Undecided in eschatology

[RoadoftheGypsy]

Hello friends this is my first post here and I registered specifically to say this:
I am UNDECIDED in my eschatology, I see both premillennialism and amillennialism have their strong points. But I feel like both sides have certain issues, lets start with

Amillennialism:
+Fits all the end times parables of Jesus about tares and wheat, sheep and goats etc. and 2 Thessalonians 1:6-7 where the wicked are destroyed and righteous given rest. Also fits 2 Peter 3:10-13 where Peter implies new heaven and earth are coming NEXT, he mentions no millenium.
+Is very simple to explain to someone and requires no charts, Occam's razor basically
+Fits perfectly with death being destroyed AT the second coming, not a thousand years later (1 Corinthians 15)
-Makes a complete word salad out of Revelation 20, saying Jesus bound satan, but in Rev 20 its an angel, we got people reigning for a thousand years, but not really (if you die a day before millennium ends you wont reign as long as someone who died in the 1st century)
-Says First resurrection is spiritual while second physical, even though identical phrase of "came to life" is used. Also there is no definite starting point to this resurrection given by amills that ive read.
-Ignores quite a few old testament prophecies or allegorizes them to non-existent pretty much.

Premillennialism:
+They got the "natural reading" of Revelation 20 on their side, clearly its a continuation of Rev 19 where beast and false prophet are dealt with, and in Rev 21 new creation. No need for anyone to explain Revelation 20, you can pick it up and understand it, with amill view you need someone to hold your hand thru Rev 20 its not something you could ever think of yourself.
+Has all the old testament prophecies covered.
-2 Thessalonians 1:6-7 is very deadly to historical premillennialism, as you got no one left in the flesh, same with sheep and goat judgments, pre-tribbers arent safe either as clearly the sheep and goat judgment happens at the coming of Jesus (matt 25:31) and then eternity is decided, no middle ground.
-It is scary the way premills believe in renewed animal sacrifices and such which should be like trampling on God's sons' sacrifice!

Basically guys, convince me.

My questions to PREMILLENNIALISTS are:
1. How do you reconcile the New Testament sheep&goats wheat&tares and 2 Thessalonians 1:6-7 judgments with premillennialism? These texts are explicit that there is no third group that lives on in the flesh. This is New Testament doctrine, Zechariah 14:16 wont explain this one away as these texts are so explicit, heaven or hell.
2. How do you reconcile the animal sacrifices and the old covenant in essence "coming back" during the millenium in light of it being "done away with" in Hebrews?
3. How do you reconcile the millennium with 2 Peter 3:10-13 where Peter says we are waiting for a NEW EARTH after this one is dissolved? Implying thats whats coming next, no millennium in between.

My questions to AMILLENNIALISTS are:
1. How do you reconcile satan being bound from deceiving the nations with him PRESENTLY deceiving the nations in Rev 12:9 and other verses where the WHOLE EARTH is said to be under the power of the evil one (1 john 5:19)?
2. How can the first resurrection be a spiritual resurrection when the same words "came to life" are used of the second, PHYSICAL (according to you) resurrection?
3. Is there any reason to make the "camp of the saints" and the "beloved city" both refer to the Church instead of the saints at JERUSALEM as premills would say?

 

[Jonaitis]

My questions to AMILLENNIALISTS are:
1. How do you reconcile satan being bound from deceiving the nations with him PRESENTLY deceiving the nations in Rev 12:9 and other verses where the WHOLE EARTH is said to be under the power of the evil one (1 john 5:19)?

His binding is often interpreted in relationship to the spread of the gospel and the expansion of the kingdom on earth. His influence may still veil the eyes of the unbelievers, but remains greatly restrained in the conversion of sinners and of dethroning principalities from under him. "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven." (Luke 10:18).

2. How can the first resurrection be a spiritual resurrection when the same words "came to life" are used of the second, PHYSICAL (according to you) resurrection?

Since there would only be one bodily resurrection, that at Christ's return, it would seem novel for John (out of all the New Testament books) to imply two.

3. Is there any reason to make the "camp of the saints" and the "beloved city" both refer to the Church instead of the saints at JERUSALEM as premills would say?

Well, many Amillenialists take a partial-preterist view on this.

 

[RoadoftheGypsy]

His binding is often interpreted in relationship to the spread of the gospel and the expansion of the kingdom on earth. His influence may still veil the eyes of the unbelievers, but remains greatly restrained in the conversion of sinners and of dethroning principalities from under him. "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven." (Luke 10:18).

Since there would only be one bodily resurrection, that at Christ's return, it would seem novel for John (out of all the New Testament books) to imply two.

Well, many Amillenialists take a partial-preterist view on this.

Thanks for the response. Is there any verses in the Bible that use "beloved city" or "holy city" or "camp" or something like that, when talking about the Church? That would be awesome. Anyone know of one?

