Surely Premils must invent 2 future glorifications days separated by 1000 years+?

[Spiritual Jew]

Continuation of previous post:

as for Satan, Satan has been going up to heaven to accuse us before God basically all of creation. He only loses that access in what you think is a past event, and I think is a future event (and I think it's future because he knows his time is short after it happens, so his efforts become very intensified, hence the 70th week events and 4 horsemen 2000 years.. is not a short amount of time).

Rev 12:5 is a clear reference to Christ's ascension. So, that establishes the timing of the war in heaven. Knowing that Jesus ascended to heaven long ago and is now our Mediator in heaven on our behalf, how is it that you think Satan has any cause to be in heaven any longer to accuse us? Do you think Jesus our King and Mediator who defeated Satan on the cross would allow that? I certainly do not. So, I believe you are mistaken on that.

As for the "short time" that Satan has after he is cast out of heaven, I don't believe that is supposed to be understood as literally a short amount of time (I'd agree that 2000 years would not qualify as a short time in that sense). Instead, I believe what it's saying is that he has a limited time. The duration of the time is not the point. It's that it will be limited. He will not get forever to go and persecute Christians like he has done for the past 2000 or so years.

I realize that if I'm going to make a claim like that I need to back up how I understand the word translated as "short" as meaning limited rather than a small duration of time. So, that's what I'll do now.

The Greek word is "oligos" and it is not always used in relation to time in scripture. First, I'm going to show how it is used in relation to a number of people.

Both Matt 20:16 and Matt 22:14 say that many are called but few are chosen. Keep in mind that your understanding of the word in relation to the amount of time Satan gets after he is cast out of heaven is that it means a literally small number (such as 3.5 years or whatever you think it is). But, in these verses the word stands for a large number. The number of chosen is few only in relation to the number that are called. But the actual number of those who are chosen is a huge number and I'm sure you would agree.

So, in those verses the word means not literally few (as in 3 or whatever we normally think of as few) but literally a lot but relatively few. That is how I believe the "short" time should be understood. Short in the sense of being a limited amount of time, but not a literally short amount of time as we would normally think of a short amount of time.

Here is a verse where the word is used in relation to a person's lifetime:

James 4:4 Whereas ye know not what shall be on the morrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapour, that appeareth for a little time (Greek: oligos), and then vanisheth away.

Some people live up to 100 or more years. To us, that can seem like a long time. But, in relation to history, it's not. The word is always used in a relative and limited sense rather than a literal short period of time as you undertand it in Rev 12:12.

Here is a verse where the word is used in relation to time and its translated as "long" instead of "short"! How about that? If that doesn't show that Satan's "short time" doesn't have to mean a literally short amount of time, I don't know what does.

The following passage contains the verse I'm talking about. This is after Paul and Barnabas were traveling together and preaching the gospel and then they went to Antioch.

Acts 14:26 From Attalia they sailed back to Antioch, where they had been committed to the grace of God for the work they had now completed. 27 On arriving there, they gathered the church together and reported all that God had done through them and how he had opened a door of faith to the Gentiles. 28 And they stayed there a long time (Greek: oligos) with the disciples.

The ironic and funny thing here is that I believe the "long time" of the verses above is much shorter than the "short time" of Rev 12:12. But, this just shows once again that the word is used in a relative sense to refer to an undefined, limited amount of time.

It depends. If it's omitted detail I can still consider them the same things. If it's contradicting details I cannot. I see Matthew 24's return of Jesus happening in Revelation 6 despite not being specific about the gathering of the elect, because the other details match, the sun and moon darken, and the son of man is visible in the clouds, and the tribes of the earth mourn.

The details in Revelation 19 on the other hand, contradict, on a horse rather than in the clouds, and the tribes of the earth are prepared for battle rather than mourning, and it'd be omitting the darkening of the sun and moon, and the gathering of the elect. Nothing matches.

This is because you take things like Jesus riding on a white horse with a sword coming out of His mouth literally. Do you really think that He will be riding a flying horse with a sword in His mouth when He comes?

So you understand that the 6th seal is the return of Christ, and yet you still think it's the same as Revelation 19's coming on a white horse, even though what's described is contradicting?

