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

[DavidPT]

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.

Let me ask you this. Assuming that the beast in question ascends out of the pit prior to the finishing of the thousand years, rather than after, regardless whether you believe that can happen or not, can that still work with Amil? I'm not seeing how it can myself. But maybe you can? I just don't see it remotely being reasonable that the saints recorded in Revelation 20:4 who did not worship the beast, that they are martyred before the beast even ascends out of the pit first.

Unfortunately, every time we try and discuss this we can't seem to get on the same page. In my mind, though there are martyrs throughout the entire church age, this doesn't mean they are all martyred because they didn't worship the beast, neither his image. That martyrdom is not even possible until the beast ascends out of the pit first. Take Stephen, for example. Does that account indicate he was martyred because he refused to worship the beast? No. And besides, didn't John indicate that the beast 'is not' when he received the visions? Wouldn't it be true that the beast was 'is not' when Stephen was martyred?

One last point for now. If anyone has already been worshiping the beast, say in the times of the apostles, why didn't any of the vials of wrath get poured out on them? Doesn't Revelation 16 indicate that the vials of wrath get poured out on those worshiping the beast? This further proves that when the saints recorded in Revelation 20:4 for not worshiping the beast, they are martyred after the beast has ascended out of the pit, and not while it is still in the pit instead. Otherwise the vials of wrath would be being poured out on those worshiping the beast. Clearly, everyone has to be alive at the same time and living in the same era of time in order to worship or not worship the beast once it ascends out of the pit. To argue otherwise is not reasonable since it would mean some get to worship the beast but not have to endure the vials of wrath, while others do.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Let me ask you this. Assuming that the beast in question ascends out of the pit prior to the finishing of the thousand years, rather than after, regardless whether you believe that can happen or not, can that still work with Amil? I'm not seeing how it can myself. But maybe you can? I just don't see it remotely being reasonable that the saints recorded in Revelation 20:4 who did not worship the beast, that they are martyred before the beast even ascends out of the pit first.

Unfortunately, every time we try and discuss this we can't seem to get on the same page. In my mind, though there are martyrs throughout the entire church age, this doesn't mean they are all martyred because they didn't worship the beast, neither his image. That martyrdom is not even possible until the beast ascends out of the pit first. Take Stephen, for example. Does that account indicate he was martyred because he refused to worship the beast? No. And besides, didn't John indicate that the beast 'is not' when he received the visions? Wouldn't it be true that the beast was 'is not' when Stephen was martyred?

One last point for now. If anyone has already been worshiping the beast, say in the times of the apostles, why didn't any of the vials of wrath get poured out on them? Doesn't Revelation 16 indicate that the vials of wrath get poured out on those worshiping the beast? This further proves that when the saints recorded in Revelation 20:4 for not worshiping the beast, they are martyred after the beast has ascended out of the pit, and not while it is still in the pit instead. Otherwise the vials of wrath would be being poured out on those worshiping the beast. Clearly, everyone has to be alive at the same time and living in the same era of time in order to worship or not worship the beast once it ascends out of the pit. To argue otherwise is not reasonable since it would mean some get to worship the beast but not have to endure the vials of wrath, while others do.

Check Church history and you will see: even with his spiritual restraint the beast/antichrist/mystery of iniquity is still able to do evil. I do believe Stephen was martyred because he refused to worship the beast. This is the wicked spirit behind wickedness and wicked empires since the beginning (2 Thessalonians 2:7-12, 1 John 2:18-23, 1 John 4:1-3, 5-6, 2 John 1:7, Revelation 17:8 and Revelation 17:11-13). Antichrist is clearly not limited to one man at the end as Futurists argue. Antichrist covers the full gamut of those belonging to the devil. Satan and the beast will be loosed at the end to resist the people of God. That is when the restraint is simply removed. Right at the end, the kingdom of darkness is overthrown.

Many wrongly divide up the fate of Satan, his demons and the beast into an array of disjointed and unconnected events, which are in truth the same overall ongoing experience. This is absurd because their fortune is carefully and inextricably tied together by association, interdependence and divine order. When Scripture speaks about Satan he is the representative head of the whole kingdom of darkness. When Satan was bound, the kingdom of darkness was bound (including the beast and every demon). When Satan is released prior to the second coming so also is the whole kingdom of darkness (including the beast and every demon). When the Bible says “resist the devil, and he will flee from you” this is not limited to Satan, it is talking about the whole demonic realm. All we have to do, is examine the fate of each in Scripture and you will quickly see a remarkable correlation. When Satan is finally destroyed, so is all of his emissaries.