 

[keras]

1. How do you reconcile the New Testament sheep&goats wheat&tares and 2 Thessalonians 1:6-7 judgments with premillennialism? These texts are explicit that there is no third group that lives on in the flesh. This is New Testament doctrine, Zechariah 14:16 wont explain this one away as these texts are so explicit, heaven or hell.

After Jesus Returns and destroys the armies at Armageddon, Which happens after all the worldwide disasters and deaths of the ungodly peoples, Revelation 6:11 to Revelation 19:10, there will only be faithful believers to go into the Millennium with Him. Revelation 5:9-10
He separates the 'sheep from the goats', Matthew 25:31-34, and only the faithful believers will survive.

2. How do you reconcile the animal sacrifices and the old covenant in essence "coming back" during the millenium in light of it being "done away with" in Hebrews?

Many Prophesies describe the resumption of sacrifices and offerings in a new Temple. They will be done again and that is simply the Will of God. Remember: He does not change. Malachi 3:1, Hebrews 13:8-9.......So do not get swept up with strange doctrines.....

3. How do you reconcile the millennium with 2 Peter 3:10-13 where Peter says we are waiting for a NEW EARTH after this one is dissolved? Implying thats whats coming next, no millennium in between.

2 Peter 3:1-10, is a sequence of events, culminating in the new heavens and earth.
No Prophecy gives us the entire story; in this case we know there is a Millennium between the world punishment by fire, and the NH,NE, from the clear Prophecy of Revelation 20.
Know that this fiery judgment/punishment, will come some years before Jesus Returns. The Sixth Seal world changer, which sets the scene for all the Prophesied end times events, leading up to the glorious Return.

The idea of AMillenniumism, simply is unscriptural and in no way are we now in the Kingdom as Prophesied, that it will be. Isaiah 65:19-25

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Hello friends this is my first post here and I registered specifically to say this:
I am UNDECIDED in my eschatology, I see both premillennialism and amillennialism have their strong points. But I feel like both sides have certain issues, lets start with

Amillennialism:
+Fits all the end times parables of Jesus about tares and wheat, sheep and goats etc. and 2 Thessalonians 1:6-7 where the wicked are destroyed and righteous given rest. Also fits 2 Peter 3:10-13 where Peter implies new heaven and earth are coming NEXT, he mentions no millenium.
+Is very simple to explain to someone and requires no charts, Occam's razor basically
+Fits perfectly with death being destroyed AT the second coming, not a thousand years later (1 Corinthians 15)
-Makes a complete word salad out of Revelation 20, saying Jesus bound satan, but in Rev 20 its an angel, we got people reigning for a thousand years, but not really (if you die a day before millennium ends you wont reign as long as someone who died in the 1st century)
-Says First resurrection is spiritual while second physical, even though identical phrase of "came to life" is used. Also there is no definite starting point to this resurrection given by amills that ive read.
-Ignores quite a few old testament prophecies or allegorizes them to non-existent pretty much.

Premillennialism:
+They got the "natural reading" of Revelation 20 on their side, clearly its a continuation of Rev 19 where beast and false prophet are dealt with, and in Rev 21 new creation. No need for anyone to explain Revelation 20, you can pick it up and understand it, with amill view you need someone to hold your hand thru Rev 20 its not something you could ever think of yourself.
+Has all the old testament prophecies covered.
-2 Thessalonians 1:6-7 is very deadly to historical premillennialism, as you got no one left in the flesh, same with sheep and goat judgments, pre-tribbers arent safe either as clearly the sheep and goat judgment happens at the coming of Jesus (matt 25:31) and then eternity is decided, no middle ground.
-It is scary the way premills believe in renewed animal sacrifices and such which should be like trampling on God's sons' sacrifice!

Basically guys, convince me.

My questions to PREMILLENNIALISTS are:
1. How do you reconcile the New Testament sheep&goats wheat&tares and 2 Thessalonians 1:6-7 judgments with premillennialism? These texts are explicit that there is no third group that lives on in the flesh. This is New Testament doctrine, Zechariah 14:16 wont explain this one away as these texts are so explicit, heaven or hell.
2. How do you reconcile the animal sacrifices and the old covenant in essence "coming back" during the millenium in light of it being "done away with" in Hebrews?
3. How do you reconcile the millennium with 2 Peter 3:10-13 where Peter says we are waiting for a NEW EARTH after this one is dissolved? Implying thats whats coming next, no millennium in between.

My questions to AMILLENNIALISTS are:
1. How do you reconcile satan being bound from deceiving the nations with him PRESENTLY deceiving the nations in Rev 12:9 and other verses where the WHOLE EARTH is said to be under the power of the evil one (1 john 5:19)?
2. How can the first resurrection be a spiritual resurrection when the same words "came to life" are used of the second, PHYSICAL (according to you) resurrection?
3. Is there any reason to make the "camp of the saints" and the "beloved city" both refer to the Church instead of the saints at JERUSALEM as premills would say?

Welcome to CF!
I'll attempt to answer ....

My questions to AMILLENNIALISTS are:
1. How do you reconcile satan being bound from deceiving the nations with him PRESENTLY deceiving the nations in Rev 12:9 and other verses where the WHOLE EARTH is said to be under the power of the evil one (1 john 5:19)?
My understanding is God only revealed Himself to the nation of Israel so that they could usher in the Messiah. All the other nations were in darkness aka Satan's dominion. When Jesus Christ of Nazareth was revealed as the Messiah for the entire world, no longer were Gentiles in darkness, He bound Satan from deceiving the nations any longer with the Good News of Salvation.

2. How can the first resurrection be a spiritual resurrection when the same words "came to life" are used of the second, PHYSICAL (according to you) resurrection?
I only know of one ressurection on the last day and it is physical not spiritual. Some to everlasting life others to condemnation.

3. Is there any reason to make the "camp of the saints" and the "beloved city" both refer to the Church instead of the saints at JERUSALEM as premills would say?
There is going to be a New Jerusalem aka the Kingdom of God where Jesus Christ of Nazareth is King and He will live forever with His Saints aka the Church.

 

[Jonaitis]

Thanks for the response. Is there any verses in the Bible that use "beloved city" or "holy city" or "camp" or something like that, when talking about the Church? That would be awesome. Anyone know of one?

I suppose one could find that in Revelation 20:9.

 

[Marilyn C]

Hello friends this is my first post here and I registered specifically to say this:
I am UNDECIDED in my eschatology, I see both premillennialism and amillennialism have their strong points. But I feel like both sides have certain issues, lets start with



Premillennialism:
+They got the "natural reading" of Revelation 20 on their side, clearly its a continuation of Rev 19 where beast and false prophet are dealt with, and in Rev 21 new creation. No need for anyone to explain Revelation 20, you can pick it up and understand it, with amill view you need someone to hold your hand thru Rev 20 its not something you could ever think of yourself.
+Has all the old testament prophecies covered.
-2 Thessalonians 1:6-7 is very deadly to historical premillennialism, as you got no one left in the flesh, same with sheep and goat judgments, pre-tribbers arent safe either as clearly the sheep and goat judgment happens at the coming of Jesus (matt 25:31) and then eternity is decided, no middle ground.
-It is scary the way premills believe in renewed animal sacrifices and such which should be like trampling on God's sons' sacrifice!

Basically guys, convince me.

My questions to PREMILLENNIALISTS are:
1. How do you reconcile the New Testament sheep&goats wheat&tares and 2 Thessalonians 1:6-7 judgments with premillennialism? These texts are explicit that there is no third group that lives on in the flesh. This is New Testament doctrine, Zechariah 14:16 wont explain this one away as these texts are so explicit, heaven or hell.
2. How do you reconcile the animal sacrifices and the old covenant in essence "coming back" during the millenium in light of it being "done away with" in Hebrews?
3. How do you reconcile the millennium with 2 Peter 3:10-13 where Peter says we are waiting for a NEW EARTH after this one is dissolved? Implying thats whats coming next, no millennium in between.

Hi Roadofthegypsy,

Interesting presentation. Well done. I am a premillennist, so will comment on that.

Now, God`s word is all about the Lord, His character and His purposes.

The `sheep and goats` refer to those of the nations who looked after the Jews during the trib. (Matt. 25: 40) and those who did not. The sheep will go into the rule of the Lord through Israel as Zech. 14: 16 reveals, (those left of the nations). The `kingdom prepared from the foundation of the world,` (Matt. 25: 34) is the earthly rule of the Lord through Israel.

Matt. 24: 39 & 40 gives more detail to this event. `one taken and one left.` Just as in the flood one was taken away in the flood while the other was left. (Noah`s family) This reveals they were left on the earth.

1 Thess. 1 6 - 7. This shows who the Lord is judging - those who do not `know` acknowledge God, (as all have a conscience, (Rom. 1: 18 - 20)

God made the earth and all in it and he will restore it anew in the NHNE. (Rev. 21: 24). However, there is a time of peace of the earth when the Lord rules through Israel. There will be no more wars and the nations will come up to Jerusalem to learn the ways of the Lord and worship. (Micah 4: 1 - 3)

The animal sacrifices pre-cross were only representational of the Lord`s eventual sacrifice and in the millennium, it is the same, a representation of what the Lord has done. These people are NOT in the Body of Christ, (a spiritual organism) but are earthly and need earthly understanding of the great sacrifice of the Lord. They are not made into `one new man` a heavenly nation, but are separate nations on the earth. They have the opportunity to walk in God`s ways or not. However, there are immediate consequences for not going up to Jerusalem to worship and learn.
(Zech. 14: 14)

2 Peter 3: 10 - 13 reveals the extent of the Day of the Lord. It starts with the Day coming as a thief, (1 Thess. 5: 2) and then ends with the elements burning up, and that includes the tribulation and the millennium.

Marilyn.

 

[RoadoftheGypsy]

Hi Roadofthegypsy,

Interesting presentation. Well done. I am a premillennist, so will comment on that.

Now, God`s word is all about the Lord, His character and His purposes.

