Show me ONE instance the bible uses 1000 to describe time literally

[ewq1938]

You're arguing against what you have already stated. If he works through others as you have stated, then clearly he can be bound and still cause havoc.

He can only work through others when he is not bound and imprisoned, like he does daily now. When the timeframe of Revelation 20 comes, he will not be able to cause any havoc or work through anyone. That's the purpose of the pit and it will be 100 percent effective.

 

[rwb]

He can only work through others when he is not bound and imprisoned, like he does daily now. When the timeframe of Revelation 20 comes, he will not be able to cause any havoc or work through anyone. That's the purpose of the pit and it will be 100 percent effective.

Bring forth the verses of Scripture to prove what you allege.

 

[ewq1938]

Bring forth the verses of Scripture to prove what you allege.

Revelation 11, 12, 13 and 20

 

[rwb]

Revelation 11, 12, 13 and 20

Those chapters do not help you.

The beast ascends out of the bottomless pit to overcome and kill the saints. Christ has the keys of hell and death, which the bottomless pit symbolizes. Since Christ has the keys, He gives the angel the key to open the pit. Sounds like the end of the thousand years when Satan is loosed from Rev 20.

Revelation 11:7 (KJV) And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them.

Revelation 1:18 (KJV) I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

Reviewing Rev 9:4-5 when the pit is first opened the minions coming out are only allowed to torment those who do not have the seal of God.

Revelation 9:1 (KJV) And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit.

Revelation 9:4-5 (KJV) And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads. And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man.

Then in Rev 11 the beast that ascends out of the pit can only kill the witnesses AFTER they have finished their testimony. What happens after that, they are called up to heaven, and the seventh angel sounds. This is the bodily resurrection on the last day, because that is when Christ returns, and our body is raised and changed (see 1Cor 15:51-56).

Revelation 11:15 (KJV) And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.

What else happens when the seven trumpets have sounded? There is not more time for time is no more.

Revelation 10:4-6 (KJV) And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not. And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hand to heaven, And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:
Revelation 10:7 (KJV) But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.

 

[ewq1938]

Those chapters do not help you.

Sure they do because they show a non bound or imprisoned satan which means his sentence to the pit is future. The Great Tribulation must start and end before satan is sent to the pit.

 

[Timtofly]

He can only work through others when he is not bound and imprisoned, like he does daily now. When the timeframe of Revelation 20 comes, he will not be able to cause any havoc or work through anyone. That's the purpose of the pit and it will be 100 percent effective.

Satan being bound is just as true spiritually. He cannot attack through a persons mind, when spiritually bound. If Satan is only bound spiritually how is the mind still being attacked?

During the 1,000 years it is both spiritual and physical. Not one or the other as Amil try to portray this binding. Satan is not going to reveal himself physically now even if free to do so. That would ruin the deception that Satan is real, God is real, and that Jesus is God. So just saying that Satan is spiritual and spiritually bound makes literally no sense.

We wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against spiritual wickedness. That is wickedness constantly being generated by Satan. Satan is the only being currently doing warfare against us, even if deceived humans are part of that process.

 

[FredVB]

I'd love someone to show me 1000 used in the context of time that is actually demonstrably literal? As in - not 'literal because I really want it to be literal to justify my own particular individualistic end-times-table'. But actually, demonstrably literal because the text is screaming out that it is literal.

EVERY instance I can see of 1000 in the bible that describes time is symbolic. It either means a 'large number of years' (like we might say 'a gazillion' years) or even eternity.

Deuteronomy 7:9 - "Know therefore that the Lord your God is God; he is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commandments."
= Is the literal futurist really bold enough to insist God is only faithful for a thousand generations? A generation was 40 years - so in 40,000 years God is unfaithful!!!???

Not that it is speaking of what relates to time, there is Genesis 20:16. To Sarah he said, “Behold, I have given your brother a thousand pieces of silver. Behold, it is for you a covering of the eyes to all that are with you. In front of all you are vindicated.”

