I was reading through Ezekiel the other day and came upon the prophecy against Gog and Magog and then remembering Gog and Magog surrounding Jerusalem in Revelation - only to be destroyed.

My question is what does Gog and Magog represent?  Just the nations of the north in general?  Rome?  Roman-influence?  Something else?

Views: 240

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Does anyone have some thoughts on this topic???
Mel, was not the statue in Daniel's vision destroyed by the rock? Jesus' kingdom destroyed Rome since Rome was the last sequence of kingdoms of the statue as well as the sea beasts.

ROME WAS DESTROYED IN 70 AD.

The devil gathered from Gog and Magog against the city God loves - Jerusalem - in Rev 20. Just as the statue was destroyed by the rock, so too was Rome destroyed by the church - the kingdom of God. Why speculate that it wasn't when the prophecy is clear that it was.

Dan 2:31 "You looked, O king, and there before you stood a large statue—an enormous, dazzling statue, awesome in appearance. 32 The head of the statue was made of pure gold, its chest and arms of silver, its belly and thighs of bronze, 33 its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of baked clay. 34 While you were watching, a rock was cut out, but not by human hands. It struck the statue on its feet of iron and clay and smashed them. 35 Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver and the gold were broken to pieces at the same time and became like chaff on a threshing floor in the summer. The wind swept them away without leaving a trace. But the rock that struck the statue became a huge mountain and filled the whole earth.

36 "This was the dream, and now we will interpret it to the king. 37 You, O king, are the king of kings. The God of heaven has given you dominion and power and might and glory; 38 in your hands he has placed mankind and the beasts of the field and the birds of the air. Wherever they live, he has made you ruler over them all. You are that head of gold.

39 "After you, another kingdom will rise, inferior to yours. Next, a third kingdom, one of bronze, will rule over the whole earth. 40 Finally, there will be a fourth kingdom, strong as iron—for iron breaks and smashes everything—and as iron breaks things to pieces, so it will crush and break all the others. 41 Just as you saw that the feet and toes were partly of baked clay and partly of iron, so this will be a divided kingdom; yet it will have some of the strength of iron in it, even as you saw iron mixed with clay. 42 As the toes were partly iron and partly clay, so this kingdom will be partly strong and partly brittle. 43 And just as you saw the iron mixed with baked clay, so the people will be a mixture and will not remain united, any more than iron mixes with clay.

44 "In the time of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed, nor will it be left to another people. It will crush ALL THOSE KINGDOMS and bring them to an END, but it will itself endure forever. 45 This is the meaning of the vision of the rock cut out of a mountain, but not by human hands—a rock that broke the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver and the gold to pieces.
"The great God has shown the king what will take place in the future. The dream is true and the interpretation is trustworthy."

So with that already known about the demise of ALL those kingdoms at the time of the rock (church; God's kingdom), I am even more curious about Gog and Magog.
Jason, you probably already watched this but wondered what your reactions were.

Thanks, Chris, I very much agree about the manner of Satan's binding in the gospels and Revelation to be the kingdoms of the world taken from him. Neat info on "out of the roof" and "out from under the roof" and it being a type/symbol of Satan being bound, too. I generally believe that the thousand years literally/physically lasted from Jesus' earthly ministry until 66 AD when the Roman army sieged Jerusalem full force for 42 months under generals Vespasian and Titus. Jesus said that he himself bound Satan by casting out demons and called it the "finger of God" (Luke 11:20). During the binding, the gospel and the signs of life and healing were manifested by faith as the confirmation of the gospel, confirmation of the kingdom and confirmation of the binding itself (Luke 10:17).

They were bound by the gospel and its going out into the "whole world" of the Gentiles and were powerless to stop it, even proclaiming Jesus' authority themselves (Luke 4:41, James 2:19) and even begging Jesus to spare them (Matt 8:29-30). If all that isn't being bound then what is? And while Satan is bound, the gospel goes out into the world as a testimony against Israel's (Matt 24:14) prostitute generation reserved for Judgment for the blood of the righteous going back to Abel (Luke 11:50-51).