The `sheep and goats` refer to those of the nations who looked after the Jews during the trib. (Matt. 25: 40) and those who did not. The sheep will go into the rule of the Lord through Israel as Zech. 14: 16 reveals, (those left of the nations). The `kingdom prepared from the foundation of the world,` (Matt. 25: 34) is the earthly rule of the Lord through Israel.

Matt. 24: 39 & 40 gives more detail to this event. `one taken and one left.` Just as in the flood one was taken away in the flood while the other was left. (Noah`s family) This reveals they were left on the earth.

1 Thess. 1 6 - 7. This shows who the Lord is judging - those who do not `know` acknowledge God, (as all have a conscience, (Rom. 1: 18 - 20)

God made the earth and all in it and he will restore it anew in the NHNE. (Rev. 21: 24). However, there is a time of peace of the earth when the Lord rules through Israel. There will be no more wars and the nations will come up to Jerusalem to learn the ways of the Lord and worship. (Micah 4: 1 - 3)

The animal sacrifices pre-cross were only representational of the Lord`s eventual sacrifice and in the millennium, it is the same, a representation of what the Lord has done. These people are NOT in the Body of Christ, (a spiritual organism) but are earthly and need earthly understanding of the great sacrifice of the Lord. They are not made into `one new man` a heavenly nation, but are separate nations on the earth. They have the opportunity to walk in God`s ways or not. However, there are immediate consequences for not going up to Jerusalem to worship and learn.
(Zech. 14: 14)

2 Peter 3: 10 - 13 reveals the extent of the Day of the Lord. It starts with the Day coming as a thief, (1 Thess. 5: 2) and then ends with the elements burning up, and that includes the tribulation and the millennium.

Marilyn.

I assume you are dispensational? Believing in the pre-trib rapture and so on? That certainly seems like the only way to get out of the issue of "who populates the millennium" As the post-tribbers and historic premills need to have unsaved people entering the kingdom. (Or atleast people who convert at the very last second)

You guys have the rapture before the time of Jacob's trouble, which leaves those who survive the tribulation to inherit the kingdom.

 

[Marilyn C]

I assume you are dispensational? Believing in the pre-trib rapture and so on? That certainly seems like the only way to get out of the issue of "who populates the millennium" As the post-tribbers and historic premills need to have unsaved people entering the kingdom. (Or atleast people who convert at the very last second)

You guys have the rapture before the time of Jacob's trouble, which leaves those who survive the tribulation to inherit the kingdom.

Hi Roadofthe Gypsy,

Yes, that`s right. Now, it good to remember that the word kingdom means rule as well as place. And God has His great kingdom/rule over all and also areas within that which are referred to as kingdom/rule. I am referring to -

1. The Third heaven. (angelic realm)
2. The Universe. (lower heavens)
3. The earth and the atmospheric heavens.

Each of these realms had/has rebellion and that is what God is putting down and will restore - His rulership through Christ from the highest to the lowest. And in each realm, there will be people who will rule with Him.

The `kingdom/rule ` of Christ on earth is in the millennium, as promised to Israel. (Dan. 7: 26 & 27, Zech. 14: 16, Joel 3: 2, Ez. 17: 22 etc)
The kingdom/rule ` of Christ in the New Jerusalem will be for the Old Testament saints. (Heb. 11: 16, Rev. 21: 12)
The kingdom/rule ` of Christ in the Third heaven with His Body of overcomers. (Rev. 3: 21)

Marilyn.

 

[StephenDisraeli]

In Revelation, Satan is the persecutor. More basically, he is the Accuser of men. When the Atonement stops him from accusing men before God, he gets his revenge by accusing them before the imperial authorities instead (the message of ch12 and ch13.

So Satan is bound specifically as a persecutor. He is stopped from deceiving the nations into a policy of persecuting the church. The angel is necessarily acting on God's authority, but I suspect the immediate agent was Constantine. When global perseucttion of rhe church starts again, that's whn the "millennium" of peace comes to an end.

 

[JulieB67]

is very deadly to historical premillennialism, as you got no one left in the flesh,

Welcome
I'm just going to address two of your comments. First of course are prayers that God that gives you the increase from his Word upon study and then you can decide for yourself. The Holy Spirit can guide better than any point I will make. Taking the Bible as a whole of course.

I'm not a pretribber but I am premil.

I don't think anyone will be in flesh in the millennium. All are changed at the last trump. But I believe some will have their glorified bodies (first ressurection of that time ) and others still will have mortal souls. (these would be the spiritually dead) Because you notice in Revelation, these are judged by their works after the Millennium.

Revelation 20:6 "Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years."

Revelation 20:12"And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works."

Faith doesnt's play a part here because those in the millennium will have already been under the reign of Christ for a thousand years before Satan is loosed once more. That's why it's such a blessing to be part of the first resurrection.

It is scary the way premills believe in renewed animal sacrifices and such which should be like trampling on God's sons' sacrifice!