It's not contradicting because I don't forget the Revelation is a highly symbolic book so that I don't make the mistake of thinking that Jesus will literally ride a white horse with a big double edged sword in His mouth.

To be honest, I'm not even really talking about the millennium mostly in this thread what I'm trying to get you to grasp is that the wrath of God takes time, it is not instant, and God's people are rescued before it.

I've never actually said otherwise. The reason I focus more on the wrath that comes down on the actual day that Christ returns is because if it's global destruction on that day, as I believe, then that makes it so that the thousand years cannot be in the future. Which obviously would make premil (whether you're pretrib, pre-wrath or post-trib) untrue and force all premils to rethink what they believe.

Your focus, however, is on trying to figure out all the different things that will happen (at each seal, trumpet and vial) and when they will happen and for exactly how long and all that. That's not my focus.

To me, the next major thing to happen in the prophetic timeline is Satan's little season. So, my focus is more on the time when there will be an increase in people falling away and being led astray from the truth (I see 2 Thess 2 as describing that time period). With that being the case, I have to focus more on showing how his little season occurs before Christ's second coming and the thousand years rather than after.

I'm trying to get you to understand that the Parousia is also not instant, that the Parousia is a presence, and everything that happens from the moment Jesus appears in the clouds, is the second coming, up through eternity.

I will never understand that no matter what you do because it isn't true. There is a future 24 hour day coming during which He will return and resurrect the dead, have His own gathered to Him "in the air", and destroy His enemies (followed by the final judgment - Matt 25:31-46).

Amillennialism requires viewing the first resurrection to have taken place back with Christ, and for it to not be an end time resurrection, and because of that, they only have the second resurrection left, meaning they have to take a post wrath view, and view the wrath of God as being instantaneous, and also leads to the absolutely silly belief that God resurrects everyone who's ever died then returns and destroys the entire planet instantly. Then He'd have to resurrect all the people He'd just killed again in order for them to stand judgement. But Hebrews 9:27 doesn't have people dying twice and then standing judgement, but once.

Wait a minute here. Hold on. Timeout. There's something you have not thought of here and that is probably because of your admitted lack of paying attention to Rev 20. You don't even realize that you have the same "silly belief" as I do, assuming you believe that the ones killed in the following passage would need to be resurrected for judgment right afterwards.

Rev 20:7 When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—and to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. 9 They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God’s people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them.

I'm sure you and all other premils (whether pre-trib, pre-wrath or post-trib) would agree that at the point that the fire comes down from heaven and destroys all these rebels (the number of whom is as the sand of the seashore - billions?) then that would bring an end to Satan's little season. What comes next after that is the judgment (Rev 20:11-15). Wouldn't those that had just been killed in Rev 20:9 at the end of Satan's little season have to be resurrected to stand before the throne for this judgment to give account of what they had done in their lives? Of course. Rev 20:15 says all those whose names are not written in the book of life will be cast into the lake of fire at that point, so that would include the ones who had just been killed. They would not get out of having to stand before the throne to be judged just like all other unbelievers.

So, how silly do you think my belief that people will be killed and then resurrected and judged shortly after is now? Knowing that you too believe the same thing since we all believe that Rev 20:7-9 happens just before the judgment.

Honestly, this post took a lot of time and effort. I appreciate the time and effort you took for you to create yours. Even though we disagree, I appreciate you keeping things civil.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Its not nasty to the ones who know the truth.

Because those who understand the problem with Amils understand the humor and truth in what I said. Its "fake news." Determined and dogmatically presented "fake news."

The topic of Amil is forbidden in many Christian forums for good reason.


Amillennialism


Amillenarism or Amillennialism (from Latin mille, one thousand; "a" being a negation prefix) is a type of chillegorism which teaches that there will be no millennial reign of the righteous on earth. Amillennarists interpret the thousand years symbolically to refer either to a temporary bliss of souls in heaven before the general resurrection, or to the infinite bliss of the righteous after the general resurrection.[1]

This view in Christian eschatology does not hold that Jesus Christ will physically reign on the earth for exactly 1,000 years. This view contrasts with some postmillennial interpretations and with premillennial interpretations of chapter 20 of the Book of Revelation.

