Separating fact from fiction about Gog and Magog

These are the names in English, the English translation of George and George. I believe Gog and Magog is an English translation and a biblical translation at that. There are many descriptions mentioned. about Gog and Magog. Yeah, George and George. Now, George and George are mentioned twice in the Quran. They're mentioned by name twice in the Quran. First time is in the second time in this in this isolated verse here in what we find of descriptions in the Quran are the most relevant descriptions of and those descriptions are that yet George are a wicked people that's have an inclination to murder and war and pillaging and so forth. There are many, many narrations regarding and many. As a matter of fact, some of these narrations have been gathered into independent Priotes. There are narrations which are agreed upon amongst the scholars to be fabrications. There are fab, there are narrations which are agreed upon amongst the scholars to be weak. There are fabrication, there are narrations regarding that are agreed upon amongst the scholars to be authentic. These authentic narrations give us a couple of descriptions. First of these descriptions is that yet George and George are human beings. Not monsters. They are not beasts. Primitive beasts. As other fabrications would articulate. Muslim, the prophet mentions of their description which we may conclude to only mean that they are human beings and they are descendants of Adam Alaihi Salam. That can evolve Second description that we have of them that is authentic Agreed upon amongst the scholars, is that they are extremely numerous. There are a lot of them. So many, that they are at the brink of being innumerable. The third description is the description of their moral values and that is that they are A people of moral decadence. They are bloodthirsty. They are prone to war and conflict, and they have inclination to violence as a means to achieving their ends. There are other narrations that are mentioned that honestly, these narrations due to the fact that they are fabrications or extremely weak or weak and transmission they should not have been translated honestly. They should have been kept in the books of scholars where scholars and scholars alone may look at them. However, they have been translated. by individuals who are good at translating but not very good at at deciphering what needs to be translated from what need not be. of these descriptions is that yeah Jude are very tiny, very very small. Some of these narrations mention that. They're so small. they will look at a person's shoe and mistake it for right obviously a fabrication. They have to be the ants essentially Another another description is of them being very very short, abnormally small. by the foot or two feet or three feet tall. Another description is that they have fangs for teeth or needles for teeth. Other descriptions that they have drills for tongues etcetera. Excuse narrations are all inauthentic. And if you'll find that these narrations usually root back to the fables of the people of the book. Christians, and their descriptions of yet Georgia and and it is not unusual books of history, or books of that document murderous people be extreme in their descriptions. So, where do these descriptions come from? Historically, speaking, in when we are dealing with history that is not transmitted by chain of narration as the Muslims transmit there narrations. Meaning, we have a that chain of narration. We know who they are and we are positive that they are honest, right? And not only that they are honest but as well they are are well versed and able to memorize. This is a condition for us to accept a narration When we take away this factor and we just have transmissions of fables, we start to see a very very pronounced divide between reality and fantasy. start to see fantasy bleeding into reality kind of how rumors are, right? Everybody adds something, some kind of emphasis in telling the story that will later warp the facts of that story. And this is in everything, even modern, even in modern times, we can see this. We don't have that vetting process that we refer you as the chain of narration or the chain of transmission that the Muslims have been endowed with then, we start to see this, we start to see this kind of fantastic descriptions start to come out. So, for instance, what I mean by this is if we were to look at the Persians and the Greeks, right? or more specifically the Persians and the Spartans, for instance, they had a very, very long history and a very bloody history as enemies, sworn enemies, the Persians and the and the Romans in Greek. They were sworn enemies. When we look into the ancient works of the Persians, we'll see their descriptions of the Greeks and Romans as being barbaric and monstrous a people that need to be exterminated. When we look at the descriptions of the Greeks, of the Persians, their enemy. They are described with things having teeth. they eat human flesh, and they are no longer even human beings. and this is because the human being naturally when they describe their enemy, they are not usually going to describe anything good about their enemy. They're only going to describe the negatives. And these negatives are going to become more and more pronounced to the push thee envelope of sanity with regards to the description of enemies over time Likewise, even in modern times, if we look at the French and the German, France and Germany are historic enemies. Even before Germany was necessarily Germany, that that people were sworn enemies of the French. And likewise, the depressions, they'll later they formed an alliance with the French for a common cause. The point here is that when we look at the descriptions of the French, even in modern history, even in history taught in schools. If you look at the description of Nazi Germany We see descriptions that make us question whether the Germans were even human beings, right? And that is popular today and I'm sure if we were to examine what the Nazi Germany was teaching about France and America and Russia, we would find similar descriptions. The point here is that these fabrications have a very organic nature and that is when we remove the factor of chain of narration, we remove the factor of vetting every person who narrates this narration. Comparing this account to the account of all of their other peers and so on and so forth. The vetting process of the science of Hadith. When we remove that factor, we are left with rumors and rumors are usually So, this is where we will find a lot of these descriptions of Georgia. we have no reason to believe that yet Georgia met George, are anything but human and very likely yet Jude and are no longer behind their wall. They multiplied and they spread throughout the earth as the rest human civilization has done and the wall of that was built by remains as an indicator for the time of when they will descend on mankind with violence However, He is narrations and these verses in do not necessitate or say that yet remain behind this wall till today. Is it possible? Yes. Is it possible that yeah are found are in a place where we have not discovered or in a place where they are hidden from the rest of mankind. Possible. Probable? Not probable but possible right? It is possible We will not deny that and we will not say for sure that is not the case because that would that would necessitate for us to know for sure who yet Jude are and we don't. However, is it more probable that yet Georgia are? of these nations of human beings that we see scattered through the earth and that they have they are a people of modern technology yet they retain their murderous nature. Yes, and we see that in many of the civilizations around today. We will end with that. Al.