Is the thousand years of Revelation chapter 20 symbolic?

[iamlamad]

Many do not understand that Dispensationalists need a Pretrib removal of the Church,
.

Dispensationalists need a Pretrib removal

I ask you honestly: is this the way YOU form doctrine? Because of some internal "NEED?"

 

[Zao is life]

David, you are a futurist and a literalist. I am neither. So, everything you said there is all based on the assumption that everything (or at least almost everything) in the book of Revelation will occur only in the future and is based on the assumption that the text must be literal unless it's spelled out for us that it's figurative or symbolic. Our approaches to interpreting the book are so different that it is impossible for us to ever agree on everything in the book as long as that is the case.

My last post #539 was so long, because it was giving some of the reasons why Premils believe as they do, that I could not possibly add all I wanted to.

VERSES WHICH STRONGLY IMPLY THAT THERE IS NO LITERAL THOUSAND YEARS
​

II Peter 3:9-13
"The Lord is not slow concerning His promise, as some count slowness, but is long-suffering toward us, not willing that any of us should perish, but that all of us should come to repentance.
But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a rushing noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat. And the earth and the works in it will be burned up.

Then, all these things being about to be dissolved, what sort ought you to be in holy behavior and godliness,
looking for and rushing the coming of the Day of God, on account of which the heavens, being on fire, will melt away, and the elements will melt, burning with heat?
But according to His promise, we look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells)"

Revelation 20 states that Satan will be bound for a thousand years - but Revelation 20 says nothing about the return of Christ at the close of the thousand years - it only states that at the close of the thousand years, Satan will be loosed again, will go out deceiving again, gathering the nations of the earth - Gog and Magog - to battle against THE CAMP OF THE SAINTS, and this rebellion will be ended when fire comes down from God and devours them; and that Satan will then be destroyed in the lake of fire where the beast and false prophet are.

There is a total absence of mention of the return of Christ at the close of the millennium in the only chapter of the Revelation that talks about a millennium.

Furthermore, we are told in Revelation 11, 13 and 17 about the activities of one beast that rises from the bottomless pit that is defeated by Christ at His return and cast into the lake of fire.

1. We are told that this beast will make war with the saints and overcome them.
2. We are told that this beast will make war with the two witnesses when they complete their testimony, overcome them, and kill them.
3. We are told that this beast will hate the city the Revelation calls a harlot and "Babylon the Great", and will "eat her flesh and burn her with fire".
4. We are told that this beast will make war against the Lamb, gathering its armies together against him in a battle the Revelation calls "Armageddon".

In Revelation 19 we are told that Christ, coming down with His armies clothed in white linen, comes to war with this beast, will overcome it, and destroy it in the lake of fire.

Satan is only being mentioned as being cast into the lake of fire where the beast and false prophet are, after a thousand years when he is released and goes out to deceive. Christ is not mentioned as coming down to destroy the beast at the close of the millennium.

Peter was expecting the second coming of Christ, and he does not mention a thousand year period during which Satan has been bound. Is this because Satan had not been bound yet? According to Premils, yes, According to Amils, no.

The question is, should II Peter 3:9-13 be isolated from the rest of Biblical scripture which speaks about the events surrounding the the return of Christ, and be interpreted "as is" apart from all other scripture (because the passage, isolated from the rest of scripture, strongly implies that there is NO literal millennium), or should we compare all scripture with scripture?

I will come back to this in my next post - because there are a number of other passages and verses in the New Testament which strongly imply that there is NO literal millennium.

I will be comparing these passages with one another and with other passages which imply that the millennium IS literal.

... because that's what needs to be done - and Amils and Premils can continue to comment on whatever I say as I go along, if they want to.

Maybe .. just maybe .. there is a remote chance of us getting to the bottom of this "at last" (and maybe not).

 

[BABerean2]

Hebrews 9:28 28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

(no one from any "cult"wrote this. My guess is, Paul wrote it.)

Are you LOOKING for and expecting His coming - like tonight?
Can you honestly say yes to this?

For those that cannot say yes, then Jesus is not coming for you. It is scripture.

I am looking for Him every moment.


.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Since there are 3 aspects of this beast, that being---1) was---2)---is not---3) shall ascend out of the pit---it wouldn't be meaning when the beast was, that it only reigned for 42 months during that time. When it was not in the pit before ending up in the pit, this would likely involve thousands of years. And it wouldn't be when the beast is not, since it wouldn't be reigning at all. Therefore, it must be meaning once it ascends out of the pit.

Those verses I brought up in Revelation 13, I didn't include verse 5, since I assumed everyone already knows that verse indicates it shall continue for 42 months. That's what some of us define as a 42 month reign.

Revelation 13:5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.

What is possible, a literal 42 months might not be meant here. But even so, until a beast rises out of the sea first, where one of his heads has a deadly wound that is healed, and another beast rises out of the earth, there can't even be what is recorded in verse 5 until those things come to pass first. Nothing I can see that is recorded in Revelation 13 could be involving a time when the beast was, nor a time when the beast is not, but is only involving a time when the beast ascends out of the pit. The latter being where it's 42 month reign fits.

Which then brings us back to the martyrs recorded in Revelation 20:4 who are martyred for refusing to worship the beast where one of his heads has a deadly wound and is healed, and not during the time when the beast was, since that is meaning during a period of time these martyrs in Revelation 20:4 can't fit in, since John had these visions post the cross, and that when he had these visions, the beast was not at the time, and that when it was, this would have to be meaning a period of time prior to John receiving these visions, and that the 42 month reign of the beast in Revelation 13 is meaning during a period of time post John receiving these visions.


Unfortunetely, I only got around to addressing your first point. Not trying to avoid your other points. I'm old school. I don't think I will ever get used to expressing my thoughts into writing. It doesn't come natural to me as it apparently does with some of the rest of you. I find it tedious a lot of times. I never did like typing, I still don't.

Thanks for taking the time to respond. Many of us obviously see the context as figurative. We see the chain, seal, prison as spiritual and representing a curtailment of influence among the Gentiles, until that restraint is removed at the end for a little season, and Satan's final throw.