The amillennial view regards the "thousand years" mentioned in Revelation 20 as a symbolic number, not as a literal description; amillennialists hold that the millennium has already begun and is identical with the current church age. Amillennialism holds that while Christ's reign during the millennium is spiritual in nature, at the end of the church age, Christ will return in final judgment and establish a permanent reign in the new heaven and new earth.

Many proponents dislike the term "amillennialism" because it emphasizes their differences with premillennialism rather than their beliefs about the millennium. "Amillennial" was actually coined in a pejorative way by those who hold premillennial views. Some proponents also prefer alternate names such as nunc-millennialism (that is, now-millennialism) or realized millennialism, although these other names have achieved only limited acceptance and usage.

Amillennialism - Wikipedia

Amil has been the prime position of the ECFs and the preeminent Protestant position from the Refornation. Dispensationalism and your 2-future-comings theory was invented by Emmanuel Lacunza (or Manuel de Lacunza y Diaz), a Chilean theologian of Spanish descent (born in Santiago, Chile, July 19, 1731, and died at Imola, Italy, June 17, 1801). He became a member of the Jesuit order in 1747 at the age of 16.

Lacunza wrote this book under the assumed name of Rabbi Ben-Ezra as a "converted Jew". The book was finished in 1790, and then circulated in manuscript form before it was published at Cadiz, Spain, in 1812. This was during the time of Cortez in Spain, and after Cortez the book was suppressed, and as much as possible withdrawn from circulation. Lacunza died in June 1801, before the book was ever published in book form.

Rev. Edward Irving, a Presbyter of the Church of Scotland, who had been the assistant to Dr. Chalmers in Glasgow, translated this book of Lacunza from the Spanish in 1826, and it was published in English by L.B. Seely and Son, Fleet Street, London, in 1827.

This is the origin of Pretrib. It is not in the Bible, as your avoidance has proved. You have zero biblical evidence, only speculations and theories.

It was designed to infiltrate Protestantism. It was unknown prior to Lacunza.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Good point there SG. That is why I do not believe that the Body of Christ will come back to earth after it has been raptured. We do not go into the millennium on earth. That is not taught in scripture and a big mistake by those who also believe in the premillennium.

Who are Gog and Magog and who are the saints on earth in Satan's little season in Rev 20?

 

[sovereigngrace]

You don't know your Bible! Its the problem here. No mortals will be killed in an accident during the Millennium!

The cow will feed with the bear,
their young will lie down together,
and the lion will eat straw like the ox.
The infant will play near the cobra’s den,
and the young child will put its hand into the viper’s nest.
They will neither harm nor destroy
on all my holy mountain,
for the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the Lord
as the waters cover the sea." Isa 11:7-9

Where is your millennium mentioned in Isaiah 11? Nowhere! You have to force it into it in the same way you do with every other passage in Scripture. You're adding on to scripture again.

 

[GenemZ]

Where is the "birth" of an infant in the text?

How do infants get here?

Are you really that confused?

 

[GenemZ]

Where is your millennium mentioned in Isaiah 11? Nowhere! You have to force it into it in the same way you do with every other passage in Scripture. You're adding on to scripture again.

Where else do we find a lion laying down with a lamb?

The wolf and the lamb will feed together,
and the lion will eat straw like the ox,
and dust will be the serpent’s food.
They will neither harm nor destroy
on all my holy mountain,”
says the Lord." Isa 65:25​

Isiah 65:17 says it is a New Heavens and New Earth chapter!!!!!!

“See, I will create
new heavens and a new earth.
The former things will not be remembered,
nor will they come to mind." vs 17!​

You keep playing games.. You're done, and its obvious.

You keep fumbling the ball and tripping right over it.

And, you tell us that we should listen to you? You have proven yourself to be inept in comprehending what the Scriptures teach.


Its no wonder I have seen over the years Amil posts being banned in other forums.

 

[BABerean2]

How do infants get here?

Are you really that confused?

Will there be any infants alive on the planet at the Second Coming of Christ?


And you are still ignoring Matthew 25:31-46...


Do you understand the difference between the Millennium, and the New Heavens and New Earth?
See 2 Peter 3:10-13, if you are confused.


.

 

[GenemZ]

Will there be any infants alive on the planet at the Second Coming of Christ?


And you are still ignoring Matthew 25:31-46...


Do you understand the difference between the Millennium, and the New Heavens and New Earth?
See 2 Peter 3:10-13, if you are confused.


