MID-DAY WATCH: Ukraine- Rosh and the Last Days!
Remember: the Media Mountain makes money off of news. Before the outlets start to spin and manipulate this unfolding story to drive ratings we should talk. Eerie how Russia keeps showing up in the news. From the Syria civil war to recent Olympics and now Ukraine. Theres a major Principality working through the Kremlin these days. So I am reviewing the role of a nation called “Rosh” located “to the farthermost north” of Israel. Seems like Rosh is lining up to be Russia.
In (Ezek. 38:1-6) we can track down the verse and the modern equivalents to Ezekiel’s list of ancient national lands. The nations that inhabit those lands now are:
Rosh = Russia
Magog = Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan (and possibly Afghanistan)
Meshech + Tubal + Gomer + Beth-togarmah = Turkey (and possibly Azerbaijan, Armenia)
Persia = Iran
Ethiopia = Sudan
Put = Libya (and possibly Algeria, Tunisia)
It’s all connected as these nations are inevitably going to get embroiled in the political, economic, ethnic and religious shaking that surrounds Israel.
So……I keep thinking about the Ukraine. What should believers be doing? I believe we should focus less on the Anti Christ and more on the one thing Jesus has not gotten in the Great Commission- Sheep NATIONS!
Can a breakaway part of Ukraine be a sheep nation? I think so. Remember Ukraine is a young nation (22 years old) with sharp divisions east and west. Why not let Russia have the part that wants closer ties with the corruption of the Kremlin and let the rest be free from the constant division?
Check out this article. There are several viewpoints on this, but here is a good place to start.
“Given how divided Ukraine is on these issues — and how incompatible Russia’s desires are with the European Union’s — Ukraine ought to consider applying a precedent from elsewhere in eastern Europe: deciding the country’s fate by referendum. The 1993 partition of Czechoslovakia, the so-called velvet divorce, was a mostly amicable division that was ratified, and thus legitimized, by the country’s own citizens. Ukrainian politicians could similarly allow the public to decide the basic course of the country’s foreign policy. It would be a messy process, and there would be many who argue reasonably that Ukrainian identity consists precisely in maintaining some link with both East and West. But foreign policy by referendum would be preferable to the permanent division of Ukraine, which is looking increasingly like a possibility. And given Ukraine’s tragic twentieth-century history, it would certainly be preferable to a solution imposed by an outside power. “
The Ukrainian-American political scientist Alexander Motyl writes:
“Personally, I have no doubt that Ukraine without its southeast would be much stronger, more stable, and more prosperous than Ukraine with its southeast. The southeast’s rust-belt economy needs either to be shut down entirely or to be refitted at the cost of trillions of dollars of non-existent investments. Moreover, the statistics plainly show that Kyiv subsidizes the Donbas (eastern Ukraine], and not vice versa. The southeast also has a low birth rate, a high death rate, low life expectancy, high energy consumption, and high AIDS and crime rates. Last but not least, the southeast is home to the ruling Party of Regions and the Communist Party. Remove the southeast and Ukraine’s treasury experiences an immediate boon; its demographics, energy consumption, and health improve; and its politics automatically become more democratic and less corrupt.”