The battle of Gog and Magog before the Millennium?

[The_old_guy]

Israel is not at rest at present and does not dwell safely. But during the Millennium it will be at rest and dwelling safely.

That is incorrect. You are confusing the battle of Armageddon (before the Millennium) with the battle of Gog and Magog (after the Millennium). And Gog and Magog are only found in Ezekiel 38:2 and Revelation 20:8 (which connects them both). So that shoots down your theory. Then we have this in Ezek 39:26
After that they have borne their shame, and all their trespasses whereby they have trespassed against me, when they dwelt safely in their land, and none made them afraid.

You have added words in parentheses. How do you know positively that those battles are separate? My theory is that the 1,000-year period is figuratively the complete period between Jesus' first coming and the one second coming. But it will all pan out.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Show me the passages that connect the 1,000-year period with Israel's safety.

While the OT does not mention the Millennium. it does mention the earthly Kingdom of God under Christ. The Millennium is the prelude to that since God will redeem and restore Israel as described in Ezekiel (and Romans 11), and that can only happen after the Second Coming of Christ.

 

[Ted01]

I thought that the battle of Godzilla and Mothra was kinda' cool...

 

[The_old_guy]

Not even close. The first coming was LONG before the thousand year period. Jesus' second coming happens before the thousand years even starts and there is no other coming after the period ends. The thousand years is a literal period of years, The Greek word used is a number that means exactly a thousand of something, no more or less is possible.

How do you know this idea to true, T? But ten is figurative in Revelation of a complete period of time, and three is too. It's 10 multiplied 3 times.

 

[The_old_guy]

Agreed.


The battles in Rev 19 & 20 are not the same battle and not fought at the same time or same location or by the same armies.

Amil believes the two battles are the same battle repeated but is that true?

1.

Battle at Armageddon:

This battle involves Satan, the beast and the false prophet and their armies.

Battle at Jerusalem:

This battle only includes Satan and his Gog Magog armies. The beast and FP are not part of this battle because they are in the LOF, Rev 20:10.


2.

Battle at Armageddon:

Location is 66 miles from Jerusalem.

Battle at Jerusalem:

Location is at Jerusalem.


3.

Battle at Armageddon:

Christ and his army on white horses and the enemy is killed by the symbolic sword of his mouth with vultures eating the dead.

Battle at Jerusalem:

Christ and his army are not involved, no sword or vultures eating the dead. The army is killed by fire from God the Father in heaven and are burned to death.


4.

Battle at Armageddon:

The beast and false prophet are cast into the lake of fire. Satan is cast into the pit not the lake of fire.

Battle at Jerusalem:

The beast and false prophet are already in the lake of fire before this battle begins. Only Satan is cast into the lake of fire where the beast and false prophet already are.


5.

Battle at Armageddon:

Two armies meet there. Christ's army meets the army of the beast and false prophet.

Battle at Jerusalem:

One army meets there. Satan's Gog and Magog army does not meet another army at Jerusalem.


Armageddon is not found in Rev 20. Armageddon happens at the second coming and is a place where the armies of the beast meet the army of Christ from heaven. The armies are led by satan, the beast and false prophet. The beast's army is slain by Christ with a symbolic sword. This is before the thousand years.



In Rev 20 satan (not the beast or the beast's army) goes and raises a fresh army and takes them not to Armageddon (a valley 66 miles from Jerusalem) but takes them to Jerusalem and they do not meet Christ or his army or any army at all. This army is led by satan alone because the beast and false prophet were cast into the LOF long ago at the battle of Armageddon. They are killed by God the Father who rains fire down upon them. This happens after the thousand years.


Conclusion:

Battle at Armageddon fought at a different time, a different place, with different armies, and different ways the enemy army is slain and the one doing the slaying is different.

The battle at Armageddon is not the battle at Jerusalem.
The battle at Jerusalem is not the battle at Armageddon.


The details always prove Amill's positions wrong. They ignore the details while Premill notices the details and takes them into consideration which is proper exegesis. Premill accepts what is written where Amill changes, ignores, or redefines what is written to make it appear to say something else. Time and time again we see Amill doing these things and we have it here again. Amill claims both battles are two different perspectives of the same battle yet all the details conflict. Nothing matches at all. It's like saying the civil war and WW2 are the same war just two different perspectives. Sorry, but they happened at different times, different places and different enemies and results and causalities.

How can you take some of the details of Revelation figuratively and others literally?

 

[Nehemiah6]

You have added words in parentheses. How do you know positively that those battles are separate? My theory is that the 1,000-year period is figuratively the complete period between Jesus' first coming and the one second coming. But it will all pan out.

All you have to do is first study Revelation 19 (which has the battle of Armageddon BEFORE the Millennium ) and then study Revelation 20 (which has the battle of Gog and Magog AFTER the Millennium). This is not rocket science. There is NOTHING FIGURATIVE about the Millennium, and that is why "a" or "one" thousand years is mentioned six times in seven verses.