 

[sovereigngrace]

With respect to you, I was following your argument (though not agreeing with it, but at least understanding it) until you implied that DavidPT is insane by saying

Choosing words like "that is insane" is not conducive to any civilized discussion. If you had merely said,

then you would not (a) first annoy; and (b) lose your reader, so that the reader does not even want to read the rest.

So, the reason, as I see it, why Premils and Amils will continue to disagree, is because Premils understand that the 42 months cannot begin until the abyss is opened, "locusts" come out of the abyss, and we literally see the rise of this end-time final empire, and see how it makes war against the saints and overcomes them, how this ties in with Daniel's prophecy about the beast that is destroyed by the stone cut out without hands wearing out the saints of the most high and they (the saints) are given into his hand for a time, times and a half a time.

Therefore since, as you say,


It shows me exactly why Amils and Premils differ and will continue to differ.

This let's me heave a sigh of relief, however, that IF (notice I said IF in order to be objective) Premils are correct in the way we interpret it, then it won't take until after the return of Christ for Amils to see the error in their interpretation - because when the abyss is opened and these things begin to take place, Amils will begin questioning their interpretation.

So, to get back to what DavidPT was saying,

1. The abyss must have been opened for the beast that will receive its power, its seat (kingdom of Satan in the world) and great authority from Satan, to ascend out of it.
2. The beast must have ascended from the abyss in order for saints to be martyred for their refusal to receive its mark or the number of its name.
3. The saints of chapter 20 who were seen at the beginning of the thousand years, were martyred for their refusal to worship the beast, receive its mark or the number of its name.

It just so happens that in THE passage in the Revelation which CLOSES with talking about the harvest, we read:

And I saw another angel flying in mid-heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach to those dwelling on the earth, even to every nation and kindred and tongue and people, saying with a great voice,

Fear God and give glory to Him! For the hour of His judgment has come. And worship Him who made the heaven and the earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.

And another angel followed, saying, The great city, Babylon, has fallen, has fallen; because of the wine of the anger of her fornication; she has made all nations to drink.

And a third angel followed them, saying with a great voice, If anyone worships the beast and its image, and receives a mark in his forehead or in his hand, he also will drink of the wine of the anger of God, having been mixed undiluted in the cup of His wrath. And he will be tormented by fire and brimstone before the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever. And they have no rest day or night, those who worship the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.

Here is the patience of the saints. Here are the ones who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.

And I heard a voice from Heaven saying to me, Write, Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on. Yes, says the Spirit, they shall rest from their labors, and their works follow them.

THE PASSAGES CLOSES WITH THE HARVEST and THE WRATH OF GOD:

And I looked, and behold, a white cloud. And on the cloud sat one like the Son of man, having a golden crown on His head, and a sharp sickle in His hand.

And another angel came out of the temple, crying in a great voice to Him sitting on the cloud,

Thrust in Your sickle and reap, for the time has come for You to reap, for the harvest of the earth was dried. And He sitting on the cloud thrust in His sickle on the earth, and the earth was reaped.

And another angel came out of the temple in Heaven, also having a sharp sickle.

And another angel came out from the altar, who had authority over fire. And he spoke with a great cry to him who had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in your sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth, for her grapes are fully ripe.
And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the anger of God.
And the winepress was trodden outside the city, and blood came out of the winepress, even to the bridles of the horses, for the space of a thousand, six hundred stadia. (Revelation 14:6-20)

The above scenario, (which we must bear in mind has been revealed to us by the Lord), agrees with many other statements in the Old and New Testaments, for example:

Daniel's prophecy, which I highlight and bold below:

Daniel 7: 17-27
These four great beasts are four kings; they shall arise out of the earth.
But the saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom and possess the kingdom forever, even forever and ever.
Then I wanted to know the truth of the fourth beast, which was different from all the others, very frightening, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails of bronze; who devoured, broke in pieces, and stamped the rest with his feet;
and of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth speaking very great things, whose look was greater than his fellows.

I watched, and that horn made war with the saints and overcame them
until the Ancient of Days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High. And the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.
And he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom on earth, which shall be different from all kingdoms and shall devour the whole earth, and shall trample it and crush it.
And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise. And another shall arise after them. And he shall be different from the first, and he shall humble three kings.

And he shall speak words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and plot to change times and laws. And they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and one-half time.

But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his rulership, to cut off and to destroy until the end.

And the kingdom and rulership, and the greatness of the kingdom under all the heavens, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. And all kingdoms shall serve and obey Him.

It's the saints who are given into his hand for a time, times and a half a time - because it's the saints who are said to be "worn out" (Hebrew: b'la, afflict) by this beast, and in verse 21 we read that Daniel saw this beast making war against the saints, and prevailing against them.

In Revelation 13, the beast has 10 horns and makes war against the saints and overcomes them.

Besides the above, there are many other (a) prophecies made; and (b) statements made in both the Old and New Testaments which collide with the notion that (a) we are living in the one-thousand year period NOW; and (b) that the 42-month reign of the beast is upon us and has been upon us since Pentecost.

Therefore, as you can see, the notion (whatever you want to call it) that we Premils have that the martyrdom of the saints who refuse to receive the mark of the beast or the number of its name, will take place in the final 42 months preceding the Lord's return, is neither extra-Biblical, nor absurd, nor insane.

If Revelation's 42-month reign of the beast = 2,000 years + (x years), then Daniel's "time, times and a half a time" = 2,000 years + (x years) also, and the abyss was opened on the day of Christ's resurrection, or on the day of Pentecost, circa A.D 30-33; and the Greek word used to denote a one-thousand year period in the Revelation is faulty, and Satan has been both bound and "not bound" all at the same time for 2,000 years + (x years).

The saints of chapter 20 who were seen at the beginning of the thousand years, were martyred for their refusal to worship the beast, receive its mark or the number of its name - which you agreed only occurs at the close of the age immediately before Christ's return.

I don't see how you can use the words "absurd", "insane" and "extra-Biblical" to describe Premils and what we believe - because according to you there will be saints martyred at the close of the thousand years for their refusal to worship the beast or receive it mark, but they live and reign with Christ from the beginning of the one thousand years. ie a symbolic millennium before they were martyred for their refusal to worship the beast or his image or receive its mark.

