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

[jeffweedaman]

Maybe the solution is, like I have proposed in the past, the NHNE are a process in the beginning, something that doesn't happen in a snap of the fingers. That it takes a thousand years, a little season, and a great white throne judgment to get to the final result of what the NHNE will end up being.

Why would God create a restored earth and then allow the unrestored to dwell on it?
Makes more sense that God restores all things after the wicked have been judged.
He prepares a place for us that is eternally separate from those who did not love the truth and so be saved in this age.

Peter saw the NHNE as being a place where righteousness dwells. not unrighteousness and righteousness dwelling in Gods perfect restoration.

 

[DavidPT]

You keep hurling your false charge of "everything can be fulfilled within 24 hours or less once Christ returns" at Amils despite that been refuted numerous times. This is another white elephant and shows how little you grasp about Amil after all these years. I can only conclude that you are deliberately trying to misrepresent that position because you have no answer to it.

Here's a chance for you to clear it up then, assuming I'm coming to the wrong conclusions per this scenario.

Let's say that Christ returns at 2pm central time on July 5, 2090, as an example. Per Amil, would it still be the last day, say July 8th at 5pm central time? Using this same time as an example, per Amil when is the longest this day can last? Can it last more than 24 hours and still be the last day? Or does it need to involve 24 hours or less in order to qualify as the last day? Assuming the great white throne judgment happens on this same last day, per Amil this would have to mean that it needs to conclude before 2pm central time on July 6, 2090, in order for it to take place in it's entirety on the last day, that being the logic. If Amils argue that the GWTJ takes place outside of time, how can Amils then argue it takes place on the last day? From 2pm central time on July 5, 2090 to 2pm central time on July 6, 2090, using this example, is not outside of time.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Here's a chance for you to clear it up then, assuming I'm coming to the wrong conclusions per this scenario.

Let's say that Christ returns at 2pm central time on July 5, 2090, as an example. Per Amil, would it still be the last day, say July 8th at 5pm central time? Using this same time as an example, per Amil when is the longest this day can last? Can it last more than 24 hours and still be the last day? Or does it need to involve 24 hours or less in order to qualify as the last day? Assuming the great white throne judgment happens on this same last day, per Amil this would have to mean that it needs to conclude before 2pm central time on July 6, 2090, in order for it to take place in it's entirety on the last day, that being the logic. If Amils argue that the GWTJ takes place outside of time, how can Amils then argue it takes place on the last day? From 2pm central time on July 5, 2090 to 2pm central time on July 6, 2090, using this example, is not outside of time.

The last day ushers in eternity.

 

[DavidPT]

Why would God create a restored earth and then allow the unrestored to dwell on it?

One reason could be so that certain prophecies recorded in the OT, these don't end up being false prophecies.

An example.

Isaiah 60:11 Therefore thy gates shall be open continually; they shall not be shut day nor night; that men may bring unto thee the forces of the Gentiles, and that their kings may be brought.
12 For the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish; yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted.
13 The glory of Lebanon shall come unto thee, the fir tree, the pine tree, and the box together, to beautify the place of my sanctuary; and I will make the place of my feet glorious.
14 The sons also of them that afflicted thee shall come bending unto thee; and all they that despised thee shall bow themselves down at the soles of thy feet; and they shall call thee, The city of the LORD, The Zion of the Holy One of Israel.

When comparing some of Isaiah 60, not just the verses above, but also the verses that are after verse 14, with that of some of Revelation 21-22, it seems pretty apparent that the timeframe meant here involves the NHNE. In the midst of this same context is verse 12. Why would that be within NHNE context and then not even involve the NHNE? How does that make good sense? Since it is within NHNE context, and that the NHNE is obviously meaning forever, we have one of two conclusions to arrive at here. Either verse 12 is meaning for all eternity this threat will still be there billions and billions of years from now, as an example. Or there is a period of time that doesn't include all of eternity thus preventing this from involving all of eternity.

 

[Timtofly]

You are making zero sense to me here. What point are you trying to make? Is it reasonable for anyone to think that there is 2 NHNEs then, where one is temporary and the other is permanent or something? I'm Premil and I too think some of Isaiah 65 involves the thousand years. Maybe the solution is, like I have proposed in the past, the NHNE are a process in the beginning, something that doesn't happen in a snap of the fingers. That it takes a thousand years, a little season, and a great white throne judgment to get to the final result of what the NHNE will end up being.

At least I'm not thinking something silly, such as everything can be fulfilled within 24 hours or less once Christ returns, as if everyone present at the GWTJ can stand before God one at a time to give an account of themselves, and that this judgment can be started and finished within the same 24 hours it allegedly begins.

