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

[Timtofly]

You are not comparing Scripture with Scripture here. Try comparing Revelation 7:15-17 with that of Revelation 21-22. Revelation 7:15-17 is not meaning now. It is meaning during the NHNE when the NJ descends from God out of heaven.

No it is not. I have compared the two. One is now. One is 1000 years from now. Not the same event at all. Revelation 7, and the coming out of great tribulation is the tribulation of the last 1991 years. "Great" is referring to the length, not intensity. Does one really know how many have been martyred over the last 1991 years? I doubt it. It has come in waves, and different places at different times, but martyrdom has been non stop. All souls since Stephen have had physical bodies and have served night and day, what ever time frame that is with the Lord. According to 2 Peter 3, it may have only felt like 2 nights and 2 days during the last 1991 years on earth. Amil think such points are meaningless and frivolous, because it is just symbolism and private opinion to them.

So saying a large multitude from every tribe and tongue is just that. People having been joining that crowd since Stephen. And the OT redeemed got there at the Cross. Many in the OT were killed for their testimony as well. But to say that souls are still stuck in sheol in Abraham's bosom until the Second Coming is just not true. To say they have to wait for resurrection bodies is not true. How about comparing Revelation 7 with 2 Corinthians 5? Where in 2 Corinthians 5, did Paul look forward to Abraham's bosom? Where in Ephesians 4:8-10 did Paul say souls were left in sheol in Abraham's bosom?

"Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.) "

What gifts to all men? Bodies to those souls who once were in Abraham's bosom, and are now walking around in Paradise? Or all those seated in heavenly places? Revelation 7 did not say they just got new bodies. It said they had been serving night and day. This was not a night and day between the 6th and 7th Seal. This was multiple nights and days since 30AD.

 

[Timtofly]

Another deliberate and malicious misrepresentation of Amil - and you know it. If you would care to objectively study the OT and the NT you will see that a mammoth change occurred after the first resurrection that opened up the Gospel to the nations. The darkness was dispelled and they were no longer without excuse.

None of what the Cross provided negates Satan being bound literally and physically for 1000 years. All what you said happened. Still not what Revelation 20 is pointing to. Revelation 20 is not your proof text for the act of the Cross and the Resurrection and the Life. Revelation 20 is the proof text of life after Satan's 42 months of sheol on earth, and utter desolation. The hope of Satan's defeat, and those beheaded for outright rejection of Satan's manipulation of humanity. Satan manipulated many into thinking that trusting him was the path to freedom and enjoyment of life. They gladly recieved the mark, only to be removed from the Lamb's book of Life. You can call it Satan's little season of desolation on earth, but still not the same season 1000 years later, after those Resurrected had enjoyed themselves in a perfect reign with Christ for those 1000 years.

How can Amil take away this 1000 years from those beheaded for not taking the mark and give that time to no one beheaded for taking the mark just prior to the Cross in 30AD? Who was beheaded other than John the Baptist in those 42 months? Are you saying John the Baptist was the only one resurrected and has not died, and is waiting for Satan and a huge army to surround his camp? Even symbolically this does not even make sense.

You have exchanged those souls not even beheaded yet, because Satan's 42 months is still future, and exchanged those for OT souls. How can John be describing those in the OT as those still in the future? Amil have to pretend all this is not even taken into consideration, and allow some human opinion called recapitulation, explain away the literal text and context.

 

[Timtofly]

Revelation has several parallels (or recapitulations) covering the period preceding the return of Christ. Parallels are simply different camera views of the same corresponding intra-Advent period. They look at different aspects of the great spiritual battle between the kingdom of God and the kingdom of darkness, righteousness and evil, truth and deceit, and light and darkness. It shows Christ (and His Church) victor over every expression of the demonic realm - over Satan, the beast, the false prophet and the demons. Each parallel winds down with the release of the kingdom of darkness from the abyss restraint before the second coming. We see the devils in Revelation 9:2-3, the beast in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12, Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 17:8, the false prophet in Revelation 13:11 and Satan in Revelation 9:10-11 and Revelation 20:3 all being released before the second coming for a little season.

