of Tәhil•im′ 2 is interpreted as referring to it (Ma•sëk′ët A•vod•âh′ Zâr•âh′3b’)” (loc. cit.). All of these indicate “the antiquity of the connection between the war of Gog and the advent of the Mâ•shi′akh.” (EJ 7, loc. cit.).
So the bottom line turns out to be that the prophecy of Yәkhëz•qeil′ hearkens back to the account of assimilation and intermarriage masterminded by בִּלְעָם—the epitomy and paradigm of assimilation and intermarriage—in bә-Mi•dәbar′ 24.7… and this is the enemy of the Mâ•shi′akh!!!
To what, then, does Yәkhëz•qeil′ refer by Meshekh and Tuval? When we look up the term משך (mëshëkh) we find that it refers to the act of pulling, attracting or dragging—exactly בִּלְעָם‘s strategy of enticement! When we look up Tuvâl we find that it’s a pu•al′ of תבל (tibeil; he spiced something). The major noun form of this verb is תבל (tevel; spice or seasoning). However, the identical word takes on another connotation by extension. Something which is ‘spiced up’ is mingled with something outside of its natural order. And we find that tevel also means a violation of the natural order, an abomination, a perversion, and confusion. Klein’s has suggested that this verb derives from the root בלל—which means to mingle, mix and confuse! Not incidentally, תבל (teiveil; civilized world, inhabited world, the world-system) is a cognate!
Recall, too, that בִּלְעָם‘s strategy of enticement to assimilation and intermarriage is in direct conflict with the admonition of Tor•âh′ to le-Havdil between what isQo′dësh and what is khol.
Yәkhëz•qeil′ was thus warning the future hearer—who would live in the Messianic era at the end time—that the ultimate war of all wars would be waged over the strategy of בִּלְעָם, the “Gog/Agog” from “the Gog/Agog,” the ‘barbarian’ of ‘the barbarian [world]‘, the goy from the goy•im′, who wishes to eliminate Israel by attracting her, drawing her, pulling her, dragging her into the mingling—’blending into the world’—through the subtle but slowly strangling enticements of ‘peer pressure,’ social entanglement, intermarriage and assimilation. This has become known by the acronym PC (political correctness)!!!
Rib′i Yәho•shu′a described this as the greatest category of those who don’t make it into מלכות י--ה (malkhut י--ה; the kingdom / realm of י--ה)—the seeds which “fell among the briars, and the briars outgrew them and withstood them” (The Nәtzâr•im′ Reconstruction of Hebrew Ma•tit•yâh′u (NHM) 13.8). Rib′i Yәho•shu′a explained (NHM 13.22) that “The briar patch into which the seeds fell, this is the one who hears the Ha•lâkh•âh′ but the worries of this world-age and the deception of wealth press in upon the Ha•lâkh•âh′, and he becomes unproductive.” The “worries of this world-age” radiate from the central desire to be accepted by the world, peer pressure, social entanglements—PC—and, when PC is outside the Tor•âh′ community, the enticement toward assimilation and intermarriage. That Rib′i Yәho•shu′a contrasted this specifically with holy marriage in the subsequent category is explicit in his description (see notes to NHM 13.23).
Thus, Meshekh and Tuval refer to the attraction, the pull, to ‘blend in’ and mingle with the world! This is the strategy of בִּלְעָם about which Yәkhëz•qeil′ prophesied. Today’s followers of בִּלְעָם—the “Gog of the Magog” prophesied by Yәkhëz•qeil′—are those who strive to attract and pull Israel to mingle with, intermarry and assimilate with their own, who are contra-Tor•âh′, immersed in the idolatry of man-god worship, the observance of pagan festivals for Esotera and Mithra, et al., and a superstitious and pagan belief in a magical—poof!—”rapture.” Such willful idolaters lack even the ears to hear the message of Mikh•âh′ 6.8 without perverting it into a contra-mi•tzәw•ot′antithesis of the original. [Quote and learn more here about how to relate to the Creator: Link]
Anders, why won’t you answer Les’ simple straightforward question? You disengenuosly posted: