Genesis 10: The Nations after the Flood

This is the account of Noah’s sons Shem, Ham, and Japheth, who also had sons after the flood. The sons of Japheth: Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras. The sons of Gomer: Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah. And the sons of Javan: Elishah, Tarshish, the Kittites, and the Rodanites. From these, the maritime peoples separated into their territories, according to their languages, by clans within their nations. The sons of Ham: Cush, Mizraim, Put, and Canaan. The sons of Cush: Seba, Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah, and Sabteca. And the sons of Raamah: Sheba and Dedan. Cush was the father of Nimrod, who began to be a mighty one on the earth. He was a mighty hunter before the Lord; so it is said, “Like Nimrod, a mighty hunter before the Lord.” His kingdom began in Babylon, Erech, Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. From that land he went forth into Assyria, where he built Nineveh, Rehoboth-Ir, Calah, and Resen, which is between Nineveh and the great city of Calah. Mizraim was the father of the Ludites, the Anamites, the Lehabites, the Naphtuhites, the Pathrusites, the Casluhites (from whom the Philistines came), and the Caphtorites. (BSB)

Says This is the account of Noah’s sons Shem, Ham, and Japheth, who also had sons after the flood (10:1). The heading in Hebrew is ve'elleh toledot, “and these are the generations,” of the sons of Noah; the BSB’s account renders toledot. The verb is passive: and sons were born to them, where the BSB has who also had sons. The verse ends after the flood, a phrase that returns at 10:32 and frames the list. The three names are those of 5:32 and 9:18–19, and 10:1 is already linked from 5:32; that xref is not reversed here. See the Hebrew note on the heading.

The sons of Japheth are Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech and Tiras (10:2). Gomer’s sons are Ashkenaz, Riphath and Togarmah (10:3). Javan’s are Elishah, Tarshish, the Kittites and the Rodanites (10:4). In the Hebrew the last two are plurals, kittim and vedodanim, “and Dodanim,” marking peoples rather than single persons. The BSB’s Rodanites follows the spelling with resh that stands in 1 Chr 1:7 and in Swete’s Ῥόδιοι; the Masoretic Text has dalet. That choice is stated, not ruled, and is a line in the box below. From these, me'elleh nifredu 'iyye haggoyim, “from these the coastlands of the nations were separated,” into their territories, each by his language, by their clans, in their nations (10:5). The BSB has the maritime peoples separated. The verb is passive, and the same form returns in 10:32. The four terms, lands, language, clans and nations, will close Ham and Shem as well (10:20, 31). 1 Chr 1:5–23 repeats this list, with the Rodanim spelling and without Nimrod, the borders and the clan formulas; that verbal link is in the Hebrew xref. Isa 66:19 later sends survivors to nations whose names are largely those of 10:2–4, and to “the islands far away.”

Implies All the nations named in this chapter come from Noah’s one family. The heading names only the three sons, and 10:32 closes the list from them. This carries out the blessing to fill the earth (9:1) and the notice that from these three the earth was peopled (9:19). The persons and peoples are real, consistent with the Genesis 7 note on persons and history. Keil calls the genealogy “not an ethnographical myth … but a historical record of the genesis of the nations, founded upon a tradition handed down from the fathers,” and adds that “the genealogies prepare the way for the promise of the blessing, which was one day to spread from the chosen family to all the families of the earth (chap. xii. 2, 3).” That last point agrees with the shape of the list: it is selective, and it is arranged so as to lead to Shem, Eber and, in chapter 11, Abram. Driver observes that Moab and Ammon, the descendants of Nahor and of Keturah, the Ishmaelite tribes, and Edom “are intentionally excluded.”

Uncertain What kind of list this is remains open. It may be a segmentary genealogy, which fits the “fathered” and “were born” lines, though many names are peoples, lands or cities. It may be an ethnographic map, which fits the coastlands and the borders of 10:19 and 10:30, though the form is a family tree. It may be a selective theological list, which fits the path toward Abram, though many names are then left without an obvious reason for inclusion. Skinner’s heading is “The Table of Peoples (P and J).” In his words, “the chapter is a redactional composition, in which are interwoven two (if not three) successive attempts to classify the known peoples of the world.” He assigns the superscription, the tripartite scheme and its formulas to P, and Nimrod, the Canaanite clans and Joktan to J, and he takes the names as eponymous: “each nation is represented by an imaginary personage bearing its name, who is called into existence for the purpose of expressing its unity, but is at the same time conceived as its real progenitor.” Driver likewise writes that “the names are in no case to be taken as those of real individuals; they just represent peoples.” Those readings are theirs, and they are not adopted here. Unity readings take the chapter as one composition. Keil, on the divine name at 10:9, holds that “the use of the name Jehovah is no proof of difference of authorship.” The wider question of two accounts is pointed to in the Genesis 2 note and is not re-argued. No lean is taken on the sources of this chapter.