 

[The_old_guy]

Nehemiah6, this is really good information. Israel is in need of some rest after fighting this war against Hamas, so yes you are right. The God Magaog war would have to be a time from now. I don't understand all of it but your information seems to line up, thanks and blessings

According to my theory, the Armageddon and gathering Gog and Magog are the final battle before the Final Judgment, our resurrection, and God's creation of his new universe, where we will live forever in our perfect bodies.

 

[The_old_guy]

God can give people over to deception and strong delusions because they do not have love for the truth.. It's not so much that satan is some awesome deceiver, It is more to do with God setting people up for judgement..

The following verses i believe talks of the time just before the return of Jesus when the anti-christ will deceive the world, Note how and why God sets the people up for this deception..

(2 Thessalonians 2:8-12) "And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: {9} Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, {10} And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. {11} And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: {12} That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

I believe this was the same kind of delusion God inflicted upon Pharaoh when he repeatedly refused to let the Hebrew people leave Egypt.. Even after just a couple of those trials that God caused upon Egypt anyone with a clear mind would have let the Hebrews go.. But Pharaoh persisted even to the extent of entering into the parted sea to pursue Moses and the Hebrews. We can see this as a kind of madness.. And i believe this kind of lack of clear thinking is to be inflicted upon people who will worship the image of the beast and at the end of the 1000 years in the minds of those who follow satan in his final vain rebellion against the Prince of peace in Jerusalem..

In my theory, this deception is happening right now, when I think that perhaps God has released Satan, who is trying to gather his followers together, and God has allowed him to have his way, except with the saved. At the same time, God is gathering his.

 

[The_old_guy]

All you have to do is first study Revelation 19 (which has the battle of Armageddon BEFORE the Millennium ) and then study Revelation 20 (which has the battle of Gog and Magog AFTER the Millennium). This is not rocket science. There is NOTHING FIGURATIVE about the Millennium, and that is why "a" or "one" thousand years is mentioned six times in seven verses.

I respect that idea, but what if Revelation 19 and 20 are separate visions. The last part of chapter 19 seems to be a figurative description of the victorious Jesus at his Second Coming, while Revelation 20 begins with Jesus' First Coming, Satan's confinement so that he can't impede the spread of the gospel all over the earth, his release (perhaps in our modern era), and the one Final Judgment like Jesus' description of it in Matthew 25.

 

[Nehemiah6]

I respect that idea, but what if Revelation 19 and 20 are separate visions. The last part of chapter 19 seems to be a figurative description of the victorious Jesus at his Second Coming, while Revelation 20 begins with Jesus' First Coming, Satan's confinement so that he can't impede the spread of the gospel all over the earth, his release (perhaps in our modern era), and the one Final Judgment like Jesus' description of it in Matthew 25.

This is all PURE CONJECTURE AND SPECULATION. We are to take all Scripture is its plain literal sense, and Revelation is in fact chronological (barring a few exception). Thus you have 7 seals, followed by 7 trumpets, followed by 7 vials, in sequential order.

 

[ewq1938]

I respect your position. I've believed that idea too. However, I pointed out the numbers that are figurative in Revelation. Doesn't that fact make the 1,000 figure at least possibly figurative too? On the other hand, it'll all pan out!!

Yes it will but no numbers in Rev are symbolic. There is a Greek way to express an unknown amount of something but it is not used in Rev 20. Rather, a number that can only mean exactly a thousand is used.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Rather, a number that can only mean exactly a thousand is used.

Correct. The Greek chilia ete (χίλια ἔτη) is used six times. This emphasizes the reality and literal existence of a future Millennium. Yet there are Christians who refuse to accept what God has said.

 

[ewq1938]

Correct. The Greek chilia ete (χίλια ἔτη) is used six times. This emphasizes the reality and literal existence of a future Millennium. Yet there are Christians who refuse to accept what God has said.

Additional info:


The main evidences are:

1. There are no NT examples of chilioi meaning more or less than exactly a thousand.
2. It (chilioi) still means exactly a thousand when paired with other numbers.
3. It's uses in the bible (chilioi) are of exactly a thousand every single time it appears.
4. When an unknown amount is used, the word used is G5505 chilias (not chilioi G5507), and it is used twice in a row.
5. G5507 chilioi is never used in this double fashion.
6. The double appearance of G5505 chilias is not found in Revelation 20.



*******************


Revelation is as much literal as it is symbolic such as the letters to the churches and various warnings about this or that, saints being overcome and killed and armies going here or there.

Revelation also uses a Greek word that can mean an unknown amount based on the idea of a thousand and it also uses a Greek word that can only mean a thousand. That's why it is essential to study all the words used in Revelation that have some relation to a thousand.

Here is an example using English to show how something written can have a literal use of exactly a thousand and also use something that means much more than a thousand.