Although I'm premil, I believe that the mention of sacrifices are symbolic since animal sacrifices were only a shadow of Christ's ultimate sacrifice for one and all time. God doesn't desire our burnt offerings, he desires our mercy/kindness/goodness.

Hosea 6:6 "For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings."

Hebrews 8:5 "Who served unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, "See", saith he, "That thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount."

We know in the millenium that Christ is our high priest and I think our goodness and love will be sufficient.

We have to remember too that in the OT they wouldn't have understood Christ's sacrifice on the cross would be for one and all time. So Ezekiel's vision although future would most likely be laid out still according the the law of the time but we know Christ fulfilled the law. So that portion would be nailed to the cross.

 

[RoadoftheGypsy]

Welcome
I'm just going to address two of your comments. First of course are prayers that God that gives you the increase from his Word upon study and then you can decide for yourself. The Holy Spirit can guide better than any point I will make. Taking the Bible as a whole of course.

I'm not a pretribber but I am premil.

I don't think anyone will be in flesh in the millennium. All are changed at the last trump. But I believe some will have their glorified bodies (first ressurection of that time ) and others still will have mortal souls. (these would be the spiritually dead) Because you notice in Revelation, these are judged by their works after the Millennium.

Revelation 20:6 "Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years."

Revelation 20:12"And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works."

Faith doesnt's play a part here because those in the millennium will have already been under the reign of Christ for a thousand years before Satan is loosed once more. That's why it's such a blessing to be part of the first resurrection.


Although I'm premil, I believe that the mention of sacrifices are symbolic since animal sacrifices were only a shadow of Christ's ultimate sacrifice for one and all time. God doesn't desire our burnt offerings, he desires our mercy/kindness/goodness.

Hosea 6:6 "For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings."

Hebrews 8:5 "Who served unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, "See", saith he, "That thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount."

We know in the millenium that Christ is our high priest and I think our goodness and love will be sufficient.

We have to remember too that in the OT they wouldn't have understood Christ's sacrifice on the cross would be for one and all time. So Ezekiel's vision although future would most likely be laid out still according the the law of the time but we know Christ fulfilled the law. So that portion would be nailed to the cross.

Now thats something I like to hear! Can you explain one point further friend? You said "I dont think anyone will be in the flesh in the millennium"... how can people reproduce and die during that period? How can they rebel against God at the end of the millennium?

 

[RoadoftheGypsy]

The idea of AMillenniumism, simply is unscriptural and in no way are we now in the Kingdom as Prophesied, that it will be. Isaiah 65:19-25

As much as I respect the amill brothers and sisters, I have to agree now that I have looked into it, I have decided on premillennialism, reason being that there is simply no reason to have the devil "deceiving the nations" in Rev 12, and being bound from "deceiving the nations" in Rev 20, not to mention it talks about the devil being thrown into the lake of fire where the beast and false prophet ARE, meaning they were thrown in there previously, and we see that in Rev 19 where Jesus returns, it just matches so perfectly.

Now its just whether its historic premillennialism or dispensational premillennialism. Both have their strengths it seems, dispensational position explains the best "who populates the millennium" whereas historic premill seems to be as the name suggests, the oldest view around, which is nothing to scoff at!

 

[RoadoftheGypsy]

Hi Roadofthe Gypsy,

Yes, that`s right. Now, it good to remember that the word kingdom means rule as well as place. And God has His great kingdom/rule over all and also areas within that which are referred to as kingdom/rule. I am referring to -

1. The Third heaven. (angelic realm)
2. The Universe. (lower heavens)
3. The earth and the atmospheric heavens.

Each of these realms had/has rebellion and that is what God is putting down and will restore - His rulership through Christ from the highest to the lowest. And in each realm, there will be people who will rule with Him.

The `kingdom/rule ` of Christ on earth is in the millennium, as promised to Israel. (Dan. 7: 26 & 27, Zech. 14: 16, Joel 3: 2, Ez. 17: 22 etc)
The kingdom/rule ` of Christ in the New Jerusalem will be for the Old Testament saints. (Heb. 11: 16, Rev. 21: 12)
The kingdom/rule ` of Christ in the Third heaven with His Body of overcomers. (Rev. 3: 21)

Marilyn.

Not to derail the thread but WHEN does dispensationalism in general say the Church began? I say pentecost, but some say its much later than that. What do you believe? What does MOST dispensationalists believe?

 

[DavidPT]

As much as I respect the amill brothers and sisters, I have to agree now that I have looked into it, I have decided on premillennialism, reason being that there is simply no reason to have the devil "deceiving the nations" in Rev 12, and being bound from "deceiving the nations" in Rev 20, not to mention it talks about the devil being thrown into the lake of fire where the beast and false prophet ARE, meaning they were thrown in there previously, and we see that in Rev 19 where Jesus returns, it just matches so perfectly.

Now its just whether its historic premillennialism or dispensational premillennialism. Both have their strengths it seems, dispensational position explains the best "who populates the millennium" whereas historic premill seems to be as the name suggests, the oldest view around, which is nothing to scoff at!