How the names are arranged is likewise open: by ethnic descent, by geography, by language, by political alliance, or by a mix. The formula of 10:5, 20 and 31 names clans, languages, lands and nations together, so no one principle is stated. Driver judges that “the principle of arrangement, it seems evident, was chiefly geographical, though sometimes it was historical or political,” with Japheth, Ham and Shem occupying “a northern, middle, and southern zone,” and that “political or commercial relations have led probably to peoples being connected genealogically, where no blood-relationship existed.” Calvin, by contrast, finds it “a frivolous curiosity to seek for certain and distinct nations in each of these names,” and says that Greece, Italy, Rhodes and Cyprus “are called islands by the Hebrews, because the sea interposed.” Identifications are proposed, each on its own evidence, and none of them fixes the meaning of the list. Javan is widely taken as the Ionians or the Greeks (Driver; Josephus). Tarshish is taken as Tartessus in Spain (Driver; Keil, who holds that “the connection with the Spanish Tartessus must be retained”) or as Cilicia (Josephus). Kittim is taken as Cyprus (Driver; Josephus). Gomer is taken as the Cimmerians (Keil; Driver), Magog as the Scythians (so, “since Josephus,” Driver), Togarmah as the Armenians (Driver; Keil), and Tubal and Meshech as the Tabali and Mushku of the inscriptions (Driver). Ashkenaz stands in Jer 51:27 beside Ararat. Riphath is, in Driver’s word, “Quite uncertain.” These identifications are gathered in the historical note on the names and are not restated at more length. No lean is taken.

Ham’s four sons are Cush, Mizraim, Put and Canaan (10:6). Mitsrayim is the ordinary Hebrew name of Egypt, and kena'an is the land later promised to Israel. Cush’s sons are Seba, Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah and Sabteca, and Raamah’s are Sheba and Dedan (10:7). Seba is spelled with samekh and Sheba with shin. Havilah and Sheba also appear among Joktan’s sons (10:28–29), and Lud will be named under Mizraim (10:13) and under Shem (10:22). The doubled names may be one people traced two ways, two peoples with one name, or a people that migrated; Driver takes the Havilah of 10:7 as a large tribe, part of which migrated, and the Sheba of 10:7 as “a northern offshoot, or colony, of the S. Arabian Sheba mentioned in v. 28,” and the Havilah of 10:29 as “in all probability, different.” Put is linked by some with Libya (Josephus; Driver, “Probably the Libyans”; Charles’s gloss on Jubilees) and by others with Punt. No lean is taken. The list places Egypt and Canaan among the nations God made from Noah’s family before Israel exists. The question of race, and the use of this chapter with 9:25, is taken up after Canaan’s borders, in 10:15–20 below.

Cush fathered Nimrod, who began to be a mighty one in the earth (10:8). The verb is yalad, “fathered,” not the heading’s passive; the BSB has was the father of. Hekhel, “began,” is the verb of 9:20. Verse 9 calls him gibbor-tsayid lifne yhwh, “a mighty one of hunting before the Lord,” and a saying repeats the phrase: “Like Nimrod, a mighty hunter before the Lord.” It is the only verse in the chapter with the divine name. Swete has γίγας, “giant,” for gibbor, and γίγας κυνηγὸς for the hunter; the first “before the Lord” is ἐναντίον Κυρίου τοῦ θεοῦ, the second ἐναντίον Κυρίου only. Those are Greek-note facts. The beginning of his kingdom was Babel, Erech, Accad and Calneh, in the land of Shinar (10:10). The BSB has His kingdom began in Babylon. Bavel is the same word as Babel in 11:9. From that land yatsa' 'ashshur, and he built Nineveh, Rehoboth-Ir, Calah and Resen, that is the great city (10:11–12). The BSB has he went forth into Assyria and the great city of Calah. There is no preposition before Asshur. Rekhovot 'ir may be a name or a phrase, “the city’s squares.” Who “the great city” is — Resen, Calah, or the group — is open. See the Hebrew notes on 10:8–9 and 10:10–12.