What's interesting is that the "city God loves" in Rev 20 is Jerusalem and yet Jerusalem in the earlier chapters is called "Babylon the Great" and the "prostitute" in Rev 17 and "Sodom and Egypt" in chapter 11:8. So why would Jerusalem be bad throughout Revelation and then good at its end? The only way I can figure it is that Satan still was blinded to the gospel and the fulfillments of its prophecies still to come within that 40 year generation. What I mean is that Satan had the authority once again in 66 AD to gather "the whole world" for battle. It wasn't just battle against some city, it was the "city God loves" - Jerusalem - which means he was doing God's will (Rev 17:17) by destroying what was actually a prostitute and yet Satan's motive for attacking Jerusalem wasn't that it was a prostitute but instead Satan's motive was it was historically "the city God loves". Evil had just put Jesus to death to accomplish God's will in 30 AD because Jesus was the Son God loved; evil would then accomplish God's will again in 70 AD by destroying the city God once loved but had become actually become a "prostitute" at its bitter end. Just as Jerusalem didn't literally "rule over all the earth" it wasn't literally "the city God loves". But the fact that God did love it in the past made it that much more valuable a prize to humiliated Satan who knew his time of trashing the city would be 42 months and then he would be destroyed from total authority over nations ever again. The strong man, Satan, was plundered and now the nations belong to Jesus.
Chris,

You wrote:

This, and ONLY THIS, is what the scripture means when it says that: "Satan will be bound for a thousand years."

This cannot be correct. Satan was not bound until circa AD70. The strong man that was bound Jesus was talking about was THE LAW. You may also respond at shauk100@gmail.com

Thanks,
Steve

Chris Adderson said:
What or Who are Gog and Magog?

In Jewish traditions, Gog is the "prince" that has been explained by Rashi, Radak and others as being the king of the nation of Magog, descended from the son Magog of Japthet, the son of Noah.

In Christian tradition, Magog was a grandson of Noah (Genesis 10:2). The descendants of Magog settled to the far north of Israel, likely in Europe and northern Asia (Ezekiel 38:2). Magog seems to be used to refer to "northern barbarians" in general, but likely also has a connection to Magog the person. The people of Magog are described as skilled warriors (Ezekiel 38:15; 39:3-9).

In Islamic tradition, Gog and Magog appear in Qur'an sura Al-Kahf (The Cave chapter), 18:83–98, as Yajuj and Majuj (Ya'juj and Ma'juj. According to Islamic tradition Gog and Magog are "Sons of Adam" Sahih al-Bukhari i.e. human beings, who would be released when a people return to a town which was destroyed and they were banned from.

In Ahmadiyya (an Islamic religious movement founded towards the end of the 19th century) the view that Gog and Magog represent one or more of the European nations.

So who or what might we deduce Gog and Magog mean?
What about a mighty prince (Gog) and his nation (Magog)?
From what historians write, doesn't this seem correct?

Who here has ever heard of Aurelius Augustinus?
How about St. Augustine of Hippo, or more simply put, Augustine?
He was a Christian Neoplatonist, North African Bishop, Doctor of the Roman Catholic Church.
He wrote many things about the Bible

He wrote the following concerning these versus we've just read...

Here is what the Book of Revelation means about Gog and Magog, and the binding of Satan for a thousand years:

After the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles, the Church was born. The proclamation of the Gospel began the spiritual reign of Christ on earth. St. Augustine says that this accompanied the prophetic:

"Satan will be bound for a thousand years." (Rev. 20:2)

The power of Satan over the world was then restrained for a long period of time. (The reference to a time-period of a thousand years is allegorical, not literal.) It does not mean that the power of Satan was destroyed entirely; it simply means that Satan's power to rule over the races of men, as he had in the past, was done away with. He was still like a vicious dog, which attacked the Church ferociously, but his power was chained. While Satan was thus bound, he could not enforce the rule he once had over the peoples of the earth. So, in a spiritual way, Satan was bound for a thousand years. He was robbed of the dominion he had over the world. This "binding of Satan" restrained him from destroying the work of the Church, which was then able to establish the spiritual Kingdom of Christ on earth.

Satan had told Christ, "All the kingdoms of the world have been given to me." That may have been true at that time. Every culture in the whole world, except for the Jews, was steeped in the worship of pantheons of false gods, which were demons who demanded worship and tribute from all who served them.

Christ had said: "If a man wishes to rob a strong man of his possessions, he must first bind that strong man, so that he can take his possessions from him." (Matt.12:29) Christ is the one who bound Satan (the strong man) and took his possessions: which were the souls of men. To take Satan's possessions from him, Christ first had to BIND HIM. Then, after Satan was bound, the Christian gospel, though amidst persecution, was effectively preached to all nations for a thousand years.