Those who try to separate the state and fate of the beast and Satan probably do so to support a bias theological paradigm. But an objective study of the fortune of both will reveal that they closely parallel each other. Along with the whole demonic realm, both are subject to the same restraint at the same time, both are released from imprisonment at the same time, both are sentenced at the same time. We should remember, the beast is a close reflection of the character and agenda of Satan. This is seen in their synonymous and symbolic features.

Re your other points, Revelation is full of recaps.

 

[Zao is life]

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 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 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 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. It 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.”

Firstly, I agree that Christ is the first resurrection:-

1. There is Adam's death:

"Therefore, even as through one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed on all men inasmuch as all sinned." Romans 5:12

2. Then there is Christ's resurrection from the dead:

"But now Christ has risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruit of those who slept. For since death is through man, the resurrection of the dead also is through a Man.
For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all will be made alive.
But each in his own order: Christ the first-fruit, and afterward they who are Christ's at His coming." 1 Corinthians 15:20-23

3. There is a second death:

"But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. The second death has no authority over these, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and will reign with Him a thousand years."
"And death and hell were cast into the Lake of Fire. This is the second death. And if anyone was not found having been written in the Book of Life, he was cast into the Lake of Fire." Revelation 20:5-6 & 14-15

There is no resurrection from the second death, and Adam's death was the first death. Christ is the only Resurrection:

"Jesus said to her, I am the Resurrection and the Life! He who believes in Me, though he die, yet he shall live." John 11:25.

So Christ is the first resurrection, and the firstfuits of the (only) resurrection, because the resurrection takes place in Him, and through His resurrection.

So there is one (first) death (Adam's death which came to all mankind), one resurrection from death (Christ's resurrection through whom all men will be resurrected); and one second death.

Secondly, here's why I agree that aside from all the New Testament scriptures you quote, a second judgment following the return of Christ (a thousand years later) makes no biblical sense:

​

"And if anyone was not found having been written in the Book of Life, he was cast into the Lake of Fire."

They are not found in the Ark of our salvation when Jesus comes to save to the utmost those who are His:

120 years before the flood, God judged the world, and the world was found guilty:

Genesis 6:5-7
"And the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the LORD repented that He had made man on the earth, and He was angry to His heart. And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created, from the face of the earth, both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air. For I repent that I have made them."

Genesis 6:13-14a
"And God said to Noah, The end of all flesh has come before Me, for the earth is filled with violence through them. And, behold, I will destroy them with the earth. Make an ark of Cyprus timbers. You shall make rooms in the ark..."

It was 120 years before the flood came:

Genesis 6:3
"And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, in his erring; he is flesh. Yet his days shall be a hundred and twenty years."

The world, in the days of Noah, was not judged on the day the floods came. The flood was just the carrying out of the decreed sentence which had already been passed when the world was judged 120 years earlier. God had already judged the world, and the world had already been found guilty.

The sentence had been decreed, but not carried out yet. There was still a chance to get into the ark, and many were no doubt called into the ark, but few (8 souls) were chosen.

The ark is a picture of Christ:

John 12:31-32
"Now is the judgement of this world. Now shall the prince of this world be cast out. And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw all to Myself."

Revelation 12:9-11
"And the great dragon was cast out, the old serpent called Devil, and Satan, who deceives the whole world. He was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. And I heard a great voice saying in Heaven,
Now has come the salvation and power and the kingdom of our God, and the authority of His Christ. For the accuser of our brothers is cast down, who accused them before our God day and night. And they overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb, and because of the word of their testimony. And they did not love their soul to the death."

Jesus is our "Ark". the Ark of our salvation:

John 3:17
"For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but so that the world might be saved through Him. He who believes on Him is not condemned, but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God."

Compare the above with:

Hebrews 11:7
"By faith Noah, having been warned by God of things not yet seen, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith."

2 Peter 3:9
"The Lord is not slow concerning His promise, as some count slowness, but is long-suffering toward us, not willing that any of us should perish, but that all of us should come to repentance."

