You are somewhat making my point for me. I'm not suggesting that something has to be in chronological order from start to finish in a chapter, in order for it be in chronological order.
Sorry, I don't think I'm following you. If you are NOT suggesting that something has to be in chronological order from start to finish in a chapter, in order for it to be in chronological order, then why is your position that gog
HAS to be defeated prior to the Spirit being poured out?
I'm using the same reasoning you are using here with your example of verse 1 was not fulfilled before verse 7. How could you have determined that void of any chronology?
I'm not quite understanding you here. Zechariah 13 has a chronology, however, the future fulfillment of Zechariah 13 does not follow it exactly. For example, In Zechariah 13, verse 1 comes before verse 7 in its immediate chronological context. However, if we are looking for the fulfillment of those said verses, Zechariah 13:7 was fulfilled prior to Zechariah 13:1. My argument is the same with Ezekiel 39. In the immediate context, Ezekiel 39 has a chronology. But it's
fulfillment is not required to follow that said chronology, in the exact same order.
What this fails to take into consideration though, there was also an exile around 70 AD.
I disagree, Jeremiah 29 makes it very clear that God will restore Jacob's fortune after the Babylonian exile.
Jeremiah 29:10-14 For this is what the LORD says: “
When Babylon’s seventy years are complete, I will attend to you and confirm My promise to restore you to this place. For I know the plans I have for you, declares the LORD, plans to prosper you and not to harm you, to give you a future and a hope. Then you will call upon Me and come and pray to Me, and I will listen to you. You will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. I will be found by you, declares the LORD,
and I will restore your fortunes and gather you from all the nations and places to which I have banished you, declares the LORD. I will restore you to the place from which I sent you into exile.”
Why can't it be a returning from that exile that
Ezekiel 38-39 has in mind?
The eternal promise land is an interesting topic.
It was promised to Abraham and his offpsring prior to the old covenant, meaning the addition of the old covenant 430 years later cannot revoke the promise made to Abraham.
Genesis 3:15 For all the land that you see, I
will give to you and your offspring forever.
Galatians 3:17-18 What I mean is this:
The law that came 430 years later does not revoke the covenant previously established by God, so as to cancel the promise. For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on a promise; but God freely granted it to Abraham through a promise.
However, God promised to scatter Israel away from the promise land if they could not keep the old covenant.
Deuteronomy 28:64-65
Then the LORD will scatter you among all the nations, from one end of the earth to the other, and there you will worship other gods, gods of wood and stone, which neither you nor your fathers have known. Among those nations you will find no repose, not even a resting place for the sole of your foot. There the LORD will give you a trembling heart, failing eyes, and a despairing soul.
Even though God promised to restore their fortunes after the blessings/curses would fall on them, it still depended on their obedience to the law. And we know that Israel could never fully obey the law.
Deuteronomy 30:1-4 When all these things come upon you—the blessings and curses I have set before you—and you call them to mind in all the nations to which the LORD your God has banished you, and when you and your children return to the LORD your God and obey His voice with all your heart and all your soul according to everything I am giving you today,
then He will restore you from captivitya and have compassion on you and gather you from all the nations to which the LORD your God has scattered you. Even if you have been banished to the ends of the earth, He will gather you and return you from there.
Deuteronomy 30:10
if you obey the LORD your God by keeping His commandments and statutes that are written in this book of the law, and if you turn to Him with all your heart and all your soul.
So how do we reconcile the land being Abraham's offspring's eternal possession, and yet God scattering Israel from the promise land if they could not obey?
Because Jesus is the offspring to which the promises of Abraham were made.
Galatians 3:16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say, “and to seeds,” meaning many,
but “and to your seed,” meaning One, who is Christ.
Jesus was seated at the right hand with all authority and above all dominion. The whole earth is his, and this includes the land of Israel, thus fulfilling the promise to Abraham and his offspring, who is Christ.
Hebrews 1:2 But in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son, whom
He appointed heir of all things, and through whom He made the universe.
Matthew 28:18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven
and on earth has been given to Me.
Revelation 1:5 and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead,
and the ruler of the kings of the earth.
Ephesians 1:20-21 and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly realms,
far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age, but also in the one to come.
1 Corinthians 10:26
For “the earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof.”
Acts 2:36 Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain
that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.”
Your looking at the wrong offspring. The promise land can never be taken away from Christ, for earth is his and the fullness thereof.
Plus, how does one reasonably explain the following if the defeat of Gog and his multitude have already been fulfilled ages ago?
Since we appear to agree that this battle is both spiritual and physical (satan, beast, kings of the earth, and their armies), I don't have an answer as to how someone could reasonably explain a spiritual and physical battle and have another party believe it.
Look at verse 22. Something similar happened to Sodom and Gomorrah. When God rained down fire on Sodom and Gomorrah that time, do you take that account literally, that this actually took place in history?
I do.
In the event you do, why wouldn't verse 22 be a literal event as well? And if it is, how could verse 22 have already been fulfilled in the past, yet not one single person past or present can even remotely prove it has?
How could someone proved pestilence, fire, and hail occurred a couple thousand years ago?
This doesn't take into account
Romans 11 where we are told that there is a part of Israel that is still blinded. It would be this part He would still be hidng His face from, and not the part of Israel who are not blinded.
How can all of Israel be saved......
Romans 11:26 And in this way
all Israel will be saved, as it is written,
...and yet only a remnant saved?
Romans 9:27 And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: “Though the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea,
only a remnant of them will be saved
Not all of Israel is Israel.
Romans 9:6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed.
For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel,
God did not reject his people whom he foreknew.
Romans 11:1-2 I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! For I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew.
and that no one to date has provided convincing evidence that God has already executed judgment on Gog ages ago,
Not sure how anyone could provide convincing evidence of a physical/spiritual battle.
So maybe He does pour out His Spirit more than once then?
This would lend evidence for your position. However, as you are making the claim, the burden of proof falls on you.