One thing we have to keep in mind, the 42 month reign of the beast precedes the 2nd coming in the end of this age. And that Revelation 20:4---which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands---undeniably means these are martyred after the beast has ascended out of the pit, and after a 2nd one has risen out of the earth(Revelation 13). And that they are martyred before satan is loosed from the pit.

This means they are either martyred before the thousand years begin, or they are martyred during the thousand years, since after the thousand years is not an option if they are already martyred and already live again before the thousand years expire. Is it reasonable that they are martyred during the thousand years? Assuming the thousand years are prior to the 2nd coming, shouldn't that mean the beast would be in the pit during the thousand years? How then would it make sense that saints are being martyred for not worshiping a beast that is not even active on the earth at the time if it is in the pit instead?

Assuming the thousand years are after the 2nd coming, shouldn't that mean the beast would already be in the lake of fire during the thousand years?

Since it is not reasonable no matter how you look at it, that saints are being martyred for not worshiping the beast during the thousand years, that means they are martyred for not worshiping the beast, before the thousand years even begin. And since they are martyred during the 42 month reign of the beast after it has ascended out of the pit, and the fact that the 42 month reign must precede the 2nd coming in the end of the age, and that if the 42 month reign precedes the beginning of the thousand years, logic tells us, assuming that scenario, that only Premil will work in that case, and certainly not Amil.

The reason why Amil can't work is because Amil has the beginning of the thousand years starting at around the time of the cross or maybe during the time of the ascension, depending which Amil you ask. Which then means if the 42 month reign precedes the beginning of the thousand years, this places the 42 month reign in the first century prior to the time of the cross. Which then means it can't precede the 2nd coming in the end of this age. Granted, Amils, or at least most of them, don't place the 42 months before the time of the cross. Yet, that doesn't matter if it is a fact that the 42 month reign has to precede the beginning of the thousand years. It just means Amils are contradicting this.

By placing the thousand years after the 2nd coming, and if it is a fact that the 42 month reign precedes the beginning of the thousand years, this logically places the 42 month reign in the end of this age not 2000 years ago, which then squares with the fact that the 42 month reign is in the end of this age and that it precedes the 2nd coming.

As to animal sacrificing resuming during the thousand years, while there are some Premils that believe that, not all Premils believe that. I certainly don't and neither do numerous other Premils. IOW, one doesn't have to agree that animal sacrificing resumes post the 2nd coming in order to be Premil.

As to where mortals come from that help populate the millennium, doesn't Zechariah 14:16-19 solve any of that?

 

[JulieB67]

! Can you explain one point further friend? You said "I dont think anyone will be in the flesh in the millennium"... how can people reproduce and die during that period? How can they rebel against God at the end of the millennium?

I actually don't believe anyone will be dying or giving birth during that time. This is all about discipline under Christ's reign for those did not overcome the first time and did not take part in the first resurrection. All are changed at the last trump. I think that will be the last of anyone being in the flesh regardless. Any verses about young and old I believe are once again symbolic in nature. I'll admit this is the tricky one. But when the verse states "all are changed" at that time, I believe that means "all". Regardless, this is something for you to ponder on. I still am. And I'm trying to still learn and grow in the Word every day.

As for the rebellion. Satan will come to earth in the end times and deceive most of the world. It's not hard to believe after a thousand more years the same could happen. Especially when we have examples like the OT when the people saw firsthand the miracles of God and still strayed away and built the calf, etc. If you're talking flesh, I think all will still have bodies, just not flesh bodies. The angels themselves have bodies like us. They can sustain our food and vice versa.

reason being that there is simply no reason to have the devil "deceiving the nations" in Rev 12, and being bound from "deceiving the nations" in Rev 20, not to mention it talks about the devil being thrown into the lake of fire where the beast and false prophet ARE, meaning they were thrown in there previously, and we see that in Rev 19 where Jesus returns, it just matches so perfectly.

This was me as well. The beast and false prophet are thrown in when Christ returns. Satan is bound at that time -just starting the 1000 years. No matter what else I'm still studying and pondering on about the millennium, these facts can't be changed.

 

[RoadoftheGypsy]

As to where mortals come from that help populate the millennium, doesn't Zechariah 14:16-19 solve any of that?

It does if you are a pre-tribber. But if you are a post-tribber not really, as Matthew 25:46, 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 and the parable of wheat and tares make it clear that when Jesus returns in the second coming, either you go to eternal life (resurrection body, cannot die) or eternal damnation. So there is no third group left to populate the millennium. Pre-tribbers have a third gruop as this is the people who "missed" the rapture and become saved during the tribulation.

I don't know how post-trib premills find their way thru these passages, but if you are one, please let me know sir.

 

[DavidPT]

It does if you are a pre-tribber. But if you are a post-tribber not really, as Matthew 25:46, 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 and the parable of wheat and tares make it clear that when Jesus returns in the second coming, either you go to eternal life (resurrection body, cannot die) or eternal damnation. So there is no third group left to populate the millennium. Pre-tribbers have a third gruop as this is the people who "missed" the rapture and become saved during the tribulation.

