Undecided in eschatology

[sovereigngrace]

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)?

Revelation 20:2 makes clear, "And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years. And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.”

Just like blindness and darkness are attributed to the Gentiles (without qualification) prior to the cross, it didn’t mean that every single Gentile was blind and in darkness. Scripture often described the Gentiles as a collective whole. That did not mean the Gentiles were all the same. Scripture, like us, makes generalities. Prior to Christ’s earthly ministry the heathen nations were viewed as being in wholesale ignorant and therefore outside of God’s plan of salvation. Could I suggest this was simply a general observation about the overall condition of the Gentiles as a broad mass, not an attempt to represent every single Gentile?

If we were to take many of the sweeping general statements re the blindness and darkness of the Gentiles in the OT hyper-literally it would negate the salvation of Abel, Noah, Abraham, Ruth (Ruth 1:16), the widow women of Zarephath that entertained Elijah (1 Kings 17:24), Rahab the harlot and “all her kindred” (Joshua 6:23-25), Naaman (2 Kings 5:15), the Queen of Sheba (Matthew 12:42), and the inhabitants of the Gentile city of Ninevah (Jonah 3:5). Were these not Gentiles? Where these not “God's people”? The fact is this general assertion did not apply to every single Gentile. Likewise, when Scripture speak about the enlightenment of the Gentiles and the removal of the deception it doesn’t mean that every Gentile will be saved, but that the Gospel message and opportunity would be extended to them as a whole – just like Israel experienced in the Old Testament.

Let me illustrate.

In Matthew 12 we see the religious Jews rejecting Christ. Matthew 12:14-22 records, “Then the Pharisees went out, and held a council against him, how they might destroy him. But when Jesus knew it, he withdrew himself from thence: and great multitudes followed him, and he healed them all; And charged them that they should not make him known: That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles. He shall not strive, nor cry; neither shall any man hear his voice in the streets. A bruised reed shall he not break, and smoking flax shall he not quench, till he send forth judgment unto victory. And in his name shall the Gentiles trust. 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.”

Christ’s rejection by his own house (Israel) saw Him turn to the Gentiles and the formerly outcast. He was now going to invade the devil’s house and acquire a spoil. Immediately after the Jews turned on Him in this story He delivers one of Satan’s household – a demon possessed man – thus illustrating that there was a darkened people out there that would come to faith in Christ. He used this man who belonged to the devil’s own house (kingdom) to impress the direction of the Gospel from hereon. Now, my main point is this: this reading expressly declares “in his name shall the Gentiles trust.” Using the Premil argument: all the Gentiles must trust, or this cannot apply today. What I am saying is, if you were to apply this argument namely that the fact that the vast bulk of Gentiles still remain deceived is evidence why we can’t be in the millennium now then we must (if we are consistent) apply the same rule to this statement to show that it can’t be relevant to today. It cannot relate to the here-and-now because the majority of Gentiles still don’t trust God. Of course that would be preposterous. Such a statement is a general reference to the removal of the veil deceiving the Gentiles as a whole after the cross.

Paul draws several of the Old Testament prophecies, relating to the removing of this global deception upon the ethnos, together in Romans 15:8-12 and shows how this began with the life, death and resurrection of Christ and the subsequent evangelism of the early Church. He declares, “Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers: And that the [Gr. ethnos] Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy; as it is written (in 1 Samuel 22:50), For this cause I will confess to thee among the [Gr. ethnos]Gentiles, and sing unto thy name. And again he saith (in Psalm 18:49), Rejoice, ye [Gr. ethnos] Gentiles, with his people. And again (in Deuteronomy 32:43), Praise the Lord, all ye [Gr. ethnos] Gentiles; and laud him, all ye people. And again (in Isaiah 11:10), Esaias saith, There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over the [Gr. ethnos] Gentiles; in him shall the [Gr. ethnos] Gentiles trust.”

The Old Testament writers predicted that there was a time coming when the Gentiles would accept Christ, glorify His name and trust Him. Now, here is an important question. Did all the Gentiles surrender to Him? Using the Premil argument on Rev 20:2 they must. After all, this reading makes a blanket statement they would believe, without qualification. Indeed, did that mean that the majority of Gentiles would do so? Of course not. Did that mean that the majority of Gentile nations would turn to God? Of course not. Did that mean that the majority of Gentiles would turn from heathenism? Of course not. This was talking about the general enlightenment of the Gentiles.

There was a spiritual deception over the Gentiles before the cross that has now been lifted. The darkness has been confronted and exposed and overcome through the Light of the truth. That light is centred in the person and message of Christ. Satan is no longer able to deceive the Gentiles in this New Testament age in the same manner and scope as he deceived them prior to Jesus binding Satan at the cross.