Who Nimrod was is open. Some take him as a historical king. Skinner writes, “A perfectly convincing Assyriological prototype of the figure of Nimrod has not as yet been discovered.” He finds Marduk and Nazi-Maruttash unsatisfying, and the “nearest analogy” in Gilgamesh, “the legendary tyrant of Erech”; “the name Nimrod remains unexplained.” Driver calls the same comparison “an attractive and probable” conjecture. Rogers holds that Gilgamesh “was wrongly identified with Nimrod.” Sargon, Tukulti-Ninurta I and Ninurta have also been proposed, on a like match to a few features; no page here pins those three. Others say he cannot be identified. No identification is adopted. “Before the Lord” is read as approval (Driver: “as He looked upon him, and (it is implied) had some regard for him”), as a neutral idiom, “in the Lord’s sight,” or as defiance. Pseudo-Jonathan has Nimrod “mighty in sin” and a “mighty rebel before the Lord”; Josephus has him tyrannize “at Babylon”; Augustine reads “a giant hunter against the Lord God”; Calvin, that he “attempted to raise himself above the order of men”; Keil, “in defiance of Jehovah.” Favor and defiance both read more into a short phrase than it states; the idiom view has to explain why the Lord is named at all. Verse 11 may have Asshur as the subject, “Asshur went out,” or Nimrod, “he went out to Asshur.” Skinner notes that the first “is grammatically correct, and gives a good sense,” but prefers the second, because “the beginning” in 10:10 “requires an antithesis,” and because in Mic 5:6 (MT 5:5) Nimrod is the hero of Assyria. The first gives Asshur a story of its own, though Asshur is listed only among Shem’s sons (10:22); the second requires an implied “to.” Erech stands both here and in the Sumerian tradition of a king of Erech, as King reports it; how the two relate is open, and no dependence is claimed. These views are set out in the historical note. No lean is taken.

The genre of the list and the number of the nations

Nimrod, the hunter, and the cities

Minor variants

Says The printed text of this chapter is the Masoretic Text throughout. For 10:1–32 the English verse numbers agree with the Hebrew and with Swete. The unit that has its own textual note is 10:22–24, Kainam between Arphaxad and Shelah in Swete and not in the Hebrew. It is not repeated as a table here; the printed wording is the Masoretic Text, confidence medium, and no lean is taken on the original. The remaining differences are box lines. In 10:4 the Hebrew has vedodanim, “and Dodanim.” The Samaritan text reads “Rodanim,” with resh, and Swete has Ῥόδιοι, “Rhodians.” The two letters look alike in Hebrew script. The BSB’s Rodanites follows that reading, as in 1 Chr 1:7. The choice is stated, not ruled. The Samaritan text also spells Elishah without its final letter. In 10:19 the Samaritan text gives a different border: from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates, and to the last sea. The Greek adds Elisa among Japheth’s sons (10:2) and lacks Obal (10:28). It reads “islands of the nations” in 10:5 and 10:32 and calls Nimrod γίγας, “giant.” It gives ἐναντίον Κυρίου τοῦ θεοῦ, “before the Lord God,” for the first “before the Lord” in 10:9, and puts Naphtuhim second in 10:13. In 10:25 it reads Φάλεκ with διεμερίσθη, “was divided,” without the Hebrew sound-play. Other notes in Swete, in plain words, include one manuscript dropping “God” in 10:9; one giving a different order in 10:13; one spelling Lasha as “Lasa” in 10:19; the Alexandrian manuscript reading “Seth” for Shem in 10:31; and a corrector in that manuscript writing over erasures at 10:22 and 10:24, as the textual note sets out. These Greek differences are facts of the page and are not used to reconstruct a Hebrew wording. The printed wording of the minor units is the Masoretic Text, confidence high.