.

I am not confused.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Where else do we find a lion laying down with a lamb?

The wolf and the lamb will feed together,
and the lion will eat straw like the ox,
and dust will be the serpent’s food.
They will neither harm nor destroy
on all my holy mountain,”
says the Lord." Isa 65:25​

Isiah 65:17 says it is a New Heavens and New Earth chapter!!!!!!

“See, I will create
new heavens and a new earth.
The former things will not be remembered,
nor will they come to mind." vs 17!​

You keep playing games.. You're done, and its obvious.

You keep fumbling the ball and tripping right over it.

And, you tell us that we should listen to you? You have proven yourself to be inept in comprehending what the Scriptures teach.


Its no wonder I have seen over the years Amil posts being banned in other forums.

Amil is not banned on most biblical forums, only the prejudiced Dispy ones that cannot abide challenging. Amil is not banned here. There are numerous Amils here, and other forums that I have been on. Pretrib is in free fall because it has no clear proof texts.

When you have no biblical support all you can do is trash your opponents.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Its not nasty to the ones who know the truth.

Because those who understand the problem with Amils understand the humor and truth in what I said. Its "fake news." Determined and dogmatically presented "fake news."

The topic of Amil is forbidden in many Christian forums for good reason.

Name one Christian forum anywhere where the topic of Amil is forbidden.

Are you sure you're not thinking of the full preterist position, which is postmil?

Amil has been a doctrine believed by many Christians for around 2000 years. Why would it be forbidden to be discussed anywhere? That's utterly ridiculous.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Name one Christian forum anywhere where the topic of Amil is forbidden.

Are you sure you're not thinking of the full preterist position, which is postmil?

Amil has been a doctrine believed by many Christians for around 2000 years. Why would it be forbidden to be discussed anywhere? That's utterly ridiculous.

Rapture Ready forbids all who disagree with them. I was a member when they introduced that, as Pretrib was getting overrun.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Rapture Ready forbids all who disagree with them. I was a member when they introduced that, as Pretrib was getting overrun.

So, they are not just singling out Amil but any doctrine that disagrees with them including post-trib premil and postmil.

What I'm really asking is for him to tell us even one forum where they only ban Amil the way that some forums (like this one, I believe) ban full preterism (postmil).

 

[sovereigngrace]

Will there be any infants alive on the planet at the Second Coming of Christ?


And you are still ignoring Matthew 25:31-46...


Do you understand the difference between the Millennium, and the New Heavens and New Earth?
See 2 Peter 3:10-13, if you are confused.


.

Bro, he has no answers to these points. All he can do is taunt Amils to distract the discussion.

 

[sovereigngrace]

So, they are not just singling out Amil but any doctrine that disagrees with them including post-trib premil and postmil.

What I'm really asking is for him to tell us even one forum where they only ban Amil the way that some forums (like this one, I believe) ban full preterism (postmil).

Correct. RR also banned post-trib premils and postmils.

 

[Jamdoc]

I believe you are clearly mistaken here. Why would Christians need to be removed from the earth when the locusts are only allowed to harm "those people who did not have the seal of God on their foreheads" (Rev 9:5). They are not allowed to harm born again Christians, in other words. Why do you think that the church will have been raptured already at that point when it clearly indicates that God's people (Christians) will be on the earth at that time and will be kept from the harm of the symbolic locusts?

Again, why would the rapture need to take place at that time when the locusts have been ordered not to harm Christians? There's no need to be taken off the earth when they can only do what God allows them to and the text indicates that they will not be allowed to harm Christians.

There's 144,000 who are sealed, the uncountable multitude of every nation, people, kindred, and tongue, is singing in heaven before the throne, in Revelation 7. One of the reason I consider 12-19 to be a parallel vision to 6-11 is because the 144,000 are shown in both chapter 7 and chapter 14.
Anyway, where's the uncountable multitude that came out of great tribulations? Heaven. This is before any trumpets have blown, and in fact, the angels are commanded not to start the wrath of God until they are sealed. 144,000. Not an uncountable multitude that are in heaven.
144,000, male, virgin, ethnic Hebrews from the 12 tribes minus Dan and Ephraim, and substituting in Levi and Joeseph to take their place. Danites and Ephraimites, are apparently extinct, or, cut off (have heard claims that Danish are descendants of the tribe of Dan, but.. I don't really put stock in it, I just know Dan and Ephraim aren't listed in Revelation 7). You're taking liberty to say that more are sealed against the wrath of God while on earth to declare that more than 144000 have that seal.
Where are the born again Christians at that time? Heaven.

