The rest of the dead is key in determining when the millennium is meaning

[DavidPT]

I realize there is already a current thread on this topic. Except that thread is for Amils only, and I'm not an Amil. Otherwise, instead of making a new thread on the same subject, I would have posted in that one instead. And since I'm interested in discussing this topic but can't since that other thread is Amil only, I'm left with starting a new thread on this same topic. But not to compete with the other one, but to be able to discuss this topic with others, regardless whether one is Premil or Amil.

Revelation 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.


I realize it is hard for both sides to do, keep Premil vs Amil out of it for a moment, and just let the text lead us to conclude what we need to conclude in regards to when the millennium is meaning.

When it says this in verse 5---This is the first resurrection---all interpreters, regardless which side of the debate they are on, should take that to be involving verse 4 and 6 and not this instead---But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. That is obviously not meaning the first resurrection if the first resurrection involves the thousand years, and that that is meaning after the thousand years.

Since there is still the rest of the dead following the first resurrection, this tends to tell us this.

Initially there is one big group, they are all dead. Then when the first resurrection occurs, some of this dead live again at that time while the remainder of the dead, they don't get to live again until the thousand years have expired. Does that mean they live again the moment the thousand years expire?

Though it could mean that, it doesn't have to mean that, because even if they didn't live again until a million years later, it would still agree with the text, that they don't live again until after the thousand years expire. A million years after the thousand years is clearly after it has expired. I'm just trying to illustrate a point here, so don't take this million years literally, as if it could be a million years after the thousand years when the rest of the dead live again.

When the rest of the dead live again, what sense is that meaning? Because what ever sense we take that to mean, why would that same sense not equally apply to those who have part in the first resurrection?

Another point I have raised in the past is this. Obviously, 2nd to Christ's, the bodily resurrection of the saints is the most important resurrection of all.

But if the first resurrection is not meaning the bodily resurrection of the saints, and that when the rest of the dead live again, is also not meaning the bodily resurrection of the saints, where then is the bodily resurrection of the saints recorded in Revelation 20? How is it reasonable that no resurrection event recorded in Revelation 20 is involving the bodily resurrection of the saints?

I'll stop here for now. Have some more to add but I think I will save that for later.

 

[keras]

Initially there is one big group, they are all dead

Not so. There will be many living, faithful peoples alive when Jesus Returns. He sends His angels to gather them. Matthew 24:31

Firstly, we must establish the fact that Revelation 20 comes straight after Rev 19, where Jesus Returns and destroys Satans armies and chains him up.
Then in Revelation 20:4, it mentions a Judgment, which has to be the sheep and goat Judgment of the nations. Matthew 25:31-33

Then: John saw the souls of the martyrs killed for their faith, who refused the mark of the 'beast' and so were beheaded. They are brought back to life, which we know cannot be to immortality, as they may die a second death, Rev 20:6, and as no one receives immortality until the Great White Throne Judgment, AFTER the Millennium. Revelation 20:11-15
As Revelation 20:5 plainly tell us: The rest of the dead do not come to life, [that is: back to consciousness] until the thousand years is over., when everybody who has ever lived will stand before God in the final Judgment; Daniel 7:9-10

Any ideas of a general resurrection of the dead, or a change to 'glorification' of the living, at the Return, are wrong and cannot happen.
However, those living; including those resurrected GT martyrs, have the Promise of longer life and freedom from disease and war, for the Millennium. Isaiah 65:18-21, Micah 4:1-7

You may ask: Why doesn't Jesus resurrect ALL the Christian martyrs. Their souls are kept under the Altar in heaven. Revelation 6:9-11
I think the reason for those early martyrs having to wait for a further thousand years, is because of culture shock, an ancient society suddenly appearing among a modern peoples, and their sheer numbers would overwhelm the GT martyrs, whom the Lord desires to honour and treat specially.

 

[Douggg]

rapture/resurrection event to eternal life (before the great tribulation).

resurrection of the martyred great tribulation saints to eternal life (after the great tribulation)(called the first resurrection)

-------------------------------------
1000 year reign and rule of Christ on this present earth.

------------------------------------ the end of the millennium reign

------------------------------------ last rebellion of the nations

------------------------------------ put down by God,

------------------------------------ Satan cast into the lake of fire

------------------------------------ then

massive resurrection of the rest of the dead.( called the second resurrection)

------------------------------------

destruction of this present earth, first and second heavens.

----------------------------------- death and hell cast into the lake of fire

Great White throne Judgement - for the rest of the dead.
some to everlasting life.
some to everlasting death, called the second death, into the lake of fire.

 

[DavidPT]

Not so. There will be many living, faithful peoples alive when Jesus Returns. He sends His angels to gather them. Matthew 24:31

That's not what I was meaning. I was meaning in regards to the dead, that everyone that are dead at the time, not meaning someone still alive, that when the first resurrection occurs, some of these that are already dead, they live again once the first resurrection takes place. Which means not all of the dead live again at the same time. Some live again at the beginning of the thousand years, thus the first resurrection. The rest of the dead, those that were already dead when the first resurrection takes place, don't live again until after the thousand years.

And the ones that don't live again until after the thousand years are meaning the ones who get cast into the LOF, since it would be ludicrous for anyone that has part in the first resurrection, that any of them are cast into the LOF.

We then end up with this. Everyone that has part in the first resurrection, none of them get cast into the LOF. Everyone that does not live again until after the thousand years, all of these get cast into the LOF. No one that has part in the first resurrection is standing among the dead in Revelation 20:11-15. They already put on immortality at the 2nd coming and last trump.

I know---you disagree since you insist 1 Corinthians 15:51-57 is not meaning when Christ comes, but is meaning a thousand years and a little season later following Christ's return. Yet, probably not one person on the planet agrees with you about that, which means, assuming you are correct, you are the only person on the planet correct about this. Everyone else got it wrong.

Then: John saw the souls of the martyrs killed for their faith, who refused the mark of the 'beast' and so were beheaded. They are brought back to life, which we know cannot be to immortality, as they may die a second death

This couldn't even be possible per Amil what you are proposing here, let alone Premil. And there for awhile I was thinking maybe you should switch to Amil and some of what you are proposing might work with that position. No way do Amils think anyone that is martyred by the beast, that they then bodily live again, then might die a 2nd time after they live again. Where are there examples of saints being martyred, then alive again as mortals, then die yet again, maybe a different way this time, such as from old age rather than martyrdom yet again.


Why would any Premils think that when the first resurrection of the saints occur, thus a bodily resurrection, that some of these same ones can die yet again during the millennium? I don't know of anyone other than you, who agrees the first resurrection is bodily, that they then think this is bodily resurrection unto mortality rather than a bodily resurrection unto immortality.

 

[TribulationSigns]

And the ones that don't live again until after the thousand years are meaning the ones who get cast into the LOF, since it would be ludicrous for anyone that has part in the first resurrection, that any of them are cast into the LOF.

Correct.

We then end up with this. Everyone that has part in the first resurrection, none of them get cast into the LOF.

Correct.

Everyone that does not live again until after the thousand years, all of these get cast into the LOF.

Correct.

No one that has part in the first resurrection is standing among the dead in Revelation 20:11-15. They already put on immortality at the 2nd coming and last trump.

Correct.

I know---you disagree since you insist 1 Corinthians 15:51-57 is not meaning when Christ comes,

The last trump of 1st Corinthians 15:51-52 is about the rapture and the Second Coming.

but is meaning a thousand years and a little season later following Christ's return.

Both the thousand years and a little season take place BEFORE the last trump. There will be no more time, even for so-called 7 years tribulation, 1,000 kingdom reign, little season, Gog and Magog, etc., when the seventh angel sound, Revelation 11:15. A thousand years and a little season is a spiritual period of time according to God, not something for us to figure out with our calendar.

I have posted recently about the millennial and the rest of the dead here.

 

[Marilyn C]

There are ONLY TWO TYPES of resurrections in God`s word -

1. to LIFE.
2. to CONDEMNATION.

`Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth - those who have done good to the resurrection of LIFE, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of CONDEMNATION. ` (John 5: 28 & 29)

Scripture gives the context whether - life or condemnation.

The Old Testament Saints are NOT under judgment but already in heaven awaiting their inheritance, (of the city).
The Body of Christ is NOT under judgment so will be resurrected to life. (Third heaven).
The saints in the tribulation are NOT under judgment, so will be resurrected to life. (new earth)

Those in the millennium will go to the graves and be judged according to their conscience, (their works). Some to life and some to condemnation.

Those in the graves who never heard of Jesus` sacrifice, will be judged by their works. If they tried to act according to their conscience then they will be resurrected to life, (new earth).

Those in the graves who never heard of Christ and did not do according to their conscience will be resurrected to condemnation, (lake of fire).
Those in the graves who rejected Christ Jesus will be resurrected to condemnation, (lake of fire).

 

[keras]

I know---you disagree since you insist 1 Corinthians 15:51-57 is not meaning when Christ comes, but is meaning a thousand years and a little season later following Christ's return. Yet, probably not one person on the planet agrees with you about that, which means, assuming you are correct, you are the only person on the planet correct about this. Everyone else got it wrong.

Daniel 12:10b says; in the last days, only a few will understand. Millions will not.

I have proved that 1 Corinthians 15:50-56 is a prophecy about what happens at the Great White Throne Judgment. Only then is Death no more.
I Cor 15:54b...then: this scripture* will be brought to pass: Death is swallowed up in Victory.
* OT Reference; Isaiah 25:8a, NT Reference; Revelation 20:14, Revelation 21:4b

Only in Eternity, will God wipe away every tear; Revelation 21:4a, Revelation 7:17 and Isaiah 25:8b {Rev 7:15-17 clearly prophesies the Eternal state]

 

[keras]

Where are there examples of saints being martyred, then alive again as mortals, then die yet again, maybe a different way this time, such as from old age rather than martyrdom yet again.

Lazarus is the example. There are others; what Elijah did.
Jesus made very sure that Lazarus was dead and starting to decompose. John 11:17 He was raised back to mortal life and presumably died years later of old age. Maybe at the Roman conquest in 70 AD, although he probably escaped to Pella, with all the Christians.

 

[DavidPT]

I have proved that 1 Corinthians 15:50-56 is a prophecy about what happens at the Great White Throne Judgment. Only then is Death no more.
I Cor 15:54b...then: this scripture* will be brought to pass: Death is swallowed up in Victory.
* OT Reference; Isaiah 25:8a, NT Reference; Revelation 20:14, Revelation 21:4b

Keras, if you are correct about that, and maybe you are for all I know, you couldn't possibly also be correct about the first resurrection then. Amils would have to be correct about the first resurrection, not you nor me, if you are correct about these other things. The reason why, no way is there any such event once Christ returns, where He bodily raises saints and that these same saints can still die after that. That's preposterous. And even using an example involving Lazarus being raised from the dead then dying again, hardly proves that Jesus is going to raise numerous saints when He returns, and that some of them can still die again.

 

[DavidPT]

Revelation 19:21 And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

Revelation 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.

Revelation 20:9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.


Some interpreters, mainly Amils, insist Revelation 19:21 and Revelation 20:9 are involving the same events, the same era of time. Personally, I would think that those in Revelation 19:21 are meaning some of the rest of the dead which lived not again until the thousand years were finished.

In Revelation 20:9, these would not be dead during the thousand years if they are alive after the thousand years then dead after the thousand years. If we don't take these two accounts to be involving the same events, this would mean these in Revelation 19:21 are still alive before the thousand years, then dead before the thousand years, thus dead during the thousand years.

Eventually those in Revelation 20:9 would be dead as well once they are devoured by fire from God out of heaven. So then, when it says in verse 5 what it does, can it also be including those in verse 9? The more I think about it, maybe it can. The reason why is because of what verse 5 is involving. It is involving living again, thus being bodily resurrected after having been dead, then standing before God at the GWTJ to be judged and sentenced. Clearly, regardless whether or not Revelation 19:21 and Revelation 20:9 are involving the same events, the same era of time, all of them have to live again, thus be bodily resurrected, in order to be present at the GWTJ.