I was not insinuating David or any Premil were insane. You need to reread my post. I was challenging his construction of something Amils do not believe and then his condemnation of the same by that false construction. It would be insane for Amils to do the same.

 

[iamlamad]

I am looking for Him every moment.

Are you saying then that you don't find anything in scripture that must happen before Christ comes again?

 

[sovereigngrace]

What exactly are Amils trying to prove by these arguments? Most Premils agree that a 'thousand' in the Bible doesn't always mean in the literal sense every single time. Some of us are not disputing that. But what Amils seem to be disputing is, that a thousand can also mean in the literal sense in the Bible as well.

What Amils really need to be trying to prove is, that when a cardinal number is followed by years in the Bible, that it doesn't mean in the literal sense every time. Meaning any amount of years not involving a thousand, in order to determine whether or not there is a strict pattern in the Bible, concerning this, and that if there is, why this would not also apply to thousand if it too is followed by years.

But it does. Scripture shows that the phrase is a figurative term. There is a big difference between "a thousand" and 1,000 [one thousand] as you keep suggesting. The number 'one' is not included in Revelation 20, Premils must insert it in. Rather it is the more general thousand. What is more, the setting is overwhelmingly symbolic.

The figure a “thousand years” is employed ten times in Scripture – twice in the Old Testament and eight times in the New Testament. Significantly, of the eight mentions in the New, six are found in the same book of the Bible – Revelation. And of even greater note, all are disproportionately found together within the same chapter – the one currently under examination – Revelation 20. The two other New Testament references are found in the book of 2 Peter 3. In all the references, they indicate a large unspecific indefinite time period.

The two Old Testament passages are found in Psalm 90 and Ecclesiastes 6. And in both references the figure ‘a thousand years’ is used in a symbolic or figurative sense to denote an indefinite time-span. The first mention is in Psalm 90:3-5, where we read, “For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night. Thou carriest them away as with a flood; they are as a sleep: in the morning they are like grass which groweth up.”

This passage is often advanced by Premillennialists as proof of a literal physical future earthly millennium. Such people confidently advance it in such a way, as if it states, ‘For a thousand years in thy sight are but as tomorrow which is yet to come’. However, a careful reading of this inspired narrative reveals that it rather in stark contrast declares, “For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past.” This passage therefore does not in the slightest allude to the future, never mind to some supposed impending earthly post Second Advent temporal period, but clearly to the past. This passage simply reveals profound truth about God and His infinite view of time rather than any misconceived earthly idea about a future millennium.

The thousand years are notably "as yesterday" rather than 'as tomorrow' or 'as a future period after Christ's Coming'.

A ‘thousand years’ is here used to describe God’s eternal view of time, which is in stark contrast to man’s limited understanding. This text teaches us that time is nothing with the Lord. God lives in eternity and His perspective of time far exceeds the finite mind of man. A ‘thousand years’ in this life is but a flash in the light of eternity. This reading goes on then to describe the solemn reality of the fleetingness of time and the brevity of life, saying, “we spend our years as a tale that is told” (v 9).

No wonder the Psalmist humbly prays to God, “teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom” (Psalm 90:12).

In Ecclesiastes 6:3,6-7 we find the second Old Testament reference to a thousand years. Here the term is simply used to represent an idea rather than outlining a specific measurable period of time. It reads, “If a man beget an hundred children, and live many years, so that the days of his years be many, and his soul be not filled with good, and also that he have no burial; I say, that an untimely birth is better than he…Yea, though he live a thousand years twice told, yet hath he seen no good: do not all go to one place? All the labour of man is for his mouth, and yet the appetite is not filled.”

This text is not remotely suggesting that a person could actually live to be a thousand years multiplied by two (or 2,000 years), such is, and has always been since the fall, a naturally impossibility. Rather, the text expresses a deep spiritual truth that even if someone lives to an incomprehensible age outside of Christ and hope, this life is completely meaningless. The term a 1000 multiplied by 2 therefore represents a hypothetically number, which spiritually impresses the important reality of the brevity and futility of carnal life. No man in Scripture, or since, has ever lived to the age of 2,000 years old.

Interestingly, the only place outside of Revelation 20 that the term a thousand years is mentioned in the New Testament is in 2 Peter 3. There, it is significantly used in an entirely figurative sense. In this chapter, Peter is specifically addressing the cynics who live in the last days that doubt the appearing of the Lord at His Second Advent and indeed harbour the foolish notion that He will not come at all. It is in this context that he addresses these misguided doubters, saying, “there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation” (2 Peter 3:3-4).

Peter, however, says in response, “For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (vv 5-9).

This familiar passage closely parallels the reading that we have just analysed in Psalm 90, indicating the same spiritual truth – that God is not limited to time. Again, notably, the contrast between the number one and a thousand is employed to simply represent an important divine truth.

Some theologians mistakenly attempt to use this passage to argue that one of God’s eternal days represents a literal thousand earthly years and that the commencement occurs at the time of Second Advent. However, they do err in their assumption, in that, this text simply indicates the briefness of time with God. 2 Peter 3 does not in anyway indicate a future earthly millennium kingdom anywhere in this reading. Peter is simply reminding such people that time is absolutely nothing to the King of glory. He ultimately sits outside of time in the realm of eternity. Time is but a blink to His infinite mind and to the eternal state.

Christ speaks of the unprepared state of many professing believers, who are exposed for their unpreparedness in Luke 12:45-46, saying, “if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken; The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.”

It is in this context that he addresses these misguided doubters. Peter says in response, “beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day” (v 8).

Peter thus outlines two distinct yet contrasting time equations in this passage for the sole purpose of expressing a deep spiritual truth. Notwithstanding, and not surprisingly, the Premillennialist are swift to selectively advance the first aspect of this calculation as supposed evidence that one of God’s heavenly days represents a thousand literal temporal earthly years. However, whilst they unquestionably address, and happily literalise, the first part of this calculation they are understandably careful to side step the second part of the sum. Evidently, such is for the reason that it doesn’t fit their flawed hyper-literalist mode of interpretation.

Significantly, this reading in no place suggests the day of the Lord lasts a literal 1,000 years. The Premillennialist forces that into the reading. In the above passage it simply indicates “one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day” (v 8).

Those who take the aforementioned verses to support a future 1,000-year millennium of peace are faced with an insurmountable inconsistency when they examine the detail of the remainder of the chapter, and try and get it to fit their paradigm. 2 Peter 3:10-13 continues, “the day of the Lord will come (or arrive) as thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall ‘go or pass away, or perish’ with a great noise, and the elements shall be ‘loosed by being set on fire’, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be ‘burned up utterly or consumed wholly’. Seeing then that all these things shall be ‘dissolved, loosened or broke up’ … Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be ‘dissolved, melted or loosed’, and the elements shall ‘melt by being set on fire’?” Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”

This passage is so clear, final and all-consummating that one wonders how anyone could remotely imagine that creation could survive such an all-consummating fiery event. One also wonders how the Holy Spirit could have possibly advanced more explicit language to indicate the idea of total devastation. Whatever way you look at this chapter there is absolutely no allowance made or possibility for a future post-Second Coming millennial kingdom on this earth. Peter knows of no other coming of Christ other than that which eradicate the heavens, elements and the earth in one stupendous conflagration.

Anyone who contends that this passage supports the Premillennial theory that the day of the Lord lasts a literal 1,000 years after the second coming must surely see the absolute absurdity of their notion in the light of these last verses. This vivid account of complete devastation and utter destruction that occurs in this final day totally destroys any credence for the advancement of the Premillennial supposition. If this day lasts 1,000 years, as the Premillennialist passionately argues, then it is unquestionably a thousand years of awful and continuous judgment, which is in stark contradiction to the peaceful (albeit goat-infested) millennium that Premillennialists try to portray in their literature.

 

[iamlamad]

It just so happens that in THE passage in the Revelation which CLOSES with talking about the harvest, we read:

And I saw another angel flying in mid-heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach to those dwelling on the earth, even to every nation and kindred and tongue and people, saying with a great voice,

Fear God and give glory to Him! For the hour of His judgment has come. And worship Him who made the heaven and the earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.

And another angel followed, saying, The great city, Babylon, has fallen, has fallen; because of the wine of the anger of her fornication; she has made all nations to drink.

And a third angel followed them, saying with a great voice, If anyone worships the beast and its image, and receives a mark in his forehead or in his hand, he also will drink of the wine of the anger of God, having been mixed undiluted in the cup of His wrath. And he will be tormented by fire and brimstone before the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever. And they have no rest day or night, those who worship the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.

Here is the patience of the saints. Here are the ones who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.

And I heard a voice from Heaven saying to me, Write, Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on. Yes, says the Spirit, they shall rest from their labors, and their works follow them.

As I read Revelation, the 42 months starts at the midpoint of the week, which in Revelation is marked by the 7th trumpet - as proven by the fleeing which starts a second or two later, as seen in 12:6.

The above verses, in particular the message of the third angel and the next verse, about the patience of the saints, is telling us that the days of great tribulation that Jesus spoke of is JUST ABOUT to begin: meaning, the Beast and False Prophet are just about to begin enforcing the worship of the image and receiving the mark. It is no coincidence that the beheaded just begin to show up in heaven in chapter 15.

How strange then that some people imagine the days of GT are at the 5th seal.

I see the 70th week of Daniel "Marked" by 7's: the 7th seal starts the week, the 7th trumpet marks the midpoint, and the 7th vial ends it.

It is no coincidence that there are 5 mentions of the 3.5 years in chapters 11, 12, and 13. These are midpoint chapters.

 

[iamlamad]

But it does. Scripture shows that the phrase is a figurative term. There is a big difference between "a thousand" and 1,000 [one thousand] as you keep suggesting. The number 'one' is not included in Revelation 20, Premils must insert it in. Rather it is the more general thousand. What is more, the setting is overwhelmingly symbolic.

The figure a “thousand years” is employed ten times in Scripture – twice in the Old Testament and eight times in the New Testament. Significantly, of the eight mentions in the New, six are found in the same book of the Bible – Revelation. And of even greater note, all are disproportionately found together within the same chapter – the one currently under examination – Revelation 20. The two other New Testament references are found in the book of 2 Peter 3. In all the references, they indicate a large unspecific indefinite time period.

The truth is, in at least one Greek manuscript, three times John wrote "THE thousand years."

How to others look on "thousand" without a one in front?
"Scientists estimate that it took a thousand years for an inch of topsoil to accumulate"
"No experiments, monumental disasters: Why it took a thousand years to develop a specialized fishing industry in Iceland"
"It took a thousand years but I have finally revived my Youtube"
"It felt like it took a thousand years to finish college. "
"It took a thousand years to build the Louvre as it is today"

Would anyone doubt that "a thousand years" is different than "one thousand years?"

"The Thousand Years War by Angel Ramon Medina"
"The Thousand Years of Uncertainty, A.D. 500 to A.D. 1500"
"The Thousand Years of Christmas was the sixth short story in the Short Trips anthology"
"Title: The thousand-years old undivided Hungary and the treaty-monster of Trianon"

(Quotes thanks to Google)

Would anyone doubt that "the thousand years" is different than "one thousand years?"

 

[BABerean2]

Are you saying then that you don't find anything in scripture that must happen before Christ comes again?

The more I study scripture, the more I understand the Dispensationalist's "signs" of Christ's return fly in the face of what Christ said about no man knows the day or hour of His return.

How many "Blood Moons" books does it take for us to see the truth about the Dispensationalist's claims?
How many refunds did they give when their book was proven wrong?

Hal Lindsay used to teach Christ would have to come back by 1988, because it was "one generation" after 1948.
When will we learn not to trust these people?

.

 

[sovereigngrace]

The truth is, in at least one Greek manuscript, three times John wrote "THE thousand years."

How to others look on "thousand" without a one in front?
"Scientists estimate that it took a thousand years for an inch of topsoil to accumulate"
"No experiments, monumental disasters: Why it took a thousand years to develop a specialized fishing industry in Iceland"
"It took a thousand years but I have finally revived my Youtube"
"It felt like it took a thousand years to finish college. "
"It took a thousand years to build the Louvre as it is today"

Would anyone doubt that "a thousand years" is different than "one thousand years?"

"The Thousand Years War by Angel Ramon Medina"
"The Thousand Years of Uncertainty, A.D. 500 to A.D. 1500"
"The Thousand Years of Christmas was the sixth short story in the Short Trips anthology"
"Title: The thousand-years old undivided Hungary and the treaty-monster of Trianon"

(Quotes thanks to Google)

Would anyone doubt that "the thousand years" is different than "one thousand years?"

10, 100, 1,000 and 10,000 are often used as round figures in Scripture to describe greater truths. We do the same today. The term "a thousand" is used in most languages in a figurative sense to represent a large number or a large indefinite period. Certain common numbers are frequently used in Scripture as valuable symbols to represent particular divine truths or ideas; a thousand and ten thousand are two such numbers. They are employed as familiar figures to impress deep spiritual principles in a distinctly comprehendible and identifiable way. It is not necessarily the exact numerical size of the figure outlined that is important but the spiritual idea that it represents. In fact, English dictionaries recognise the indefinite nature of a thousand defining it variously as a very large number or a great number or amount. This use is very common in our daily language.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Thank you for explaining your view so well, Spiritual Israel!

Thank you for saying that. It honestly took a lot of time and effort, so it's good to know that it was appreciated even by someone who disagrees with my conclusions.

I think we are getting down to the crux of the matter.

As you have correctly pointed out, the reason why Premils and Amils will continue to disagree, is because Premils believe that the 42 months cannot begin until the abyss is opened, "locusts" come out of the abyss, and we literally see the rise of this end-time final empire, and see how it makes war against the saints and overcomes them, and how this ties in with Daniel's prophecy about the beast that is destroyed by the stone cut out without hands wearing out the saints of the most high and they (the saints) are given into his hand for a time, times and a half a time.

For the sake of saving space, I'm not going to quote your entire post. Your post was long (like mine) and wasn't easy to follow, but I get the gist of what you're trying to say. Thank you for taking the time to explain your understanding of the beast.

I know you think you have made an airtight argument here, but, probably not to your surprise, I don't find it to be convincing. It's a little disappointing that you didn't really respond directly to any of the points I made, but I will respond directly to a couple of yours.

The above scenario, (which we must bear in mind has been revealed to us by the Lord), agrees with many other statements in the Old and New Testaments, for example (only one example to shorten this already lengthy post), Daniel's prophecy, which I highlight and bold below:

Daniel 7: 17-27
"These four great beasts are four kings; they shall arise out of the earth. But the saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom and possess the kingdom forever, even forever and ever.

Then I wanted to know the truth of the fourth beast, which was different from all the others, very frightening, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails of bronze; who devoured, broke in pieces, and stamped the rest with his feet; and of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth speaking very great things, whose look was greater than his fellows.

I watched, and that horn made war with the saints and overcame them until the Ancient of Days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High. And the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.

And he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom on earth, which shall be different from all kingdoms and shall devour the whole earth, and shall trample it and crush it.

And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise. And another shall arise after them. And he shall be different from the first, and he shall humble three kings.

And he shall speak words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and plot to change times and laws. And they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and one-half time.

But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his rulership, to cut off and to destroy until the end.

And the kingdom and rulership, and the greatness of the kingdom under all the heavens, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. And all kingdoms shall serve and obey Him."

[ In verses 11-12 of the same passage, it states: "Then I was looking because of the voice of the great words which the horn spoke. I watched until the beast was slain, and his body was destroyed and given to the burning flame.

And the rest of the beasts, their dominion was taken away. Yet their lives were made longer for a season and time." ]

--------------------------------------------------​

In Daniel, it's the saints who are given into the beast's hand for a time, times and a half a time - because it's the saints who are said to be "worn out" (Hebrew: b'la, afflict) by this beast, and in verse 21 we read that Daniel saw this beast making war against the saints, and prevailing against them."

I think it's fair to conclude that the fourth beast that Daniel prophesied about is the same beast (the first beast) that John prophesied about in the book of Revelation. The beast that was, is not and will ascend out of the abyss.

What needs to be kept in mind when interpreting Daniel 7:17-27 is that it is an explanation of the visions Daniel had just prior to that.

15 “I, Daniel, was troubled in spirit, and the visions that passed through my mind disturbed me. 16 I approached one of those standing there and asked him the meaning of all this.

Which included a vision of four beasts and their descriptions as well as this vision:

Daniel 7:13-14
13 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

It should be obvious that this is speaking of Jesus (the Son of Man) and I'm sure you would agree. But, what is the timing of this vision? Is this an unfulfilled future event as you believe (I assume that since part of Daniel 7:17-27 contains the explanation of this vision and you believe Daniel 7:17-27 all occurs in the future) or is a vision of something that occurred in the past (our past, not Daniel's).

I believe this passage should be understood to be speaking of the ascension of Jesus Christ to heaven after His resurrection rather than His second coming as most premils believe. Notice it speaks of Him approaching the Ancient of Days, which I'm sure most of us would agree is a reference to God the Father. Where else would this happen except in heaven?

Note the similarities in Daniel 7:13-14 to this:

Ephesians 1:18-23
18 I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in his holy people, 19 and his incomparably great power for us who believe. That power is the same as the mighty strength 20 he exerted when he raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, 21 far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. 22 And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, 23 which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.

In this passage, Paul declares that when God raised Christ from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in heaven (a clear reference to what occurred upon Christ's ascension) Christ was then in a position "far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked". Compare that to Daniel 7:13-14 which indicates that He would "be given authority, glory and sovereign power" and it should then be easy to deduce that the timing of the fulfillment of Daniel 7:13-14 was when Christ was resurrected and then caught up to heaven at the right hand of God the Father.

So, this establishes the timing of what Daniel was talking about in Daniel 7:17-27. He was not just prophesying about a future time (from now) as premils believe, but rather of a time that would begin when Christ was resurrected and ascended to heaven. This must be taken into account when trying to interpret Daniel 7:17-27.

In Revelation 13, the beast that has ascended out of the opened abyss has 10 horns and makes war against the saints, and overcomes them. The same beast makes war against the two witnesses, overcomes them, and kills them.

First of all, Rev 13 does not describe the beat ascending out of the abyss. It talks about the beast ascending "out of the sea". I made this same point to David. How do you know that "the sea" should be understood as being the same as the abyss? If that was the case, why wasn't John given a vision of the beast coming out of the abyss rather than "the sea"? I see no reason to equate the two as if the timing of the beast coming out of the sea has to be the same as the beast coming out of the pit.

If the 42 months and the 1260 days of Revelation 11 refer to the same time period as the 42 months of Rev 13:5, as I believe, then that would be all the evidence we need to prove that the timing of the beast coming out of the sea is not the same as the beast coming out of the pit. Allow me to explain.

Rev 11:1-6
I was given a reed like a measuring rod and was told, “Go and measure the temple of God and the altar, with its worshipers. 2 But exclude the outer court; do not measure it, because it has been given to the Gentiles. They will trample on the holy city for 42 months. 3 And I will appoint my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth.” 4 They are “the two olive trees” and the two lampstands, and “they stand before the Lord of the earth.” 5 If anyone tries to harm them, fire comes from their mouths and devours their enemies. This is how anyone who wants to harm them must die. 6 They have power to shut up the heavens so that it will not rain during the time they are prophesying; and they have power to turn the waters into blood and to strike the earth with every kind of plague as often as they want.7 Now when they have finished their testimony, the beast that comes up from the Abyss will attack them, and overpower and kill them.

In Rev 13:5 it says "the beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise its authority for forty-two months". To me this lines up with God allowing the Gentiles (heathen) to "trample on the holy city for 42 months".

But, at the same time, despite the beast wreaking havoc during that time, the two witnesses (which I believe symbolically represent the witness of the church) cannot be harmed. I believe that is a symbolic representation of the fact that the gates of hell will not prevail over the church (Matt 16:18). So, the 42 months (1260 days, time, times and half a time) that follow the ascension of the beast out of the sea symbolically represent the time since Christ's resurrection.

It's important to note that the beast doe not ascend out of the abyss/pit until after the two witnesses "have finished their testimony" (Rev 11:7). Which means he does not ascend out of the abyss until after the 42 months/1260 days. You have him ascending out of the abyss at the beginning of the 42 months. Rev 11 shows that he will have 3.5 days (Rev 11:7-12) to make war against the two witnesses (the church) and overcome them. Since you understand the time periods literally (I assume) then how can Rev 11:7-12 (the time of the beast after coming out of the abyss) refer to the same time period as Rev 13:1-8 (the time of the beast coming out of the sea) in your view?

I believe that the 3.5 days equates to Satan's little season described in Rev 20:7-9.

I believe Rev 11, 12 and 13 all symbolically represents a time when the dragon (Satan) and beast make war with the church but at the same time cannot stop the witness of the church (the preaching of the gospel) throughout the world. That time began after the resurrection of Christ. The coming in power of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost right after the ascension of Christ ensured that nothing was going to stop the gospel from going out into the world through the power of the Holy Spirit.

So, it's a question of who is (unwittingly and without realizing it) "mentally adjusting the meaning" of many passages of scripture to fit in with their understanding: Premils, or Amils?

Of course, I believe the answer to that question is premils.

I believe premil "mentally adjusts the meaning" of many passages of clear, straightforward scripture. These would include Matt 24:35-39, John 5:28-29, 1 Thess 4:13-5:6, 2 Thess 1:7-10, and 2 Peter 3:3-13 among many others.

 

[sovereigngrace]

The more I study scripture, the more I understand the Dispensationalist's "signs" of Christ's return fly in the face of what Christ said about no man knows the day or hour of His return.

How many "Blood Moons" books does it take for us to see the truth about the Dispensationalist's claims?
How many refunds did they give when their book was proven wrong?

Hal Lindsay used to teach Christ would have to come back by 1988, because it was "one generation" after 1948.
When will we learn not to trust these people?

.

Exactly bro. Deu 18:22 Whenever a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, and the oracle does not come about or the word is not fulfilled, then the LORD has not spoken it. The prophet will have spoken presumptuously, so you need not fear him."

 

[Spiritual Jew]

The truth is, in at least one Greek manuscript, three times John wrote "THE thousand years."

How to others look on "thousand" without a one in front?
"Scientists estimate that it took a thousand years for an inch of topsoil to accumulate"
"No experiments, monumental disasters: Why it took a thousand years to develop a specialized fishing industry in Iceland"
"It took a thousand years but I have finally revived my Youtube"
"It felt like it took a thousand years to finish college. "
"It took a thousand years to build the Louvre as it is today"

Would anyone doubt that "a thousand years" is different than "one thousand years?"

"The Thousand Years War by Angel Ramon Medina"
"The Thousand Years of Uncertainty, A.D. 500 to A.D. 1500"
"The Thousand Years of Christmas was the sixth short story in the Short Trips anthology"
"Title: The thousand-years old undivided Hungary and the treaty-monster of Trianon"

(Quotes thanks to Google)

Would anyone doubt that "the thousand years" is different than "one thousand years?"

What difference does that make if the one thousand years is meant to be understood symbolically? Which amils obviously believe it does. Whether or not the term would normally in literal, straightforward text (which Rev 20 is not) mean literally "one thousand" is irrelevant because we're talking about a highly figurative book here.

Take, for example, the reference to "the beast". Since it's THE beast it's referring to one beast, right? So, it's a literal beast then, right? No. The beast is symbolic. Just like the thousand years.

 

[DavidPT]

The 4 Gospels have plenty to say about a harvest. Jesus was not just talking about the end of the OT. He was talking about the end of the NT some 1990 years later.

I know the 4 Gospels do. But per that other post that went over my head, you seemed to suggest that the harvest doesn't end with the end of the age, but continues post that point. Actually, I'm not sure what you were trying to convey, not because I'm incapable of grasping things, but mainly because I'm not familiar with the position you are proposing.