I get that things happen before the day Christ returns, but the argument I have made is that passages like 1 Thess 4:13-5:6 and 2 Peter 3:3-13 do not speak of anything that happens prior to the day He returns (other than that scoffers would be scoffing at the idea of Him returning and that believers should "watch and be sober" before that day.

The main focus of those passages is on the actual day He returns. So, in Paul and Peter's minds "the day of the Lord" is the day Christ returns. In your mind you see it as being a certain period of time where certain things happen before the day He returns. But, I'd rather stick with their understanding of the day of the Lord when discussing those passages instead of getting them confused with other passages in Revelation or elsewhere that speak of the days prior to His return.

When it comes to the amil vs premil debate in particular (rather than pre-trib vs pre-wrath vs post-trib), the focus is more on what happens on the actual day Christ returns because what happens that day determines how we should understand Revelation 20.

The point is, and the main push that I have, is that not only do things happen before the return of Christ, but after as well. The rapture happens at the return of Christ. We'd both agree on that.
What we don't agree on is that after the return of Christ, there's the wrath of God, which I propose, while you believe in instant destruction all within an hour or half an hour something like that and then suddenly eternity. In Revelation 19 He kills with a sword (symbolically anyway, it comes from His mouth so.. speaking people to death I guess, makes me think a little of the movie Dune), not fire, and the angels call the carrion birds to feed on their corpses. Doesn't sound like instantaneous destruction by fire if there's corpses being fed on.
Here's the thing. when you look at prophecy from thousands of years in the future, all you notice, is the highlights, the peaks. and with no gauge of time happening between these things, they seem like they all happen at once. The mountains from a distance all look like they're right next to each other even though there's many miles between each peak.
Old Testament prophets saw events in the future, and because they had no gauge of time, even the Apostles were disappointed and confused when Jesus died, because they knew the Messianic prophecies and thought that He was going to restore the kingdom to Israel. Because their interpretation of the scripture, they saw the events of the first, AND second coming, as all happening at once.
You do this same thing, with second coming prophecies. You understand that there's a first coming and a second coming, and that the second coming is at least 1990 years and counting after the first coming. Why's it so difficult to understand that the second coming is not everything happening all in the same 24 hours? You want to see 1000 years to be symbolic, but you insist that "the day of the Lord" must be 1 24 hour day, literally. I see "the day" or "the hour" to be figures of speech. We do it all the time "that'll be the day", "one day" something will happen or I will do something. If we say "One day I'm gonna be an astronaut" do we mean we're only going to be an astronaut for one 24 hour period? No!

How so? Look again at what it says at the end of the chapter after things had gotten significantly worse:

Rev 6:20 The rest of mankind who were not killed by these plagues still did not repent of the work of their hands; they did not stop worshiping demons, and idols of gold, silver, bronze, stone and wood—idols that cannot see or hear or walk. 21 Nor did they repent of their murders, their magic arts, their sexual immorality or their thefts.

This very clearly says that they do not stop what they normally do which is worship demons and other things, murder people, practice magic arts, sexual immorality and theft. They may be unhappy with their lives, but they still keep on doing what they normally do. And, they have no clue that Christ is about to come and take vengeance on them, which matches up with what Jesus indicated in the Olivet Discourse. They will be doing what they normally do without having any idea of what's about to come upon them. That's the point. Jesus mentioned them eating and marrying and such, but the Rev 6 text includes the evil things they normally do as well. In both cases, the point is that they will be doing what they normally do right up until the day Christ comes to take His vengeance on them.

