One of the most common errors in interpreting Bible prophecy is to roll the various evil individuals of the end times together into one.
In the past, it was stylish to plunk this conglomerate down in Rome and call it the Antichrist.
Lately, more and more are combining this conglomerate with the Assyrian.
But the Assyrian, Gog, the king of the south, The king of revived Judea, and the beast, are all separate and distinct individuals in end time prophecy.
The Assyrian is a descendant of the ancient Assyrian, who ruled over the same territory as the (much later) Selucid empire. In the portion of Daniel 11 that has already been fulfilled, "the king of the north" was the ruler of the Selucid empire. So it is the same for the portion that has not been fulfilled. The king of the north is the ruler over the lands ruled bu the Selucid Empire. But these are the same lands as those ruled by the former Assyrian Empire. So we know that "the king of the north" and "the Assyrian" are the same end time individual.
The beast is the ruler of the revived Roman Empire, Which at that time will be composed of ten kingdoms.
The king of the south is the end time king of Egypt.
But even as until quite recently, almost no one seemed to even notice the many prophecies about the end time Assyrian, almost no one still seems to have noticed the prophecies about the end time king of Judah.
We first find this king in Daniel 11:36-37, where we read, "And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done. Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all."
There is no excuse for making this king out to be either the Roman prince or the king of the north. The passage itself identifies him. In the first place, when a leader is introduced without any designation, the reference is always to the leader of whatever group is under discussion. If we are in the United States and are talking politics, if we simply say "the president," it is understood that the president we are referring to is the president of the United States. So when "the king" is suddenly introduced without any designation, it means the king of the nation under discussion. In this case, that nation is Judah, which is now called Israel.
But that is not the only way he is identified. According to Daniel 11:37 this king shall not regard “the God of his fathers,” but shall instead honor “a god whom his fathers knew not.” (verse 38) This term, “the God of his fathers,” is not just a generic reference to a god worshiped in past generations. Some form of this term is used of the God of Israel fifty-eight times in the Old Testament. When the Lord sent Moses to the children of Israel He told him “And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this
is my name for ever, and this
is my memorial unto all generations.” (Exodus 3:15) Thus we see that the God this king shall ignore is none other than the God of Israel; and that in calling Himself “the God of his fathers,” the Lord was identifying this “king” as an Israelite.
Most modern translations render this clause “the gods of his fathers.” This is a possible translation because the Hebrew word for God (‘elohiym, word number 430 in Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary) is plural. But the Hebrew scriptures use ‘elohiym for the one true God of Israel about two thousand four hundred times. (Including Deuteronomy 6:4, “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD!”
While it was used of the gods of the heathen only about two hundred times. Whether ‘elohiym should be translated God or gods can only be determined from the context. Nothing in Daniel 11:37 implies a plural sense for this word. But if “the gods of his fathers” were correct, this would be the only place the Holy Spirit ever used this formula in speaking of false gods. Translators did not begin to use the plural word gods in this verse until the notion that “the king” is “the prince” became popular. So we realize this idea is the basis of the plural translation. Thus we understand that using the plural translation to prove this idea is only reasoning in a circle. Now some, who want to make this king out to be "the king of the north" may make the same argument, but the answer is the same.
We find this king also in Zechariah 11:15-17, where we read, "And the LORD said unto me, Take unto thee yet the instruments of a foolish shepherd. For, lo, I will raise up a shepherd in the land,
which shall not visit those that be cut off, neither shall seek the young one, nor heal that that is broken, nor feed that that standeth still: but he shall eat the flesh of the fat, and tear their claws in pieces. Woe to the idol shepherd that leaveth the flock! the sword
shall be upon his arm, and upon his right eye: his arm shall be clean dried up, and his right eye shall be utterly darkened."
This foolish and idol shepherd will be raised up "in the land." So we know that this is a reference to a shepherd in Judah. Our Lord Jesus contrasted himself to this "idol shepherd that leaveth the flock" by saying, "I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep. But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep. The hireling fleeth, because he is an hireling, and careth not for the sheep. I am the good shepherd, and know my
sheep, and am known of mine. As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep"
In so contrasting himself to tis idol shepherd, Jesus was pointing him out as the one He had spoken of in John 5:43, when He said, "I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive" That is, Jesus was pointing him out as the great false Messiah, the Antichrist.