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

It's the carrying out of the decreed sentence that is still coming: John saw death and hades delivering up all the dead in them only after a final judgment upon rebellion against God and His Christ had taken place.

The books were opened, and all whose names were not written in the book of Life were cast into the Lake of fire (Revelation 20:11-15),

but the Great White Throne is not the judgement - it's the carrying out of the sentence, which is the 2nd death.

When the world was judged, the judgement fell on Christ, and just as the floods came upon the ark, but the ark was lifted up (and out of the destruction) while those in the ark were saved (but only those in the ark), so Christ bore the judgement of the world, was lifted up from the earth, and He is our ark, the ark of those who are IN HIM through faith in Him.

Hebrews 1:1-2
"God, who at many times and in many ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, by whom also He made the worlds."

"The last days" in Noah's day was the 120 years before the flood came.

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

I agree with the words you chose: defeated at the cross, and limited,

but defeated does not mean shackled or bound, and as many scriptures you provide which you believe indicate that Satan was bound at Calvary, there are scriptures that indicate that he was defeated, but not bound. The following scriptures do not speak of Satan having been bound at any time since the ascension of Christ (in fact, they state the opposite):

* John 12:31; Revelation 12:9, 12, 17;
* 2 Corinthians 4:3-4;
* 1 Peter 5:8-9;
* Ephesians 2:2
* Ephesians 6:11-12;
* Revelation 2:12-13; Revelation 2:9-10;
* 1 Thessalonians 2:18;
* James 4:7.

But 'm happy to believe God when He teaches me through the scriptures that I don't know much. I'm satisfied with that. I never used to be, but now I'm satisfied with that.

The gospel in your OP, Post #1 in this thread, is what actually matters, and what matters to God is what we do once we are in Christ, not what we "know" (or think we know). Our understanding of eschatology and how much we "know" matters little.

My problem with Revelation 20 is not as a result of ignoring the present tense in the scriptures you quoted, or disagreeing with any of the scriptures you quoted in your above post. My problem comes only from

(a) Revelation 20's statement that those who lived and reigned with Christ had refused to worship the beast or receive it/his mark or the number of its/his name; and
(b) Revelation 20's statement regarding the binding of Satan because I cannot see that the New Testament teaches us that he has been bound since Calvary.

So in short, even though I agree with a great deal of what you say, Revelation 20 to me is one of those seeming contradictions (and I know there are no contradictions in the Bible, but it's my understanding that is lacking).

I do not believe anymore (as I used to) that the thousand years mentioned in Revelation 20 are literally one thousand years linked to earth's clock and earth's calendar, but I still can't place that "thousand years" in the current time where you have it,

so I will have to live with my own cognitive dissonance about Revelation 20 until I get it sorted.

And that's what Revelation 20 has become for me now: Cognitive Dissonance.

 

[DavidPT]

I do not believe anymore (as I used to) that the thousand years mentioned in Revelation 20 are literally one thousand years linked to earth's clock and earth's calendar, but I still can't place that "thousand years" in the current time where you have it,

The logic I use in regards to something like that, every single place in the Bible where a number is followed by years, it is meaning in the literal sense everytime. You would think the same has to be true when the number is a thousand and that it is followed by years. Amil cannot work if the thousand years are literal. If they don't have to be literal years this means Amil can work since this position relies on the fact that literal years are not meant. This presents no problem as long as Amil is the correct position to begin with, but if it isn't the correct position that means Amils can still use the argument that a literal thousand years are not meant and even point out that some Premils agree a literal thousand years are not meant as well. As to Premil, Premil can work regardless whether a literal thousand years are meant or not. The same is not true concerning Amil.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Why then do these same Premils think some of Isaiah 65 involves the thousand years?

What are you talking about? I think most Premils do not see Isaiah 65:17-25 as involving the thousand years because it very clearly involves the eternal new heavens and new earth instead.

Does not any of that involve the NHNE?

Isaiah 65:17-25 all involves the NHNE, but it's figurative language and it needs to be interpreted in such a way that does not contradict Revelation 21:1-4.

How does it make good sense for them to disagree with me when they are doing the exact same thing?