If you've lied in the past, even if you have not lied for years, but have not repented of it to Christ, what are you? A liar.
If you've stolen in the past, even if you have not stolen for years, but have not repented of it to Christ, what are you? A thief.
It doesn't say they continued doing those things as normal, it says they didn't repent of what they had done that had earned them judgement. They're still guilty and need to repent, but they don't.
Now some of those things, they will continue to do even in a time of distress, they'll continue to steal, to survive in a time of chaos, in the time of the wrath of God, it is likely many governments will fail outside of militaries you'll have martial law but in some places the government will just forsake it to anarchy so people will be stealing food and necessities, killing each other to steal from them to survive, maybe praying to false gods to deliver them from the end of the world. But they're not going to be planning weddings.
and that was what Jesus described, not people surviving in catastrophe, but people living like no judgement is coming, nothing is going to change People in the time of Noah laughed at Noah as Noah prophesized incoming destruction. Sodom was a prosperous city. They weren't living like "Mad Max" or "The Road" or "The Day After"
Once the wrath of God starts? Yeah, it's going to be more like a post apocalyptic movie for them. Scrounging for supplies and having to defend themselves from other survivors.
They'll be saying peace and safety in those days. (1 Thessalonians 5:3). For them? it's going to come out of nowhere.

Where is your proof of that? Even though it speaks of symbolic locusts stinging people and whatnot, I believe that's all symbolic so I don't think it's actually physical torment they go through, but rather spiritual and mental. But, there are plenty of people today who are experiencing spiritual or physical torment but they still get married and do a lot of the things that people normally do.

That's a problem when you go this far in allegorizing the bible. You start treating it all as hyperbole.
That means you're not watching for the signs Jesus told us to watch for, because you see it all as symbolic or allegory. So yes, the day of the Lord is going to sneak up on you like a thief in the night.

But, I would like to comment on something else you said here. You are talking about nonbelievers not having the mark of the beast? How does that line up with what it says here:

Rev 13:8 All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast—all whose names have not been written in the Lamb’s book of life, the Lamb who was slain from the creation of the world.

When you read further in the chapter you can see that everyone who worships the beast receives the mark of the beast. Which makes sense since it would not make sense for someone to worship the beast and at the same time somehow refuse to receive its mark. And, look who Rev 13:8 describes as being the ones who worship the beast (and, by implication, receive its mark)? ALL whose names are not written in the book of life. With that in mind, how do you have some whose names are not written in the book of life (that describes non believers, right?) as not taking the mark? It seems to me that only those who have their names written in the book of life (believers) would refuse to receive the mark.

Some people have been written in the book, that are not saved at one point in time, don't take the mark, but they're still written in the book, because God knows they WILL be saved. That's foreknowledge.
There's 144,000 Israelites, multiple angels, and the 2 witnesses who are preaching the gospel. Taking the mark of the beast, is an unforgivable sin. There must be some people who can still be saved, otherwise, what's the use of the preaching?
Israel only gets saved just before the 7th trumpet... and God had already promised that Israel would be saved, therefore, the remnant, that God knows will be saved, also won't take the mark despite not being saved before the trumpets and vials start.

He is referred to as the king and angel of the abyss. Not a king of the abyss. THE king and THE angel of the abyss. Not a leader of fallen angels. THE leader. I'm sure you would agree that Satan is THE leader of the fallen angels (Matt 25:41, Rev 12:9)

Revelation 9:11

11 And they had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon.

also as I pointed out, I don't think Satan's bound up in the pit right now as you do, because he's still influencing the world. Abaddon and his angels on the other hand, probably haven't been able to do anything since they've been in the pit. Maybe torment sinners like the wealthy man who end up in the pit with them.

But Satan? not currently bound up in the pit, because we still see him deceiving the nations.
In the Millennium, he will deceive the nations NO MORE.

 

[GenemZ]

Amillennialism first years came into being because those so involved with its development could not reconcile what the Scriptures teach with the fact that at that time Israel had ceased to exist as a nation. So? Some decided to spiritualize, rather than accept what the Scriptures declare by faith.

Keep in mind. Israel as a nation had disappeared in 70 AD, and reappeared on May 14, 1948!

No wonder some centuries ago tried to reconcile what the Scriptures actually say by "spiritualizing."

Explained. And, no longer excusable.

 

[GenemZ]

Bro, he has no answers to these points. All he can do is taunt Amils to distract the discussion.

ok... infant. An infant placed into eternity. No resurrection body? Just remains an infant forever?

You can not answer that. Not with a good answer, you can't.

.... infancy + eternity? = a retarded soul for all eternity!?

For, nothing ages in eternity. Nothing can grow old, nor age.

