Premillennialism ignores the tenses in the original Greek in order to sustain its teaching

[Timtofly]

We do not just reign over sin. We reign over our spiritual enemies today.

You have control over other humans and what they do spiritually? I thought that only applied to cults?

 

[Guojing]

What are you talking about? Jesus testified after His resurrection: “All power [or authority] is given unto me in heaven and in earth” (Matthew 28:18).

Jesus rules and reigns today over all creation. There is nothing that is not under His feet. What He says goes! This is biblical bedrock! This is a foundational Christian truth.

I mean, how much more power than “all power ... in heaven and in earth” does He need to exercise power and authority over His enemies?

This proves that Christ has already come and now exercises kingship today over all mankind. It means: He carries the Father’s divine authority. He is currently enthroned. This is Sovereign power! He holds this today upon His Father’s throne as God and upon David’s throne as Messiah. Him and the Father are one spiritually in authority.

In our main text this morning, Jesus is described in Revelation 3:7 as, “he that hath the key (or authority) of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth.”

He holds all power (without qualification). After all, He is God! God either causes or permits - as He is God and He is sovereign. Simple! That is an explicit biblical truth and a Christian fundamental. The powerful language that accompanies the mention of Christ holding the key of David proves that this is referring to His majestic power and might.

You can go on and on quoting your interpretation of those scripture as saying Jesus is currently ruling over the Earth.

As I said, it doesn't mean much to you since, "Believers can still fall sick, sin can still run rampant on Earth, the wolf is still not lying down with the lamb, no children can play with serpents."

 

[Timtofly]

I'm mostly in agreement with you here. I agree it's physical and a type of resurrection. But it's also chronological in relation to when any of the lost rise. None of the lost ever rise before anyone having part in the first resurrection do. Jesus rose in this type of resurrection, the first resurrection. No lost souls rose before He did. Those resurrected in Matthew 27 you brought up, they rose in this type of resurrection, the first resurrection. No lost souls rose before they did. The 2 witnesses rise in this type of resurrection, the first resurrection. No lost souls rise before they do. The dead in Christ who rise first, rise in this type of resurrection, the first resurrection. No lost souls rise before they do. It makes it the first resurrection in this sense as well, that all of the saved rise before any of the lost ever do, since Revelation 20 only mentions 2 resurrections.

I have no clue what Amils are trying to do with the first resurrection? They are trying to make something plain and simple complicated instead.

I am not sure the GWT is a first resurrection. They are still dead standing before the GWT.

I have leanings to the point if they had a resurrection at the GWT, they would remain in the Lamb's book of Life and be allowed to live on earth and escape the Lake of Fire. Yet all seem to want a general resurrection at the GWT. No where does it claim these people are even in time on the NE looking around at the beautiful site, just to be cast into the Lake of Fire.

From what John wrote the GWT is the only thing in existence and time may not exist at all for this "event". I do not think those given a first resurrection, which would be all on earth and all in Paradise even witness the GWT. They would not be necessarily taken out of time, but the NHNE is immediate for them.

Some think this is a resurrection to somewhere. I think it is outside of existence, and a resurrection would place a soul back into a permanent incorruptible physical body on earth. Otherwise all the dead are brought out of sheol, Death, and the sea, and placed no where else but the LOF.

John calls it the second death only. There is no mention of a first resurrection or second resurrection. I think the assumed second resurrection that some add to the 20th chapter is just that, an assumption. No second resurrection was chronologically implied. Those reading the NT should already know the first resurrection is physical and not chronological.

No where did John need to come back and explain Revelation 20, because it has no symbolism to explain. Most have to assume that John does explain in some chapters what the 7 Seals are, what the 7 Trumpets mean. Why the 7 vials. Not every chapter is a direct chronological point. There are not 7, 1000 year periods needing to be explained. There is only one, and hardly any explanation at all. There is still a chronological sequence to the events in the chapter, but not a chronological explanation, or even "why" for that matter. But we do know one reason for Satan being bound, and that is to prevent humans from being decieved.