Which then raises yet more questions. What now?

 

[TribulationSigns]

Revelation 19:21 And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

Revelation 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.

Revelation 20:9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.


Some interpreters, mainly Amils, insist Revelation 19:21 and Revelation 20:9 are involving the same events, the same era of time. Personally, I would think that those in Revelation 19:21 are meaning some of the rest of the dead which lived not again until the thousand years were finished.

Revelation 20:9 is speaking about the judgment of the enemies (ie. professed Christians) that comes into the camps of the Saints and beloved City which is what remains of the church. This is the judgment of the harlot. This takes place prior to Second Coming.

Revelation 19:21 is speaking of the Second Coming when Christ comes to judge the world. The sword is His Word.

 

[DavidPT]

I have posted recently about the millennial and the rest of the dead here.

Here's something else you posted in that same thread I'm unable to address in that thread since it is an Amil Only thread. I guess I can address it in here, though.

1Pe 5:8
(8) Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

How many different ways do you want us to answer it? How the spirit Satan can be bound and in a pit (Revelation 20), and yet still go about as a roaring lion in the world is a matter of "for whom he was bound," and to what degree. I use "the analogy" of a lion that is bound or chained to a stake in an open field. A blind person that walks through that field and strays into the area limited by the chain, is going to be devoured by the lion. Because the lion is free to roam to the length of the chain throughout the circumference of the area in all directions

This same useless analogy that I have seen other Amils use over the years, thus this analogy is apparently parroted by numerous Amils, is plain useless since it doesn't even remotely fit what 1 Peter 5:8 is depicting.

Where in 1 Peter 5:8 are you seeing it depicting a restraint of some kind on the devil? How is, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour, depicting a restraint of some kind?

Since the devil is meant here, and that if the devil is bound in the pit at the time, and that if this were happening to a real lion, we end up with utter nonsense. We have a lion that is bound in a pit, keeping in mind pits are usually involving holes in the ground, and that while this lion is trapped in this pit, it is at the same time, walking about, seeking whom it might devour. Since something like that can't happen in the real world, we can't then apply utter nonsense to the text by insisting this means the devil, just like a lion trapped in a pit, is really like a dog on a long leash, and as long as one is not within range of this leash, the devil nor the lion can have contact with anyone. But go within the range of it's leash, that's another story.

If Amils are going to come up with an analogy that makes 1 Peter 5:8 compatible with Amil, Amils are going to have to come up with something better than this utter nonsense. Whoever came up with that analogy initially, I don't know? But why other Amils would want to parrot it, is beyond me, since it is useless and makes nonsense out of 1 Peter 5:8 if satan is supposed to be bound at the time.

What about after the thousand years, assuming satan is bound in this age? What do Amils do with 1 Peter 5:8 then, since they can no longer use the same useless 1 Peter 5:8 analogy argument they were using when he was allegedly bound?

 

[keras]

Keras, if you are correct about that, and maybe you are for all I know, you couldn't possibly also be correct about the first resurrection then. Amils would have to be correct about the first resurrection, not you nor me, if you are correct about these other things. The reason why, no way is there any such event once Christ returns, where He bodily raises saints and that these same saints can still die after that. That's preposterous. And even using an example involving Lazarus being raised from the dead then dying again, hardly proves that Jesus is going to raise numerous saints when He returns, and that some of them can still die again.

The Bible tells us that when Jesus Returns, He will bring the souls of the martyrs killed during the 42 months of 'beast' rule, Rev 13:5, and raise them back to life. They will be His priests and co-rulers.
Not at all 'preposterous', but what will happen. Proved feasible by the raising of Lazarus.

The common Church teaching of 1 Corinthians 15:50-56 taking place at the Return is error and it does not happen at that time.
Immortal, Spiritual people do not live in the mortal, physical world.