They miss the point in 2 Peter 3 that Noah's Flood destroyed the former heavens and earth. There was a new heavens and earth after the Flood. Since the promise was to destroy the earth and heavens with fire, there will also be a new heavens and earth after the Second Coming. Both literal new heavens and earth.

At the end of this reality, the literal new reality called the NHNE will begin. Context is key, not human imagination rewriting and reinterpreting God's Word.

 

[claninja]

If you don't believe that to be the case, yet believe his little season began with Christ's ascension, there already appears to be a conflict with what is recorded in Revelation 20. Revelation 20 records that those in verse 8, at the end of of satan's little season they are devoured by fire from God out of heaven, which is then followed by satan getting cast into the LOF, followed by the great white throne judgment of humans. In your mind you already found a solution for verse 10, though I fully disagree with your proposed solution, but what about verses 11-15 then?

Plus, if the wicked are devoured by fire from God out of heaven at the end of satan's little season, and if you don't believe his little season is thousands of years, where did all of the wicked come from again after they were already devoured in verse 9? And why would there be a gap of thousands of years after verse 9 until that of verses 11-15? As to those verses, in order to fulfill them it requires that there has to be a bodily resurrection from the dead first.

Though you might not agree with other Amils here nor Premils, between what you are proposing, what other Amils are proposing, and what Premils are proposing, what you are proposing has zero chance of being correct. I don't even know why you interpret things in the manner you do when it obviously conflicts with the bigger picture? You seem to be interpreting a lot of these things in a vacuum, as if the first century is the only century that matters, the only century that counts. As if everything needing to be fulfilled, every single thing was fulfilled in the first century.

If the end of this present earth age would have ended in the first century, thus no 2nd century after that, no 3rd century, no 4th century, etc, maybe then some of what you are proposing might work. But then we wouldn't be having this debate in the 21st century if the entire earth age ended in the first century.

it’s simple:

1.) did the apostles believe they were living at the end of the ages, the last days, the last hour, etc.. and that Christ would come in their lifetime?

2.) did the apostles demonstrate that Satan was deceiving, hindering, prowling like a lion, leading astray, working through the sons of disobedience, etc… but would soon be crushed?

if the answer is yes to both questions, then it renders any traditionally Amil interpretation of the millennium as being literally thousands of years prior to Christs return as untenable, UNLESS the apostles were completely wrong.


The author of Hebrews, in chapt 10 v 37, stated that “in a little (same Greek word for little as Satan’s little season) while” Christ would come “without delay”. How can this mean thousands of years but Satan’s “little” season is literally short?

 

[claninja]

It is hard to know where to start with your theology. It is so way off base and nonsensical that it does not remotely add up. You render the detail, facts and events in Revelation 20 worthless and irrelevant. You now turn the thousand years and Satan's little season into an apparition. It is not real time and what occurs within it is simply a delusion. Hahnism should be rejected for what it is - flagrant false teaching.

You totally miss the fact that the binding of Satan for a thousand years and the ruling and reigning of the saints for the same is a result (and consequence) of the victory of the first resurrection.

This teaching is so irrational. Please tell us:

1. When did the thousand years commence?
2. What triggered it?
3. What in reality results from it?
4. When does it end?
5. How does it end?
6. When does Satan’s little season commence?
7. What in reality results from it?
8. When does it end?
9. How does it end?

You make Premil compelling.

the real question to ask, is did the apostles believe Christ would come in their life time, “in a little while, without delay”?

If yes, then the millennium being symbolic for thousands of years prior to Christ’s coming is untenable, unless of course the apostles were wrong or mistaken….

 

[claninja]

What do you believe the dead in Christ are doing right now?

The rewarding of the saints is mentioned in Revelation 21:1-4 which obviously immediately follows the end of Revelation 20. We will inherit the eternal new heavens and new earth at the conclusion of the judgment. Matthew 25:31-46 makes it clear that both believers and unbelievers will be present at the judgment.

I'm sorry, but this is complete nonsense and can't be taken seriously. The thousand years clearly has a beginning and and end and is clearly connected with Christ's reign and with the binding of Satan. Your explanation of the thousand years seems to ignore all of that.

Are you saying that you think Satan was loosed upon Christ's resurrection and ascension? If so, you have it all mixed up. That is when he was bound. If you think he was loosed upon Christ's resurrection and ascension, then when was he bound?

wow, ok, so your just going to zip past and not acknowledge the part about you being incorrect about mikron/mikros, which demonstrates your inconsistencies about Christ coming in a “little” while without delay and Satan having a “little” season….

its contradicting that the millennium should be interpreted as thousand a of years prior to Christ’s coming, per Amil, if the disciples believed Christ would come “in a little while, without delay”.