What are you talking about? I'm talking about Premils who do not see Isaiah 65:17-25 as involving the thousand years as you do. I'm saying I think they have good reason to disagree with you on that because the thousand years occurs BEFORE the new heavens and new earth are ushered in.

If they have some of Isaiah 65 involving the thousand years after the 2nd coming, and that this involves the NHNE according to those same verses, how can that not be the same thing that I'm concluding, that the NHNE begin with the 2nd coming?

I was talking about Premils who do not have Isaiah 65:17-25 as involving the thousand years, so why are you asking me about those who are like you and see it as involving the thousand years?

I know what you're probably thinking. That's something I need to ask them not you. But that is beside the point.

No, I'm wondering why you are talking about Premils that are like you instead of Premils like I described who do not see Isaiah 65:17-25 as being about the thousand years.

The point has to do with you finding it a good reason for most Premils to disagree with me about that when they are doing the exact same thing themselves.

Are they? Who are you even talking about? Again, I was talking about those who do not see Isaiah 65:17-25 as referring to the thousand years.

I'm not aware of any Premil who thinks none of Isaiah 65 involves the thousand years.

None of Isaiah 65:17-25? That is what I'm referring to specifically. I think there are plenty of Premils who don't see Isaiah 65:17-25 as involving the thousand years.

It's not like there are two sets of NHNE or something. There is only one NHNE in the future.

Exactly. And there will be no more death, crying, sorrow or pain at that point (Rev 21:1-4). Does your interpretation of Isaiah 65:17-25 line up with that?

 

[Bob_1000]

The logic I use in regards to something like that, every single place in the Bible where a number is followed by years, it is meaning in the literal sense everytime. You would think the same has to be true when the number is a thousand and that it is followed by years. Amil cannot work if the thousand years are literal. If they don't have to be literal years this means Amil can work since this position relies on the fact that literal years are not meant. This presents no problem as long as Amil is the correct position to begin with, but if it isn't the correct position that means Amils can still use the argument that a literal thousand years are not meant and even point out that some Premils agree a literal thousand years are not meant as well. As to Premil, Premil can work regardless whether a literal thousand years are meant or not. The same is not true concerning Amil.

The thousand years is literal but the question isn't whether it's literal or figurative, the question is which time system is the thousand years given in, God's time system or earth's time system.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

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.

There is no indication of that anywhere in scripture. Only doctrinal bias could lead someone to think something lke that.

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.

Give me a break. There is no indication of such a thing whatsoever in scripture. There will be not be a new heavens and new earth until the current heavens and earth pass away first. You have the new heavens and new earth appearing already before the current heavens and current earth pass away.

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.

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.

How many times do I have to tell you that Amils do not claim that the GWTJ will be completed within 24 hours? You continue to blatantly misrepresent Amil even after being corrected many times. Why is that? I believe eternity will be ushered in at the point when the GWTJ occurs, so time won't exist anymore at that point. So, get this ridiculous idea that Amils believe the GWTJ will be completed in 24 hours out of your head.

 

[DavidPT]

The thousand years is literal but the question isn't whether it's literal or figurative, the question is which time system is the thousand years given in, God's time system or earth's time system.

Explain how a thousand years cannot mean a literal thousand years to God, since I'm assuming that is what you are meaning by God's time system. Isn't God the one who made years possible in the beginning to begin with? Before the beginning were years already possible?

 

[DavidPT]

How many times do I have to tell you that Amils do not claim that the GWTJ will be completed within 24 hours? You continue to blatantly misrepresent Amil even after being corrected many times. Why is that? I believe eternity will be ushered in at the point when the GWTJ occurs, so time won't exist anymore at that point. So, get this ridiculous idea that Amils believe the GWTJ will be completed in 24 hours out of your head.

Let me ask you this then. What is the last event you see taking place on the last day of this age, where it then is no longer the last day of this age and that eternity has been ushered in? I already know from what you stated here that once the GWTJ judgment commences, eternity is ushered in at that time. But that doesn't tell me what you see as the very last event that ends this age.

 

[DavidPT]

Give me a break. There is no indication of such a thing whatsoever in scripture. There will be not be a new heavens and new earth until the current heavens and earth pass away first. You have the new heavens and new earth appearing already before the current heavens and current earth pass away.

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.