 

[Timtofly]

So, if Rev 12 and Rev 13 are speaking of the same time periods, as I believe, then that means the dragon (Satan) and the beast started making war with Christians right after Jesus ascended to heaven. Obviously, that didn't just happen for 42 months, so the 42 months has to be symbolic. It shouldn't be that hard to believe that the time periods mentioned in the book are symbolic when so much of the rest of the book is clearly symbolic. But, I know you, with your tendency to see things literally, have a very hard time seeing it that way.

The dragon and the FP relationship was prophecied in Daniel 11. It started with the Greek kingdom. In 2 Thessalonians 2 Paul says the deception already started before his time. The FP was dead, but Satan kept going behind the scenes until today. Somehow Satan will bring back the FP, and for 42 months work with the FP again. This relationship and deception has been ongoing for 2500 years. A times and half a time. It will not go on for the time (millennium). The FP will be in the lake of fire. Satan will be confined to sheol. Your 42 months does not exactly match the 2500 year history. 1000 years is left over from Daniel's prophecy.

 

[Timtofly]

Many do not understand that Dispensationalists need a Pretrib removal of the Church, so that God can go back and deal with Israel under the Old Covenant system. It is one of the pillars of the doctrine. Like a three legged stool, the doctrine collapses without it.


Once a person comes to understand the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and specifically applied to the Church in 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, and Hebrews 12:22-24, the Two Peoples of God Doctrine of modern Dispensational Theology falls apart, and the pretrib removal of the Church falls with it.

Except this short 2+ years after the rapture is the final harvest. Where does John mention a covenant with your "athiest" Israel? All John says is that 144K Jewish male virgins, note virginity is the only social responsibility term mentioned, are sealed. 12k from each tribe. John did not explain the details nor genetic rifraf that some bring up. If John did not explain it, we as readers should not have to explain it, but trust God's Word.

Objection about a covenant denied.

 

[BABerean2]

Except this short 2+ years after the rapture is the final harvest. Where does John mention a covenant with your "athiest" Israel? All John says is that 144K Jewish male virgins, note virginity is the only social responsibility term mentioned, are sealed. 12k from each tribe. John did not explain the details nor genetic rifraf that some bring up. If John did not explain it, we as readers should not have to explain it, but trust God's Word.

Objection about a covenant denied.

Are you ignoring what Paul said about "genealogies" in Titus 3:9?

If you go to the modern State of Israel and ask those living there what tribe they are from, what kind of answer do you expect to get?
You will have the same luck finding a woolly mammoth roaming around in your back yard.
Both the pure bloodlines of the original twelve tribes, and the woolly mammoths are now extinct.


Who was James speaking to below, who were his "brethren" in the "faith".
Remember the fact that the Northern tribes were taken into captivity hundreds of years before the time of Christ.

Jas 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
Testing of Your Faith
Jas 1:2 My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations;
Jas 1:3 Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience.


.

 

[Timtofly]

But it does. Scripture shows that the phrase is a figurative term. There is a big difference between "a thousand" and 1,000 [one thousand] as you keep suggesting. The number 'one' is not included in Revelation 20, Premils must insert it in. Rather it is the more general thousand. What is more, the setting is overwhelmingly symbolic.

The figure a “thousand years” is employed ten times in Scripture – twice in the Old Testament and eight times in the New Testament. Significantly, of the eight mentions in the New, six are found in the same book of the Bible – Revelation. And of even greater note, all are disproportionately found together within the same chapter – the one currently under examination – Revelation 20. The two other New Testament references are found in the book of 2 Peter 3. In all the references, they indicate a large unspecific indefinite time period.

The two Old Testament passages are found in Psalm 90 and Ecclesiastes 6. And in both references the figure ‘a thousand years’ is used in a symbolic or figurative sense to denote an indefinite time-span. The first mention is in Psalm 90:3-5, where we read, “For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night. Thou carriest them away as with a flood; they are as a sleep: in the morning they are like grass which groweth up.”

This passage is often advanced by Premillennialists as proof of a literal physical future earthly millennium. Such people confidently advance it in such a way, as if it states, ‘For a thousand years in thy sight are but as tomorrow which is yet to come’. However, a careful reading of this inspired narrative reveals that it rather in stark contrast declares, “For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past.” This passage therefore does not in the slightest allude to the future, never mind to some supposed impending earthly post Second Advent temporal period, but clearly to the past. This passage simply reveals profound truth about God and His infinite view of time rather than any misconceived earthly idea about a future millennium.

The thousand years are notably "as yesterday" rather than 'as tomorrow' or 'as a future period after Christ's Coming'.

A ‘thousand years’ is here used to describe God’s eternal view of time, which is in stark contrast to man’s limited understanding. This text teaches us that time is nothing with the Lord. God lives in eternity and His perspective of time far exceeds the finite mind of man. A ‘thousand years’ in this life is but a flash in the light of eternity. This reading goes on then to describe the solemn reality of the fleetingness of time and the brevity of life, saying, “we spend our years as a tale that is told” (v 9).

No wonder the Psalmist humbly prays to God, “teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom” (Psalm 90:12).

In Ecclesiastes 6:3,6-7 we find the second Old Testament reference to a thousand years. Here the term is simply used to represent an idea rather than outlining a specific measurable period of time. It reads, “If a man beget an hundred children, and live many years, so that the days of his years be many, and his soul be not filled with good, and also that he have no burial; I say, that an untimely birth is better than he…Yea, though he live a thousand years twice told, yet hath he seen no good: do not all go to one place? All the labour of man is for his mouth, and yet the appetite is not filled.”

This text is not remotely suggesting that a person could actually live to be a thousand years multiplied by two (or 2,000 years), such is, and has always been since the fall, a naturally impossibility. Rather, the text expresses a deep spiritual truth that even if someone lives to an incomprehensible age outside of Christ and hope, this life is completely meaningless. The term a 1000 multiplied by 2 therefore represents a hypothetically number, which spiritually impresses the important reality of the brevity and futility of carnal life. No man in Scripture, or since, has ever lived to the age of 2,000 years old.