Scripture repeatedly identifies the Messianic intra-Advent period as the time of the enlightenment of the Gentiles. This does not in any way insinuate that all will be saved. Not in any way. With the global expanse of the great commission the Gentiles are now without excuse. The ignorance is gone. The veil is lifted.

When Scripture speak about the enlightenment of the Gentiles and the removal of the deception it doesn’t mean that every Gentile will be saved, but that the Gospel message and opportunity would be extended to them as a whole – just like Israel experienced it in the Old Testament.

Zacharias the father of John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Ghost in Luke 1:67-80 and prophesied: “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began: That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us; To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant; The oath which he sware to our father Abraham, That he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear, In holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life … Through the tender mercy of our God; whereby the dayspring from on high hath visited us, To give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace. And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his shewing unto Israel.”

Jesus came to shine a light of truth into the world. The reality is: He was truth because He was God. He epitomized all that was truth. In John 14:7 He said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” In Revelation 22:6 He is described as: “faithful and true.”

Jesus said in John 8:12 “I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life."

John 12:46 "I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness.”

He shined the light and it dispelled the darkness. In fact, wherever this light shines it removes ignorance and deception and enlightens and sets men free. No one could surely deny that this light has been shining strong upon the Gentiles for 2,000 year. The evidence is there for all to see.

Through the indwelling Holy Spirit (who reveals Christ in us), and the preaching of the Word of God, The Church now manifest that light throughout the nations. God has availed the Gentiles an opportunity to embrace the light. They are no longer without excuse. It is not therefore a question of whether the light came, or that it exists, but will the Gentiles receive it and believe it.

Ephesians 5:8: “For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light.”

 

[sovereigngrace]

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?

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.

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?

It doesn't mention Jerusalem. You have to put it in there. The saints throughout the NT are Christians. Why change it 3 chapters before the end of the NT to sustain a questionable end-time position?

There has only ever been one people of God. We have been grafted into faithful Israel. Premils are trying to make 2 out of 1, when Scriptures clearly make 1 out of 2. I prefer Scripture to your theories.

Romans 2:25 tells us: “if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.”

Romans 2:28-29 plainly states, “For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh.”

Paul explains in Romans 9:8: “they which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.”

Romans 10:12 states: “For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.”

I Corinthians 7:17 declares, “Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing"

Colossians 3:11 declares, “there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all."

Galatians 3:28 says, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”

Galatians 5:2 declares, “if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing."

Galatians 5:5 declares, "For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love."

Galatians 6:15 reinforces that, saying, “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.”

Race means nothing any more – forever, it is all of grace. Being natural means nothing when it comes to salvation. That is a myth that conflicts with New Testament teaching.

The fact is, there is (and only has been) one people of God from the beginning. Whilst they were largely found within the nation of Israel before the cross, that was broadened out after the cross to embrace all nations. Race means nothing under the new covenant. The New Testament outlines clearly and repeatedly that "there is no difference between Jews and Gentiles.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

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!

So, how do you get around the strengths of Amillennialism and the weaknesses of Premillennialism that you outlined in your original post then?

And why did you make a decision on this so soon after you were undecided? You decided on this before any Amilllennialists like sovereigngrace and myself even had a chance to address your original post. I find that to be a bit baffling.

Anyway, I would recommend reading sovereigngrace's posts carefully and would also recommend maybe taking a bit more time before deciding what you believe. I will address your original post as well, but will try not to repeat things that sovereigngrace has already said.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

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)?

Are you sure you're interpreting Revelation 12:9 correctly? Are YOU under the power of Satan? I don't believe so. Am I? No. Is any believer under his power? No. So, you have to be careful about interpreting verses like that too literally as if it was talking about literally all people being under Satan's power. What I think many don't recognize is that passages like the following relate to the binding of Satan:

Hebrews 2:14 Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil— 15 and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death.

1 John 3:8 The one who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work.

Acts 26:15 “Then I asked, ‘Who are you, Lord?’“ ‘I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,’ the Lord replied. 16 ‘Now get up and stand on your feet. I have appeared to you to appoint you as a servant and as a witness of what you have seen and will see of me. 17 I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them 18 to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.’

What needs to be taken into consideration here is the fact that in Old Testament times a vast majority of people "were held in slavery by their fear of death" because of the one who held "the power of death--that is, the devil" back then. But, in New Testament times multitudes have been saved and set free from the fear of death and turned "from the power of Satan to God". I believe this could only happen because of Satan being bound. It's not talking about him being bound from deceiving in a general sense as if it's talking about a spirit being somehow being physically incapacitated. It's talking about him being bound from still being able to hold the power of death and keep people in slavery to the fear of death. The gospel being preached through the power of the Holy Spirit is something that Satan cannot overcome. He was bound from stopping the gospel from impacting multitudes of people throughout the world for the past almost 2,000 years.