And Canaan was the father of Sidon his firstborn, and of the Hittites, the Jebusites, the Amorites, the Girgashites, the Hivites, the Arkites, the Sinites, the Arvadites, the Zemarites, and the Hamathites. Later the Canaanite clans were scattered, and the borders of Canaan extended from Sidon toward Gerar as far as Gaza, and then toward Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboiim, as far as Lasha. These are the sons of Ham according to their clans, languages, lands, and nations. (BSB)

Says Canaan was the father of Sidon his firstborn, and of Heth (10:15; the BSB has the Hittites). Then come the Jebusites, the Amorites, the Girgashites, the Hivites, the Arkites, the Sinites, the Arvadites, the Zemarites and the Hamathites (10:16–18). Mizraim, already named in 10:6, has fathered peoples in 10:13–14: the Ludites, the Anamites, the Lehabites, the Naphtuhites, the Pathrusites, the Casluhites “(from whom the Philistines came),” and the Caphtorites. The names are gentilic plurals in ־ים; the BSB uses “-ites.” After kasluhim the Hebrew has 'asher yats'u misham pelishtim, “from where the Philistines went out.” Swete keeps the clause after the Casluhim, as the Masoretic Text does, and at 10:13 places Νεφθαλιεὶμ second, not fourth. After the Hamathites, “Later the Canaanite clans were scattered” (10:18). The verb is nafotsu, the root of 9:19 and of 11:4, 8–9, where the people would not be scattered and the Lord scatters them. “The borders of Canaan extended from Sidon toward Gerar as far as Gaza, and then toward Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboiim, as far as Lasha” (10:19). The Hebrew has bo'akhah, “as you go,” twice; the BSB has toward. Swete has ἕως ἐλθεῖν twice and ends ἕως Δασά; one manuscript reads Λασα. Verse 20 closes, “These are the sons of Ham according to their clans, languages, lands, and nations,” the formula of 10:5.

Implies Israel’s neighbors, Egypt and Canaan among them, are placed among the nations God made from Noah’s family before Israel exists. Deuteronomy 32:8 later speaks of the Most High dividing the nations their inheritance and setting the boundaries of the peoples; that verbal link is in the Hebrew xref from 10:32, and the Deuteronomy note on the Most High and the nations is pointed to, not restated. The list is not a ranking of races. Canaan, a son of Ham, lives in the land of Canaan: his firstborn is Sidon, and his border runs from Sidon toward Gerar and Gaza, and on to the cities of the plain (10:15–19). Cush, Mizraim and Canaan are peoples and lands, not skin colors. Josephus says that “Canaan, the fourth son of Ham, inhabited the country now called Judea, and called it from his own name Canaan,” and that the Hebrews “call Egypt Mestre.” Augustine holds that whatever a man’s “appearance … in color,” “no Christian can doubt that he springs from that one protoplast.” All the nations come from one family (10:32), and every human bears God’s image (9:6). It is historically documented that Gen 10, read with 9:25, was used to rank races and to defend slavery and segregation. The text gives that use no ground, and the use is rejected. The curse of 9:25 names Canaan, not a race, and is not taken up again here; see the Genesis 9 note on the misuse and the historical note on the sons of Ham.

Uncertain The Philistine clause stands after the Casluhim, but Amos 9:7 has “the Philistines from Caphtor,” and Jer 47:4 ties them to Caphtor as well. The clause may have shifted from after the Caphtorim, which is Driver’s judgment (“in all probability misplaced”), or both peoples may belong to the Philistines' story. Caphtor is often identified with Crete; Keil says that this “is not decisively proved.” Driver adds that, whatever place Caphtor may have been, “political relations, subsisting anciently between it and Egypt, no doubt determined the statement that Mizraim 'begat' Caphtor.” No lean is taken. Driver also asks why the Phoenicians and Canaanites, who “were beyond all question a Semitic people, and spoke a language closely allied to Hebrew,” are classed among the descendants of Ham, and he finds the origin here assigned to them most probably due to religious antagonism and to intercourse with Egypt. That is a proposed reason for the arrangement, not a ranking of races, and it does not fix the meaning. The Girgashite’s land is, in the lexicon, unknown. No lean is taken.

