Daniel 2 presents the four world empires from man’s perspective as a great metallic man, while Daniel 7 views the same empires from God’s perspective as wild, ravenous beasts. The bear in Daniel 7:5 is ancient Persia, not Russia.
The first place mentioned in Ezekiel 38 is Magog (see Ezekiel 38:2; 39:6).[3] Besides its mention in Ezekiel, the name Magog is found in the Bible only in Genesis 10:2 and 1 Chronicles 1:5—where he is listed as a son of Japheth (one of Noah’s three sons)—and in Revelation 20:8, a connection we’ll examine in chapter 8.[4]
Flavius Josephus, the Jewish historian, says the ancient Scythians inhabited the land of Magog.[5] The Scythians were ruthless northern nomadic tribes who inhabited a large swath of territory encompassing Central Asia and the southern steppes of modern Russia. Magog today includes five former Soviet republics: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Tajikistan. Afghanistan could also be part of this territory. These nations, with a combined population of more than sixty million, are all Islamic.
Many believe ancient Magog also includes what today is Russia. The Nelson Study Bible describes Magog as “usually understood to be in the area near the Black Sea or the Caspian Sea. Magog is one of the sons of Japheth, whose descendants occupied lands from Spain to Asia Minor, the islands of the Mediterranean to southern Russia.”[6]
Charles Ryrie says, “Magog was identified by Josephus as the land of the Scythians, the region N and NE of the Black Sea and E of the Caspian Sea (now occupied by three members of the Commonwealth of Independent States: Russia, the Ukraine, and Kazakhstan).”[7] Referring to Magog, Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal, Arnold Fruchtenbaum says, “These tribes of the ancient world occupied the areas of modern day Russia.”[8] John MacArthur, referring to Ezekiel 38:2, says, “The names of ancient peoples are given who lived in northern Mesopotamia and the Caucasus region of modern Russia.”[9]
Ancient Magog included land that today is in Russia.
After Gog and Magog, the third proper name in Ezekiel 38:2 is Rosh. It’s referred to again in Ezekiel 38:3 and 39:1. Because of the obvious similarity of Rosh with Russia, many have equated them. This view was popularized in the note on Ezekiel 38:2 in The Scofield Reference Bible: “That the primary reference is to the northern (European) powers, headed up by Russia, all agree…. The reference to Meshech and Tubal (Moscow and Tobolsk) is a clear mark of identification.”[10]
Scofield seems to base his correlation on the similarity in sound and pronunciation of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal with Russia, Moscow, and Tobolsk. Linking Rosh in Ezekiel 38:2 and 39:1 with Russia simply because the two words sound similar, however, is not a valid method of interpretation. There is no justification to equate an ancient word with a modern location just because they sound the same. Yet the evidence that Ezekiel was thinking of the land that is now Russia is based on much more than just a similar sound. Three lines of evidence point toward Rosh as Russia.
The language in Ezekiel 38 favors equating Rosh with Russia. The word rosh in Hebrew simply means “head, top, summit, or chief.” It is a very common word found in all Semitic languages. In the Old Testament alone it appears more than six hundred times. Many English translations of rosh render it as the word chief, not as the proper name of a geographical location. The King James Version, the Revised Standard Version, the English Standard Version, the New American Bible, and the New International Version all adopt this translation. However, the translation is not unanimous. The Jerusalem Bible, the New English Bible, and the New American Standard Bible all translate rosh as a proper name indicating a geographical location.
The preponderance of the evidence supports taking rosh as a proper name in Ezekiel chapters 38 and 39. Four main points support this reading. First, the eminent Hebrew scholars C. F. Keil and Wilhelm Gesenius both hold that the superior translation of rosh in Ezekiel 38:2-3 and 39:1 is as a proper noun denoting a specific geographical location.[11] Support from these two scholars from the nineteenth century is significant. G. A. Cooke translates Ezekiel 38:2 “the chief of Rosh, Meshech and Tubal.” He believes this is “the most natural way of rendering the Hebrew.”[12] Nevertheless, many modern translations and commentators translate rosh as the adjective “chief,” modifying the word “prince.” The main reason seems to be that they aren’t aware of a place in Ezekiel’s day called Rosh. Old Testament scholar John B. Taylor admits that “if place-name Rosh could be vouched for,” then Rosh would be the best translation.[13] As we’ll discover shortly, a place known as Rosh did exist in Ezekiel’s day, thus removing this obstacle to translating rosh as a proper name.
Second, in the Septuagint—the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament—rosh is translated as the proper name “Ros.” While not conclusive, this evidence is weighty in light of the close proximity of the Septuagint to Ezekiel’s day. The Septuagint was translated within three centuries of the writing of the book of Ezekiel.[14] The Hebrew Masoretic Text, the basis for most English translations of the Old Testament, also supports taking rosh as the name of an ethnic group.[15]
Third, several standard Bible dictionaries and encyclopedias support taking rosh as a proper name in Ezekiel 38: New Bible Dictionary, Wycliffe Bible Dictionary, Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names, and Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible.
Fourth, rosh occurs for the first time in Ezekiel 38:2. It appears again in Ezekiel 38:3 and 39:1. C. F. Keil notes that rosh must be a proper name since it appears several times because titles are generally abbreviated in Hebrew.[16] If rosh were the adjective “chief,” it wouldn’t reappear two more times.
The biblical evidence strongly supports taking rosh as a proper noun referring to a geographical location. But that’s only half of the issue. The next question is—which geographical location? Wilhelm Gesenius, the father of modern Hebrew lexicography, believed Rosh in Ezekiel is a proper name referring to Russia. He wrote in 1846 that Rosh is “undoubtedly the Russians, who are mentioned by the Byzantine writers of the tenth century, under the name Ros, dwelling to the north of Taurus [in Turkey].”[17] Clearly, Gesenius did not base his view on current events or any theological predisposition to favor this view. As author Joel Rosenberg observes,
3
Gog is mentioned before Magog, but Gog is the leader of this invasion. We will discuss the meaning of Gog in the next chapter.
4
Daniel I. Block,
5
Josephus,
7
Charles C. Ryrie,
8
Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum,
9
John MacArthur Jr.,
10
C. I. Scofield, ed.,
11
C. F. Keil,
12
G. A. Cooke,
13
John B. Taylor,
14
The mistranslation of