A Lecture on Rev. 20 by Amillennialist, Steve Gregg

[random person]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mk5XumnPpjQ

God bless you Steve Gregg!

 

[ebedmelech]

This brother's book "Revelation: Four Views" is the most fair and comprehensive book of eschatology, because he's consistent and points out problems in all these views.

Gregg is amillennial, but in this work he does an excellent Job in that book.

 

[random person]

This brother's book "Revelation: Four Views" is the most fair and comprehensive book of eschatology, because he's consistent and points out problems in all these views.

Gregg is amillennial, but in this work he does an excellent Job in that book.

Thanks brother!

I just ordered it, the updated version with the grey cover. I love this brother, he really knows his history on views of eschatology and is well read on the subject.

 

[random person]

I hope people will view this video, awesome lecture albeit nearly two hours long by a partial preterist amillennialist. But well worth everyone's time if anything to hear eschatology from a different perspective. Consider it educational.

I love Steve Gregg!

 

[Old Timer]

What I truly can't understand about this is the context..

How can anyone (even a babe in Christ) read Revelation 20 in its context and not be able to see that it is contextually tied to Rev 19 and the coming of Christ?

I can remember reading the Revelation (or the unveiling) of Jesus Christ for the first time and being able to see that.. I couldn't have been in Christ for more than a few years at the time.

And it was obvious.

And then wouldn't you know that the first exposure I had to any commentary on the Revelation came from a preterist.. seriously.. the guy was telling me that it was all in the past..

And I'm just thinking to myself.. can this guy really actually believe that Christ has already come.. as it is described in the latter portion of Revelation 19.. after the marriage of the Lamb to his wife?

Anyway..

How in the world does anyone reconcile that in their spiritual mind?

 

[random person]

What I truly can't understand about this is the context..

How can anyone (even a babe in Christ) read Revelation 20 in its context and not be able to see that it is contextually tied to Rev 19 and the coming of Christ?

I can remember reading the Revelation (or the unveiling) of Jesus Christ for the first time and being able to see that.. I couldn't have been in Christ for more than a few years at the time.

And it was obvious.

And then wouldn't you know that the first exposure I had to any commentary on the Revelation came from a preterist.. seriously.. the guy was telling me that it was all in the past..

And I'm just thinking to myself.. can this guy really actually believe that Christ has already come.. as it is described in the latter portion of Revelation 19.. after the marriage of the Lamb to his wife?

Anyway..

How in the world does anyone reconcile that in their spiritual mind?

Watch the video.

Paul in Acts 24:15 speaks of a singular resurrection.

In John 5:24, Jesus speaks of conversion from death into life, but a few verses later 28-29, Jesus speaks of the physical resurrection.

This is one of the many arguments Gregg uses in defense of his eschatology.

That Rev. 20:1-6 is speaking of that very same conversion from death to life. Also spoken of in John 6:40, 47, 54, 58 & Ephesians 2:1, 5-6 and many other passages.

Gregg goes deeper into it than this.

 

[Old Timer]

Watch the video.

Paul in Acts 24:15 speaks of a singular resurrection.

In John 5:24, Jesus speaks of conversion from death into life, but a few verses later 28-29, Jesus speaks of the physical resurrection.

This is one of the many arguments Gregg uses in defense of his eschatology.

That Rev. 20:1-6 is speaking of that very same conversion from death to life. Also spoken of in John 6:40, 47, 54, 58 & Ephesians 2:1, 5-6 and many other passages.

Gregg goes deeper into it than this.

I did, it still completely fails to address the obvious contextual tie between Rev 19.

Do you actually believe that The Lord came according to Rev 19?

 

[Old Timer]

Does anyone else see the glaring connection between Revelation 19 which speaks of the marriage of the Lamb (in heaven) and the coming of Christ to destroy the beast and false prophet.. with Revelation 20?

Or am I totally off base here?

I'm certainly open to that possibility.

 

[Notrash]

Steve views the new heavens and new earth as physical, not spiritual associations and meanings of the new ordinances, truths and laws and domain of the new (everlasting) covt that were in contrast with the mosaic covt heavens and earth, or the law of sin/seperation from the garden.