"And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled:"

So no deception period for 1000 years. No one is in spiritual darkness nor bound by what sin can do. No deception period as before Adam disobeyed God. Not just an "elect few" on earth trying to "convert" people, but the whole earth, every nation not decieved by Satan. No one is decieved nor corrupted by sin period. That is what decieving the nations is. The 7th Trumpet had just ended all that Adam brought on the world. The 7th Trumpet finalized the points of Daniel's 70 weeks. Christ is now physically reigning from Jerusalem. Satan is bound. That is what John is implying, not a second resurrection. Not even a second first resurrection.

Not sure if every translation, but:

"But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection."

It does not say they did live again after the 1000 years. I also do not think all living again is even implied. The point is that they could not live again until the 1000 years are up. Not even that they can live again. If this were a symbolic 1000 years, John would by implying they may only symbolically live again. Their living again is hinged on the validity of the 1000 years. Just something to think about.

If this chapter were literally about the last 1991 years, none of the people living in the last 1991 are even being addressed here. This is only talking about those who died prior to 30AD. This is only talking about those not resurrected at the Cross. Literally only those mentioned coming out the graves when Jesus died on the Cross have been alive for 1991 years reigning over the nations, if that is the symbolic application of Revelation 20. There is no mention at all about those born and living in the last 1991 years accept they attack Christ and the camp of the saints and are consumed by fire. Obviously OT saints have not been ruling the world for the last 1991 years. At least not by sight and certainly not in a camp that can be attacked soon, when Satan is let loose. Would not the same resurrected souls be the same saints in the camp with Christ?

 

[Timtofly]

A lot of times verses are simply compressed, giving the illusion that something immediately follows something else. That means that the details involving them marching to surround the city and God then raining fire down on them, these things are likely recorded in other passages in great detail, either in the OT or NT, and in some cases both. That means this battle likely involves way more than what you are taking it to involve.

I have yet to see proof of such corroboration in Scripture. It is a task just to get some Scripture to explain this Millennium. Especially in response to Amil. They clearly reject any other validating verses to point out the Millennial conditions.

Why not just post your own verses to validate more detail? From what I see, despite a seemingly large amount of rebellion from a one shot march against Jerusalem, peace is still on earth, Nation still never turned against nation. No where does peace end and violence ensues.

Not to mention that Christ hands God a perfect Kingdom, because any objectors were just consumed by fire after registering the one large complaint initiated by Satan.

Many assume that certainly after 1000 years there would be billions of unhappy citizens. I ask why? If that were the case why release Satan at all? Why not just offer a chance to rally billions of dissatisfied customers? Obviously people were not decieving themselves they were happy. One would certainly know if they were unhappy and already be raising some kind of billion army resistance to complain how perfect things were going.

 

[DavidPT]

I have yet to see proof of such corroboration in Scripture. It is a task just to get some Scripture to explain this Millennium. Especially in response to Amil. They clearly reject any other validating verses to point out the Millennial conditions.

Why not just post your own verses to validate more detail? From what I see, despite a seemingly large amount of rebellion from a one shot march against Jerusalem, peace is still on earth, Nation still never turned against nation. No where does peace end and violence ensues.

I never got around to mentioning it at the time, but it could be that Amils, not Premils, can fill in the missing details. I think there is more to it than them marching up to the city and God then devouring them with fire, thus that verse is likely compressed.

 

[sovereigngrace]

You can go on and on quoting your interpretation of those scripture as saying Jesus is currently ruling over the Earth.

As I said, it doesn't mean much to you since, "Believers can still fall sick, sin can still run rampant on Earth, the wolf is still not lying down with the lamb, no children can play with serpents."

You are trying to rebut Amil with false Premil beliefs. That is why your argument is moot. Consequently, you have no answer for the Scriptures I present. This is how Premils have to deal with these Scriptures.

 

[Guojing]

You are trying to rebut Amil with false Premil beliefs. That is why your argument is moot. Consequently, you have no answer for the Scriptures I present. This is how Premils have to deal with these Scriptures.