Interestingly, the only place outside of Revelation 20 that the term a thousand years is mentioned in the New Testament is in 2 Peter 3. There, it is significantly used in an entirely figurative sense. In this chapter, Peter is specifically addressing the cynics who live in the last days that doubt the appearing of the Lord at His Second Advent and indeed harbour the foolish notion that He will not come at all. It is in this context that he addresses these misguided doubters, saying, “there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation” (2 Peter 3:3-4).

Peter, however, says in response, “For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (vv 5-9).

This familiar passage closely parallels the reading that we have just analysed in Psalm 90, indicating the same spiritual truth – that God is not limited to time. Again, notably, the contrast between the number one and a thousand is employed to simply represent an important divine truth.

Some theologians mistakenly attempt to use this passage to argue that one of God’s eternal days represents a literal thousand earthly years and that the commencement occurs at the time of Second Advent. However, they do err in their assumption, in that, this text simply indicates the briefness of time with God. 2 Peter 3 does not in anyway indicate a future earthly millennium kingdom anywhere in this reading. Peter is simply reminding such people that time is absolutely nothing to the King of glory. He ultimately sits outside of time in the realm of eternity. Time is but a blink to His infinite mind and to the eternal state.

Christ speaks of the unprepared state of many professing believers, who are exposed for their unpreparedness in Luke 12:45-46, saying, “if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken; The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.”

It is in this context that he addresses these misguided doubters. Peter says in response, “beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day” (v 8).

Peter thus outlines two distinct yet contrasting time equations in this passage for the sole purpose of expressing a deep spiritual truth. Notwithstanding, and not surprisingly, the Premillennialist are swift to selectively advance the first aspect of this calculation as supposed evidence that one of God’s heavenly days represents a thousand literal temporal earthly years. However, whilst they unquestionably address, and happily literalise, the first part of this calculation they are understandably careful to side step the second part of the sum. Evidently, such is for the reason that it doesn’t fit their flawed hyper-literalist mode of interpretation.

Significantly, this reading in no place suggests the day of the Lord lasts a literal 1,000 years. The Premillennialist forces that into the reading. In the above passage it simply indicates “one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day” (v 8).

Those who take the aforementioned verses to support a future 1,000-year millennium of peace are faced with an insurmountable inconsistency when they examine the detail of the remainder of the chapter, and try and get it to fit their paradigm. 2 Peter 3:10-13 continues, “the day of the Lord will come (or arrive) as thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall ‘go or pass away, or perish’ with a great noise, and the elements shall be ‘loosed by being set on fire’, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be ‘burned up utterly or consumed wholly’. Seeing then that all these things shall be ‘dissolved, loosened or broke up’ … Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be ‘dissolved, melted or loosed’, and the elements shall ‘melt by being set on fire’?” Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”

This passage is so clear, final and all-consummating that one wonders how anyone could remotely imagine that creation could survive such an all-consummating fiery event. One also wonders how the Holy Spirit could have possibly advanced more explicit language to indicate the idea of total devastation. Whatever way you look at this chapter there is absolutely no allowance made or possibility for a future post-Second Coming millennial kingdom on this earth. Peter knows of no other coming of Christ other than that which eradicate the heavens, elements and the earth in one stupendous conflagration.

Anyone who contends that this passage supports the Premillennial theory that the day of the Lord lasts a literal 1,000 years after the second coming must surely see the absolute absurdity of their notion in the light of these last verses. This vivid account of complete devastation and utter destruction that occurs in this final day totally destroys any credence for the advancement of the Premillennial supposition. If this day lasts 1,000 years, as the Premillennialist passionately argues, then it is unquestionably a thousand years of awful and continuous judgment, which is in stark contradiction to the peaceful (albeit goat-infested) millennium that Premillennialists try to portray in their literature.

Where is your Scriptural proof of your private interpretation of eternal time? You are viewing eternity as a human. You claim time goes on forever. That is not God's eternity. In God's eternity there is no change and no time at all. The relationship of 1000 years as a Lord's Day only deals with this creation. Creation is finite, not indefinite. Creation has a beginning and end in God. God is the alpha and omega, the beginning and end. That is the definition of creation.

Creation cannot be indefinite nor can the term a thousand. You cannot interpret this creation time of a thousand years which is definite, to eternity where time does not exist at at all. God deals with creation in days. Each day is 1000 definite years.

Science is correct in the fact this is a three dimensional creation. Albert Einstein claimed it was "bound" by the 4th dimension called time. GOD exist in eternity, however in this 3 dimensional creation GOD is physically also 3 in 1 being. Time being definite and the 4th aspect of GOD in His creation. This being a 3 dimensional creation and we have a trinity special for this creation. All this is physical in this creation. We see it as spiritual, because we have veil of blindness to the rest of creation. Placing any of creation including terms for time outside of creation and stating they are terms where time does not even exist is error. Your claim needs proof that any of creation relates to anything outside of creation. Even God the father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit only exist as part of this creation. They are the physical emminations of GOD only. That the Lamb is GOD is proof that GOD declared it happened even before Creation. You accuse dispensationalist of messing with time. Separating the spiritual from the physical as not part of creation is an even greater error. The spiritual is just as much a physical aspect of current creation.

The disobedience of Adam caused the split between physical and spiritual. The 6th seal will reveal this split to all humanity. God will give living humans 5+ years before the final millennium to choose God or Satan. That is the reason those 5 descriptions in chapter 6 match up with those destroyed in chapter 19. That is why leading up to the final battle God reminds us that it is too late at that time with the thief in the night reference. Humans have had over 1900 years to be prepared, yet some will still choose to fight with Satan.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

The question is, should II Peter 3:9-13 be isolated from the rest of Biblical scripture which speaks about the events surrounding the the return of Christ, and be interpreted "as is" apart from all other scripture (because the passage, isolated from the rest of scripture, strongly implies that there is NO literal millennium), or should we compare all scripture with scripture?

That is a question we can ask about any passage that we think supports our view, whether amil or premil. We can ask you the same about Rev 20. Obviously, amils have many other passages to support our view besides that one. Amil is all about interpreting scripture with scripture. That's why we constantly relate scriptures together to back up our claims.