Premillennialists focus far too much on what Satan is able to do and not nearly enough on what he is no longer able to do like he did in Old Testament times.

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?

You are mistaken here. I'm sure you are aware that the New Testament was not originally written in English, but rather was written in Greek. The Greek words translated as "came to life" in the English translation you're using are not translated from the same words in Greek. I think this is a better translation of Revelation 20:4-5 where it talks about the souls John saw as living and reigning with Christ and about the rest of the dead coming to life.

Revelation 20:4 (KJV) And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

In this translation the Greek word zaō (Strong's G2198) is translated as "lived" in verse 4 rather than "came to life", which I believe is more accurate because in other scripture the word is never used to described someone being resurrected from the dead. Instead, it's a word that is used to described someone being alive or living.

In verse 5, a different Greek word, anazao, is used to refer to the rest of the dead coming to life. That word is also used elsewhere to refer to people being revived or resurrected from the dead. So, the question you need to consider is why was the word zao used in verse 4 instead of anazao if verse 4 is talking about the bodily resurrection of the martyred saints that John saw? I believe the reason is because John did not see those martyred saints being bodily resurrected, but rather saw their souls and saw them living and reigning with Christ in heaven.

So, what about where it talks about the martyred saints having part in the first resurrection, you might ask? Well, using scripture to interpret scripture, we have to conclude that it's talking about having part in Christ's resurrection because His was the first resurrection.

Acts 26:23 that the Messiah would suffer and, as the first to rise from the dead, would bring the message of light to his own people and to the Gentiles.”

So, in my view the first resurrection itself is not a spiritual resurrection, but is Christ's bodily resurrection. Believers spiritually have part in Christ's resurrection when we become saved, as taught in passages like Ephesians 2:1-6 and others.

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, the new Jerusalem is referred to as "the holy city" in Revelation 21:2 and is also referred to as "the bride, the wife of the Lamb" in Revelation 21:9. What else is the bride/wife of the Lamb except for the church? Agree? The "camp of the saints", "beloved city", "holy city" and "new Jerusalem" are all figurative references to the church.

 

[sovereigngrace]

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!

Do you believe in corroboration?

 

[RoadoftheGypsy]

Are you sure you're interpreting Revelation 12:9 correctly? Are YOU under the power of Satan? I don't believe so. Am I? No. Is any believer under his power? No. So, you have to be careful about interpreting verses like that too literally as if it was talking about literally all people being under Satan's power. What I think many don't recognize is that passages like the following relate to the binding of Satan:

Hebrews 2:14 Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil— 15 and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death.

1 John 3:8 The one who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work.

Acts 26:15 “Then I asked, ‘Who are you, Lord?’“ ‘I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,’ the Lord replied. 16 ‘Now get up and stand on your feet. I have appeared to you to appoint you as a servant and as a witness of what you have seen and will see of me. 17 I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them 18 to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.’

What needs to be taken into consideration here is the fact that in Old Testament times a vast majority of people "were held in slavery by their fear of death" because of the one who held "the power of death--that is, the devil" back then. But, in New Testament times multitudes have been saved and set free from the fear of death and turned "from the power of Satan to God". I believe this could only happen because of Satan being bound. It's not talking about him being bound from deceiving in a general sense as if it's talking about a spirit being somehow being physically incapacitated. It's talking about him being bound from still being able to hold the power of death and keep people in slavery to the fear of death. The gospel being preached through the power of the Holy Spirit is something that Satan cannot overcome. He was bound from stopping the gospel from impacting multitudes of people throughout the world for the past almost 2,000 years.

Premillennialists focus far too much on what Satan is able to do and not nearly enough on what he is no longer able to do like he did in Old Testament times.


You are mistaken here. I'm sure you are aware that the New Testament was not originally written in English, but rather was written in Greek. The Greek words translated as "came to life" in the English translation you're using are not translated from the same words in Greek. I think this is a better translation of Revelation 20:4-5 where it talks about the souls John saw as living and reigning with Christ and about the rest of the dead coming to life.

Revelation 20:4 (KJV) And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

In this translation the Greek word zaō (Strong's G2198) is translated as "lived" in verse 4 rather than "came to life", which I believe is more accurate because in other scripture the word is never used to described someone being resurrected from the dead. Instead, it's a word that is used to described someone being alive or living.

In verse 5, a different Greek word, anazao, is used to refer to the rest of the dead coming to life. That word is also used elsewhere to refer to people being revived or resurrected from the dead. So, the question you need to consider is why was the word zao used in verse 4 instead of anazao if verse 4 is talking about the bodily resurrection of the martyred saints that John saw? I believe the reason is because John did not see those martyred saints being bodily resurrected, but rather saw their souls and saw them living and reigning with Christ in heaven.

So, what about where it talks about the martyred saints having part in the first resurrection, you might ask? Well, using scripture to interpret scripture, we have to conclude that it's talking about having part in Christ's resurrection because His was the first resurrection.