 

[claninja]

No, you gave the impression that YOU believed that. You are almost impossible to follow. Please tell me when you believe Satan's little season began and when it ended.

what post# gave that impression?

 

[sovereigngrace]

the real question to ask, is did the apostles believe Christ would come in their life time, “in a little while, without delay”?

If yes, then the millennium being symbolic for thousands of years prior to Christ’s coming is untenable, unless of course the apostles were wrong or mistaken….

Your avoidance speaks volumes. You cannot answer these questions honestly because Full Preterism is banned here.

 

[sovereigngrace]

wow, ok, so your just going to zip past and not acknowledge the part about you being incorrect about mikron/mikros, which demonstrates your inconsistencies about Christ coming in a “little” while without delay and Satan having a “little” season….

its contradicting that the millennium should be interpreted as thousand a of years prior to Christ’s coming, per Amil, if the disciples believed Christ would come “in a little while, without delay”.

I've already addressed this with you, and you have already avoided this. When interpreting Scripture, it is important to see context and meaning. The contrast in Revelation 20 is clear. It is comparative. We have a long period (the thousand years) where Satan is bound and a short period (Satan’s little season) where he is released to wreck havoc before the end. You have to ignore this in order to justify Hahnism.

Revelation 20 relates to a period after the first resurrection (not before as you argue) and involves real and detailed events. Extreme Preterism denies this with their fixation with AD70 and the coming of Titus.

 

[Zao is life]

I also believe that the NHNE follows immediately after the return of Christ.

There is a reason why Amillennialists do not take the thousand years literally!

Moses employs `a thousand' in Deuteronomy 7:9 saying, "Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

1 Chronicles 16:13-17 also states, "O ye seed of Israel his servant, ye children of Jacob, his chosen ones. He is the LORD our God; his judgments are in all the earth. Be ye mindful always of his covenant; the word which he commanded to a thousand generations; Even of the covenant which he made with Abraham, and of his oath unto Isaac; And hath confirmed the same to Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

A thousand and ten thousand are used together in Psalm 91, saying, "Thou shalt not be afraid for the terror by night; nor for the arrow that flieth by day; Nor for the pestilence that walketh in darkness; nor for the destruction that wasteth at noonday. A thousand shall fall at thy side, and ten thousand at thy right hand; but it shall not come nigh thee" (vv 5-7).

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

A similar contrast between these two numbers or ideas is seen in Deuteronomy 32:30, where a rhetorical question is asked, "How should one chase a thousand, and two put ten thousand to flight, except their Rock had sold them, and the Lord had shut them up?"

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

Joshua affirms, on the same vein, in chapter 23, "One man of you shall chase a thousand: for the LORD your God, he it is that fighteth for you, as he hath promised you" (v 10).

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

Isaiah the prophet similarly declares in Isaiah 30:17, "one thousand shall flee at the rebuke of one."

This incidentally is the only passage in Scripture that makes mention of the actual number "one thousand," albeit, the term is used to impress a spiritual truth.

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

Psalm 84:9-10 says, "Behold, O God our shield, and look upon the face of thine anointed. For a day in thy courts is better than a thousand. I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

The figure a thousand is also employed in Psalm 50:10-11 saying, "For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills. I know all the fowls of the mountains: and the wild beasts of the field are mine."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

Ecclesiastes 7:27-28 succinctly says, "one man among a thousand have I found."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

In the same vein, Job 33:23 declares, "If there be a messenger with him, an interpreter, one among a thousand, to shew unto man his uprightness."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

The distinct contrast between one and a thousand is again found in Job 9:2-3, where Job declares, "I know it is so of a truth: but how should man be just with God? If he will contend with him, he cannot answer him one of a thousand."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

I agree with what you say about a thousand years not necessarily being literal, and I get to that further down in my reply here, looking at it from a different angle, but reinforcing what you said about it.

But whether or not the one thousand years commences before or after the return of Christ depends on the identity of the beast and when it was destroyed by Christ, because those seen in Revelation 20:4-6 were beheaded for their refusal to worship the beast or receive its/his mark or the number of its/his name.

But maybe the wrong question is, "How long is a thousand years?"

Compare the two passages below:

Revelation 7 (the multitude who came out of great tribulation):
16 They shall hunger no more, neither thirst any more; neither shall the sun light on them, nor any heat.
17 For the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and shall lead them unto living fountains of waters: and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.

Revelation 21 (conditions in the New Heavens and New Earth):
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.
5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.
6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.