Satan is the only being released from a pit in Revelation 20. All other beast and the FP are in the Lake of Fire. Revelation 20 is not a recap. Revelation 20 has the beast and FP in the Lake of Fire for 1000 years, not a pit. And they are not released from the Lake of Fire. You need to stop picking randomn verses and read the ones in between.

"And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever."

Satan was put in the Lake of Fire 1000 years after the other two. They had already been there.

 

[Timtofly]

Good observation. So, are the camp of saints being warred against, the same as those living and reigning with Christ?

It is His Kingdom and beloved city. Some deny that is Jerusalem.

I would say those resurrected in verse 4, have offspring. The word camp would be symbolic of their size, compared to a thousand years later, after 30 to 40 generations of human offspring. Their offspring after the 1000 years have spread out over all the land available, the four corners of the earth.

Many have rejected that they can have offspring. They claim it is about the evangelism to lost people that have offspring. Why? The whole point is to replenish the earth without sin. If there was sin, why do they need to be decieved. Those in sin are already decieved. People project "now" into the next age.

Was the pre-Flood condition projected onto Noah's family post Flood? Or was Satan just free to decieve them and get them back into the same old habits as those destroyed in the Flood. Where was Christian evangelism prior to the Flood? Where was Christian evangelism between the Flood and Abraham? Why would Christian evangelism be during Christ's physical reign with the rod of iron?

Stop projecting sin onto the Millennium Kingdom. Stop applying this time to the past wickedness on earth. That is not what John witnessed. He witnessed a future time after the Second Coming. A rod is used to rear children, in biblical jargon. It is all about having families and literally millions and millions of families in all the nations spread out over the whole earth, after fire destroys the wickedness like Noah's Flood accomplished. This time, no Satan and no sin nature.

 

[Timtofly]

This is yet something else that makes Amil nonsensical, the fact the martyrs recorded in verse 4 have zero to do with the camp of the saints surrounded in verses 7-9

This is not about your typical martyrs. These are not Christians dying for their faith. The act of removing their heads prevents the mark of the beast. These people chose to die to remain in the Lamb's book of life. Today Christians choose to live to be part of the Lamb's book of life, not die. This is not about a second birth into the family of God. They are not glorified. They are allowed to have incorruptible physical bodies and live on earth. The first resurrection physical, not the Second Birth into the spiritual part of God's image. That may or may not happen after the 1000 years. We are not told.

Christians today have the second birth prior to the first resurrection. As the first resurrection cannot happen until physical death. Those in Revelation 20:4 only have the first resurrection, not the second birth. They cannot be affected by the second death, but are not part of the second birth. They have bodies and offspring.

Those glorified in Paradise do not have offspring. No need to have glorified babies. The second birth produces no spiritual residual offspring. Other than by the symbolism of fruit of one's labor. He that winneth souls is wise. That is the extent of spiritual offspring. Bringing the lost to Christ.

 

[sovereigngrace]

that he should deceive the nations no more

Since when does no more not mean exactly what it says?

In the KJV doing a phrase search for 'no more' in the book of Revelation it brings up some of the following results.

Revelation 7:16 They shall hunger no more, neither thirst any more; neither shall the sun light on them, nor any heat.



Revelation 18:21 And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast it into the sea, saying, Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all.


Revelation 18:22 And the voice of harpers, and musicians, and of pipers, and trumpeters, shall be heard no more at all in thee; and no craftsman, of whatsoever craft he be, shall be found any more in thee; and the sound of a millstone shall be heard no more at all in thee;


Revelation 18:23 And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.

Revelation 21:4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

Revelation 22:3 And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:

Which of these passages do you propose that 'no more' does not mean exactly what it says? Let's take Revelation 7:16, for instance---They shall hunger no more. Does this mean they will still hunger, just a little less than before? Or does it mean they will hunger no more, period? As to Revelation 20:3, it says satan is bound that he should deceive the nations no more. How can that not mean the exact same thing 'no more' means in Revelation 7:16? If anyone still hungers that hardly equals one hungering no more. If any nations are still being deceived that hardly equals nations being deceived no more.