Acts 26:23 that the Messiah would suffer and, as the first to rise from the dead, would bring the message of light to his own people and to the Gentiles.”

So, in my view the first resurrection itself is not a spiritual resurrection, but is Christ's bodily resurrection. Believers spiritually have part in Christ's resurrection when we become saved, as taught in passages like Ephesians 2:1-6 and others.

Well, the new Jerusalem is referred to as "the holy city" in Revelation 21:2 and is also referred to as "the bride, the wife of the Lamb" in Revelation 21:9. What else is the bride/wife of the Lamb except for the church? Agree? The "camp of the saints", "beloved city", "holy city" and "new Jerusalem" are all figurative references to the church.

Just when you think its all figured out you post this and drag me back to the drawing board!
Let me say the first resurrection question is no longer a problem. Thanks for explaining that, I actually DID NOT KNOW that those greek words were different and i was LIED to by a preacher who claimed it was the same word. God bless you sir

Now its just the binding of satan, what makes it difficult for many to accept probably is the langauge of "ABYSS" being used, and he is SEALED in there. Take a look at Luke 8:31 And they begged him not to command them to depart into ithe abyss. The demons are begging Jesus NOT to be sent to the abyss. In the book of Revelation the tormenting scorpions also rise up "From the Abyss" and they require a KEY to come out of there. So my point is: If some demon or whatever, is locked in the abyss, he isnt active on the earth, as we see from the scorpions in Rev 9:1, and also from the Legion demons who begged Jesus not to send them to the Abyss.

How do you respond to that argument? Especially cause Rev 9:1 is in the same book as Rev 20 binding of satan. Its just a hard sell.

 

[RoadoftheGypsy]

Do you believe in corroboration?

Sure brother.

 

[DavidPT]

Just when you think its all figured out you post this and drag me back to the drawing board!
Let me say the first resurrection question is no longer a problem. Thanks for explaining that, I actually DID NOT KNOW that those greek words were different and i was LIED to by a preacher who claimed it was the same word. God bless you sir

As to these two Greek words in question, take note of the following passage, and then notice that the Greek word zao rather than anazao is used.

Revelation 2:8 And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write; These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive(zao)

Is one going to argue that since zao rather than anazao was used, this indicates Christ was spiritually dead then became spiritually alive rather than He was literally bodily dead then became literally bodily alive again? Isn't that what some of these Amils are arguing per verse 4 and 5 in Revelation 20, that if a bodily resurrection was meant per verse 4, the fact a bodily resurrection is meant per verse 5, verse 4 would have used the same Greek word verse 5 used? So, why didn't Revelation 2:8 also use the same Greek word Revelation 20:5 did, the fact both verses require that one has to bodily rise from the dead in order to be alive once again, but instead used the same Greek word Revelation 20:4 did?

Keep in mind, before you or anyone for that matter fully decides anything one way or the other, one needs to consider all of the facts first.

 

[5thKingdom]

Revelation 20:2 makes clear, "And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years. And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.”

You do not understand Rev 20


Rev 20 shows TWO (2) different "Kingdoms/Beasts"
You cannot hope to offer an "informed opinion" on Rev 20
unless/until you can understand the CONTEXT of the Scripture.


Rev 20 shows the Third Beast on earth, existing WHILE Satan is "bound" in the Bottomless Pit.
This Third Beast represents the (3rd) Christian "Kingdom of Heaven" [Mat 13, in 7 verses]
commonly known as the Great Commission of the Church Age...
the A-Millennial Kingdom when the Saints
"lived and ruled with Christ"


Rev 20:1-3
And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more,
till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a Little Season.


Again... the Third Beast existed WHILE Satan is "bound" in the Bottomless Pit.
The Fourth Beast begins AFTER Satan is "loosened" from the Bottomless Pit.


Rev 20:7-8
And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog,
to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.


Bottom Line:
Rev 20 shows TWO (2) separate and distinct "Beasts".
One exists WHILE Satan is "bound" in the Pit and the Saints "lived and ruled with Christ".
The other exists AFTER Satan is "loosened" from the Bottomless Pit.


The Beast that exists AFTER Satan is "loosened" from the Pit is shown in Scripture as:
(1) Daniel's Fourth Beast and (2) the Revelation Beast and (3) the Great Tribulation "Kingdom of Heaven" [Mat 25:1]
and (4) the RULE of the Anti-Christ (called the "Little Horn" and "False Prophet" and the "Man of Sin")
during (5) Satan's "Little Season".


You cannot expect to understand the MEANING of Rev 20
unless/until you can discern the CONTEXT of the Scripture.


Jim

 

[sovereigngrace]

Sure brother.