There is probably no harm in thinking that some will become immortal at the Return, [that won't happen] but it is a seriously bad belief to think some will be made immortal and go to live in heaven, before the Return, or any tribulation. It is the 'rapture to heaven' of the Church, the idea that we can escape all the forthcoming disasters and testing times ahead, that is so wrong and has led millions to become complacent and unaware of what God has planned for our future.

It is involving living again, thus being bodily resurrected after having been dead, then standing before God at the GWTJ to be judged and sentenced. Clearly, regardless whether or not Revelation 19:21 and Revelation 20:9 are involving the same events, the same era of time, all of them have to live again, thus be bodily resurrected, in order to be present at the GWTJ.

I do not think that all the dead will be resurrected back to mortal life. The GWT Judgment is told to us in a metaphorical manner, their souls will hear and understand their fate, when the Book of Life is opened. Those, dead and still living, at the end of the Millennium; whose names are found in the Book of Life, will be changed in the blink of an eye, into immortality and will be with God in the Spiritual new Jerusalem for Eternity.

 

[grafted branch]

This same useless analogy that I have seen other Amils use over the years, thus this analogy is apparently parroted by numerous Amils, is plain useless since it doesn't even remotely fit what 1 Peter 5:8 is depicting.

I don’t want to get involved in the debate but I heard awhile back where someone (Amil I think) argued that lions only roar for specific reason. I can’t remember the exact argument he used but I searched the internet and there are four reasons why lions roar.



1 communication with other members of their pride
2 displaying their health and strength to potential rivals
3 marking their territory to deter intruders
4 attracting mates



I suppose someone could argue that the territory in #3 is the bottomless pit but it doesn’t seem likely that Satan would try to deter intruders.

 

[DavidPT]

there are four reasons why lions roar.



1 communication with other members of their pride
2 displaying their health and strength to potential rivals
3 marking their territory to deter intruders
4 attracting mates



I suppose someone could argue that the territory in #3 is the bottomless pit but it doesn’t seem likely that Satan would try to deter intruders.

In 1 Peter 5:8 the text then goes on to say---seeking whom he may devour

In regards to lions, roaring lions in this case, what does it generally mean in regards to devouring? What would that look like in the real world, a roaring lion walking about, seeking whom it might devour? Would that look like this---And cast him into a pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him?

 

[grafted branch]

In 1 Peter 5:8 the text then goes on to say---seeking whom he may devour

In regards to lions, roaring lions in this case, what does it generally mean in regards to devouring? What would that look like in the real world, a roaring lion walking about, seeking whom it might devour? Would that look like this---And cast him into a pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him?

I don’t think lions roar when they are stalking their prey. They may roar afterwards but to roar while seeking something to devour doesn’t happen, as far as I can tell (I’m not an expert on this subject).

Perhaps 1 Peter 5:8 is saying Satan is roaring in the sense that he is trying to attract a mate, as in option #4. Believers are the bride of Christ so it’s not too far a stretch to think that Satan is also seeking a similar arrangement for himself. Except Satan devours his mate? I’m not sure if there are any other verses that would support Satan devouring his mate.

As far as Satan being in the pit and roaring, you’ll have to ask an Amil about that one. I did hear someone talk about this but it’s been a while and I can’t remember how he tied it altogether.

 

[TribulationSigns]

In case you did not read this before...

1Pe 5:8
(8) Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

How many different ways do you want us to answer it? How the spirit Satan can be bound and in a pit (Revelation 20), and yet still go about as a roaring lion in the world is a matter of "for whom he was bound," and to what degree. I use "the analogy" of a lion that is bound or chained to a stake in an open field. A blind person that walks through that field and strays into the area limited by the chain, is going to be devoured by the lion. Because the lion is free to roam to the length of the chain throughout the circumference of the area in all directions. By the same token, those who can see are going to avoid walking through the circumference or circle where the chained lion can devour them. That's the analogy of Satan being bound with a chain that Revelation chapter 20 puts forth. God has given "the elect" power so that Satan cannot harm them. Get it?? He is "bound" from doing so, while he is still free to devour the spiritually blind. For example, the closer we walk with God, the farther away from the devil's sphere we will be. The more we submit ourselves to God, the farther away the devil will be. For God is the one who has restrained Satan from us, Selah!! And sorry, it is NOT a literal/physical chain or abyss, it is spiritual restraint. By the grace of His cross, we are secure (sealed) that he cannot harm us. Indeed, he flees from us because the children of God have power over serpents by the grace of God.