Once again you are trying to impose something upon the text that does not exist therein to justify Premil. However, this is simply telling us that the Gentiles are no longer deceived, in darkness and without hope since the first resurrection. Simple!

The Interpretation that you foist upon the text enjoys zero corroboration in the rest of Scripture. Amillennialism is the opposite. It enjoys much support for a climatic coming of Jesus.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Let's try the following angle. Let's assume Amil. Can you point out anywhere in Revelation 20:1-6 where it indicates satan goes to war with anyone during that period of time? It for sure indicates that in Revelation 20:7-9. You would think if it applies to the thousand years as well, it would have at least said so somewhere within those first 6 verses.

Why would Amils not think this part of Revelation 12:17--and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ--parallels the 42 months recorded in Revelation 13? How can those 42 months not be meaning in the end of this age? Does not this 42 months involve the beast that ascends out of the pit making war with the saints? If what I brought up in Revelation 12:17 began 2000 years this would have to mean that the beast ascended out of the pit 2000 years ago and that the 42 month reign of the beast has been going on for almost 2000 years. Per Amil that would equal that the 42 month reign and the thousand years, these are speaking of the exact same period of time. It would also mean when the beast is supposed to still be in the pit per Amil.

What you are missing is that Revelation 20 is simply highlighting the fact that the devil cannot wholesale blind the Gentile nations anymore since Christ defeated him.

Imprisonment, deception, blindness, darkness, hopelessness and ignorance are often tied together in Scripture, specially to describe the state of the Gentiles before the cross.

Ephesians 2:11-13 confirms this, saying, “ye being in time past Gentiles (ethnos) in the flesh, who are called uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: but now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.”

The Scriptures often depict the Gentiles in the Old Testament as deceived, without hope, blinded, ignorant and darkened. The Bible repeatedly describes the Gentiles in the New Testament as enlightened. That does not suggest that all were blind in the Old Testament or that all will be enlightened in the New Testament. These are simply sweeping generalities establishing the Gospel climate in either era. The widespread light didn’t shine on the nations throughout the Old Testament. Today, it does exist as the Gospel is preached throughout the nations. Before the cross, the Gospel was largely withheld from the nations. After the cross, the Gospel spread like wildfire throughout the globe. Like Israel in the Old Testament, the Gentiles in the New Testament have now had the light shone on them through the great commission.

 

[DavidPT]

No it is not. I have compared the two. One is now. One is 1000 years from now. Not the same event at all. Revelation 7, and the coming out of great tribulation is the tribulation of the last 1991 years. "Great" is referring to the length, not intensity. Does one really know how many have been martyred over the last 1991 years? I doubt it.

Clearly, them coming out of great tribulation is something that happens in the here and now and not something that happens during the NHNE or anytime after Christ returns. I'm not saying nor suggesting otherwise. But as to Revelation 7:15 -17, that is meaning their destiny in the new Jerusalem in the NHNE once it comes down from God out of heaven. It is not meaning something already taking place now. Let's compare something else for a moment.

Therefore are they before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple(Revelation 7:15)

Let's now compare that with something recorded in Revelation 15.

and no man was able to enter into the temple, till the seven plagues of the seven angels were fulfilled(Revelation 15:8)

Therefore are they before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple(Revelation 7:15)---and no man was able to enter into the temple, till the seven plagues of the seven angels were fulfilled(Revelation 15:8)

How can both of these things possibly be true at the same time? Where I come from that is called a contradiction if both are true at the same time. Therefore, the former has to be meaning after the latter, and not before or during the latter instead.

Let's now compare with Revelation 22.

but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him(Revelation 22:3)----Therefore are they before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple(Revelation 7:15)

One is to go with the Scriptures that contradict(that being Revelation 7:15 and Revelation 15:8 in this case), and not instead go with the Scriptures that don't contradict(Revelation 22:3 and Revelation 7:15 in this case)???