THE PROMISES TO THOSE WHO OVERCOME:-​

(1) They will eat of the Tree of Life (Revelation 2:7)
(2) They will not be hurt by the Second Death (Revelation 2:11)
(3) They will eat Hidden Manna and receive a New Name (Revelation 2:17)
(4) Their names will not be blotted out of the Book of Life (Revelation 3:5)
(5) They will be made a Pillar in the Temple of God (Revelation 3:12)
(6) They will inherit All Things (Revelation 21:7)
(7) They will sit with Christ in His Throne (Revelation 3:21)
(8) They will be given power over the nations (Revelation 2:26)

βασιλεύσει (He will reign) forever and ever: Revelation 11:15 (Christ).
βασιλεύσουσιν (they will reign) on the earth: Revelation 5:10 (those who overcome).
βασιλεύσουσιν (they will reign) with Christ a thousand years: Revelation 20:6 (those who overcome).
βασιλεύσουσιν (they will reign) forever and ever: Revelation 22:5.

Revelation 22:5 (reigning in the new heavens & earth):
“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: And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads. And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God gives them light: and they will reign (βασιλεύσουσιν) for ever and ever."

This brings questions to mind (at least to my fallible human mind):-

1. Who are "they" that Revelation 22:5 says will reign forever and ever?

2a. Who are "they" that 20:4-6 says will reign "a thousand years" and why are they only said to reign only for a thousand years, whereas "they" in Revelation 22:5 are said to reign forever and ever?
2b. What's the difference between "they" who will reign forever and ever in 22:5 and "they" who will reign "a thousand years in 20:4-6?

3. What about what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15:24?

4. How long is a thousand years, anyway?

Revelation 21:22-24
"And I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God Almighty is its temple, even the Lamb. And the city had no need of the sun, nor of the moon, that they might shine in it, for the glory of God illuminated it, and its lamp is the Lamb. And the nations of those who are saved will walk in the light of it; and the kings of the earth bring their glory and honor into it.

Earth to Jupiter: Hey Joops, you need to get your clock set correctly. Your seconds are ticking so fast you might explode. Your clock is doing one entire day in 10 hours. Your time is wayyy out. At your rate you should be doing a year in less than half a year, but for some reason you're only doing a year in almost 12 years!
Jupiter to Earth: Hey li'l Oithy (Jupiter has a thick accent), you're wrong. It's YOUR time that's out. Your clock is really slow. You need to change the battery. And your calendar too, because that's also wayyyy out.
Venus: HAHAHA Earthy and Joopy, your clocks and your calendars are both wrong. Here, let me help you to set your clocks and your calendars ..

The universe consists of billions of planets in millions of galaxies and solar systems, each planet with it's own length of days and years. How long is a thousand years in the universe?

What about in eternity? The future does not exist at this moment. Neither does the past. We think of "moment by moment" in terms of the ticking of clocks linked to earth-time, but how long is "a thousand years" in eternity? Isn't eternity one never-ending moment in which those in Christ live forever and ever?

BETTER QUESTIONS?​

Maybe it would be (bearing in mind that we know that God is 100% just) better to ask:

Can God, may God, would God, should God have willed to be 100% just "to the end" and be seen to be 100% just "to the end"?

(Yes, He can, and yes He may, and yes He has).

But since He has, what is "to the end" in God's mind? When man was living forever and ever in the Garden of Eden, Satan was "released" into the Garden of Eden to attempt to beguile mankind, and he succeeded.

What if God willed to release Satan one more time in the NEW "Garden of Eden" (NHNE) in order for Satan and man to be tested one more time?

We know that God is 100% just, but if He wills to be seen to be 100% just "to the end" then how can we THINK we "know" where God's "to the end" lies, or how long "a thousand years" is?

"For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor your ways My ways, says the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts." Isaiah 55:8.

I think if God had to sing us a song, His song to us would go something like, "You don't know much, but you know how much I love you - it's written in John 3:16".

I don't believe that what you say about the beast in your 2nd reply post to me is correct, but I'll answer that in a reply to your post about that.

 

[Zao is life]

My previous post re the beast proves that the beast was before John. The same goes for the mystery of iniquity and antichrist. They all relate to the same ongoing entity. The symbolic description is looking at its whole life, which takes it right up until the second coming.

Mystery of iniquity and Antichrist yes, but John is clearly told in Revelation 17 that the beast no longer existed in his day. It depends on to what extent we want to change the Bible's own symbolism derived from Daniel 7 and other places in order to change what a beast and horns and "mountains" refers to.

 

[DavidPT]

Since the promise was to destroy the earth and heavens with fire

The flood in Noah's day was clearly literal, the fire mentioned in 2 Peter 3 is not literal. One is to believe there will be no more animals on the earth once Christ returns? Since there is not an ark to board animals on this time, and assuming the entire planet is engulfed in flames, how can any animals survive that? Is God then going to resurrect animals so that they can be present in the next age? Is God then going to create and form new animals? If yes to any of that, why didn't He think of that during Noah's flood? Why bother trying to preserve any of them when He simply could have created and formed some brand new ones instead?