Maybe you have a good explanation of some of Isaiah 60 then, where some of that seems to be involving the NHNE, and in the midst of that same context there is verse 12?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

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.

Amils don't argue that the GWTJ takes place within 24 hours. How many times do you have to be told this before you accept it? For once, let us tell you what we believe instead of you trying to tell us what we believe, okay?

We believe that Jesus will return on the last day, but we also believe that His return will usher in eternity. In my view, what will happen on that day before time ends is that the dead in Christ will be raised and then caught up together with those who are alive and remain to Christ "in the air", then He will destroy all His enemies on the earth. At that point, I believe time will end and eternity will be ushered in. So, the GWTJ will take place in eternity.

Obviously, in the realm of time the judgment would take a very long time to complete because we're talking about billions of people having to stand before Christ and give an account of themselves. It would be insane for anyone to claim that could possibly occur within 24 hours. But, in the realm of eternity that won't be an issue.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Firstly, I agree that Christ is the first resurrection:-

1. There is Adam's death:

"Therefore, even as through one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed on all men inasmuch as all sinned." Romans 5:12

2. Then there is Christ's resurrection from the dead:

"But now Christ has risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruit of those who slept. For since death is through man, the resurrection of the dead also is through a Man.
For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all will be made alive.
But each in his own order: Christ the first-fruit, and afterward they who are Christ's at His coming." 1 Corinthians 15:20-23

3. There is a second death:

"But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. The second death has no authority over these, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and will reign with Him a thousand years."
"And death and hell were cast into the Lake of Fire. This is the second death. And if anyone was not found having been written in the Book of Life, he was cast into the Lake of Fire." Revelation 20:5-6 & 14-15

There is no resurrection from the second death, and Adam's death was the first death. Christ is the only Resurrection:

"Jesus said to her, I am the Resurrection and the Life! He who believes in Me, though he die, yet he shall live." John 11:25.

So Christ is the first resurrection, and the firstfuits of the (only) resurrection, because the resurrection takes place in Him, and through His resurrection.

So there is one (first) death (Adam's death which came to all mankind), one resurrection from death (Christ's resurrection through whom all men will be resurrected); and one second death.

Secondly, here's why I agree that aside from all the New Testament scriptures you quote, a second judgment following the return of Christ (a thousand years later) makes no biblical sense:

​

"And if anyone was not found having been written in the Book of Life, he was cast into the Lake of Fire."

They are not found in the Ark of our salvation when Jesus comes to save to the utmost those who are His:

120 years before the flood, God judged the world, and the world was found guilty:

Genesis 6:5-7
"And the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the LORD repented that He had made man on the earth, and He was angry to His heart. And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created, from the face of the earth, both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air. For I repent that I have made them."

Genesis 6:13-14a
"And God said to Noah, The end of all flesh has come before Me, for the earth is filled with violence through them. And, behold, I will destroy them with the earth. Make an ark of Cyprus timbers. You shall make rooms in the ark..."

It was 120 years before the flood came:

Genesis 6:3
"And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, in his erring; he is flesh. Yet his days shall be a hundred and twenty years."

The world, in the days of Noah, was not judged on the day the floods came. The flood was just the carrying out of the decreed sentence which had already been passed when the world was judged 120 years earlier. God had already judged the world, and the world had already been found guilty.

The sentence had been decreed, but not carried out yet. There was still a chance to get into the ark, and many were no doubt called into the ark, but few (8 souls) were chosen.

The ark is a picture of Christ:

John 12:31-32
"Now is the judgement of this world. Now shall the prince of this world be cast out. And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw all to Myself."

Revelation 12:9-11
"And the great dragon was cast out, the old serpent called Devil, and Satan, who deceives the whole world. He was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. And I heard a great voice saying in Heaven,
Now has come the salvation and power and the kingdom of our God, and the authority of His Christ. For the accuser of our brothers is cast down, who accused them before our God day and night. And they overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb, and because of the word of their testimony. And they did not love their soul to the death."

Jesus is our "Ark". the Ark of our salvation:

John 3:17
"For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but so that the world might be saved through Him. He who believes on Him is not condemned, but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God."

Compare the above with:

Hebrews 11:7
"By faith Noah, having been warned by God of things not yet seen, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith."

