On the Lord’s Announcement of Gentile Judgments.
As this, it seems, is liable to be misunderstood, I add a few words here to say that my allusion was especially to Luke 21:25-27,25And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; 26Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. 27And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. (Luke 21:25‑27) and 35. “And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.” The same principle, substantially, is found in Matthew 24:37-4137But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 38For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, 39And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 40Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. 41Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left. (Matthew 24:37‑41); which, dealing with the earth, widens out so as to embrace all men, though clearly growing out of the Jewish section of the prophecy. The scene portrayed in Matthew 25:31-4631When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: 32And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: 33And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. 34Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: 36Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. 37Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? 38When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? 39Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? 40And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. 41Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: 42For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: 43I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. 44Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? 45Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. 46And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. (Matthew 25:31‑46) is the Lord’s judgment of the nations, after He is come and while He is reigning in peace. It is millennial, though its issues are final
On the Rosh of Ezek. 38, & 39.
It may interest some readers to discuss a little more fully the right rendering of ראש.
Aquila of Pontus, who became a Jewish proselyte, was the first Greek translator to depart from the sense reflected in the version of the LXX. But he who most influenced others in a similar direction was Jerome. Nevertheless, in the cited-version before his comment, even he gives the alternative of the proper name, though preferring to take the word as an appellative. “Fili hominis, pone faciem tuam contra Gog, terrain Magog, principem capitis (sive Ros) Mosoch et Thubal, et Taticinare de eo.” In his subsequent remarks he owns that the translators Syachus and Theodotion adhered to the Septuagint, while Aquila, followed by himself, took the word in the sense of “head.” His reason was, that Rosh is not to be found as the name of a nation in Genesis or any other book of Scripture, or in Josephus. “Ex quo manifestum est, Ros non gentem significare, sed caput.” But the editors of Jerome’s works admit in their annotations that the argent is invalid; for many other proper names occur in Ezekiel, and not elsewhere, such as Chebar, Gammadim, Chelmad, Chub, Hethion, Sibraim, and the like. The context is decisively in favor of taking Rhos as a proper name. So judged Bochart (Phaleg 3:13) and Vitringa (Anacris. Apoc. p. 1170); and they have been followed by all scholars of weight down to De Wette in our own day, whose German version (close, though rationalistic) gives this meaning. And such is the rendering of the able Jew, David Levi, in spite of the Chaldee paraphrase. The Byzantine historians abound with proofs of the fact, that ‘Ρώς is constantly employed as the name of a Scythian race, then living on both sides of the Araxes = Aras, one of the progenitors of the great Russian nation. (See Cedrenus, Const. Porphyrogen., Leo Gram., Zonaras, &c., who diinguish the ‘Ρως from the Turks, with whom Mede, Bp. Newton, and others confounded them.)
The following extract from the Origines Russes (St. Petersburgh, pp. 24-26) of S. Von Hammer, who identifies the Ros or Ras of the Bible with the Ras or Ros of the Coran, sufficiently conveys the opinion of that diinguished Orientalist. “Tin autre passage de la Bible dont on n’a pas encore fait usage, is ce que je crois, vient fortement a I’appui de la veritable signification du mot trmi qui doit etre entendu comme un nom du people et non pas comme un appellatif. Les trois passages connus d’Ezechiel sont Leviticus 2 et 3 verset du xxxviii. et le Pr du xxxix. Chapitre והובל םשך דאך נשיא Principem capitis (Ros) Mosoc et Tubal. Outre que prineeps capitis’ ne forme aucun sons raisonable, nous trouvons les deux peuples Mosoc et Tubal dans un autre passage, savoir dans le’ 20 verset chapter 10 de la Genese, associes, comme dans les passages d’Ezechiel, a Gog et Magog, mais aussi a un troisieme people ותידס וםשך תבל et Mosoc et Tiras. Or, comme ici Tubal et Mosoc se trouvent associes a un troisieme peuple, on est autorise croire que le דאש (Ρώς) trois passages d’Ezechiel est de meme un nom de peuple comme il a ete traduit par les LXX., et non pas un nom appellatif comme il se trouve traduit dans la Vulgate. Cette probabilite, dela extrement grande, se change en certitude, quand nous retrouvons דאש (Ρώς, Ras ou Ros de la Bible aussi dans deux passages du Coran) associes de “mime a deux noms de peuples, lesquels cependant ne sont pas ceux de Mosoc et Tubal. 11 nous paralt hors de doilte que Mohammed qui a eu evidemment connaissance de la Bible ait eu en vue ce passage, et de la l’ ignorance de quelques commentateurs du Coran qui, cherchant lea Ras ou Ros dans PArabie, ne savaient pas oil les trouver, et changerent le fleuve (Ras) Bur lequel ils habitaient dans un puits, jusqu’ a ce que des commentateurs plus instruits les replacerent dans leurs veritables demeures c’est-a-dire dans l’Azerbeidjean sur lea bords de PAraxes.
“Une autre preuve que les Ras ou Ros du Coran ne sont qu’un plagiat des trrri Ras ou Ros de la Bible se trouve dans leer denomination meme d’Asshabias, c’est-à-dire les maltres du Ras, dans lequel nous reconnaissons le no rittrl c’est-a-dire principem Ras (Αρχοντα Ρως) de in Bible, repete dans tour les trois versets d’Ezechiel comme le Asshabir-Ras dans les deux versets du Coma.
“Ayant ainsi mis hors de dote que les Ras ou Ros du Coran sont les Roe on Ras de la Bible, et que le mot de trill dans la Bible est un nom propre du peuple, et non, pas un nom appellatif, it nous reste a montrer que les Tires Φειρας, תידס de la Genese (malgre la difference des deux s du ש et ס malgre la premiere syllabe Ti) sont le memo peuple, que les Ras ou Ros qui se trouvent dans les trois passages d’Ezechiel a Gog et Magog et a Mosoc et Tubal.
“Etant constate que Ros ou Ras associe trois foil dans Ezechiel aux peuples de Mosoc et Tubal est aussi nil nom de peuple, it est d’abord` naturel de chercher le nom de ce peuple dans la genealogie des flls de Noe, qui donne l’origine de touter les nations. C’est cette idee si naturelle qui nous conduit an passage en question (-eneso 10:2) oil nous retrouvons les Tubal et Mosoc reunis, eunmie dans lea tons passages inzechiel, mail associes aux This an lieu des Ras.
“On peut done inferer de la avec quelque probabilite, que lea Ras et Tiras sont le meme peuple, et cette probabilite recoit le plus grand degre de vraisemblance par le passage de Tzetzes deja cite par Bochart, qui dit qu’on appellait les Rως aussi Tavpovs. (Phaleg 3:13.) Σαφεστερον εδηλςσα Ταυρους τους Ρως καλεισαι,” Von H. next refers to some Oriental confirmations in pp. 26 —.29, which need not be cited.
There is a curious passage in the Apocrypha bearing on this subject. The children of Rasses were among those whose lands were laid waste by Holofernes. (Judith 2:23.) The Vulgate has Tharsis and Ismahel, the old Latin. has Thiras and Rasis. In Smith’s Dict. of the Bible we are told that Wolff restores the original Chaldee text of the passage as Thars and Rosos, comparing the latter name with Rhosus on the Gulf of Issus. “If the above restation of the original text is correct, the interchange of Meshech and Rosos, as connected with Thar or Thiras (see Gen. 10:22The sons of Japheth; Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras. (Genesis 10:2)), is very remarkable; since, if Meshech be the original of Muscovy, Rosos can hardly be other than that of Russia.”