Ezekiel 38-39-The Russian Led Invasion of Israel Will Take Place Before Daniel's Seventieth Week (Doctrinal Bible Church in Huntsville, Alabama)

Doctrinal Bible Church

Pastor-Teacher Bill Wenstrom

Wednesday April 17, 2024

The Day of the Lord: Ezekiel 38-39-The Russian Led Invasion of Israel Will Take Place Before Daniel’s Seventieth Week

Lesson # 19

One of the most fascinating prophecies in the Bible is that of the Russian invasion of Israel which will take place before Daniel’s seventieth week and is recorded in Ezekiel 38:1-39:24.

The events of Ezekiel 38:1-39:24 have never taken place in the past since no historical events have matched this prophecy but will take place prior to the start of Daniel’s Seventieth Week.

There are several points supporting this view.

First of all, Russia today is still a major world power.

The picture of Israel as described in Ezekiel 38-39 fits well with the nation as she is now presently constituted because she has been brought back from the sword (38:8) because after 1900 years, 46 invasions, and the War of Independence, the Land is Jewish again and free from foreign domination.

Furthermore, Israel has been gathered from many nations and peoples (38:8, 12) because the Jews in Israel today come from approximately 80-90 different nations.

Also, the continual waste places are now inhabited (38:8, 12) has been fulfilled because the Israelis today are rebuilding the ancient places and turning them into modern towns and cities and they are dwelling securely (38:11, 14).

Some argue that the meaning of the Hebrew root bā·ṭǎḥ (בָּטַח) speaks of peace, however, this is not the case but rather the nominal form of this root means “security” and this is not the security due to a state of peace, but a security due to confidence in their own strength.

The Israeli army has fought four major wars since its founding and won them swiftly each time and thus today they are confident that her army can repel any invasion from the Arab states.

Today, Israel is dwelling in unwalled villages (38:11), which is of course descriptive of the present-day kibbutzim in Israel.

This interpretation of Ezekiel 38-39 which has Russia and her allies invading Israel prior to the seventieth week of Daniel also best answers the problem of the seven months the Jews will be burying the dead from this invasion (39:12) and the seven years in which the weapons of the invaders are used for fuel (39:9-10).

Now, placing this invasion at the beginning of the seventieth week presents no real problem with the seven months, but it does have problems with the seven years because this would put it at a time when Israel would be running from her enemies and would not have time to finish the burning of the weapons.

There is also a problem placing this invasion in the middle of the seventieth week in relation to the seven months and the seven years because the seven months would extend into the second half of the Tribulation, a time when Israel has to worry about her own dead, and not to mention the Russians.

The seven years would extend throughout the rest of the seventieth week and into the Millennium, making it inconsistent with the biblical view of the Millennium and also Israel would need these weapons to fight the tribulation armies.

The problem of placing this invasion at the end of the seventieth week is that it causes problems with both the seven months and the seven years, since both would extend into the Millennium.

Some interpret this invasion as taking place at the beginning of the Millennium but this has problems with both the seven months and the seven years, since both would extend into the Millennium due to the fact that the interlude is only 75 days.

Those who interpret this invasion at the end of the Millennium have problems with both seven months and the seven years because the seven months of burial seem pointless when there is a resurrection after the invasion and the seven years would have to extend into the Eternal Order.

Therefore, I believe the best interpretation is that this Russian led invasion of Israel will take place before the seventieth week because it is only view which has no problems with either the seven months or the seven years.

The Jews continue to dwell in the Land after this invasion and remain there until the middle of the seventieth week and thus the seven months of burial is no problem and the seven years also create no problem since they would begin before the seventieth week and can extend as far as the middle of the seventieth week if at all necessary.

Therefore, this interpretation must take place at least three and a half years or more before the seventieth week starts.

These are the strengths of this particular view.

However, there are objections raised to this particular view, and these will now have to be answered.