There is no basis to say it was really another number and not a thousand. Why should time be an exception? That would be from your interpretation.

Keeping a covenant to a thousand generations is not about how much time God is faithful, but about those generations to whom God has the covenant with. Why say a thousand generations must be forty thousand years? No passage says that, it is also your interpretation. A thousand generations could really cover twenty thousand years. And maybe it does. I don't have to limit my understanding that all Bible history has to be held in seven thousand years. Moses was son of Amram, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, found in Exodus 6:16-20, the people of Israel were in Egypt four hundred twenty years. Logic of the math shows there would be unnamed generations in-between, generations get skipped in places in biblical genealogy.

We wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against spiritual wickedness. That is wickedness constantly being generated by Satan. Satan is the only being currently doing warfare against us, even if deceived humans are part of that process.

Why would all that be from Satan, one being, who is limited, while with an army of fallen angelic beings which followed him? Any of those serve Satan, and collectively are the enemy, which need to be overcome in the struggles of believers, which is why we need the help from God that God gives.

 

[Timtofly]

Not that it is speaking of what relates to time, there is Genesis 20:16. To Sarah he said, “Behold, I have given your brother a thousand pieces of silver. Behold, it is for you a covering of the eyes to all that are with you. In front of all you are vindicated.”

There is no basis to say it was really another number and not a thousand. Why should time be an exception? That would be from your interpretation.

Keeping a covenant to a thousand generations is not about how much time God is faithful, but about those generations to whom God has the covenant with. Why say a thousand generations must be forty thousand years? No passage says that, it is also your interpretation. A thousand generations could really cover twenty thousand years. And maybe it does. I don't have to limit my understanding that all Bible history has to be held in seven thousand years. Moses was son of Amram, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, found in Exodus 6:16-20, the people of Israel were in Egypt four hundred twenty years. Logic of the math shows there would be unnamed generations in-between, generations get skipped in places in biblical genealogy.



Why would all that be from Satan, one being, who is limited, while with an army of fallen angelic beings which followed him? Any of those serve Satan, and collectively are the enemy, which need to be overcome in the struggles of believers, which is why we need the help from God that God gives.

The fallen angels are still bound in chains of darkness. They are not loosed until the 5th Trumpet. Satan is the only spiritual high place wickedness that those humans pulling government strings are listening to.

If humans are demon possessed, who in their right mind would listen to them? Is there a sophisticated type of demon possession?

 

[eclipsenow]

Not that it is speaking of what relates to time, there is Genesis 20:16. To Sarah he said, “Behold, I have given your brother a thousand pieces of silver. Behold, it is for you a covering of the eyes to all that are with you. In front of all you are vindicated.”

There is no basis to say it was really another number and not a thousand.

Sure - my opening post clarifies that when counting something concrete and real 1000 is usually literal.

Why should time be an exception? That would be from your interpretation.

Not at all!
The bible does it, not me.

Keeping a covenant to a thousand generations is not about how much time God is faithful, but about those generations to whom God has the covenant with. Why say a thousand generations must be forty thousand years? No passage says that, it is also your interpretation. A thousand generations could really cover twenty thousand years.

It could possibly - but then it isn't that, either. I was setting up an illustration of how ridiculous it is to read 1000 generations as ANYTHING literal! (There are grounds for thinking the Hebrews thought of a generation as 40 years - such as the generation that wandered the desert wilderness and were forbidden to go into the promised land).

Let me try again - does God's faithfulness have an expiry date?
Does God's character change?

And maybe it does.

Wow - I suggest you re-read the Opening Post again, the verses involved, and have another try.

Symbolic uses of 1000 and concepts of time abound.
Literal uses of 100 and time? ZERO.

 

[DavidPT]

Symbolic uses of 1000 and concepts of time abound.
Literal uses of 100 and time? ZERO.

I'm assuming you made a typo and meant to say 1000 not 100.

Ecclesiastes 6:6 Yea, though he live a thousand years twice told, yet hath he seen no good: do not all go to one place?