James 4:6-8

• "But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.
• Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.
• Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded."

Satan flees from the elect because the elect is sealed "that" the spirit Satan has no more power to bind them. His power is itself "bound" as if he were chained up and cast into an abyss of nothingness for their sake. It's all about Satan's binding "for the elect," of the world, and not for the world. That part you did not seem to understand.

John 17:9

• "I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine."

Listen, Christ came to save "His people," not (Matthew 1:21) all people in the world. That's the point Premillennialists (and Postmillennialists) are missing in thinking Christ will come to evangelize or Christianize the whole world. On the contrary, Christ Christianizes "His people" from out of the world, and from every nation in the world. You need to realize that Satan was bound from devouring the elect of the world, and yet free to devour the wicked and unfaithful of the world. Indeed, the very point your theology misses is that Satan "was bound for the sake of the elect." Unfortunately, Premillennialists usually have the idea that he was (or will be) bound for the sake of the whole world. Which is not the case. Sorry!

 

[DavidPT]

I don’t think lions roar when they are stalking their prey. They may roar afterwards but to roar while seeking something to devour doesn’t happen, as far as I can tell (I’m not an expert on this subject).

Perhaps 1 Peter 5:8 is saying Satan is roaring in the sense that he is trying to attract a mate, as in option #4. Believers are the bride of Christ so it’s not too far a stretch to think that Satan is also seeking a similar arrangement for himself. Except Satan devours his mate? I’m not sure if there are any other verses that would support Satan devouring his mate.

As far as Satan being in the pit and roaring, you’ll have to ask an Amil about that one. I did hear someone talk about this but it’s been a while and I can’t remember how he tied it altogether.

Maybe we should look and see what devour means in the Greek and how that same Greek word is used elsewhere?

katapino
kat-ap-ee'-no
from kata - kata 2596 and pinw - pino 4095; to drink down, i.e. gulp entire (literally or figuratively):--devour, drown, swallow (up).

That Greek word is only used in a handful of verses. The following verse might be relevant to what sense it might be meaning in 1 Peter 5:8?


Hebrews 11:29 By faith they passed through the Red sea as by dry land: which the Egyptians assaying to do were drowned(katapino)

In this example it led to death. And when you think about it, in the real world if a lion is devouring it's prey, that likely leads to death as well.

I'm not certain how anyone could think it's reasonable, if satan is bound in a pit, how that can lead to the death of anyone, in any sense, if he bound at the time?

Picture someone cast into a dungeon, chained up, then locked up. Who could they possibly harm/kill outside of the dungeon, or inside of the dungeon for that matter, while in that condition?

The following in the OT somewhat makes me think of Revelation 20:2-3.

Jeremiah 38:6 Then took they Jeremiah, and cast him into the dungeon of Malchiah the son of Hammelech, that was in the court of the prison: and they let down Jeremiah with cords. And in the dungeon there was no water, but mire: so Jeremiah sunk in the mire.

I'm sure while in that condition Jeremiah was a threat to others outside of the dungeon.

 

[grafted branch]

Maybe we should look and see what devour means in the Greek and how that same Greek word is used elsewhere?

katapino
kat-ap-ee'-no
from kata - kata 2596 and pinw - pino 4095; to drink down, i.e. gulp entire (literally or figuratively):--devour, drown, swallow (up).

That Greek word is only used in a handful of verses. The following verse might be relevant to what sense it might be meaning in 1 Peter 5:8?


Hebrews 11:29 By faith they passed through the Red sea as by dry land: which the Egyptians assaying to do were drowned(katapino)

In this example it led to death. And when you think about it, in the real world if a lion is devouring it's prey, that likely leads to death as well.

I'm not certain how anyone could think it's reasonable, if satan is bound in a pit, how that can lead to the death of anyone, in any sense, if he bound at the time?