How long is that going to take to sink in? all eternity?

 

[GenemZ]

Amil is not banned on most biblical forums, only the prejudiced Dispy ones that cannot abide challenging. Amil is not banned here. There are numerous Amils here, and other forums that I have been on. Pretrib is in free fall because it has no clear proof texts.

When you have no biblical support all you can do is trash your opponents.

I notice how you avoided 99.98% of my post. Diversionary missionary.

 

[GenemZ]

Amil is not banned on most biblical forums, only the prejudiced Dispy ones that cannot abide challenging. Amil is not banned here. There are numerous Amils here, and other forums that I have been on. Pretrib is in free fall because it has no clear proof texts.

When you have no biblical support all you can do is trash your opponents.

Here we are again. This time, without what you used to avoid addressing my post with.

are you ready?

Where is your millennium mentioned in Isaiah 11? Nowhere! You have to force it into it in the same way you do with every other passage in Scripture. You're adding on to scripture again.

Where else do we find a lion laying down with a lamb besides Isaiah 11? (which you just claimed does not speak of the new heavens and new earth)

The wolf and the lamb will feed together,
and the lion will eat straw like the ox,
and dust will be the serpent’s food.
They will neither harm nor destroy
on all my holy mountain,”
says the Lord." Isa 65:25​

Isiah 65:17 says it is a New Heavens and New Earth chapter!!!!!!

“See, I will create
new heavens and a new earth.
The former things will not be remembered,
nor will they come to mind." vs 17!​

You keep playing games.. You keep fumbling the ball and tripping right over it. God's Word just proved you wrong.

 

[Jamdoc]

Continuation of previous post:

Rev 12:5 is a clear reference to Christ's ascension. So, that establishes the timing of the war in heaven. Knowing that Jesus ascended to heaven long ago and is now our Mediator in heaven on our behalf, how is it that you think Satan has any cause to be in heaven any longer to accuse us? Do you think Jesus our King and Mediator who defeated Satan on the cross would allow that? I certainly do not. So, I believe you are mistaken on that.

As for the "short time" that Satan has after he is cast out of heaven, I don't believe that is supposed to be understood as literally a short amount of time (I'd agree that 2000 years would not qualify as a short time in that sense). Instead, I believe what it's saying is that he has a limited time. The duration of the time is not the point. It's that it will be limited. He will not get forever to go and persecute Christians like he has done for the past 2000 or so years.

Your explanation aside, even if you want to consider 2000 years a short time, Satan has been active in the world and deceiving the nations (as with the creation of Islam), but he has not thrown the world into 2000 years of great tribulation which is what would have happened if Satan had only had that "short time" for that long. Jesus says the days of Satan's wrath/great tribulations will be cut short because if they are not, no flesh will survive, Satan would succeed in killing all Christians and Jews, in order to point God out as a promise breaker.

This is because you take things like Jesus riding on a white horse with a sword coming out of His mouth literally. Do you really think that He will be riding a flying horse with a sword in His mouth when He comes?

It's not contradicting because I don't forget the Revelation is a highly symbolic book so that I don't make the mistake of thinking that Jesus will literally ride a white horse with a big double edged sword in His mouth.

The sword coming from His mouth is obviously the word of God. The sword of the spirit.
as for the horse, maybe literal, may be John describing something else in a term he can convey, but the meaning is that Jesus is on some sort of transportation. Might be a winged horse.
Might be some sort of spaceship. If you read Ezekiel having been aware of UFO's Ezekiel's descriptions of the wheels in the sky take on an entirely new imagery don't they? I'm perfectly comfortable with God using technology when He feels like it. Jesus doesn't NEED transportation, but, in this passage He uses transportation for some reason, it being some sort of space ship or jet.. is pure speculation. But it's certainly not a throne in the clouds.

I've never actually said otherwise. The reason I focus more on the wrath that comes down on the actual day that Christ returns is because if it's global destruction on that day, as I believe, then that makes it so that the thousand years cannot be in the future. Which obviously would make premil (whether you're pretrib, pre-wrath or post-trib) untrue and force all premils to rethink what they believe.

Your focus, however, is on trying to figure out all the different things that will happen (at each seal, trumpet and vial) and when they will happen and for exactly how long and all that. That's not my focus.