There is no need to answer to the scriptures you present, because you are giving it your own unique interpretation, and you are not open to other possible interpretations.

 

[Acts29]

What are you talking about? Jesus testified after His resurrection: “All power [or authority] is given unto me in heaven and in earth” (Matthew 28:18).

When does this prophecy apply? God constantly spoke in the present and past tense to prophesy about the future all throughout the scriptures. He is eternal. If, as you say, that statement of Jesus applied at the moment He said it, why do we later read this?

Revelation 11:15 Then the seventh angel sounded: And there were loud voices in heaven, saying, “The kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever!”

The book of Revelation was given many years AFTER Jesus was raised and said all authority is given to Him. Why then do we have more prophecy about Jesus receiving the kingdom at the 7th Trumpet if He already received it?

Jesus rules and reigns today over all creation. There is nothing that is not under His feet. What He says goes! This is biblical bedrock! This is a foundational Christian truth.

I mean, how much more power than “all power ... in heaven and in earth” does He need to exercise power and authority over His enemies?

This proves that Christ has already come and now exercises kingship today over all mankind. It means: He carries the Father’s divine authority. He is currently enthroned. This is Sovereign power!

Hardly. Are you really giving Jesus all the blame for the sorry state of the world today? You said He is ruling and reigning today.

 

[Guojing]

When does this prophecy apply? God constantly spoke in the present and past tense to prophesy about the future all throughout the scriptures. He is eternal. If, as you say, that statement of Jesus applied at the moment He said it, why do we later read this?

Revelation 11:15 Then the seventh angel sounded: And there were loud voices in heaven, saying, “The kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever!”

The book of Revelation was given many years AFTER Jesus was raised and said all authority is given to Him. Why then do we have more prophecy about Jesus receiving the kingdom at the 7th Trumpet if He already received it?



Hardly. Are you really giving Jesus all the blame for the sorry state of the world today? You said He is ruling and reigning today.

Well said, both of us came to the same conclusion regarding Amills. =)

 

[claninja]

They claim their authority and power through and since Christ's first resurrection. They rule as kings and priests (in life and death) from then.

as an Amil, you agree that the saints are awarded at the final judgment (John 5:29, Romans 2:6, 2 Corinthians 5:10, Matthew 16:27, 2 Timothy 4:8, revelation 22:12)

If you notice, In revelation 20, the saints are not awarded at the great white throne judgement. “The rest of the dead who lived not again” from Death, Hades, and the sea are judged at the great white throne, but the saints were instead awarded at the first resurrection in revelation 20:4.

My “thesis”, as you put it, is that revelation 20 is not necessarily in Chronological order, but ordered by purpose/relation. Hence, the saints are awarded at the first resurrection, with no mention of their awarding at the great white throne judgement.

Our difference:

you seem to look at the revelation 20:4 as the realized promises to the saints through Christ’s resurrection - promises we have now in the flesh and promises we are awarded when our soul goes to heaven.

I look at revelation as the realized promises to the saints through Christ’s resurrection - promises we have now in the flesh and promises we are awarded at the resurrection.

We do not just reign over sin. We reign over our spiritual enemies today.

Agreed. But this doesn’t address the type of reigning in revelation 20:4.

the premil believes this is reigning at the resurrection. The Amil believes this is reigning when the soul goes to heaven upon death prior to the resurrection.

Since you often demand evidence for premils literal 1,000 year reign, where is your evidence that souls go to heaven to reign upon physical death prior to the resurrection?

 

[claninja]

I'm sorry, but I find this to be complete nonsense that I can't even take seriously. Come on. In your interpretation of the thousand years it doesn't even have a beginning and an ending even though Revelation 20 makes it clear that it has a beginning and an ending. It talks about Satan being loosed when the thousand years ends. You don't even have the thousand years as being an actual period of time, so Satan can't be loosed when the thousand years ends in your view.

All I’m saying is that WITHIN the vision, the first resurrection = those living and reigning with Christ for 1,000 years. Since I interpret the first resurrection as CHRIST, and not believers being born again, I believe the 1,000 years are symbolic for Christ’s resurrection. Christ’s resurrection bound Satan, who had the power over death, and cast him out.