The sons of Ham, and Canaan’s land

And sons were also born to Shem, the older brother of Japheth; Shem was the forefather of all the sons of Eber. The sons of Shem: Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud, and Aram. The sons of Aram: Uz, Hul, Gether, and Mash. Arphaxad was the father of Shelah, and Shelah was the father of Eber. Two sons were born to Eber: One was named Peleg, because in his days the earth was divided, and his brother was named Joktan. And Joktan was the father of Almodad, Sheleph, Hazarmaveth, Jerah, Hadoram, Uzal, Diklah, Obal, Abimael, Sheba, Ophir, Havilah, and Jobab. All these were sons of Joktan. Their territory extended from Mesha to Sephar, in the eastern hill country. These are the sons of Shem, according to their clans, languages, lands, and nations. All these are the clans of Noah’s sons, according to their generations and nations. From these the nations of the earth spread out after the flood. (BSB)

Says “And sons were also born to Shem, the older brother of Japheth; Shem was the forefather of all the sons of Eber.” (10:21, BSB). The Hebrew is 'akhi yefet haggadol, and 'avi kol-bene-ever, “father of all the sons of Eber.” The verb is passive, “and to Shem also, to him, was born,” as at 10:25. Swete ends ἀδελφῷ Ἰάφεθ τοῦ μείζονος: the genitive agrees with Japheth, not with “brother,” so the Greek calls Japheth the greater. The sons of Shem are Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud and Aram (10:22); the sons of Aram are Uz, Hul, Gether and Mash (10:23). The printed wording of 10:24 is the Masoretic Text, confidence medium: “Arphaxad was the father of Shelah, and Shelah was the father of Eber.” Swete adds a generation, τὸν Καινάμ, between Arphaxad and Sala. In the Alexandrian manuscript a corrector wrote over erasures at 10:22 and at 10:24; Swete does not say what was erased. The Bodleian Genesis also adds Kainan at 10:22. “Two sons were born to Eber: One was named Peleg, because in his days the earth was divided, and his brother was named Joktan.” (10:25, BSB). The verb nifleggah is a Niphal and sounds like the name; ha'arets can mean the earth, a land, or its people. Swete has Φάλεκ and διεμερίσθη ἡ γῆ, without the sound-play. Joktan fathered thirteen sons, ending with Obal, Abimael, Sheba, Ophir, Havilah and Jobab (10:26–29). Swete has twelve, with no name for Obal. “Their territory extended from Mesha to Sephar, in the eastern hill country” (10:30); the Hebrew is har haqqedem, “the mountain of the east.” “These are the sons of Shem, according to their clans, languages, lands, and nations.” (10:31). “All these are the clans of Noah’s sons, according to their generations and nations. From these the nations of the earth spread out after the flood.” (10:32, BSB). The Hebrew of the last clause is and from these the nations were separated on the earth after the flood; the verb is nifredu, as in 10:5. Toledot returns in by their generations. Chapter 11 will follow Peleg’s line, not Joktan’s, and will tell of a people who settle in the land of Shinar and of a city named Babel, the word already used of Nimrod’s first city in 10:10. Those links are in the Hebrew xrefs from 10:10 and from 10:24–25, and Genesis 11:1–9 is pointed to, not treated.

Implies Shem is named as father of all the sons of Eber before any of his own sons are listed, and Eber’s line is then followed in two branches. The list is selective and is arranged so as to lead to Shem, Eber and, in chapter 11, Abram. Calvin’s editor notes that Shem, though generally named first as a mark of divine favor, is here placed last, because the subsequent history of Moses principally concerns this race. All the nations come from Noah’s one family (10:1, 32), fulfilling 9:1 and 9:19. Deut 32:8 takes up the dividing of the nations and the boundaries of the peoples; that verbal link is in the Hebrew xref, and the Deuteronomy note is pointed to.

Uncertain The Hebrew of 10:21 may mean “the older brother of Japheth,” as the BSB has it, or “the brother of Japheth the elder.” Calvin’s text has the second, “the brother of Japheth the elder.” Driver takes the words as added “in order to preclude the idea that, because named last, Shem was therefore the youngest.” Swete agrees with Japheth as the elder. No lean is taken. Three views are held of Kainam at 10:24. He may be an addition in the Greek, which also gives him a place in 11:12–13; the objection is that Luke 3:36 names a Cainan between Arphaxad and Shelah. The Greek may preserve a name lost from the Hebrew; the objection is that the Hebrew lacks it, and the Alexandrian corrections show that the Greek itself was unsettled at both 10:22 and 10:24. Luke may follow the Greek text he used, or may be evidence for the name. Wider questions are left with these views stated. Josephus’s line runs from Arphaxad to Sala with no Cainan. No lean is taken on originality; the printed wording is the Masoretic Text. See the textual note and the Greek note.