 

[Zao is life]

If you are up to it anytime soon, it would be nice if you could start a thread on this since I for one am interested in your thoughts on this. I, too, though I'm a Premil, tend to think the NHNE begin with the 2nd coming. Most Premils are against this idea, yet these same Premils have Isaiah 65 involving the thousand years, where that obviously involves the NHNE. As if there is a former NHNE followed by a new completely different NHNE. All one has to do is read Revelation 21:1 and it's plainly obvious that one NHNE doesn't precede another NHNE.

Revelation 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

Does this mean this---And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first new heaven and the first new earth were passed away? Of course not. It is meaning the present heaven and the present earth were passed away.

I agree with you. I basically answered your question now in post # 1272 in this thread, in my reply to SG.

With regard to Isaiah 65, there is so much that Premils do with prophetic scripture, when scripture is using metaphor and they turn it into something literal, that it would be difficult to debate anything with them. I actually think Preterists can teach us a lot in this regard (the metaphor used in apocalyptic literature), though I disagree with Preterism's conclusions.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Mystery of iniquity and Antichrist yes, but John is clearly told in Revelation 17 that the beast no longer existed in his day. It depends on to what extent we want to change the Bible's own symbolism derived from Daniel 7 and other places in order to change what a beast and horns and "mountains" refers to.

Revelation 17:8 states, “The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.”

This passage strongly shows that the beast existed prior to the day of John, stating, “the beast that was.” Notwithstanding, the terminology that follows appears slightly contradictory – “is not, and yet is.” One could be tempted to reason: it either is or else it isn’t, notwithstanding, this reading plainly says that it both “is” and “is not.” The import of the reading appears to demonstrate that the beast did exist in John’s day, and in fact, before John’s day, but that it had not fully developed into what it would eventually become. There is a saying in Northern Ireland that appears to explain this reading – ‘He is a big fellow, but a wee jacket fits him’ i.e. ‘he is not as big as he thinks he is’. This appears to be the meaning.

Revelation 17:11-13 further enlarges, “the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition. And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast. These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.”

A plain reading of these passages proves that, whatever the beast truly represents, he/it was expressly in existence before the time that John received this symbolic revelation. The beast cannot therefore merely be a last few years end-time phenomenon, as some would have us believe. After all, he existed before John wrote Revelation. We learn through the apostle’s first century testimony that the beast expressly “was” (past tense). In fact, the passage mentions this fact three times (twice in verse 8, and once in verse 11). Therefore, he existed before John. He also existed at the time of John – who said of his day, the beast “is” (present tense). John then explained that the beast would continue after his day, saying it “shall” be (future tense). In fact, Scripture tells us that the beast, and the false prophet, will only finally be destroyed at the all-consummating second coming of the Lord, where they will be “cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone” (Revelation 19:20). Why would this world system be destroyed at Christ’s coming and then re-emerge in a future millennium as the sand of the sea?

Having said all this, the terminology that follows is strange and appears contradictory, saying, “is not, and yet is.” One could naturally be tempted to reason: the beast either is or else it isn’t, although, this reading plainly says that the beast both “is” and “is not” at the same time. Whilst the import of the reading indicates that the beast existed in John’s day, it would seem to suggest that it did so in a restrained or restricted manner. How else can we marry the two facts that the beast “is” and “is not” at the same time. The system represented by the beast must have been around in John’s day, albeit in a curtailed manner – a bit like a prisoner that has full movement within a prison, although, he is restricted to particular areas at given times and must continually abide by the careful rules and guidelines that govern his movements within the penitentiary. He has freedom – to a degree, but in another hand he is not free to do as he wishes. The bottom line is: the prisoner would be viewed by every sane observer as bound.

The beast “was” because Satan and his kingdom operated long before Christ ever invaded his territory at the first Advent. He is deemed “is not” because, through Christ's successful completion of His Father’s assignment on earth He roundly defeated Satan in his own backyard and spiritually spoiled his goods and influence. Christ instigated the great triumphant global advance upon the kingdom of darkness. This has inflicted great injury and damage upon the antichrist spirit for near 2,000 years. Christ went forth conquering and to conquer through the successful spread of the Gospel to the nations. The fact is the gates of hell can never prevail against the Church of Jesus Christ.

The beast “is not” because Satan no longer exercises complete unchallenged control over the nations as he once did before the cross. Revelation 13:1-4 shows that at some stage in history one of the beast’s heads were “wounded” thus incapacitating this evil ogre. This can only refer to the cross and Christ’s great victory over the kingdom of darkness. This transaction placed chains upon the rebellious principalities and powers which remain until Satan’s little season.