The Antichrist is not someone that attacks Israel, he is its leader. So he cannot even possibly be either the beast, the Assyrian, the king of the north, or Gog.
This leaves Gog, the great leader that attacks in Ezekiel 38 and 39. There are numerous details in Ezekiel 38 and 39 that plainly show when this great event will take place. We will first see that this attack is unquestionably an end time event.
In Ezekiel 38:8 the LORD tells Gog, “After many days you will be visited. In the latter years you will come into the land of those brought back from the sword and gathered from many people on the mountains of Israel.” Again, in verse 16 He plainly states that “It will be in the latter days that I will bring you against My land, so that the nations may know Me, when I am hallowed in you, O Gog, before their eyes.” There was no event even remotely similar to the one described in these chapters at any time after their partial return in the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, so this has to be an end time event.
But when, within the timeline prophesied for the end times, will it take place. We will first examine two details that show that it cannot take place before the middle of Daniel’s seventieth week.
In Ezekiel 39:7, after telling Gog he will be destroyed, the Lord says “So I will make My holy name known in the midst of My people Israel, and I will not let them profane My holy name anymore.” But Daniel 9:27 tells us that “in the middle of” Daniel’s seventieth week, the Roman prince “shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate.” There can be no reasonable doubt that the abomination referred to is when “the man of sin,” “the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped” “sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.” (I Thessalonians 2:3-4) Aside from their blasphemy against and crucifixion of Jesus, This will clearly be the worst profaning of the Lord’s name ever done by His rebellious people. But after Gog is destroyed, the Lord “will not let” His people Israel “profane” His holy name “anymore.” This shows us that Gog’s destruction cannot take place before the middle of Daniel’s seventieth week, the time of the Antichrist.
We just looked at the first part of Ezekiel 39:7. The rest of that verse is “Then the nations shall know that I am the LORD, the Holy One in Israel.” But according to I Thessalonians 2:9-12, “The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.” During the time of the Antichrist “God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie.” But beginning with the destruction of Gog, (notice the word “then”
“Then the nations shall know.” that Israel’s God is the Lord. This has to be after the time they are under a divinely sent “strong delusion, that they should believe the lie.” This again shows that Gog’s destruction cannot take place before the time of the Antichrist.
Knowing it cannot be before the middle of Daniel’s seventieth week is still not very definitive. But the time is shown more precisely that.
In Ezekiel 39:29 the Lord says that after this great deliverance He “will not hide” His “face from them anymore.” But during the great tribulation “they will cry to the Lord, But He will not hear them; He will even hide His face from them at that time, Because they have been evil in their deeds.” (Micah 3:4) This shows that the deliverance from Gog cannot take place until after the great tribulation.
So now we know that Gog’s attack and destruction has to be not only after the middle of Daniel’s seventieth week, but also after the great tribulation, which is the last half of Daniel’s seventieth week. But scripture even gives us the timing more precisely that this.
In Ezekiel 39:22, the Lord says, “the house of Israel shall know that I am the LORD their God from that day forward” But in John 5:43 Jesus told the Jews (see verses 5:18-19); “I have come in My Father's name, and you do not receive Me; if another comes in his own name, him you will receive.” This plainly shows that the Jews will receive the Antichrist, so at that time they will not know that the Lord is “their God.” But when Gog is destroyed, “the house of Israel shall know that” He is “the LORD their God from that day forward.” During the millennium “No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them.” (Jeremiah 31:34) So Gog will be destroyed before the millennium. From these two details we see that we really do not need anything more than this one verse to understand that Gog’s destruction takes place after the time of the Antichrist (this is the third detail in this prophecy that shows that) and before the millennium.
All this plainly shows that Gog cannot be the great attacker that comes down on Israel in the middle of Daniel's seventieth week. So he cannot be "the Assyrian," who is also "the king of the north."