 

[DavidPT]

NM. Did it yet again. Reposted when I meant to Edit instead

 

[jeffweedaman]

There is no wicked during the 1000 years. Not sure of your point. I say good riddance as well at the Second Coming. Still not sure of your point.

If you say good riddance to the wicked at the Lords coming then who populates your future millennium?
Billions of uncircumcised of heart people come against us.

 

[DavidPT]

Billions of uncircumcised of heart people come against us.

We need to interpret Scripture with Scripture. Usually I use Zechariah 14 in a case like this, but this time I will just leave that ch out of the equation and use the following in Daniel 7 instead.

Daniel 7:9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.
10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.
11 I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.
12 As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.


Everything recorded here is obviously part of the same scene taking place at the time. The LOF is obviously in view here. No problem though. The LOF is also in view in Revelation 19. Anyone reading the text above, unless they suffer from some form of reading comprehension regarding the above verses, they should be able to plainly see that only the beast involving the horn speaking great words is destroyed at the time, but as concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.

How is verse 12 possibly supposed to fit Amil? Per Amil what is recorded above would be meaning the great white throne judgment. How could anyone's lives be being prolonged for a season and time during the GWTJ? That couldn't remotely be something that takes place during the GWTJ. Therefore, the GWTJ is not even in view in any of the above verses. The above verses fit Premil not Amil. Verse 12 works with Premil but certainly can't and doesn't work with Amil.

Think about it for a moment. If one is employing good common sense regarding the verses above, they would not be insisting the GWTJ is in view here. Because if the GWTJ was in view here, it is ludicrous that verse 12 would be telling us their lives are prolonged for awhile. It would instead be telling us that the rest of the beasts were also given to the burning flame at the time. So where does it say that in those verses? Why doesn't it say that in those verses? Obviously, because it is not even true that the rest of the beasts are given to the burning flame at the time also.

 

[claninja]

This is yet something else that makes Amil nonsensical, the fact the martyrs recorded in verse 4 have zero to do with the camp of the saints surrounded in verses 7-9. Why even bring martyrs up at all if what happens after the thousand years does not even involve them? If they are in heaven at the time, how could anyone surrounding the camp of saints back on earth possibly affect them one way or the other?

It seems to me that if we start with verse 1--And I saw an angel come down from heaven--this already tells us the scene is earth not heaven since it would be nonsensical for an angel to come down from heaven while remaining in heaven. That contradicts what the verse says.

Revelation 12:12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.


Maybe the reason he has to come down from heaven to earth because that is where Revelation 12:12 has satan being located following the war in heaven. That means when he is bound it has to be meaning post that of Revelation 12:12. But if one looks at the remaining verses in Revelation 12, where is there a place to fit a thousand year binding? If he is in the pit he wouldn't be having great wrath while in there. He would be having great wrath when he is not in the pit. Two times he is not in the pit. Before the thousand years and after the thousand years. If he is not bound during Revelation 12:12-17, yet, he is bound in this age, that would have to mean he is bound while he still had access to accusing the brethren before God. I don't see any logic in that myself. What I conclude then, since I see Revelation 12:17 leading to the end of this present age, he is bound at the end of that war he unleashes on the saints during his 42 month reign.

I think that’s why the Amil presents revelation 20:4 as souls of dead believers going to heaven, while the camp of saints being warred against on earth, are those who had not yet physically died.

to be fair to the Amil, and to counter the premil position, there are no scriptures, outside of revelation 20, that demonstrate the resurrected saints will be warred against by Satan and his army. such scriptures, just like souls going to heaven to live and reign prior to the resurrection, are absent.

 

[DavidPT]

to be fair to the Amil, and to counter the premil position, there are no scriptures, outside of revelation 20, that demonstrate the resurrected saints will be warred against by Satan and his army. such scriptures, just like souls going to heaven to live and reign prior to the resurrection, are absent.