The beast “is” (at the time of John's writing) because even though Christ spiritual bound him at the cross, he was allowed to continue to operate for a prescribed period, albeit under very definite limits which God has divinely set. These cannot be penetrated.

 

[sovereigngrace]

I agree with what you say about a thousand years not necessarily being literal, and I get to that further down in my reply here, looking at it from a different angle, but reinforcing what you said about it.

But whether or not the one thousand years commences before or after the return of Christ depends on the identity of the beast and when it was destroyed by Christ, because those seen in Revelation 20:4-6 were beheaded for their refusal to worship the beast or receive its/his mark or the number of its/his name.

But maybe the wrong question is, "How long is a thousand years?"

Compare the two passages below:

Revelation 7 (the multitude who came out of great tribulation):
16 They shall hunger no more, neither thirst any more; neither shall the sun light on them, nor any heat.
17 For the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and shall lead them unto living fountains of waters: and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.

Revelation 21 (conditions in the New Heavens and New Earth):
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.
5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.
6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.

THE PROMISES TO THOSE WHO OVERCOME:-​

(1) They will eat of the Tree of Life (Revelation 2:7)
(2) They will not be hurt by the Second Death (Revelation 2:11)
(3) They will eat Hidden Manna and receive a New Name (Revelation 2:17)
(4) Their names will not be blotted out of the Book of Life (Revelation 3:5)
(5) They will be made a Pillar in the Temple of God (Revelation 3:12)
(6) They will inherit All Things (Revelation 21:7)
(7) They will sit with Christ in His Throne (Revelation 3:21)
(8) They will be given power over the nations (Revelation 2:26)

βασιλεύσει (He will reign) forever and ever: Revelation 11:15 (Christ).
βασιλεύσουσιν (they will reign) on the earth: Revelation 5:10 (those who overcome).
βασιλεύσουσιν (they will reign) with Christ a thousand years: Revelation 20:6 (those who overcome).
βασιλεύσουσιν (they will reign) forever and ever: Revelation 22:5.

Revelation 22:5 (reigning in the new heavens & earth):
“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: And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads. And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God gives them light: and they will reign (βασιλεύσουσιν) for ever and ever."

This brings questions to mind (at least to my fallible human mind):-

1. Who are "they" that Revelation 22:5 says will reign forever and ever?

2a. Who are "they" that 20:4-6 says will reign "a thousand years" and why are they only said to reign only for a thousand years, whereas "they" in Revelation 22:5 are said to reign forever and ever?
2b. What's the difference between "they" who will reign forever and ever in 22:5 and "they" who will reign "a thousand years in 20:4-6?

3. What about what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15:24?

4. How long is a thousand years, anyway?

Revelation 21:22-24
"And I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God Almighty is its temple, even the Lamb. And the city had no need of the sun, nor of the moon, that they might shine in it, for the glory of God illuminated it, and its lamp is the Lamb. And the nations of those who are saved will walk in the light of it; and the kings of the earth bring their glory and honor into it.

Earth to Jupiter: Hey Joops, you need to get your clock set correctly. Your seconds are ticking so fast you might explode. Your clock is doing one entire day in 10 hours. Your time is wayyy out. At your rate you should be doing a year in less than half a year, but for some reason you're only doing a year in almost 12 years!
Jupiter to Earth: Hey li'l Oithy (Jupiter has a thick accent), you're wrong. It's YOUR time that's out. Your clock is really slow. You need to change the battery. And your calendar too, because that's also wayyyy out.
Venus: HAHAHA Earthy and Joopy, your clocks and your calendars are both wrong. Here, let me help you to set your clocks and your calendars ..

The universe consists of billions of planets in millions of galaxies and solar systems, each planet with it's own length of days and years. How long is a thousand years in the universe?

What about in eternity? The future does not exist at this moment. Neither does the past. We think of "moment by moment" in terms of the ticking of clocks linked to earth-time, but how long is "a thousand years" in eternity? Isn't eternity one never-ending moment in which those in Christ live forever and ever?

BETTER QUESTIONS?​

Maybe it would be (bearing in mind that we know that God is 100% just) better to ask:

Can God, may God, would God, should God have willed to be 100% just "to the end" and be seen to be 100% just "to the end"?

(Yes, He can, and yes He may, and yes He has).

But since He has, what is "to the end" in God's mind? When man was living forever and ever in the Garden of Eden, Satan was "released" into the Garden of Eden to attempt to beguile mankind, and he succeeded.

What if God willed to release Satan one more time in the NEW "Garden of Eden" (NHNE) in order for Satan and man to be tested one more time?