To me, the next major thing to happen in the prophetic timeline is Satan's little season. So, my focus is more on the time when there will be an increase in people falling away and being led astray from the truth (I see 2 Thess 2 as describing that time period). With that being the case, I have to focus more on showing how his little season occurs before Christ's second coming and the thousand years rather than after.

I will never understand that no matter what you do because it isn't true. There is a future 24 hour day coming during which He will return and resurrect the dead, have His own gathered to Him "in the air", and destroy His enemies (followed by the final judgment - Matt 25:31-46).

That's the main thrust of my argument, is that it takes longer than a day after His return for Him dish out all His wrath on the earth. In Revelation 15, it is explicit, that the 7 bowls, are the wrath of God. In Revelation 6:9-11, after the first 5 seals, it has not been the wrath of God. The Trumpets also.
These events take time, and I am saying these events come AFTER the return of Jesus. The trumpets are not given out until the 7th seal. The bowls are not given out until after the harvest.
It is perhaps as Isaiah puts it, a day of vengeance, and a year of recompense.

Wait a minute here. Hold on. Timeout. There's something you have not thought of here and that is probably because of your admitted lack of paying attention to Rev 20. You don't even realize that you have the same "silly belief" as I do, assuming you believe that the ones killed in the following passage would need to be resurrected for judgment right afterwards.

Rev 20:7 When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—and to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. 9 They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God’s people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them.

I'm sure you and all other premils (whether pre-trib, pre-wrath or post-trib) would agree that at the point that the fire comes down from heaven and destroys all these rebels (the number of whom is as the sand of the seashore - billions?) then that would bring an end to Satan's little season. What comes next after that is the judgment (Rev 20:11-15). Wouldn't those that had just been killed in Rev 20:9 at the end of Satan's little season have to be resurrected to stand before the throne for this judgment to give account of what they had done in their lives? Of course. Rev 20:15 says all those whose names are not written in the book of life will be cast into the lake of fire at that point, so that would include the ones who had just been killed. They would not get out of having to stand before the throne to be judged just like all other unbelievers.

So, how silly do you think my belief that people will be killed and then resurrected and judged shortly after is now? Knowing that you too believe the same thing since we all believe that Rev 20:7-9 happens just before the judgment.

Honestly, this post took a lot of time and effort. I appreciate the time and effort you took for you to create yours. Even though we disagree, I appreciate you keeping things civil.

The difference is, I believe that the first resurrection, is the rapture, that comes after the tribulations, but before God's wrath. ONLY believers are resurrected at that time, not everyone. Everyone else who has died, is still dead. So the millennium happens, people who survived have children, their children have children, and then Satan is let loose. Many of those people, despite not having had any influence from Satan their whole lives, will show themselves wicked they rise up, and go to war, and then fire devours them.
In this case, everyone only dies once before judgement. The righteous, in resurrection bodies that cannot die, are not killed by fire, perhaps they're taken up to heaven or perhaps they just.. don't burn even though they're surrounded by fire, like the 3 in Daniel in the furnace. But the rest who were not resurrected or taken in the rapture, whether believing or unbelieving, are killed. That is their 1 death, then there's the second resurrection, and they stand judgement.

The difference is, if you believe that the 1st resurrection refers to 2000 years ago, and that we're all waiting for the 2nd resurrection, which resurrects everyone, and that happens as Jesus comes down from heaven, people get resurrected, so many unbelievers who have already died get resurrected, and then, instantly incinerated to die a second time, which would require another resurrection for them to stand judgement.
That's the part that is silly. If you see everyone being resurrected at the same time, just before they're instantly destroyed again. See if it's only believers who are resurrected at the return of Christ, then it is no problem that the resurrection happens while Jesus is still in the air, before He's destroyed anything or anyone in His wrath. Nobody's subject to a second death there.
But if EVERYONE is resurrected while Jesus is returning and is still in the air, before any wrath has started, then they are subject to a second death, and then hell being the 3rd death.
If the first resurrection is an end times resurrection at the rapture of believers only, and the 2nd resurrection happens after the world has been purged by fire, and resurrects everyone (aside from those who'd already been resurrected in the rapture) , well then they can just stand judgement. Rather than be resurrected, killed, then have to be resurrected again to stand judgement.