This passage involves both 1000 and time. If a thousand years can mean any number of years other than a literal thousand, which then means it could mean a million years, why then does the text mention twice told in regard to an undetermined number of years? The text makes better sense if a literal thousand years is being meant here, especially the fact that not one single person has lived an entire literal thousand years, let alone twice told.


How can anyone live an undetermined number of years twice told and that one is to make sense out of that, since it would mean we don't even know how many years are being meant? Maybe it means 100 billion years? Why would anyone need to do that twice told when it wouldn't even be possible to do it just once let alone twice?

 

[eclipsenow]

I'm assuming you made a typo and meant to say 1000 not 100.

Thank you - absolutely correct.

Ecclesiastes 6:6 Yea, though he live a thousand years twice told, yet hath he seen no good: do not all go to one place?

First, let's check it in a modern translation like the NIV
"6 even if he lives a thousand years twice over but fails to enjoy his prosperity. Do not all go to the same place?"


Today the verse could even read: "Even if he lives a gazillion years twice over..."
What's so hard? It's OBVIOUSLY metaphorical.

Second, if you go back to the OP, you'll see many ways 1000 is used in combination with other numbers that just basically mean "many bajillion" or "Many gazillion" or whatever your favourite modern informal word for a LOT is. There are verses that go "a gazillion" and then repeat the sentiment with "10 gazillion" - that sort of things. Or "a gazillion generations" which in a hyper-literalist reading would mean 40,000 years.


Third: "why then does the text mention twice told"
Pro-tip: avoid confusing KJV's etc. They didn't have access to the abundance of earlier source material we have now, and are now so archaic and silly-sounding they frequently mislead readers.

As the Reformation Study Bible commentary says:

Eccl 6:6
6:6 one place. The case of those who live long in discontent is more pathetic than that of a stillborn child. The stillborn, at least, does not spend long years in the self-inflicted misery of ingratitude.

Eccl 6:6 - ESV Reformation Study Bible - Bible Gateway​

 

[ewq1938]

Thank you - absolutely correct.



First, let's check it in a modern translation like the NIV
"6 even if he lives a thousand years twice over but fails to enjoy his prosperity. Do not all go to the same place?"


Today the verse could even read: "Even if he lives a gazillion years twice over..."
What's so hard? It's OBVIOUSLY metaphorical.

When an OBVIOUS alteration to the text is made as you did. The original uses a thousand years twice, which is 2000 years. That meets the criteria of a thousand years used in relation to time.

 

[eclipsenow]

When an OBVIOUS alteration to the text is made as you did. The original uses a thousand years twice, which is 2000 years. That meets the criteria of a thousand years used in relation to time.

Where does it say two thousand years?

The NIV says ""6 even if he lives a thousand years twice over but fails to enjoy his prosperity. Do not all go to the same place?""

The three best versions I know are NIV, ESV and New American Standard.

New International Version
even if he lives a thousand years twice over but fails to enjoy his prosperity. Do not all go to the same place?

English Standard Version
Even though he should live a thousand years twice over, yet enjoy no good—do not all go to the one place?

New American Standard Bible
Even if the man lives a thousand years twice, but does not see good things—do not all go to one and the same place?”

Sorry - but what OBVIOUS alteration have I made to the text?
Gazillion. It's just what 1000 means in many of these verses.
Go read the OP again - and make sure you clear your mind, pray, and ask God to help you overcome any biases or presuppositions. Be ready to read his word as his word - not as a checklist of things you already think.

 

[ewq1938]

Where does it say two thousand years?

You quoted it:


The NIV says ""6 even if he lives a thousand years twice over but fails to enjoy his prosperity. Do not all go to the same place?""

Sorry - but what OBVIOUS alteration have I made to the text?
Gazillion. It's just what 1000 means in many of these verses.

Gazillion is a made-up word meaning "a whole bunch". It isn't in the verse, nor any translation. You inserted it into the verse ie: obvious alteration.