 

[Old Timer]

So in other words... yes, this guy believes that Christ already came..

I can't even begin to wonder how any person (even an unbeliever for cryin out loud) can be duped into believing that Christ already came and this is it..

It really makes one wonder about religious pride.. how people would rather stick to something as nonsensical as that rather than simply admit that they're wrong and have been deceived..

And deception is one thing... although continuing to spread this nonsense after being refuted countless times comes down to sheer disobedience to the word of God.

 

[Notrash]

I don't know what he's saying on that issue. I just picked up the idea that he viewed new heavens and earth as physical recreation and the same usage found in Genesis from his openi.g statements.

To reply to your point, where did Jesus say that the kingdom of God was established?

 

[Old Timer]

I don't know what he's saying on that issue. I just picked up the idea that he viewed new heavens and earth as physical recreation and the same usage found in Genesis from his openi.g statements.

To reply to your point, where did Jesus say that the kingdom of God was established?

Sorry then, it certainly seemed like this is what you were saying that he believed.. that the new heavens and earth were somehow already here.

The kingdom simply means the King's Domain.. and right now of course that is in heaven and not on earth... although it will be.. in that Day.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

So in other words... yes, this guy believes that Christ already came..

I can't even begin to wonder how any person (even an unbeliever for cryin out loud) can be duped into believing that Christ already came and this is it..

It really makes one wonder about religious pride.. how people would rather stick to something as nonsensical as that rather than simply admit that they're wrong and have been deceived..

And deception is one thing... although continuing to spread this nonsense after being refuted countless times comes down to sheer disobedience to the word of God.

It is a religious spirit.

A religious spirit is hard and blind.

 

[Old Timer]

It is a religious spirit.

A religious spirit is hard and blind.

I often wonder why though.. what makes a person think this way?

I've been wrong my whole life and will hopefully continue to actually GROW in the grace and in the knowledge of Jesus Christ.. which means being corrected often.

Correction is a wonderful GODLY thing.. that's how we're conformed to the image of Christ isn't it?

I love strong convictions.. but let's have the sense that there is infinitely more to grow in Him.. into that perfect man, even our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[Old Timer]

I'd add that there was a time in my earlier days when I simply assumed all men wanted to tell the truth.. and perhaps that is true for the most part.. although there is deception going on all around us and unless we're fully equipped with the armour of God, then we're going to be turned with just about every wind of doctrine coming down the pike.

Trading has helped me a lot as well.. you always want to think of who is on the other side of a trade that you're making.. and although it's not a strong analogy to the spiritual world.. I'm simply trained to always think on the other side of things.. and in the case of being a Christian.. we need to remember that the rulers of the darkness of this world are real and they're doing all that they can to crush the faith once delivered to the saints.

.02

 

[Notrash]

Sorry then, it certainly seemed like this is what you were saying that he believed.. that the new heavens and earth were somehow already here.

The kingdom simply means the King's Domain.. and right now of course that is in heaven and not on earth... although it will be.. in that Day.

You didn't answer tge question
Where did Jesus say that the domain of the kingdom of god is?

This isn't the answer, but when Jesus said to pilate that his kingdom was not of this world or realm of thinking, he also said that now (then at that instant) his kingdom was not from "hence", meani.g nit administered through Pilates seat of por as it had been prophecied to be administered in deut 32:42. And elsewhere.

How are the words heaven and earth used in Isaiah 13?

Heavens and earth have about 4 different meanings in the OT.
In Job 38:33 theye words are associated with the ordinances (heaves) and domain of those ordinances (earth) In Is 13 they refer to a govornmental and religious structure. They are the religious atmoshphere of an administration. The mosaic covt created an "atmosphere" undrr whiich the people of that covt lived (or didn't live). Paul calls it the admi.istration of death in 2 Cor 3.

Do you still participate in conditional religious attempts to appease God and on a national or territorial level? Perhaps you or many participate in that type of system ( heavens).