Picture someone cast into a dungeon, chained up, then locked up. Who could they possibly harm/kill outside of the dungeon, or inside of the dungeon for that matter, while in that condition?

The following in the OT somewhat makes me think of Revelation 20:2-3.

Jeremiah 38:6 Then took they Jeremiah, and cast him into the dungeon of Malchiah the son of Hammelech, that was in the court of the prison: and they let down Jeremiah with cords. And in the dungeon there was no water, but mire: so Jeremiah sunk in the mire.

I'm sure while in that condition Jeremiah was a threat to others outside of the dungeon.

It might also be helpful if we can define what Satans roar is. I personally face temptation of some kind most every day but I wouldn’t call it Satans roar; nor would I call Eve’s temptation Satans roar, it was more like Satan coming as an angel of light.

If I were to hear a lion roar my instinct would be to keep myself safe. Romans 7:7 says I had not known sin except through the law and 1 Corinthians 15:56 says the strength of sin is the law. It seems to me that Satans roar could very well be the law.

How would you define Satans roar?

 

[claninja]

I realize there is already a current thread on this topic. Except that thread is for Amils only, and I'm not an Amil. Otherwise, instead of making a new thread on the same subject, I would have posted in that one instead. And since I'm interested in discussing this topic but can't since that other thread is Amil only, I'm left with starting a new thread on this same topic. But not to compete with the other one, but to be able to discuss this topic with others, regardless whether one is Premil or Amil.

Revelation 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.


I realize it is hard for both sides to do, keep Premil vs Amil out of it for a moment, and just let the text lead us to conclude what we need to conclude in regards to when the millennium is meaning.

When it says this in verse 5---This is the first resurrection---all interpreters, regardless which side of the debate they are on, should take that to be involving verse 4 and 6 and not this instead---But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. That is obviously not meaning the first resurrection if the first resurrection involves the thousand years, and that that is meaning after the thousand years.

Since there is still the rest of the dead following the first resurrection, this tends to tell us this.

Initially there is one big group, they are all dead. Then when the first resurrection occurs, some of this dead live again at that time while the remainder of the dead, they don't get to live again until the thousand years have expired. Does that mean they live again the moment the thousand years expire?

Though it could mean that, it doesn't have to mean that, because even if they didn't live again until a million years later, it would still agree with the text, that they don't live again until after the thousand years expire. A million years after the thousand years is clearly after it has expired. I'm just trying to illustrate a point here, so don't take this million years literally, as if it could be a million years after the thousand years when the rest of the dead live again.

When the rest of the dead live again, what sense is that meaning? Because what ever sense we take that to mean, why would that same sense not equally apply to those who have part in the first resurrection?

Another point I have raised in the past is this. Obviously, 2nd to Christ's, the bodily resurrection of the saints is the most important resurrection of all.

But if the first resurrection is not meaning the bodily resurrection of the saints, and that when the rest of the dead live again, is also not meaning the bodily resurrection of the saints, where then is the bodily resurrection of the saints recorded in Revelation 20? How is it reasonable that no resurrection event recorded in Revelation 20 is involving the bodily resurrection of the saints?

I'll stop here for now. Have some more to add but I think I will save that for later.

I’ve stopped viewing the millennium as a strict, literal, chronological event, and started seeing it as simply a story that contains the truths of the gospel.

1.) In the story: dead saints are raised to life again in order to reign with Christ as a kingdom of priests for 1,000 years, and will never face the 2nd death. The story calls this the first resurrection.

The gospel truths to be found in this story: Christ is the first to rise from the dead. As a result anyone who believes in His name has been given eternal life, is part of the kingdom of priests, will rise again to never face the 2nd death, and will reign with Him.

2.) In the story: Satan is bound for 1,000 years and then is released to persecute the saints.

The gospel truths to be found in this story: the works of the devil were destroyed, and the strong man was bound by Christ. Satan was cast out of his position, and began to prowl as a lion, looking to devour. Christians will face persecution.



I think there are merits to both the premil and Amil sides. However, taking this story as a literal chronological event is difficult for both sides to reconcile with what is taught in the gospels and epistles.