The division in Peleg’s days is read four ways, and no lean is taken. It may be the division of languages at Babel. The view fits the chapter’s place next to 11:1–9 and takes earth as the population of the earth; Driver thinks this “most likely,” “and that the 'division' referred to is the dispersion of ix. 19, x. 32, xi. 9.” The objection is that 10:25 and 11:9 use different verbs, and Skinner finds “no very strong reason to suppose that the dispersion … of the Tower of Babel is referred to.” It may be a political or ethnic division, “the separation of the Yoḳṭanites from their northern kinsmen,” or “some other tradition regarding the distribution of nations” (Skinner, who points to Jubilees). Jubilees has Noah’s sons divide the earth “into three parts, for Shem and Ham and Japheth,” and names Peleg because then “the children of Noah began to divide the earth.” Josephus has Phaleg “born at the dispersion of the nations.” It may refer to canal-digging: as a common noun peleg means a watercourse or artificial canal, and Akkadian palgu has that sense; Driver notes Sayce’s conjecture about a “division” of Babylonia into canals. The objection is that the view rests on one word. It may be a division of land masses, taking ha'arets as the physical earth and the verb as a splitting of continents. The grounds are the ordinary senses of earth and was divided. The objection is that the list around the verse is about peoples and their lands, not about continents. No page here states that last reading, and it is not derided. The early readings are in the historical note.

Lud stands both at 10:13, among Mizraim’s peoples, and at 10:22, among Shem’s sons; Driver takes the latter as “the Lydians of Asia Minor,” “though why they should be mentioned between Arpachshad and Aram, or, indeed, reckoned to Shem at all, is by no means apparent.” Elam’s place among Shem’s sons is, in Driver’s judgment, “in all probability” a matter of “geographical proximity to Assyria.” Those are proposed reasons, and they do not fix the meaning. Several of Joktan’s names, as Driver says, “cannot be identified, at least with any certainty.” Ophir is left open.

Chapter 10 speaks of many languages (10:5, 20, 31), while 11:1 begins with “one language and a common form of speech.” The chapter may be placed first by theme, with 11:1–9 explaining how the languages and the separation of 10:5, 20, 31 and 32 arose; or the two may follow in time order, which is harder to fit with 11:1. Calvin’s editor notes that “the events here placed first, in the order of narration, were subsequent in the order of time.” How languages here sits with 11:1 is open on both views. No lean is taken. Genesis 11:1–9 is pointed to and is not treated.

Shem, Eber, and Joktan’s line

Peleg, and the earth divided

The nations separated, and Babel

New Testament reading

Says Three New Testament texts are in view for this chapter, and only those three as new units. They are quoted from the BSB; no claim is made here about their Greek wording. Acts 17:26 has, “From one man He made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and He determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their lands.” The wording answers to 10:1 and 10:32, the sons of one man and the nations separated on the earth after the flood, and it also answers to Deut 32:8, where the Most High divides the nations and sets the boundaries of the peoples. The speech in Acts does not name Genesis 10. Luke 3:35–36 runs the line through Peleg, Eber, Shelah, Cainan, Arphaxad, Shem and Noah. Peleg, Eber, Shelah, Arphaxad, Shem and Noah are the names of 10:24–25 and 10:1. Cainan stands between Shelah and Arphaxad, as Kainam stands in Swete at 10:24 and not in the Masoretic Text of 10:24 or of 11:12. The three views of that name, and Luke 3:36 as either a witness or a following of the Greek Luke used, are set out above and in the textual note; no lean is taken. The Genesis 5 xref to Luke 3:36–38 takes up the rest of this genealogy and is not restated here. Rev 20:8 speaks of deceiving the nations in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog. Magog is named among Japheth’s sons in 10:2, with Tubal and Meshech; Gog is not named in this chapter. Ezek 38:2 names “Gog of the land of Magog” with Meshech and Tubal; that verbal link is in the Hebrew xref and is not a claim about the vision. How Rev 20:8 uses the two names is open. No lean is taken. The three xrefs below take up Acts 17:26, Luke 3:35–36 and Rev 20:8.

New Testament reading of Genesis 10