This, and ONLY THIS, is what the scripture means when it says that: "Satan will be bound for a thousand years."

"But after the thousand years are over, Satan will be released to deceive the nations in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, and mobilize them for war. His armies will be as many as the sands of the sea; they will swarm over the entire country and besiege the Camp of the Saints, which is the City that God loves. But fire will come down on them from heaven, and consume them." (Rev. 20:7)

In the original language, Gog means: "under the roof". Magog means "out from under the roof". Gog refers to Satan as he is captive, bound, kept as it were: under a roof. Magog refers to Satan being unloosed. As Magog, he bursts forth from where he had been bound, under the roof. The scriptural references to Gog and Magog symbolize the full fury of Satan unchained: the unleashing of the spirit of antichrist.

St. Augustine states that what the scripture means when it says that "his armies will be as many as the sands of the sea; they will swarm over the entire country and besiege the Camp of the Saints, which is the City that God loves", is that at some point Satan's power will universally re-conquer the whole world! After the thousand years are over, he will wage war against the Church, which is the camp of the saints, in every way conceivable. He predicts that Christians and all men of good-will throughout the whole world will be besieged, on a spiritual and cultural level by the powerful influences of the forces of Satan: "whose armies will be as many as the sands of the sea."

Hope this helps.

In His love,
Chris
Chris: "As for the 70AD part - I have an issue with Jesus warning the Christians of Jerusalem about impending destruction of said city and then sending the letter to the churches of Asia first."

Chris, I'm confused about your statement here. You said that Jesus first warned Jerusalem of doom. Then you said that Jesus first warned the churches of Asia. Well which is it? Which one was first? Jerusalem or Asia? Can't be both. Jesus indeed warned Jerusalem first and then years (decades) later an apocalyptic letter warns them at the last second to get ready because the "time is at hand". Jesus gave the Jews one generation to await God's wrath against them for what they did to the prophets, apostles and the Son of God himself. And getting technical, the Jews had this warning of doom preached to them from the mouth of Moses himself. This was nothing new, nothing foreign or alien to all Jewish prophecy fulfillments.

Jesus warned more than one city before his death...

Luke 10:13 “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes. 14 But it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon at the judgment than for you."

Revelation's warnings to the churches were not concerning Jerusalem, they concerned Jesus' "soon" coming and for their repentance because the Judgment and Tribulation were "on the whole world":

Rev 3:9 "I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you. 10 Since you have kept my command to endure patiently, I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come on the whole world to test the inhabitants of the earth.
11 I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown."

Jesus made "lying Jews" fall at the feet of the Philadelphians and admit Jesus loves the Gentile Christians when Jerusalem, the Temple, Priesthood, Genealogy and Covenant fell in 70 AD.

Conclusion, Jesus warned Jerusalem (Matt 24:25) about their calamity that had one generation for "everything" to be fulfilled. The apostles after Pentecost went out into ALL the world with the testimony of the gospel against Jerusalem within a generation. The salvation of the faithful was preached and fulfilled at 70 and the condemnation of the faithless was preached and fulfilled at 70.

And again, I don't understand why futurists deem it necessary to ignore 70 AD as if it "just happened" in the mesh of history. Christians wouldn't have written to the early church about us when its irrelevant to them and their contemporaneous situations. Words like "soon", "now", "at hand", "this generation", "near", "is coming", "us", "we", "our" would be irrelevant to the people who were written to in the first century about the "transition generation" from the Law of Moses into grace.

By the way, this is a Full Preterist forum. If your main feelings against a 70 AD fulfillment is: "That's a very long way away for God to warn 1 city. :)" then we won't find much common ground when it comes to what the bible actually says and believing that over human doubts and putting God into our box.



Chris Adderson said:
St. Augustine wrote that, I just quoted him.

As for the 70AD part - I have an issue with Jesus warning the Christians of Jerusalem about impending destruction of said city and then sending the letter to the churches of Asia first. That's a very long way away for God to warn 1 city. :)

In His love,

Chris

Chris,
I think I wrote this to the wrong person before....

You wrote:

This, and ONLY THIS, is what the scripture means when it says that: "Satan will be bound for a thousand years."

This cannot be correct. Satan was not bound until circa AD70. The strong man that was bound Jesus was talking about was THE LAW. You may also respond at shauk100@gmail.com



Jason King said:
Chris: "As for the 70AD part - I have an issue with Jesus warning the Christians of Jerusalem about impending destruction of said city and then sending the letter to the churches of Asia first."