Fruchtenbaum writes “One objection states that the Ezekiel 38–39 passage is in the restoration section of Ezekiel. The answer is that this is true, but which restoration? the partial in unbelief? or the final in faith? It would seem to be the partial one in unbelief. Faith begins in Israel only after this invasion. The chronology of the Book of Ezekiel would hardly be a problem for this view. The restoration in faith is covered by Ezekiel 40–48. A second objection, and the one most commonly used, is that ‘dwelling safely’ or ‘securely’ as used in the Old Testament always refers to millennial peace and security—something that Israel will not receive before the Tribulation. However, this is an overstatement. While it is true that the term ‘dwell securely’ is used of life in the Millennium, this is true only of the minority of cases and not at all true of the majority. A list of references where this is not true includes: Leviticus 25:18, 19; 26:5; Deuteronomy 12:10; 1 Samuel 12:11; 1 Kings 4:25; Psalm 4:8; 16:9; Proverbs 1:33; 3:23, 29; Isaiah 47:8; Jeremiah 49:31; and Zephaniah 2:15. The Jeremiah reference is particularly significant since it uses the very same phrases that are found in Ezekiel 38:11. This phrase is used more in non-millennial contexts than in millennial ones. A third objection states that this contradicts the doctrine of imminency. However, stating that something must precede the Tribulation is not the same as stating that it must precede the Rapture unless it is further stated that the Rapture begins the Tribulation. However, the act that begins the Tribulation is not the Rapture, but the signing of the seven-year covenant and nothing else. The pretribulation view asserts that the invasion will occur before the signing of the seven-year covenant. This does not destroy any argument of imminency, because the Rapture may still come even before this. This view does not state that this invasion will occur before the Rapture; it only asserts that this invasion will occur before the Tribulation. The Rapture is both imminent and pretribulational. All this means is that the Rapture can occur at any time between now and the signing of the seven-year covenant. It does not mean that the Rapture begins the Tribulation. So then, to say that the invasion takes place before the Tribulation does not negate imminency since it is not the Rapture which begins the Tribulation. Another way of showing this is to use these questions: Could the Rapture have come before 1948? The answer is ‘yes,’ because the Rapture is imminent. However, could the Tribulation have come before 1948? The answer is ‘no,’ because there was no Jewish State and government to sign the covenant which would begin the Tribulation. Believing that Israel had to be established before the Tribulation was never an argument against imminency. Neither is the belief that the invasion comes before the Tribulation an argument against imminency. The author of this book holds to a pretribulation Rapture and believes that the Rapture is imminent. Believing that the Russian invasion also occurs before the Tribulation in no way destroys the argument of imminency for it is not the Rapture which begins the Tribulation. A fourth objection states: How could Israel apostatize so soon again after the nation has had a revival? But the real problem is why this should even be a problem. This was often true in Old Testament history. There was speedy apostasy of Israel following the various miracles of the Exodus and the recognition of God at Sinai. There was speedy apostasy after the revivals of Hezekiah and Josiah. There was a speedy apostasy at Nineveh after the city repented under Jonah. This has happened before, and there is no problem with it happening again. A fifth objection states that this event happens in the latter days and years. But these terms simply apply to the whole period of the end times when prophecy is again being fulfilled, and so it can very easily apply to the closing days of the Church Age as well. However, this objection is really based on the faulty assumption that this view holds to a pre-Rapture position, which is not true. This is a position of a pretribulation invasion, but not a pre-Rapture invasion. A sixth and final objection states that Israel will not gain any title to the Land nor have the right to return till she signs the covenant with the Antichrist. Building on this statement, those who hold this opinion go on to state that this view would have to say that the covenant is signed before the Rapture. The latter is still based on the confusion as to what this view actually states. It has already been shown that this view does not state that the invasion comes before the Rapture. Actually this objection is a little ridiculous. In what possible way could the covenant with the Antichrist give the Jews the right to return that the United Nations did not? Israel already possesses the title of the Land and has possessed it since God made His covenant with Abraham. Furthermore, the United Nations recognized Israel in 1948, and Jews have had the right to return since then. And Jews are returning. Israel’s right to return will not be based on her covenant with the Antichrist any more than it is based on the full recognition by the United Nations. Israel’s title to the Land is based on the Abrahamic Covenant. The Scriptures predict a regathering before the Tribulation in unbelief in preparation for judgment. It is God Who is doing the moving, and it is God Who is bringing the Jews back into the Land, and this is enough for Israel’s right to the Land. A covenant with the Antichrist will hardly give Israel the right to return. Israel is back in the Land before the Tribulation, and hence, this invasion could take place before the Tribulation. So from all these facts, this author concludes that the pretribulational view is by far the best view. The Russian invasion is another birth pang that will occur before the Tribulation begins.”