I was commenting that I gathered that Gregg considered the new heavens and earth as physical effects of the whole earth in the same manner that the flood whad effected it. I disagree with that use of those words in that and many applications.

The curse on the physical earth was lifted through the flood as declared by Gen 5:29.

 

[Old Timer]

You didn't answer tge question
Where did Jesus say that the domain of the kingdom of god is?

I tried to.. just not to your satisfaction perhaps.

I'm not sure if there is a verse(s) of scripture you're refering to here.. but allow me to go further..

The body of Christ is the church of God.. we have (already) been translated into the kingdom of God's dear Son.. and if that's all that we knew about it, then it might be fine to believe that this is His kingdom on earth..

But wait, there's more..

We also know that we are seated in heavenly places in Christ.. and Paul says that our citizenship is in heaven.. Paul also tells us to set our affections on the things which are above, and NOT on the things on earth..

Why?

Because ye are dead he says.. and your life is hidden in Christ with God.. and when He appears, we shall appear with Him.

When His kingdom does actually come to earth, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit upon the throne of His glory. When the kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our God and of His Christ.

This isn't the answer, but when Jesus said to pilate that his kingdom was not of this world or realm of thinking, he also said that now (then at that instant) his kingdom was not from "hence", meani.g nit administered through Pilates seat of por as it had been prophecied to be administered in deut 32:42. And elsewhere.

And these words of Christ are living and powerful.. are you going to suggest that they're no longer true? That they're applicable to the past only?

How are the words heaven and earth used in Isaiah 13?

Heavens and earth have about 4 different meanings in the OT.
In Job 38:33 theye words are associated with the ordinances (heaves) and domain of those ordinances (earth) In Is 13 they refer to a govornmental and religious structure. They are the religious atmoshphere of an administration. The mosaic covt created an "atmosphere" undrr whiich the people of that covt lived (or didn't live). Paul calls it the admi.istration of death in 2 Cor 3.

Sorry, I believe that the heavens actually mean the heavens and that the earth actually means the earth. I know that may sound silly.. but so be it.

Do you still participate in conditional religious attempts to appease God and on a national or territorial level? Perhaps you or many participate in that type of system ( heavens).

Not sure what your point is here or aht you're trying to say.

I was commenting that I gathered that Gregg considered the new heavens and earth as physical effects of the whole earth in the same manner that the flood whad effected it. I disagree with that use of those words in that and many applications.

The curse on the physical earth was lifted through the flood as declared by Gen 5:29.

When Peter speaks of the elements being disolved.. I believe that is exactly what he means.. not some make believe spiritualization of the matter which ultimately only leads to denying what the truth actually says.

 

[Notrash]

Jesus said that the kingdom if God us within; in your beliefs and doctrine.

Stoichion (elements) means foundational principles. "Elements" as a chemical term wasn't in use yet. Peter is associating the burning of the elements of the mosaic covt that had been prophecied at the end of the mosaic covt in deut 32.

We'll remain in disagreement of opinion and belief of which meaning of 'heaveans and earth' are being employed in rev 20, Is 65,66,13,51 etc. Thanjs for your opinion and perhaps I've opened a new perspective for you to consider. Please review Isaiah 13 and 51.

 

[Old Timer]

Jesus said that the kingdom if God us within; in your beliefs and doctrine.

No doubt about it, just as there is no doubt about the scriptural fact that his kingdom is not yet of this present evil world.. just as it's true that he shall sit upon the throne of his glory when he comes in his glory..

It baffles me as to why people quote scripture and ignore scripture at the same time..

Stoichion (elements) means foundational principles. "Elements" as a chemical term wasn't in use yet. Peter is associating the burning of the elements of the mosaic covt that had been prophecied at the end of the mosaic covt in deut 32.

And of course the context here is the Day of the LORD.. which shall come.. not which has come.. Paul warns the church of those who would say that THAT DAY has come.. the exact thing which you are suggesting here.

We'll remain in disagreement of opinion and belief of which meaning of 'heaveans and earth' are being employed in rev 20, Is 65,66,13,51 etc. Thanjs for your opinion and perhaps I've opened a new perspective for you to consider. Please review Isaiah 13 and 51.