I don't know how post-trib premills find their way thru these passages, but if you are one, please let me know sir.

I'm not Pretrib, I'm Post trib, and still I find that Zechariah 14:16-19 solves this. And here are some reasons why, which BTW, have zero to do with Pretrib nor Post trib helping to determine any of this. This can be determined from Zechariah 14 alone.

Let's start with verse 2.

Zechariah 14:2 For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.


Obviously, this has to be fulfilled before verses 16-19 can be fulfilled. Let's fastforward to verse 12.

Zechariah 14:12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.


This is obviously meaning at the end of all nations coming against Jerusalem to battle. This gives the impression there will be no survivors who come against Jerusalem. And this is certainly true of the ones actually coming against Jerusalem. But, does everyone come against Jerusalem? No. Otherwise verse 16 is nonsensical.

Zechariah 14:16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.


The text doesn't say every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem, that these survivors also came against Jerusalem. It is saying that there are some within the nations that came against Jerusalem, that they themselves had no part in that, thus are spared rather than verse 12 having been their fate. And none of these could possibly be meaning the saved who put on immortality at the last trump if they can be threatened with plagues if they fail to comply and do what is commanded of them in verse 16---shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.

Let's assume cpl of scenarios here.

1) Verses 16-19 are not even meaning post the 2nd coming, it is meaning in this age prior to the 2nd coming.

2) Verses 16-19 are meaning post the 2nd coming.

If option 1), how then does one explain this since this can't even be fulfilled until verse 12 has been fulfilled first? Is one going to argue that verse 12 has already been fulfilled then expected to be taken serious?

If option 2), Should we then assume this threat with plagues for not complying, that something puts an end to these threats eventually? Or should we assume these threats will be there throughout all eternity, as if it makes sense that what is depicted in verses 16-19, this will be like this throughout all eternity? But, if there is something that could prevent this from involving all of eternity, what else could it be if not the thousand years followed by satan's little season? Surely, after those things are fulfilled, no one would still be being threatened with plagues for failing to comply.

Which then means, the fact both testaments are holy writ, and even though the NT gives the impression there will be no mortal survivors post the 2nd coming, we know that that is not the case by comparing with Zechariah 14. Unless one can reasonably prove how Zechariah 14:16-19 is not meaning post the 2nd coming, but is meaning before the 2nd coming. Which then means they somehow have to get around Zechariah 14:12 first in order to prove that, the fact verses 16-19 are meaning post verse 12, and that verse 12 hasn't even been fulfilled yet.

 

[Zao is life]

Hello friends this is my first post here and I registered specifically to say this:
I am UNDECIDED in my eschatology, I see both premillennialism and amillennialism have their strong points. But I feel like both sides have certain issues, lets start with

Amillennialism:
+Fits all the end times parables of Jesus about tares and wheat, sheep and goats etc. and 2 Thessalonians 1:6-7 where the wicked are destroyed and righteous given rest. Also fits 2 Peter 3:10-13 where Peter implies new heaven and earth are coming NEXT, he mentions no millenium.
+Is very simple to explain to someone and requires no charts, Occam's razor basically
+Fits perfectly with death being destroyed AT the second coming, not a thousand years later (1 Corinthians 15)
-Makes a complete word salad out of Revelation 20, saying Jesus bound satan, but in Rev 20 its an angel, we got people reigning for a thousand years, but not really (if you die a day before millennium ends you wont reign as long as someone who died in the 1st century)
-Says First resurrection is spiritual while second physical, even though identical phrase of "came to life" is used. Also there is no definite starting point to this resurrection given by amills that ive read.
-Ignores quite a few old testament prophecies or allegorizes them to non-existent pretty much.

Premillennialism:
+They got the "natural reading" of Revelation 20 on their side, clearly its a continuation of Rev 19 where beast and false prophet are dealt with, and in Rev 21 new creation. No need for anyone to explain Revelation 20, you can pick it up and understand it, with amill view you need someone to hold your hand thru Rev 20 its not something you could ever think of yourself.
+Has all the old testament prophecies covered.
-2 Thessalonians 1:6-7 is very deadly to historical premillennialism, as you got no one left in the flesh, same with sheep and goat judgments, pre-tribbers arent safe either as clearly the sheep and goat judgment happens at the coming of Jesus (matt 25:31) and then eternity is decided, no middle ground.
-It is scary the way premills believe in renewed animal sacrifices and such which should be like trampling on God's sons' sacrifice!

Basically guys, convince me.

My questions to PREMILLENNIALISTS are:
1. How do you reconcile the New Testament sheep&goats wheat&tares and 2 Thessalonians 1:6-7 judgments with premillennialism? These texts are explicit that there is no third group that lives on in the flesh. This is New Testament doctrine, Zechariah 14:16 wont explain this one away as these texts are so explicit, heaven or hell.
2. How do you reconcile the animal sacrifices and the old covenant in essence "coming back" during the millenium in light of it being "done away with" in Hebrews?
3. How do you reconcile the millennium with 2 Peter 3:10-13 where Peter says we are waiting for a NEW EARTH after this one is dissolved? Implying thats whats coming next, no millennium in between.