 

[eclipsenow]

Gazillion is a made-up word meaning "a whole bunch". It isn't in the verse, nor any translation. You inserted it into the verse ie: obvious alteration.

And if we read every verse in the bible literally we'd be worshipping this.
So the obvious question is, how do we tell if a word is literal or figurative for something else?
Answer?
Context. Read the OP and tell me if ANY of the theological uses of 1000 in those verses are literal.
Or get busy painting this on your church wall.

 

[DavidPT]

And if we read every verse in the bible literally we'd be worshipping this.
So the obvious question is, how do we tell if a word is literal or figurative for something else?
Answer?
Context. Read the OP and tell me if ANY of the theological uses of 1000 in those verses are literal.
Or get busy painting this on your church wall.
View attachment 317590

Why do you seem to enjoy insulting ppl's intelligence with some of your posts by making preposterous arguments like this, that if one ever takes a thousand in the Bible in the literal sense it means that same person should start painting that image on church walls since this means that person obviously takes that image in the literal sense as well?

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

If one takes the word of God at face value (when it is meant to be), then the statements in Psalms, 2 Peter and Revelation referring to 1000 years and God's day lead to a proper understanding of the length of human history.
If we start at the end, the Day of the Lord will be a period of 1000 literal years. As is presented in the Bible the week or 7 sequential days is a type. The 7th day is the Sabbath - the day of rest - the day of completion.
So if the 7th day is equivalent to a time period of 1000 years at the end of human history, then there are 6 additional days, all of 1000 year length as well.
There are other proofs but it would take much longer to develop. One relatively simple one is the importance of the "middle of the week". This occurs multiple times through out Scripture. If the 7 Days of Human History theory is correct, then Jesus Christ died/resurrected on the 4th Day. This is the middle of the Week. It can also be shown that 31 AD was the "middle of the week" of the Sabbatical year cycle. It was also on a Wednesday - which is the middle of the week. It was all done right on schedule in the predetermined exact point of history.

 

[eclipsenow]

Why do you seem to enjoy insulting ppl's intelligence with some of your posts by making preposterous arguments like this, that if one ever takes a thousand in the Bible in the literal sense it means that same person should start painting that image on church walls since this means that person obviously takes that image in the literal sense as well?

I'm not insulting your intelligence but pointing out that the MOST symbolic book in the bible has images people desperately want to be symbolic - like the one above - but cannot STAND the thought that Revelation might use the most symbolic NUMBER symbolically.

Like, with your 'long life' verse. Do you really think it's literal? Do you think the author is saying there WAS a man who lived 2000 years? Isn't it obvious hyperbole?

 

[eclipsenow]

If one takes the word of God at face value (when it is meant to be),

Except science shows the universe to be 13.6 billion years old, the creation narrative in Chapter 1 of Genesis is one of the most highly symbolic and stylised chapters in the bible and itself uses the highly symbolic number 7, and it sets up the 7 day week narrative for the Sabbath rest commands to come later. So I'm not really sure what your argument is, other than summarising it as "Because I assume this number over here is literal, therefore it's really significant that I assume this other number over in this other chapter is literal?"

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

Except science shows the universe to be 13.6 billion years old, the creation narrative in Chapter 1 of Genesis is one of the most highly symbolic and stylised chapters in the bible and itself uses the highly symbolic number 7, and it sets up the 7 day week narrative for the Sabbath rest commands to come later. So I'm not really sure what your argument is, other than summarising it as "Because I assume this number over here is literal, therefore it's really significant that I assume this other number over in this other chapter is literal?"

Actually, "science" does no such thing. There is no proof for billions of years. And you set up "science" as the antithesis to Genesis. That's absolutely false. God set up science and the rules by which the universe operates. So any scientific fact and discovery is one that proves the existence and work of God. I do not accept the false dichotomy.

There is tangible proof that the first day of creation began 6000 years ago. I'd have to write a whole lengthy post. But basically it can be shown that the 5th day of Creation (Thursday) was the day the universe began at the new moon phase on Nisan 1 which was April 14, 3970 BC.