I'd say the same although I tend to agree with yeshuasavedme that this religious spirit is blind and not open to anything other than their own opinion on the matter.. I'll probably never understand why that is but I certainly have witnessed it countless times in my life.. people not even being able to fathom that they're wrong or deceived, regardless of the mountains of scriptural evidence against it..

 

[Bible2]

Old Timer said in post 8:

Does anyone else see the glaring connection between Revelation 19 which speaks of the marriage of the Lamb (in heaven) and the coming of Christ to destroy the beast and false prophet.. with Revelation 20?

Yes.

There are at least 8 scriptural reasons to read the 1,000 years of Revelation 20:2-6 as not beginning until after Jesus' (never fulfilled) 2nd coming in Revelation 19:7-21.

First, this is in accord with how the rest of Revelation chapters 6 to 22 are in chronological order, insofar as the future tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 will begin with the events of the 2nd through 6th seals, occurring in the order shown in Revelation 6:3-14. After the events of the 6th seal, Revelation 7 will occur. Then the 7th seal will be unsealed and out of it will come the tribulation's 7 trumpets (Revelation 8:1-6). Then the events of the first 6 trumpets in Revelation 8:7 to Revelation 9:21 will occur in the order shown there. Then Revelation 10 will occur. Then the literal 3.5 years of the Antichrist's worldwide reign will occur, which time period is shown from 4 different angles in Revelation chapters 11 to 14 (Revelation 11:2b-3, Revelation 12:6,14, Revelation 13:5,7, Revelation 14:9-13).

Then the 7th trumpet will sound, announcing the legal end of the Antichrist's reign (Revelation 11:15). Out of the 7th trumpet's heavenly-temple opening will come the 7 plagues of the 7 vials (Revelation 11:19, Revelation 15:5 to 16:1), the tribulation's final stage. Then the events of the 7 vials will occur in the order shown in Revelation 16. Jesus will return right after the 7th vial (Revelation 16:17,19, Revelation 19:2-21), and he will marry the church at that time (Revelation 19:7). Then he will defeat the world's armies (Revelation 19:11 to 20:3) and reign on the earth with the bodily resurrected or changed church for 1,000 years (Revelation 20:4-6, Revelation 5:10, Revelation 2:26-29; 1 Corinthians 15:51-53). Then the events of Revelation 20:7 to Revelation 22:5 will occur in the order shown there.

-

Second, the 1,000 years in Revelation 20:2-6 is when Satan will be literally bound with a chain, and cast into and locked within the literal bottomless pit, whereas currently he is walking about freely on the earth seeking whom he may devour (1 Peter 5:8). So the 1,000 years can't have started yet. But their beginning after Jesus' 2nd coming makes perfect sense (Revelation 19:7 to 20:6).

Third, during the 1,000 years, Satan won't be able to deceive the world (Revelation 20:3), whereas currently he is able to deceive the world (2 Corinthians 4:4; 2 Corinthians 11:3,14,15; 2 Thessalonians 2:9-10, Revelation 12:9, Revelation 13:14, Revelation 19:20, Revelation 20:10). So the 1,000 years can't have started yet.

Fourth, the defeat of Satan in Revelation 20:1-3 is in chronological accord with the immediately preceding defeat of the Antichrist (the individual man aspect of the beast), and the False Prophet, and the world's armies, at Jesus' 2nd coming (Revelation 19:19-21). Indeed, there is no chapter break between Revelation 19 and Revelation 20 in the original Greek manuscripts, so that Revelation 19:19 to 20:3 can be taken together as a unit, showing how every power of evil will be defeated at Jesus' 2nd coming.