Since abandoning Premillennialism I have engaged in many debates/discussions on the matter of the second coming, end-times and the here-after. These are some of the major weaknesses I find in the Premillennialism doctrine, and are strong reasons why I believe the dogma should be rejected.

It does not matter what Scripture one looks at, or what topic under discussion, Premils have no clear corroboration for their opinions. Their doctrine is bereft of any reasonable, logical, theological, or textual acceptance.

My main reason for abandoning Premil was the severe lack of corroboration. I had a major issue with that! What is more: I had multiple problem-texts as a Premil that showed the coming of Christ to be climactic and all-consummating. I have presented a lot of these questions in discussions over the years (since 2000) on boards like this and have failed to get any satisfactory corroboration for these questions. What I normally get is either blatant avoidance of the issues or "Revelation 20 says." This is so frustrating because Revelation 20 does not corroborate Revelation 20. Amils on the other hand tend to use the biblical premise "what saith the Scripture." The only conclusion I could arrive at is that the Premil interpretation of Revelation 20 is in error, it conflicts with numerous Scripture, and enjoys no other serious scriptural support.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Just when you think its all figured out you post this and drag me back to the drawing board!
Let me say the first resurrection question is no longer a problem. Thanks for explaining that, I actually DID NOT KNOW that those greek words were different and i was LIED to by a preacher who claimed it was the same word. God bless you sir

Now its just the binding of satan, what makes it difficult for many to accept probably is the langauge of "ABYSS" being used, and he is SEALED in there. Take a look at Luke 8:31 And they begged him not to command them to depart into ithe abyss. The demons are begging Jesus NOT to be sent to the abyss. In the book of Revelation the tormenting scorpions also rise up "From the Abyss" and they require a KEY to come out of there. So my point is: If some demon or whatever, is locked in the abyss, he isnt active on the earth, as we see from the scorpions in Rev 9:1, and also from the Legion demons who begged Jesus not to send them to the Abyss.

How do you respond to that argument? Especially cause Rev 9:1 is in the same book as Rev 20 binding of satan. Its just a hard sell.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[DavidPT]

Premils avoid the most important resurrection to let their opinion fit. 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).

As to understanding the first resurrection to be meaning Christ's resurrection, I'm somewhat onboard with that idea, yet it doesn't prevent me from being a Premil, though. That doesn't have to mean what is depicted in Revelation 20:4, that in order for those martyrs to live and reign with Christ a thousand years, they don't do this via a bodily resurrection. Why not? Isn't that how it was in Christ's case? First He was alive, then He was dead, then He was alive once again. How did He become alive once again if not via a bodily resurrection?

Amils argue, that since the text indicates John sees the souls of the martyrs, this undeniably proves they are not in a bodily risen state yet. I agree to a degree, meaning that when he initially sees them, they are in a disembodied state, but why would they remain in a disembodied state once they live again and begin reigning with Christ? Why would anyone need to reign in heaven with Christ while in a disembodied state? In order to accomplish exactly what? Doesn't Revelation 20:6 indicate everyone who has part in the first resurrection, they shall be priests of God and of Christ the duration of the thousand years? How does one apply that to the martyrs in verse 4 if they are still in a disembodied state for the duration of the thousand years?

And what about when the thousand years expire on earth? Shouldn't that mean the thousand years expire in heaven as well? IOW, surely these time frames would be in sync with each other unless one wants to argue, for example, that the thousand years begin in heaven way before it begins on earth, as in, they are not synced with each other. But, if the thousand years start in heaven when they start on the earth, why wouldn't they end in heaven when they end on the earth? Then you end up with more nonsense, now satan's little season is affecting those in heaven somehow.

 

[DavidPT]

But, if the thousand years start in heaven when they start on the earth, why wouldn't they end in heaven when they end on the earth? Then you end up with more nonsense, now satan's little season is affecting those in heaven somehow.

A thought crossed my mind after having said that. The point I was trying to make, if the thousand years end on earth and that they also end in heaven, this would mean that those in heaven and those on earth are no longer experiencing the thousand years, they are experiencing satan's little season, and that it is nonsensical that satan's little season could be affecting anyone in heaven as well. Then I was reminded of the following verse.

Revelation 13:6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven

If this time period is involving satan's little season as some Amils tend to believe, obviously then, satan's little season would be affecting those in heaven as well. Hmmmm...Maybe it's not as nonsensical as I first thought. If nothing else, it proves what I was arguing, that when the thousand years end on earth, they end in heaven. When satan's little season begins on earth, it also begins in heaven. Assuming the thousand years and satan's little season is pertaining to this age.

 

[sovereigngrace]

As to understanding the first resurrection to be meaning Christ's resurrection, I'm somewhat onboard with that idea, yet it doesn't prevent me from being a Premil, though. That doesn't have to mean what is depicted in Revelation 20:4, that in order for those martyrs to live and reign with Christ a thousand years, they don't do this via a bodily resurrection. Why not? Isn't that how it was in Christ's case? First He was alive, then He was dead, then He was alive once again. How did He become alive once again if not via a bodily resurrection?