We know that God is 100% just, but if He wills to be seen to be 100% just "to the end" then how can we THINK we "know" where God's "to the end" lies, or how long "a thousand years" is?

"For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor your ways My ways, says the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts." Isaiah 55:8.

I think if God had to sing us a song, His song to us would go something like, "You don't know much, but you know how much I love you - it's written in John 3:16".

I don't believe that what you say about the beast in your 2nd reply post to me is correct, but I'll answer that in a reply to your post about that.

Thank you for your detailed response. I enjoyed reading it. It is refreshing to see somebody dig deep and do the research.

The big mistake (I believe) Premillennialists make is that they abandon corroboration when it comes to Revelation 20. They impose a meaning upon this apocalyptic passage that enjoys no other Old Testament or New Testament support. This (to me) is a grave error. If we let Scripture interprets Scripture it is easy to understand this much-debated passage.

When you follow the New Testament narrative through, and let it speak for itself, you see that Revelation 20 neatly fits into the intra-Advent period. It is a record of Christ's great victory over every enemy of righteousness. It shows our conquering king Christ returning after defeating sin, death, Satan, Hades and eternal punishment (the lake of fire). That is why Jesus come. In His mission He accomplished every demand asked of Him. I believe Revelation 20 is also a record of the great commission.

There is one literal first resurrection where Christ defeated the grave. The Bible makes it clear that Christ is "the first resurrection" (Acts 26:23 and Revelation 20:6), "the firstborn from the dead" (Colossians 1:18), "the firstfruits of them that slept" (1 Corinthians 15:20), "first begotten of the dead" (Revelation 1:5).

Since this, Revelation 20 describes the defeat and binding (or curtailment) of Satan for the expressed purpose of the Gospel invading the nations and removing the deception that blinded the Gentiles before Christ's first resurrection. When Satan was bound through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ then the kingdom of darkness was bound (including the beast and every demon). 2 Peter 2:4, Jude v 6, Revelation 9 and Revelation 20 all prove the whole demonic realm is currently restrained from stopping the free-flow of the Gospel. The bruising of the head of the beast (Revelation 13:3, 13:12 and 13:14) correlates with the bruising of the head of Satan 2,000 years ago through the earthly ministry of Christ (Genesis 3:15). They correspond with the spiritual binding imprisoning of Satan during the millennial period. These are figurative metaphors describing the impairment of the kingdom of darkness 2000 years ago.

Matthew 12:22-29, Mark 3:11, 23-27, Luke 10:18-19, Luke 11:20-22, John 12:31-33 Colossians 2:13-15, Hebrews 2:14-15, I John 3:8, Revelation 9:1-11 and Revelation 20:2 prove Satan was bound, defeated, incapacitated, divested of power, disarmed, brought to naught, undone, stripped and spiritually imprisoned through Christ's sinless life, atoning death and triumphant resurrection. Colossians 2:15 tells us: “having spoiled (or divested or disarmed) principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.” Satan has not been rendered immobile or inoperative but is limited in his power, kingship and influence by being defeated on the cross. He is like a dog on a chain. He is shackled.

There is a literal reigning of the dead in Christ now during the intra-Advent period (Revelation 20:4). See also Hebrews 12:18, 22-23, Revelation 6:9-10, 7:9-17, 15:1-3).

There is a literal coming of Christ (Revelation 20:11). See also Matthew 24:27, Matthew 26:64, Mark 14:62, Luke 21:26–27, Acts 1:10 and Revelation 1:7, etc, etc.).

There is a literal resurrection/judgment (singular) of all mankind in the future on the last day (Matthew 10:15, 12:36, 16:27, 25:31-46, John 5:21-30, 6:39-44, 54, 10:42, 11:21-27, 12:48, 17:30-32, 24:15, Acts 10:42, 17:30-31, Romans 2:4-8, 14:10-12, 1 Corinthians 3:6-8, 11-15, 1 Corinthians 4:5, 2 Corinthians 5:10, 2 Timothy 4:1-8, 2 Thessalonians 1:5-8, 1 Timothy 5:24, Hebrews 9:27, 10:27, 2 Peter 2:9, 3:7, 1 Peter 4:1-5, 1 John 4:17, and Revelation 19:11, 20:11-15, 22:12).

There is a real conflagration (Job 14:12-14, Isaiah 13:9-11, Isaiah 34:1-4, 8, Isaiah 65:17-21, Isaiah 66:22-24, Joel 2:3, Joel 2:10-11, Malachi 4:1-3, Matthew 24:29-30, Matthew 24:35-44, Mark 13:24-26, Luke 21:25-27, Romans 8:18-23, 1 Corinthians 15:23-24, 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10, 2 Peter 3:10-13, Hebrews 1:10-12, Revelation 6:13-17, Revelation 16:15-20, Revelation 19:11-16 and Revelation 20:11-15).