Those that PARTAKE in this 1,000 year first resurrection, are simply the saints experiencing the realized promises - in this life and life to come.

That is irrelevant! The thousand years is the time period starting with Christ's reign and Satan's binding and ending with the loosing of Satan. You don't even have it as an actual time period during which Christ reigns and Satan is bound. Your interpretation is utterly ludicrous, in my opinion. It makes the Premil view look credible in comparison.

Satan was cast out to have a little season upon Christ’s resurrection and ascension to heaven (revelation 12:12)

Upon being cast out Satan was warring against the saints by:

1.) working in the sons of disobedience (Ephesians 2:2)

2.) masquerading as an angel of light (2 Corinthians 11:14)

3.) hindering the gospel to the nations (1 Thessalonians 2:18)

4.) prowling like a lion looking to devour (1 Peter 5:8)

5.) leading astray (1 Timothy 5:15)

However, Paul’s hope was that Satan was soon to be crushed (Romans 16:20).

Therefore, based on gospel/epistolic evidence of Satan’s activities in the first century following his binding and casting out, i disagree with the Amil chronology of revelation 20.

 

[sovereigngrace]

When does this prophecy apply? God constantly spoke in the present and past tense to prophesy about the future all throughout the scriptures. He is eternal. If, as you say, that statement of Jesus applied at the moment He said it, why do we later read this?

Revelation 11:15 Then the seventh angel sounded: And there were loud voices in heaven, saying, “The kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever!”

The book of Revelation was given many years AFTER Jesus was raised and said all authority is given to Him. Why then do we have more prophecy about Jesus receiving the kingdom at the 7th Trumpet if He already received it?



Hardly. Are you really giving Jesus all the blame for the sorry state of the world today? You said He is ruling and reigning today.

This is a major difference between Premillennialism and Amillennialism. This is just another reason (of many) why Christians should reject Premillennialism and embrace what Scripture says over the teaching of man.

The reality is: Jesus is allowing and permitting evil according to His sovereign purposes. He places places boundaries upon evil and limits man according to His overriding will. He elevates and removes leaders as He sees fit. Jesus is in control and there is nothing that is not under Him.

 

[claninja]

Hardly. Are you really giving Jesus all the blame for the sorry state of the world today? You said He is ruling and reigning today.

He is in control of all things for His own sovereign purpose and glory

“I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things.” Isaiah 45:7

 

[sovereigngrace]

All I’m saying is that WITHIN the vision, the first resurrection = those living and reigning with Christ for 1,000 years. Since I interpret the first resurrection as CHRIST, and not believers being born again, I believe the 1,000 years are symbolic for Christ’s resurrection. Christ’s resurrection bound Satan, who had the power over death, and cast him out.

Those that PARTAKE in this 1,000 year first resurrection, are simply the saints experiencing the realized promises - in this life and life to come.




Satan was cast out to have a little season upon Christ’s resurrection and ascension to heaven (revelation 12:12)

Upon being cast out Satan was warring against the saints by:

1.) working in the sons of disobedience (Ephesians 2:2)

2.) masquerading as an angel of light (2 Corinthians 11:14)

3.) hindering the gospel to the nations (1 Thessalonians 2:18)

4.) prowling like a lion looking to devour (1 Peter 5:8)

5.) leading astray (1 Timothy 5:15)

However, Paul’s hope was that Satan was soon to be crushed (Romans 16:20).

Therefore, based on gospel/epistolic evidence of Satan’s activities in the first century following his binding and casting out, i disagree with the Amil chronology of revelation 20.

When did Satan's little season start and when did (or will) it finish?

 

[sovereigngrace]

as an Amil, you agree that the saints are awarded at the final judgment (John 5:29, Romans 2:6, 2 Corinthians 5:10, Matthew 16:27, 2 Timothy 4:8, revelation 22:12)

If you notice, In revelation 20, the saints are not awarded at the great white throne judgement. “The rest of the dead who lived not again” from Death, Hades, and the sea are judged at the great white throne, but the saints were instead awarded at the first resurrection in revelation 20:4.