Maybe if one ignores some of Zechariah 14 and some of Daniel 7, for example, maybe that way there are no Scriptures supporting Premil in regards to this. Sometimes one simply has to logically deduce things since not everything comes right out and plainly says something. If any of Zechariah 14 involves the 2nd coming, it is not unreasonable to assume, regardless that it says no such thing anywhere in that chapter, that the saved dead have been raised and are now in immortal bodies at this point. Then there is the matter of Zechariah 14:16-19. If that chapter involves the 2nd coming, these verses would be meaning post the 2nd coming.

You might be applying block logic to Zechariah 14 rather than step logic. And if so, block logic can never involve step logic as well?

I don't claim to fully understand the concept of block logic, but if it involves grouping similar themes together, why can't any of that also involve chronology of some sort? Doesn't step logic usually involve chronology?

As to Zechariah 14:16-19 if that is meaning post the 2nd coming in the end of this age, that assuming the 2nd coming is recorded in this chapter, but would have been hidden until the NT shed light that Christ's advent involves 2 not 1, comings, anyone that can be threatened with punishment post the 2nd coming for refusing to come up could not possibly be meaning saved saints who have put on bodily immortality at the 2nd coming. Nor could Zechariah 14:16-19 possibly be meaning that it will be like that for all eternity, what is recorded in those verses.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Per Amil apparently satan can pretty much do everything he can do when he is loosed while he is bound.

That is absolutely not true. This is yet another in a long line of your false accusations made against Amil. You know that you have no convincing arguments against Amil, so you always have to resort to misrepresenting Amil.

Tell me, in Old Testament times was anyone able to resist the devil so that he had to flee from them?

Tell me, in Old Testament times did the devil hold the power of death? How about in New Testament times?

Tell me, in Old Testament times was Satan able to keep a vast majority of the Gentile nations of the world in spiritual darkness without any knowledge of the word of God to the point where Paul would describe them as being "without hope and without God in the world"? How about in New Testament times?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

The literal time frame is from David to Christ. Closer to a literal 1000 years, than 1991 indefinite years.

You both are wrong in your application of Revelation 20.

And, yet, you are completely unable to prove that using scripture. You are completely incapable of showing how a passage like 2 Peter 3 can possibly support Premil. Or John 5:28-29. I could go on and on. I'm supposed to take you seriously when you've never made a convincing argument to support your doctrine? You're all talk.

There is no wicked during the 1000 years. Not sure of your point. I say good riddance as well at the Second Coming. Still not sure of your point.

The point is that if all the wicked are destroyed at the second coming then that would not leave any mortals to populate an earthly millennial kingdom because believers would all have immortal bodies at that point. I know you don't agree with that, but I'm just explaining the point since you weren't getting it.

You make it sound like spirits do not inhabit human bodies. Since when do spirits do physical things without a human in the mix?

They influence humans, but Paul taught that our real battle is not against flesh and blood (humans) but rather evil spirits/demons. Is that too hard for you to understand? We have humans that come against us, but we know that they are being influenced by demons and our real enemies are demons rather than the humans that they are influencing. We should love our human enemies and be kind to them, but we have no love for demons whose only goal is to destroy us.

"For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. But if I live in the flesh, this is the fruit of my labour: yet what I shall choose I wot not. For I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better: Nevertheless to abide in the flesh is more needful for you."

This does not say without a body. This is talking about sinful flesh. Paul endures this sinful flesh to remain faithful on earth. There was still a permanent incorruptible physical body waiting for him, and he has enjoyed it since the first century.


"We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord. Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him."

Which of these bodies:

"For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens."

Notice the phrase whether absent or present? Absent or present with the Lord. The point was not about "not having" a body. Absent from the body is the same thing as present with the Lord. Paul was distinguishing between being absent or present with the Lord. Not being present or absent from a body.

Paul set the topic with the first verse. The following verses complement the point about having a permanent physical body in Paradise, not written to contradict that point.

Nothing you said here makes any sense. Soul sleep is a false doctrine. If you're absent from the body that means you're apart from your body. That is obvious. But, you act as if someone can't be absent from their body even though Paul clearly indicated otherwise.

1000 years is not an indefinite period of time either.

This comment is completely unhelpful and has absolutely nothing to do with the point I was making.