A man is selling a piece of art that is historically important and valuable. He is asked how much he wants and he says, "I'm not sure but certainly thousands." A buyer replies, "I agree it's valuable but your asking price is too high and incalculable so I offer a thousand dollars."

So here we have something using the word thousand which is an unknown amount while we also have an exact amount of a thousand. Revelation also has the same usages of something using the word thousand which is an unknown amount while it also has a word that is an exact amount of a thousand.

Here we have a Greek word G1367 dischilioi. "Dis" means two or twice and chilioi (G5507) means a thousand so this word means two thousand. Naturally then if there was one chilioi (G5507) (found in Revelation 20) it would be exactly a thousand just as it is in every occurrence of the word in the NT.

G1367 dischilioi means 2,000. It cannot mean 10,000. It cannot mean 1,000. It has a fixed meaning.
In order to use Greek and speak of an unknown number the use of chilias G5505 which means a thousand but when used twice, it represents "thousands and thousands" which is an unknown amount.

Back to the story above. Someone in the future might read the story and try to argue that the buyers offer was more than a thousand because in a different culture and different language and in a different religion, in a book written thousands of years before that art story, they used a thousand as a figurative number. Well, that is completely unrelated to the art story and it's language and culture.

 

[The_old_guy]

This is all PURE CONJECTURE AND SPECULATION. We are to take all Scripture is its plain literal sense, and Revelation is in fact chronological (barring a few exception). Thus you have 7 seals, followed by 7 trumpets, followed by 7 vials, in sequential order.

Where did you get the idea that all Scripture is literal? Look at Revelation 12, the most obvious example. A dragon attacks a child born of a woman, Old and Testament people of God, and sweeps a third of the stars out of the heavens. Obviously, the dragon stands for Satan, who is not a literal one but is a rebel-angel. The stars are not literal celestial bodies but, of course, stand for the angels who followed him into the war against God. The child is obviously Jesus. The woman escapes into the desert, symbolic of the world short of the blessings of faith. Therefore, the Book of Revelation is like the many "apocalyptic" books of that same era, but inspired of God to comfort believers that he is still in charge.

Obviously, it depends on the type of literature a book is. Historical, prophetic, and teaching books are literal, but Revelation is not, though its figurative language points to real spiritual realities.

 

[ewq1938]

Where did you get the idea that all Scripture is literal? Look at Revelation 12, the most obvious example. A dragon attacks a child born of a woman, Old and Testament people of God, and sweeps a third of the stars out of the heavens. Obviously, the dragon stands for Satan, who is not a literal one but is a rebel-angel. The stars are not literal celestial bodies but, of course, stand for the angels who followed him into the war against God. The child is obviously Jesus. The woman escapes into the desert, symbolic of the world short of the blessings of faith. Therefore, the Book of Revelation is like the many "apocalyptic" books of that same era, but inspired of God to comfort believers that he is still in charge.

Obviously, it depends on the type of literature a book is. Historical, prophetic, and teaching books are literal, but Revelation is not, though its figurative language points to real spiritual realities.

Overall Revelation is literal and symbolic. It's more literal than not though.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Overall Revelation is literal and symbolic. It's more literal than not though.

Why is it that people have such a hard time reading and believing Revelation in is plain LITERAL sense? Sure, there are many symbols in this book, but they are generally explained as to what they mean.

Why would Christ say that the ones who read it and "keep those things which are written thereinwill be blessed" if it were not to be taken literally? For the unsaved, it is a huge incentive to get saved. For the saved, it is a huge incentive to be positive in spite of all the judgments to come. Ultimately sin and death will be eradicated from the earth, and there will be New Heavens and a New Earth after the Millennium.

 

[Adstar]

In my theory, this deception is happening right now, when I think that perhaps God has released Satan, who is trying to gather his followers together, and God has allowed him to have his way, except with the saved. At the same time, God is gathering his.

You can even look at the wokism teachings and beliefs like transgender ideology of promoting gender doubt in children and then promoting the genital mutilation and chemical puberty blockers and other such hormone treatment that will in the future lead to many of these children having destroyed adult lives.. This is just one example of the plunge into insane thinking running riot though world societies.. Of course those who have their minds guarded by The Holy Spirit can see how this madness is infecting the people around us..

 

[The_old_guy]

Overall Revelation is literal and symbolic. It's more literal than not though.

How do you know? It follows the pattern of symbolic, apocalyptic literature of that time, though inspired by God, probably to protect the Roman Christians from persecution because of it.

 

[Omegatime]

I agree that the end of the Millenium is the correct time. Under the reign of the antichrist a war will take place with Egypt, Ethiopia, and Libya. Dan. 11:43 and since these nations are also placed in the Gog war, makes sense the this war happens at end of the Millennium.

 

[ewq1938]

How do you know?

I've read it.