Amils argue, that since the text indicates John sees the souls of the martyrs, this undeniably proves they are not in a bodily risen state yet. I agree to a degree, meaning that when he initially sees them, they are in a disembodied state, but why would they remain in a disembodied state once they live again and begin reigning with Christ? Why would anyone need to reign in heaven with Christ while in a disembodied state? In order to accomplish exactly what? Doesn't Revelation 20:6 indicate everyone who has part in the first resurrection, they shall be priests of God and of Christ the duration of the thousand years? How does one apply that to the martyrs in verse 4 if they are still in a disembodied state for the duration of the thousand years?

And what about when the thousand years expire on earth? Shouldn't that mean the thousand years expire in heaven as well? IOW, surely these time frames would be in sync with each other unless one wants to argue, for example, that the thousand years begin in heaven way before it begins on earth, as in, they are not synced with each other. But, if the thousand years start in heaven when they start on the earth, why wouldn't they end in heaven when they end on the earth? Then you end up with more nonsense, now satan's little season is affecting those in heaven somehow.

It is a total contradiction. This age is the millennial kingdom. It started with Christ’s "first resurrection." It will finish with the coming of Christ and the general resurrection of the dead and general judgment. Premil duplicates everything. Two kingdom ages, two Gospel ages, two ages of death, sin, rebellion, funerals. 2 resurrection days and 2 judgment days. There is nowhere in Scripture that talks about 2 resurrection days (plural) and 2 judgment days (plural), including Revelation 20. They invent 2 Gog/Magog wars at the end of two last days periods. They invent two "first resurrections," 2 new heavens and new earths, 2 “last days” periods. They duplicate the "last day." They have 2 bindings of Satan. They have 2 weddings of the elect (Revelation 19:7-8 and Revelation 21:2), 2 future glorifications and 2 raptures (to facilitate their millennial earth passing away 1,000 years+ after the second coming). What is next? Is anything safe from this faulty mode of interpretation?

 

[sovereigngrace]

A thought crossed my mind after having said that. The point I was trying to make, if the thousand years end on earth and that they also end in heaven, this would mean that those in heaven and those on earth are no longer experiencing the thousand years, they are experiencing satan's little season, and that it is nonsensical that satan's little season could be affecting anyone in heaven as well. Then I was reminded of the following verse.

Revelation 13:6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven

If this time period is involving satan's little season as some Amils tend to believe, obviously then, satan's little season would be affecting those in heaven as well. Hmmmm...Maybe it's not as nonsensical as I first thought. If nothing else, it proves what I was arguing, that when the thousand years end on earth, they end in heaven. When satan's little season begins on earth, it also begins in heaven. Assuming the thousand years and satan's little season is pertaining to this age.

You more than any poster is preoccupied with the identity of the beast and these 42 months. So, who is the beast? When did he begin? You have carefully avoided this question for years.

 

[Zao is life]

As to these two Greek words in question, take note of the following passage, and then notice that the Greek word zao rather than anazao is used.

Revelation 2:8 And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write; These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive(zao)

Is one going to argue that since zao rather than anazao was used, this indicates Christ was spiritually dead then became spiritually alive rather than He was literally bodily dead then became literally bodily alive again? Isn't that what some of these Amils are arguing per verse 4 and 5 in Revelation 20, that if a bodily resurrection was meant per verse 4, the fact a bodily resurrection is meant per verse 5, verse 4 would have used the same Greek word verse 5 used? So, why didn't Revelation 2:8 also use the same Greek word Revelation 20:5 did, the fact both verses require that one has to bodily rise from the dead in order to be alive once again, but instead used the same Greek word Revelation 20:4 did?

Keep in mind, before you or anyone for that matter fully decides anything one way or the other, one needs to consider all of the facts first.

@RoadoftheGypsy

And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the witness of Jesus and for the Word of God, and who had not worshiped the beast nor his image, nor had received his mark on their foreheads, nor in their hands. And they lived (zao) and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

This is the first (Greek: ho anastasis - "the resurrection").