2 Peter 3:9
"The Lord is not slow concerning His promise, as some count slowness, but is long-suffering toward us, not willing that any of us should perish, but that all of us should come to repentance."

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

It's the carrying out of the decreed sentence that is still coming: John saw death and hades delivering up all the dead in them only after a final judgment upon rebellion against God and His Christ had taken place.

The books were opened, and all whose names were not written in the book of Life were cast into the Lake of fire (Revelation 20:11-15),

but the Great White Throne is not the judgement - it's the carrying out of the sentence, which is the 2nd death.

When the world was judged, the judgement fell on Christ, and just as the floods came upon the ark, but the ark was lifted up (and out of the destruction) while those in the ark were saved (but only those in the ark), so Christ bore the judgement of the world, was lifted up from the earth, and He is our ark, the ark of those who are IN HIM through faith in Him.

Hebrews 1:1-2
"God, who at many times and in many ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, by whom also He made the worlds."

"The last days" in Noah's day was the 120 years before the flood came.


I agree with the words you chose: defeated at the cross, and limited,

but defeated does not mean shackled or bound, and as many scriptures you provide which you believe indicate that Satan was bound at Calvary, there are scriptures that indicate that he was defeated, but not bound. The following scriptures do not speak of Satan having been bound at any time since the ascension of Christ (in fact, they state the opposite):

* John 12:31; Revelation 12:9, 12, 17;
* 2 Corinthians 4:3-4;
* 1 Peter 5:8-9;
* Ephesians 2:2
* Ephesians 6:11-12;
* Revelation 2:12-13; Revelation 2:9-10;
* 1 Thessalonians 2:18;
* James 4:7.

But 'm happy to believe God when He teaches me through the scriptures that I don't know much. I'm satisfied with that. I never used to be, but now I'm satisfied with that.

The gospel in your OP, Post #1 in this thread, is what actually matters, and what matters to God is what we do once we are in Christ, not what we "know" (or think we know). Our understanding of eschatology and how much we "know" matters little.

My problem with Revelation 20 is not as a result of ignoring the present tense in the scriptures you quoted, or disagreeing with any of the scriptures you quoted in your above post. My problem comes only from

(a) Revelation 20's statement that those who lived and reigned with Christ had refused to worship the beast or receive it/his mark or the number of its/his name; and
(b) Revelation 20's statement regarding the binding of Satan because I cannot see that the New Testament teaches us that he has been bound since Calvary.

So in short, even though I agree with a great deal of what you say, Revelation 20 to me is one of those seeming contradictions (and I know there are no contradictions in the Bible, but it's my understanding that is lacking).

I do not believe anymore (as I used to) that the thousand years mentioned in Revelation 20 are literally one thousand years linked to earth's clock and earth's calendar, but I still can't place that "thousand years" in the current time where you have it,

so I will have to live with my own cognitive dissonance about Revelation 20 until I get it sorted.

And that's what Revelation 20 has become for me now: Cognitive Dissonance.

I have to disagree with you re no support for the binding of Satan through the first Advent, culminating in the victory of the cross and the first resurrection. Genesis 3:15 predicted, “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.”

This is metaphoric language predicting the impairment of the devil through the earthly ministry of the Messiah. Satan was going to be spiritually incapacitated through the work of Christ. We see two amazing things in this prophecy, first, a profound picture of the cross, and second, the acute effect that it had upon the devil. This prophecy is a remarkable forecast of Calvary and the consequence of Christ’s atoning sacrifice on the enemy. It also addresses the incapacitating fate that befalls Satan. This shows that Satan’s ability to function has been impaired. His power and that of his deluded minions is restricted through the preaching of the Gospel and the advance of the kingdom of God. Satan’s power and his movement has been restrained, albeit not completely.

Significantly, the first prophecy of Christ and His coming and the devil and his doom in Scripture is a symbolic one with a literal interpretation. This is surely something Bible students should carefully note. It is also worth noting that nowhere in this well-known prophetic passage does it predict that Satan would be destroyed at Calvary – that is still to come – but that he would be restricted in his operations through the spiritual brain damage he would sustain there.