Chris, I'm confused about your statement here. You said that Jesus first warned Jerusalem of doom. Then you said that Jesus first warned the churches of Asia. Well which is it? Which one was first? Jerusalem or Asia? Can't be both. Jesus indeed warned Jerusalem first and then years (decades) later an apocalyptic letter warns them at the last second to get ready because the "time is at hand". Jesus gave the Jews one generation to await God's wrath against them for what they did to the prophets, apostles and the Son of God himself. And getting technical, the Jews had this warning of doom preached to them from the mouth of Moses himself. This was nothing new, nothing foreign or alien to all Jewish prophecy fulfillments.

Jesus warned more than one city before his death...

Luke 10:13 “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes. 14 But it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon at the judgment than for you."

Revelation's warnings to the churches were not concerning Jerusalem, they concerned Jesus' "soon" coming and for their repentance because the Judgment and Tribulation were "on the whole world":

Rev 3:9 "I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you. 10 Since you have kept my command to endure patiently, I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come on the whole world to test the inhabitants of the earth.
11 I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown."

Jesus made "lying Jews" fall at the feet of the Philadelphians and admit Jesus loves the Gentile Christians when Jerusalem, the Temple, Priesthood, Genealogy and Covenant fell in 70 AD.

Conclusion, Jesus warned Jerusalem (Matt 24:25) about their calamity that had one generation for "everything" to be fulfilled. The apostles after Pentecost went out into ALL the world with the testimony of the gospel against Jerusalem within a generation. The salvation of the faithful was preached and fulfilled at 70 and the condemnation of the faithless was preached and fulfilled at 70.

And again, I don't understand why futurists deem it necessary to ignore 70 AD as if it "just happened" in the mesh of history. Christians wouldn't have written to the early church about us when its irrelevant to them and their contemporaneous situations. Words like "soon", "now", "at hand", "this generation", "near", "is coming", "us", "we", "our" would be irrelevant to the people who were written to in the first century about the "transition generation" from the Law of Moses into grace.

By the way, this is a Full Preterist forum. If your main feelings against a 70 AD fulfillment is: "That's a very long way away for God to warn 1 city. :)" then we won't find much common ground when it comes to what the bible actually says and believing that over human doubts and putting God into our box.



Chris Adderson said:
St. Augustine wrote that, I just quoted him.

As for the 70AD part - I have an issue with Jesus warning the Christians of Jerusalem about impending destruction of said city and then sending the letter to the churches of Asia first. That's a very long way away for God to warn 1 city. :)

In His love,

Chris
Steve, I think Chris left the building. He decided that this site was not for him and we wish him Godspeed.

Thanks Chuck. Do you have a take on the discussion? Or I should say the interpretation I proposed?
Chuck said:
Steve, I think Chris left the building. He decided that this site was not for him and we wish him Godspeed.
Steve, I apologize, but right now I have far too much on my plate. I really have to pick and choose what I can get involved in. I've shut down my time on FB and wish I had more time to give to these kinds of endeavors. Huge test upcoming (at least for me) and all kinds of end of the year commitments. Daughter's 3 month into her pregnancy and my son just got engaged. Having a sizable (no more than 1,000 :) gathering of local preterists today at my house. And I think Mike B. is in the same boat with his impending wedding. Sorry.



Steven Haukdahl said:

Thanks Chuck. Do you have a take on the discussion? Or I should say the interpretation I proposed?
Chuck said:
Steve, I think Chris left the building. He decided that this site was not for him and we wish him Godspeed.
No prob. That's why I asked IF you had a take on it. I know everybody is working on different things at different times pertaining to the scriptures. Take care for now!

Chuck said:
Steve, I apologize, but right now I have far too much on my plate. I really have to pick and choose what I can get involved in. I've shut down my time on FB and wish I had more time to give to these kinds of endeavors. Huge test upcoming (at least for me) and all kinds of end of the year commitments. Daughter's 3 month into her pregnancy and my son just got engaged. And I think Mike B. is in the same boat with his impending wedding. Sorry.



Steven Haukdahl said:

Thanks Chuck. Do you have a take on the discussion? Or I should say the interpretation I proposed?
Chuck said:
Steve, I think Chris left the building. He decided that this site was not for him and we wish him Godspeed.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

© 2014   Created by Michael Bennett.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service