 

[DavidPT]

I think that’s why the Amil presents revelation 20:4 as souls of dead believers going to heaven, while the camp of saints being warred against on earth, are those who had not yet physically died.

But where in verses 7-9 does it give the impression that any of the camp of the saints ever die to begin with? The only ones I see dying in those verses are the ones surrounding them. This presents a problem since the 42 month reign of the beast has to happen in the end of this age in order for the beast and false prophet to be alive and active at the time so that they can be cast into the LOF per Revelation 19.

Revelation 13:15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.


Clearly, there are martyrs during it's 42 month reign. If we compare this to Revelation 20:4---and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands---Revelation 13:15 obviously and undeniably explain how and why these in verse 4 are martyred. Verse 4 is not meaning after the thousand years, though. The 42 month reign is meaning in the end of this age, though. The only way to square the texts, the 42 month reign precedes the thousand years not follows it instead. That is Premil not Amil unless your version of Amil could possibly fit a scenario like this? The version of Amil that SG and SJ holds to couldn't possibly fit this scenario.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Good observation. So, are the camp of saints being warred against, the same as those living and reigning with Christ?

No, the camp of the saints are those who are alive on earth. It is the church that is being opposed by living unbelievers. This is something that makes no sense about Premil. They actually think that Christ, in all His glory, and His people with IMMORTAL bodies, will be physically attacked. Physically attacking immortals? Really? That is complete nonsense.

 

[DavidPT]

That is absolutely not true. This is yet another in a long line of your false accusations made against Amil. You know that you have no convincing arguments against Amil, so you always have to resort to misrepresenting Amil.

Tell me, in Old Testament times was anyone able to resist the devil so that he had to flee from them?

Tell me, in Old Testament times did the devil hold the power of death? How about in New Testament times?

Tell me, in Old Testament times was Satan able to keep a vast majority of the Gentile nations of the world in spiritual darkness without any knowledge of the word of God to the point where Paul would describe them as being "without hope and without God in the world"? How about in New Testament times?

Look at how you are arguing, though. Would all of that only be true while satan is bound but not still be true when satan is loosed?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

But where in verses 7-9 does it give the impression that any of the camp of the saints ever die to begin with? The only ones I see dying in those verses are the ones surrounding them. This presents a problem since the 42 month reign of the beast has to happen in the end of this age in order for the beast and false prophet to be alive and active at the time so that they can be cast into the LOF per Revelation 19.

Revelation 13:15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.


Clearly, there are martyrs during it's 42 month reign. If we compare this to Revelation 20:4---and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands---Revelation 13:15 obviously and undeniably explain how and why these in verse 4 are martyred. Verse 4 is not meaning after the thousand years, though. The 42 month reign is meaning in the end of this age, though. The only way to square the texts, the 42 month reign precedes the thousand years not follows it instead. That is Premil not Amil unless your version of Amil could possibly fit a scenario like this? The version of Amil that SG and SJ holds to couldn't possibly fit this scenario.

You never remember anything I tell you. I have never said that I believe the 42 months refers to Satan's little season. Clearly, it would not make sense to conclude that those who don't worship the beast and are martyred during Satan's little season go on to reign with Christ for a thousand years since the thousand years precedes his little season.

Revelation 11:1-7 indicates that the beast doesn't ascend from the pit until the 42 months/1260 days are over, but you have the beast ascending from the pit at the beginning of the 42 months. The two witnesses prophesy and give their testimony during the 42 months/1260 days and it's not until that time period ends that the beast is able to overcome and kill them (Rev 11:7).

I've talked to you about this before (I actually remember our discussions, unlike you) and you just tried to brush it off and acted like that doesn't necessarily mean the beast doesn't ascend from the pit until then, but I find that to be a weak argument.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Look at how you are arguing, though. Would all of that only be true while satan is bound but not still be true when satan is loosed?

No, it wouldn't be true any longer when he is loosed. He will be given a little season to again have the kind of freedom and authority he had in Old Testament times. Now, can you please address what I said in that post and answer the questions I asked?