Those are the two Greek words used in the above statement, and below is what they always mean whenever used in the New Testament:-

Below is a list of the New Testament scriptures using the Greek word záō. None of them are in reference to someone who has died / fallen asleep / is not alive, i.e living in his body. Not one. Without exception, they are all used in the same way we would say that someone is alive/someone is living:-

|| Matthew 16:16; Matthew 22:32; Matthew 26:63; Matthew 27:63; Mark 5:23; Mark 12:27; Mark 16:11; Luke 2:36; Luke 4:4; Luke 10:28; Luke 15:13; Luke 20:38; Luke 24:5; Luke 24:23; John 4:10; John 4:11; John 4:50; John 4:51; John 4:53; John 5:25; John 6:51; John 6:57; John 6:58; John 6:69; John 7:38; John 11:25; John 11:26; John 14:19; Acts 1:3; Acts 7:38; Acts 9:41; Acts 10:42; Acts 14:15; Acts 17:28; Acts 20:12; Acts 22:22; Acts 25:19; Acts 25:24; Acts 26:5; Acts 28:4; Romans 1:17; Romans 6:2; Romans 6:10; Romans 6:11; Romans 6:13; Romans 7:1; Romans 7:2; Romans 7:3; Romans 7:9; Romans 8:12; Romans 8:13; Romans 9:26; Romans 10:5; Romans 12:1; Romans 14:7; Romans 14:8; Romans 14:9; Romans 14:11; 1 Corinthians 7:39; 1 Corinthians 9:14; 1 Corinthians 15:45; 2 Corinthians 1:8; 2 Corinthians 3:3; 2 Corinthians 4:11; 2 Corinthians 5:15; 2 Corinthians 6:9; 2 Corinthians 6:16; 2 Corinthians 13:4; Galatians 2:14; Galatians 2:19; Galatians 2:20; Galatians 3:11; Galatians 3:12; Galatians 5:25; Philippians 1:21; Philippians 1:22; Colossians 2:20; Colossians 3:7; 1 Thessalonians 1:9; 1 Thessalonians 3:8; 1 Thessalonians 4:15; 1 Thessalonians 4:17; 1 Thessalonians 5:10; 1 Timothy 3:15; 1 Timothy 4:10; 1 Timothy 5:6; 1 Timothy 6:17; 2 Timothy 3:12; 2 Timothy 4:1; Titus 2:12; Hebrews 2:15; Hebrews 3:12; Hebrews 4:12; Hebrews 7:8; Hebrews 7:25; Hebrews 9:14; Hebrews 9:17; Hebrews 10:20; Hebrews 10:31; Hebrews 10:38; Hebrews 12:9; Hebrews 12:22; James 4:15; 1 Peter 1:3; 1 Peter 1:23; 1 Peter 2:4; 1 Peter 2:5; 1 Peter 2:24; 1 Peter 4:5; 1 Peter 4:6; 1 John 4:9; Revelation 1:18; Revelation 2:8; Revelation 3:1; Revelation 4:9; Revelation 4:10; Revelation 5:14; Revelation 7:2; Revelation 7:17; Revelation 10:6; Revelation 13:14; Revelation 15:7; Revelation 16:3; Revelation 19:20 (cast alive into the lake of fire); Revelation 20:4. ||

That's how we're born when we come into the world: alive (zao) in a body - but we will also die and remain eternally dead to God, the source of all life, unless we are born of the Spirit of God from above also.

This new birth (of the Spirit of God) is what zōopoiéō means: zōopoiéō Quickened (made alive by the Spirit). The word zōopoiéō is used in the following verses:

|| John 5:21; John 6:63; Romans 4:17; Romans 8:11; I Corinthians 15:22, 36 & 45; II Corinthians 3:6; Galatians 3:21; I Timothy 6:13; I Peter 3:18. ||

"It is the Spirit that makes alive [ζωοποιέω zōopoiéō] the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit and are life." (John 6:63).

The word syzōopoiéō (made alive together with Christ) is used twice in the New Testament:

(1) "But God, who is rich in mercy, for His great love with which He loved us, even us being dead in sins, He hath [syzōopoiéō] quickened together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved) And hath [synegeírō] raised us up together *, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (Ephesians 2:4-6).

* The word synegeírō refers to bodily resurrection from physical death.

(2) "And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with [syzōopoiéō] Him, having forgiven you all trespasses" (Colossians 2:13).

"Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit." (Titus 3:5).

WORDS USED IN THE NEW TESTAMENT IN REFERENCE TO BODILY RESURRECTION FROM THE DEAD

Noun: ἀνάστασις anástasis (“The Resurrection”)
A standing up again, i.e. (literally) a resurrection from death (individual, genitive case or by implication, (its author)), or (figuratively) a (moral) recovery (of spiritual truth):--raised to life again, resurrection, rise from the dead, that should rise, rising again.

Noun: ἔγερσις égersis
a resurgence (from death):--resurrection.

Verb: ἐγείρω egeírō
* synegeírō = together with Christ's resurrection and refers to bodily resurrection from physical death.
To waken (transitively or intransitively), i.e. rouse (literally, from sleep, from sitting or lying, from disease, from death; or figuratively, from obscurity, inactivity, ruins, nonexistence):--awake, lift (up), raise (again, up), rear up, (a-)rise (again, up), stand, take up.