My “thesis”, as you put it, is that revelation 20 is not necessarily in Chronological order, but ordered by purpose/relation. Hence, the saints are awarded at the first resurrection, with no mention of their awarding at the great white throne judgement.

Our difference:

you seem to look at the revelation 20:4 as the realized promises to the saints through Christ’s resurrection - promises we have now in the flesh and promises we are awarded when our soul goes to heaven.

I look at revelation as the realized promises to the saints through Christ’s resurrection - promises we have now in the flesh and promises we are awarded at the resurrection.





Agreed. But this doesn’t address the type of reigning in revelation 20:4.

the premil believes this is reigning at the resurrection. The Amil believes this is reigning when the soul goes to heaven upon death prior to the resurrection.

Since you often demand evidence for premils literal 1,000 year reign, where is your evidence that souls go to heaven to reign upon physical death prior to the resurrection?

Please do not talk on behalf of Amils. You have proven several times that you do not understand the belief. Extreme Preterism makes Premil look plausible - and that is saying something.

 

[claninja]

Please do not talk on behalf of Amils. You have proven several times that you do not understand the belief.

please demonstrate which part I did not understand, instead of just making a generic blanket statement. This not only helps me learn but the readers discern your position.

do amils not believe revelation 20:4 is about souls reigning in heaven prior to the resurrection?

Just as you demand other scriptural evidence from premils for a literal 1,000 year reign , where is your evidence that souls go to heaven to reign prior to the resurrection?

When did Satan's little season start and when did (or will) it finish?

Started: at his casting out in association with Christ’s resurrection and ascension.

Ends: Christ’s parousia

 

[sovereigngrace]

Well said, both of us came to the same conclusion regarding Amills. =)

Two wrongs do not make a right.

 

[sovereigngrace]

please demonstrate which part I did not understand, instead of just making a generic blanket statement. This not only helps me learn but the readers discern your position.

do amils not believe revelation 20:4 is about souls reigning in heaven prior to the resurrection?

Just as you demand other scriptural evidence from premils for a literal 1,000 year reign , where is your evidence that souls go to heaven to reign prior to the resurrection?



Started: at his casting out in association with Christ’s resurrection and ascension.

Ends: Christ’s parousia

When is Christ’s parousia and what happens there?

 

[claninja]

When is Christ’s parousia and what happens there?

Christs’s unknown future parousia, is just that: Unknown in the future. Remember, I’m a partial preterist.

But nice try on your deflection in attempt to try to falsely accuse me as a full preterist in order to avoid answering my questions.



now back to what you are clearly trying to avoid:

1.) Please provide an example where i do not understand Amil, Otherwise the readers can see your statement is just a false smokescreen.

2.) my understanding, because I was raised Amil ( church and Christian Amil grade school and high school), is that the traditional Amil position, in regards to revelation 20:4, is about souls reigning in heaven prior to the resurrection. Where is your other scriptural evidence of this: souls reigning in heaven, just as you demand premils produce other scripture of a literal 1,000 year reign?

 

[sovereigngrace]

Christs’s unknown future parousia, is just that: Unknown in the future. Remember, I’m a partial preterist.

But nice try on your deflection in attempt to try to falsely accuse me as a full preterist in order to avoid answering my questions.



now back to what you are clearly trying to avoid:

1.) Please provide an example where i do not understand Amil, Otherwise the readers can see your statement is just a false smokescreen.

2.) my understanding, because I was raised Amil ( church and Christian Amil grade school and high school), is that the traditional Amil position, in regards to revelation 20:4, is about souls reigning in heaven prior to the resurrection. Where is your other scriptural evidence of this: souls reigning in heaven, just as you demand premils produce other scripture of a literal 1,000 year reign?

So, Satan's little season started at Satan's casting out in association with Christ’s resurrection and ascension and ends at Christ's literal physical future climactic parousia?