My questions to AMILLENNIALISTS are:
1. How do you reconcile satan being bound from deceiving the nations with him PRESENTLY deceiving the nations in Rev 12:9 and other verses where the WHOLE EARTH is said to be under the power of the evil one (1 john 5:19)?
2. How can the first resurrection be a spiritual resurrection when the same words "came to life" are used of the second, PHYSICAL (according to you) resurrection?
3. Is there any reason to make the "camp of the saints" and the "beloved city" both refer to the Church instead of the saints at JERUSALEM as premills would say?

You're in the same place I was in for a year or two, for basically the same reasons.

Today I'm not Pre-millennialist, nor Amillennialist, nor Post-millennialist. Nor do I believe in mortals in the millennium, nor do I believe in sacrifices in a physical temple.

But before I give you my view, I should also add that until post the Great White Throne Judgment, I only believe in OSAS (once saved always saved) for those who overcame, and are promised that the 2nd death will have no power over them (Revelation 20:4-6).

So this is my view, and my question to you is based on the following two scriptures:

"For a thousand years in Your sight are as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night." Psalms 90:4

"But, beloved, let not this one thing be hidden from you, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." 2 Peter 3:8.

Question: How long after Adam had become a living soul when God breathed eternal life into him, who was permitted to eat of the tree of life freely in the Garden of Eden, did God permit Satan to put mankind to the test?

Those whom John saw in Revelation 20:4-6 living after they had been beheaded for the Word of God, their testimony to Christ and their refusal to worship the beast or his image, had been tested the way Adam was, and overcame.

These are the only people of whom it is said that the second death has no power over them - but the text of Revelation Chapter 20 is completely silent about all the other saints who will have part in the first resurrection, whom the New Testament tells us will be raised from the dead when Christ returns (i.e the resurrection in Christ, who IS the resurrection and the life).

There is no resurrection explicitly mentioned in John's vision of the final judgment of the dead at the close of the thousand years, whom John saw being judged at a time when death and hades "deliver up the dead in them" (Revelation 20:11-15). Unlike in Revelation 20:4-6, the word "living" (zao) and the Greek words for "raised", "rise", or "resurrection" are not used in these verses. These verses speak only of death and hades "delivering up the dead in them" and the dead standing to be judged.

A SECOND DEATH

After Adam's fall, God promised us a Savior who would be the last Adam, the Son of man, who would take all Adam's and the sons and daughters of Adam's sins upon Himself, die and rise again. He IS the resurrection and the Life, and our resurrection is with HIS resurrection.

Adam's death was the first death, and it came upon all men. But there will be no 2nd sacrifice for sins, and no 2nd resurrection from the 2nd death.

To me it's only logical then that if a king has an adversary in his kingdom who is causing disruption, killing or harming the king's subjects, deceiving as many as he can, continuously encouraging dissent against the king, and continuously calling the king's authority and integrity into question, then if the king wants to put a stop to it, he would need to either bind the adversary and lock him in a dungeon, rendering the adversary completely unable to cause more harm, or simply destroy the adversary,

but if the king in his wisdom and sovereign will continues to permit the adversary for a season and a time to continue, whether it be in order to separate the king's loyal and faithful subjects from his adversaries or for any other reason, then this choice and decision is within the king's sovereign right.

So I believe the millennium commences when the New Heavens and New Earth commences, and the close of it is like the close of the sabbath in the garden of Eden. Unlike those who overcame and to whom it is promised that the second death will have no power over them, those among the sons of Adam who have been resurrected but have never been tested the way Adam was, are still in danger of a second death - if at the close of the millennium they do what Adam did at the close of the sabbath in the Garden of Eden.

Naturally, my view does not "sit well" with most Christians.

 

[Clare73]

My questions to AMILLENNIALISTS are:

1. How do you reconcile satan being bound from deceiving the nations with him PRESENTLY deceiving the nations in Rev 12:9 and other verses where the WHOLE EARTH is said to be under the power of the evil one (1 john 5:19)?

Your question presumes literal interpretation of prophetic riddles in Revelation, betraying your premillennialist view.
Prophecy is given in riddles and not clearly (Nu 12:8).
I do not build my theology on riddles.

2. How can the first resurrection be a spiritual resurrection when the same words "came to life" are used of the second, PHYSICAL (according to you) resurrection?

If you interpret the prohetic riddle of Rev 20 to be the church age, you could interpret the first resurrection to be the new birth from eternal death to eternal life.

3. Is there any reason to make the "camp of the saints" and the "beloved city" both refer to the Church instead of the saints at JERUSALEM as premills would say?

Don't know to what you are referring either in Rev or the NT. . .Scriptures?