The age to come has no room for "mortals" (Luke 20:34-36, Romans 8:19-23, 1 Corinthians 15:50-55 and Revelation 21-22) or the unregenerate (Psalms 37:9-11, Luke 17:26-30, 1 Corinthians 6:9, I Thessalonians 5:2-3, 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10). This would be a strong argument to me that the second coming is “the end.”

 

[DavidPT]

Revelation 17:8 states, “The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.”

This passage strongly shows that the beast existed prior to the day of John, stating, “the beast that was.” Notwithstanding, the terminology that follows appears slightly contradictory – “is not, and yet is.” One could be tempted to reason: it either is or else it isn’t, notwithstanding, this reading plainly says that it both “is” and “is not.”

I tend to think what is meant by 'yet is' is this---and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit. IOW, it 'is not', because it is in the pit at the time, 'yet is', because it is in the pit at the time and will ascend out of the pit in the future. And 'was', meaning up until it is in the pit.


I still think Revelation 20:4 is key here, meaning this--and I saw the souls of them---which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands. Which status of the beast at the time makes more sense when they are martyred for not worshiping the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands?

A) This status---'was'?

B) Or this status---'and is not'?

C) Or this status---'and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit'?

It seems like a no-brainer to me. It has to be C). Which then means some Amils are wrong to conclude that the beast doesn't ascend out of the pit until the thousand years finish first.

 

[sovereigngrace]

I tend to think what is meant by 'yet is' is this---and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit. IOW, it 'is not', because it is in the pit at the time, 'yet is', because it is in the pit at the time and will ascend out of the pit in the future. And 'was', meaning up until it is in the pit.


I still think Revelation 20:4 is key here, meaning this--and I saw the souls of them---which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands. Which status of the beast at the time makes more sense when they are martyred for not worshiping the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands?

A) This status---'was'?

B) Or this status---'and is not'?

C) Or this status---'and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit'?

It seems like a no-brainer to me. It has to be C). Which then means some Amils are wrong to conclude that the beast doesn't ascend out of the pit until the thousand years finish first.

Yes, the spiritual restrain has been on Satan and the demonic realm since the First Advent. He is in a spiritual prison. The binding, imprisonment and sealing of the dragon are themselves metaphors for the curtailment of Satan's authority. While a prisoner has movement within a prison he is restricted to very clear boundaries that cannot be breached. If we view the heavenly angel as being Christ (as most commentators of all views do), then there seems reasonable grounds to come to that conclusion. This whole portrayal corresponds with the great battle of the ages that occurred with the earthly life, death and resurrection of Christ 2,000 years when Christ stripped Satan of his previous authority given to him by man. This seems to fit the victorious outworking of this great conflict when Christ assumed “All power ... in heaven and in earth” (Matthew 28:18).

Satan has not been rendered immobile or inoperative but is limited in his power, kingship and influence by being defeated on the cross. He is like a dog on a chain. He is shackled.

• He is powerless to do what he wants to do.
• He is powerless to stop the Church of Jesus Christ (His body) spreading the
good news of Gospel throughout the nations.
• He is powerless to stop someone coming to Christ.
• He is powerless to stop a man or woman of God walking in the will of God.
• He is powerless to affect the final outcome of this battle between the
kingdom of God and the kingdom of darkness.

Satan is restrained through the advance of the Gospel light and the power of the Holy Spirit. He cannot stop the enlightenment of the Gentiles. The Gentiles that were wholly deceived before the cross have now been enlightened and given an opportunity to experience God's wonderful covenant of grace that was hitherto shut up to them.

 

[Bob_1000]

It is a parenthetical statement. The NIV even puts parentheses there. But I do agree with that the bodily resurrection of the just and unjust will take place on the last day. That has not yet occurred. But, that isn't what Revelation 20:4-5 is about. The first resurrection is Christ's resurrection (Acts 26:23, Col 1:18, 1 Cor 15:20, Rev 1:5). We spiritually have part in His resurrection when we're saved. The souls John saw were in heaven and they live and reign with Christ there. Revelation 20:4 is not speaking about the mass bodily resurrection of the dead in Christ, but is speaking of those who have died and had spiritually had part in Christ's resurrection.

I don't know what you're talking about here. Maybe you weren't aware, but I'm an Amillennialist and I don't take the thousand years literally. However, 2 Peter 3:8 has nothing to do with the thousand years of Revelation 20.

I think I see your point. I believe you are saying the 1st resurrection was the bodily resurrection of Christ which allowed for a spiritual resurrection of believers in Christ. Then later another resurrection happens where the earthly bodies of believers in Christ are raised.