Fifth, reading Revelation 20:4-6 as Jesus and the bodily resurrected church reigning first on the present (not the new) earth after his 2nd coming (Revelation 19:7 to 20:6) matches Jesus reigning first on the present (not the new) earth after his 2nd coming in Zechariah 14:3-21. For Zechariah 14:8-21 can't be referring to the new earth, because it refers to a temple building in Jerusalem (Zechariah 14:20-21), whereas there will be no temple building in New Jerusalem on the new earth (Revelation 21:22). Also, Zechariah 14:8-21 can't be referring to the new earth because it refers to surviving unsaved people from the present earth being forced to come up to worship the returned Jesus in Jerusalem during the millennium (Zechariah 14:16-19), whereas by the time of the new earth, all the unsaved people from the present earth will have already been cast into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:15 to 21:8).

Sixth, reading the first resurrection in Revelation 20:4-6 as the bodily resurrection of the church at Jesus' 2nd coming (Revelation 19:7 to 20:6) matches other verses which show that the bodily resurrection of the church will occur at Jesus' 2nd coming (1 Corinthians 15:21-23,51-54; 1 Thessalonians 4:15-16).

Seventh, reading the first resurrection in Revelation 20:4-6 as the bodily resurrection of the church at Jesus' 2nd coming is in line with Revelation 20:5, which must refer in its entirety to only bodily resurrection. For not every dead person is going to be figuratively resurrected in the sense of becoming saved (Revelation 20:15). And Revelation 20:5 means that the rest of the dead (i.e. all the non-church dead of all times) will be resurrected in the same manner that the church will be resurrected in Revelation 20:4-6, but the rest of the dead won't be resurrected until sometime after the 1,000 years are over.

Eighth, reading the first resurrection in Revelation 20:4-6 as the bodily resurrection of the church at Jesus' 2nd coming is in line with Revelation 20:4, which shows that the people in the first resurrection will include those in the church who will have been beheaded by the Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of the beast) for not worshipping him or his image, or receiving his mark on their hand or forehead. This refers back to the details of Revelation 13:4-18, which have never been fulfilled. So the first resurrection can't have happened yet. But its occurring at Jesus' 2nd coming, when he will defeat the Antichrist, makes perfect sense (Revelation 19:20 to 20:6; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-9).

*******

Old Timer said in post 17:

When Peter speaks of the elements being disolved.. I believe that is exactly what he means.. not some make believe spiritualization of the matter which ultimately only leads to denying what the truth actually says.

That's right.

Just as the heaven and earth which "were of old" (2 Peter 3:5-6) were the literal first "heaven" (the sky/atmosphere, in which the birds fly: Genesis 1:20) and the literal "earth" (the dry land) which God created in Genesis 1:7-10 and which "perished" in Noah's flood (2 Peter 3:5-6, Genesis 6:13-21), so the heaven and earth "which are now" (2 Peter 3:7) and which will perish in the future by fire instead of flood (2 Peter 3:7-12), are the earth's present atmosphere and surface. And so the new heaven and earth, which the church is still waiting for (2 Peter 3:13) -- because the new heaven and earth (Revelation 21:1) won't be made until after the never-fulfilled events of Revelation chapters 6 to 20 -- will be a new atmosphere and surface for the earth.

That is, the "old" heaven and earth perished at the time of Noah's flood (2 Peter 3:5-6), which was over 1,000 years before the Old Covenant Mosaic law was established in Exodus. The letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law's commandments was abolished the moment that Jesus died on the Cross (Matthew 27:50-51a, Ephesians 2:15-16, Colossians 2:14-17, Romans 7:6; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18, Hebrews 7:18-19), which was the same moment that he brought the New Covenant into effect (Matthew 26:28, Hebrews 9:15-17, Hebrews 10:19-20, Matthew 27:51a). Matthew 5:18 refers to the literal heaven and earth "which are now" (2 Peter 3:7), and which are going to be literally burned up in our future (2 Peter 3:7-12).

So the "elements" in 2 Peter 3:10,12 are physical, just as the heaven and earth in 2 Peter 3:10,12 are physical. 2 Peter 3:10,12 can be (and in fact is) the only place in the New Testament where the Greek word "stoicheion" (G4747) is used to refer to physical elements, just as, for example, Revelation 6:6 can be (and in fact is) the only place in the New Testament where the Greek word "choinix" (G5518) is used at all.