Q. Side-by-side arguments concerning interpretation of Psalm 83 are currently listed in Rapture Ready. Both sides make believable points to the untrained novice’s eschatological eye. After reading both viewpoints, I still believe that Psalm 83 describes a war separate from Ezekiel 38. However, if someone asked me to justify this position, I don’t believe that I could make a precise, concise, cogent argument because of all the nuances in prophetic interpretations involved in these two articles.
If you will, at some point would you kindly write a “precise-concise” rebuttal to the “Psalm 83 is a non-war” stance? There has to be at least one linchpin errancy in interpretation that will cause a domino effect in demonstrating the falsehood of this argument. Thank you, Jack, for all that you do for your readers. No other eschatology site even comes close.
A. I’ve read both articles and remain persuaded that Psalm 83 and Ezekiel 38 are two different events. The most obvious difference can be found by comparing the two lists of combatants lining up against Israel. They’re completely different. To me the only way to explain the absence of Israel’s next door neighbors from the battle of Ezekiel 38 is that they’ve already been neutralized, which means Psalm 83 has to happen first. I also don’t buy the argument that life in Israel today meets the definition of “peaceful and unsuspecting” as Ezekiel 38:11 requires, nor do I believe that sufficient motivation exists yet for Russia to justify being drawn into the fray. Finally, all the current indicators favor Israel launching a preventive strike against its enemies, not being caught by a surprise attack as Ezekiel described. But if Iran’s nuclear program was dealt even a temporary setback, and Hamas, Hizbollah, the PLO, and Syria were no longer threats, I could see Israel being lulled into a false sense of security.