The bruising of Satan’s head by Christ broke the unchallenged sway of the devil over the nations. Jesus destroyed the incredible lordship that Satan had on the human race and plundered his house of countless souls. Since the cross, numerous Gentiles have been set free from their blindness and bondage. They have been delivered into the kingdom of God. In doing this, Christ destroyed the claims, authority and ownership that Satan had over the nations. Jesus made a way of escape for the Gentiles out of the kingdom of Satan. The power and influence Satan once had over the Gentiles was assaulted through the earthly ministry of Christ. This curtailed the devil, allowing the free-flow of the Gospel across the world. Christ battered Satan’s house, damaged his authority, limiting the scale of his influence. He indeed destroyed the overwhelming claims and ownership that Satan had over the Gentile people.

Matthew 12:22-29 records, “Then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil, blind, and dumb: and he healed him, insomuch that the blind and dumb both spake and saw. And all the people were amazed, and said, Is not this the son of David? But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils. And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges. But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you. Or else how can one enter into a strong man’s house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind (Gr. deo) the strong man? And then he will spoil his house.”

The “strong man” here is Satan. His “house” is the dark area of spiritual influence that Satan rules over in the kingdom of darkness. His “goods” are the humans he enslaves in bondage and servitude. To “spoil his house” and “spoil his goods” is to conquer those who are enslaved under the devil’s control and liberate them into the kingdom of God.

Obviously, the fact that Jesus cast out devils by the Spirit of God demonstrated that the promised kingdom of God has already come. This parable confirms that the liberating of the elect could not happen “except he first bind the strong man.” According to Christ, this deliverance from captivity could not happen before Satan was spiritually bound. The binding therefore had to precede the liberation of the redeemed and was definitely not delayed 2000 years+ until the second coming as Premillennialists would wrongly argue. This all occurred through the earthly ministry of Christ.

He came to the strong man's house (this sinful world) and spiritually chained Satan. He is like a dog on a leash that will only harm those that foolishly get close to him. He has power and movement but it is restrained and limited since the ministry of Christ. The devil was subject to the purposes of God and hurt by the spiritual advance of the kingdom of God. This kingdom is still alive and active today. Souls are still being marvellously delivered from the power of Satan. The binding of the strong man continues today wherever the Gospel prevails.

Mark 3:11, 23-27 also records: “unclean spirits, when they saw him, fell down before him, and cried, saying, Thou art the Son of God ... And the scribes which came down from Jerusalem said, He hath Beelzebub, and by the prince of the devils casteth he out devils. And he called them unto him, and said unto them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan? And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand. And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end. No man can enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he will first bind (Gr. deo) the strong man; and then he will spoil his house.”

Christ’s earthly ministry expressly bound Satan and damaged his wicked house on this earth. This was indeed what was prophesied in the Garden of Eden. It didn’t say that the cross would destroy him, but hamper him in his schemes. His head was bruised by the supernatural punch of Christ.

The Lord confronted Satan head on in his own backyard and soundly defeated him. Everywhere that Christ went, demons were subject to his every word. This authority was in turn delegated to his disciples who operated this same spiritual power were ever they gone. His servants enforced his authority casting many demons out and seeing many men and women delivered from the power of Satan to the power of God. This was unprecedented. God's people, as a whole, had now power over the enemy.

Significantly, the Greek word deo (Strong’s 1210) employed here is the exact same word used in Revelation 20 which means to bind in either a literal or a spiritual sense. This is what happened everywhere the kingdom of God was seen, the kingdom of darkness was suppressed. Moreover, at Calvary, Satan’s power to deceive the nations was spiritual bound or curtailed by the finished and victorious work of Christ. Revelation 20:2-3 states, “And he (Christ) laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and (Gr. deo) bound him a thousand years, And cast him into the abyss, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more.”

 

[Spiritual Jew]

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.

Yes, that is correct. That is what Paul taught here:

1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Let me ask you this then. What is the last event you see taking place on the last day of this age, where it then is no longer the last day of this age and that eternity has been ushered in? I already know from what you stated here that once the GWTJ judgment commences, eternity is ushered in at that time. But that doesn't tell me what you see as the very last event that ends this age.

See my post #1291.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Maybe you have a good explanation of some of Isaiah 60 then, where some of that seems to be involving the NHNE, and in the midst of that same context there is verse 12?

Do you mean Isaiah 65? All I can say is that it's clear that Isaiah 65:17-25 is about the new heavens and new earth. That is clearly established in verse 17. And, as I've said many times before, I believe Isaiah wrote about eternity in a figurative way that his readers could understand back then. They didn't have any concept of eternity back then. That concept was not really understood or thought about much at all until Christ died and rose again to provide the opportunity for eternal life.

 

[DavidPT]

How many times do I have to tell you that Amils do not claim that the GWTJ will be completed within 24 hours?

Some posts I may not have even read yet, especially if I never bothered trying to respond to them at the time. Sometimes I don't even want to read some of these posts by some of you since some of you seem to make it personal at times, as if I'm the biggest idiot that ever walked the planet and you don't mind pointing it out. As to someone such as claninja, though I don't always agree with him either, I never dread having to read his posts, though. He has never made me feel like the biggest idiot on the planet regardless that he couldn't agree with me about something. IOW, there is no drama involved when discussing debating with him. Some of you, especially you, seem to thrive on drama, especially in regards to what I post.

 

[DavidPT]

Do you mean Isaiah 65? All I can say is that it's clear that Isaiah 65:17-25 is about the new heavens and new earth. That is clearly established in verse 17. And, as I've said many times before, I believe Isaiah wrote about eternity in a figurative way that his readers could understand back then. They didn't have any concept of eternity back then. That concept was not really understood or thought about much at all until Christ died and rose again to provide the opportunity for eternal life.

I'm meaning Isaiah 60, where verse 12 indicates that the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee. Then a cpl of verses earlier it tells us that the 'thee' meant here, this, for in my wrath I smote thee, but in my favour have I had mercy on thee.

 

[Timtofly]

Impossible. The NHNE is perfect. You continually misunderstand and misrepresent Isaiah 65. When I have presented a literal Hebrew rendering of it you have ignored it.

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.

Why would Isaiah use a metaphor of death and being a sinner as a perfect place without end? I realize you think there is no sin either in this perfect reality of here and now, which is what premil accept as the perfect Millennium reign. Those who want to rebel are instantly dead. Isaiah claims a sinner that dies at 100 is cursed. Not a metaphor about living forever. Your imagination may very.

I pointed out that to mention death and sin does not make sense about heaven or eternity, as you seem to declare that is what heaven and eternity are.

 

[grafted branch]

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.

Revelation 12:17 has the dragon making war prior to the beast in Revelation 13.


Where would you place 1 Thessalonians 5:3, option A, B, or C? I would say no one has said “peace and safety” in the literal sense as of yet and 1 Thessalonians 5:3 is speaking of the day of the Lord coming as a thief in the night.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

The flood in Noah's day was clearly literal, the fire mentioned in 2 Peter 3 is not literal.

That is clearly false. Let's take a look at the text.

2 Peter 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. 5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: 7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

The context of this passage is regarding the second coming of Christ and how in the last days scoffers scoff at the possibility of that happening. Those scoffers are willingly ignorant of what happened with the flood in Noah's day. Peter pointed out that "the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished". Then he said "But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire". How exactly can that possibly be figurative and not literal? He was comparing a figurative event to a literal one? That makes no sense. No, he said "by the same word" the current heavens and earth are reserved for fire. That means he was speaking in the same context regarding what will happen in the future to what happened in the past. He was comparing a literal event to a literal event. That's what "by the same word" means.

Explain clearly to me how that can possibly be figurative? What does it figuratively represent? Peter went on to describe the heavens and earth being reserved for fire in more detail here:

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? 13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

How exactly is this figurative and not literal? Please explain that. Peter indicated that despite what he described in verses 10-12, we are looking forward to new heavens and a new earth. How else could the new heavens and new earth be ushered in unless all the wicked people and things of this earth are removed first? What other way will all the wicked things on this earth be removed if they won't be literally burned up?

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?

God could easily supernaturally spare some of them if He wanted, so that isn't an issue. We can only speculate as to whether or not there will be animals on the new earth.

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?

This is ridiculous. Is this the reason you can't take 2 Peter 3:10-12 literally? Just because of your concern for animals being killed? Don't worry about it. If God determines that all the animals will be killed, what's that to you? He can do what He wants. He killed a whole lot of animals with the flood. Does that bother you? Should He not have done that? If He wants to spare some animals, He can do that. Your interpretation of 2 Peter 3 should not be based on something silly like this.