Verb: ἀνίστημι anístēmi
To stand up (literal or figurative, transitive or intransitive):--arise, lift up, raise up (again), rise (again), stand up(-right).

* The verbs are sometimes employed for normal use, for example as in "Rise up! Let's go!", but the nouns are always talking about the bodily resurrection from the dead.

The Greek noun used in the New Testament for The Resurrection is ho anástasis: ("the resurrection"). Without fail, each and every time anástasis is used in the New Testament, it's referring to (the) bodily resurrection:

|| Matthew 22:23, 28 & 30-31; Mark 12:18 & 23; Luke 2:34; Luke 14:14; Luke 20:27, 33, 35-36; John 5:29; John 11:24-25; Acts 1:22; Acts 2:31; Acts 4:2; Acts 4:33; Acts 17:18, 32; Acts 23:6, 8; Acts 24:15, 21; Acts 26:23; Romans 1:4; Romans 6:5; 1 Corinthians 15:12-13, 21, 42; Philippians 3:10; II Timothy 2:18; Hebrews 6:2; Hebrews 11:35; I Peter 1:3; I Peter 3:21; Revelation 20:5-6. ||

All of the following verses below use one or more of the following words, and all are speaking about (the) bodily resurrection:

égersis; anístēmi; egeírō:

|| Matthew 9:25; Matthew 10:8; Matthew 11:5; Matthew 14:2; Matthew 17:9; Matthew 16:21; Matthew 17:23; Matthew 20:19; Matthew 26:32; Matthew 27:52-53 & 63-64; Matthew 28:6-7; Mark 6:14 & 16; Mark 12:26; Mark 14:28; Mark 16:6 & 14; Luke 7:14; Luke 7:22; Luke 8:54; Luke 9:7 & 22; Luke 14:13-14; Luke 20:37; Luke 24:6; Luke 24:34; John 2:19-21; John 5:21; John 5:28-29; John 6:39, 40 & 44; John 11:23-35; John 12:1, 9 & 17; John 21:14; Acts 1:22; Acts 2:24, 31-32; Acts 3:15 & 26; Acts 4:1-2, 10 & 33; Acts 5:30; Acts 10:40; Acts 13:30 & 33-37; Acts 17:18 & 31-32; Acts 23:6-8; Acts 24:15 & 21; Acts 26:8; Romans 1:4; Romans 4:23-25; Romans 6:4-5; Romans 6:9; Romans 7:4; Romans 8:11; Romans 8:34; Romans 10:9; 1 Corinthians 6:14; 1 Corinthians 15:4, 12-23, 35-36, 42-45, 50-57; 2 Corinthians 1:9; 2 Corinthians 4:14; 2 Corinthians 5:15; Galatians 1:1; Ephesians 1:20; Ephesians 2:5-6; Ephesians 5:14; Philippians 3:10-11; Colossians 2:12-13; Colossians 3:1 (Compare with Romans 6:5); 1 Thessalonians 1:9-10; 1 Thessalonians 4:13-16; 2 Timothy 2:8 & 18; Hebrews 6:1-2; Hebrews 11:35; 1 Peter 1:3-5; 1 Peter 1:21; 1 Peter 3:18 & 21; Revelation 20:5-6. ||

Not one New Testament verse employing any of the above listed words associated with The Resurrection is not talking about the bodily resurrection. Not one.

And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the witness of Jesus and for the Word of God, and who had not worshiped the beast nor his image, nor had received his mark on their foreheads, nor in their hands. And they lived (zao) and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

This is the first (Greek ho anastasis (the resurrection).

It's most certainly not talking about a "spiritual" resurrection. Being quickened in the new birth (of the Spirit of God) is referred to as zōopoiéō (Quickened/made alive by the Spirit). The word zōopoiéō is used in the following verses:

|| John 5:21; John 6:63; Romans 4:17; Romans 8:11; I Corinthians 15:22, 36 & 45; II Corinthians 3:6; Galatians 3:21; I Timothy 6:13; I Peter 3:18. ||

"It is the Spirit that makes alive [ζωοποιέω zōopoiéō] the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit and are life." (John 6:63).

"But God, who is rich in mercy, for His great love with which He loved us, even us being dead in sins, He hath [syzōopoiéō] quickened together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved) And hath [synegeírō] raised us up together *, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (Ephesians 2:4-6).

So IN JESUS we are already spiritually quickened [syzōopoiéō] and bodily raised from the dead [synegeírō], but our own bodily resurrection (the resurrection of our own bodies when it is raised a spiritual body) is still coming.

Jesus is therefore the first resurrection, but until now no one has been beheaded for refusal to worship the beast - and Revelation 13:11-18 & Revelation 20:4 are the only two places that mention anyone being killed for refusal to worship the beast.

Hope this helps.

 

[5thKingdom]

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)?

(1) When it says Satan is "bound" in a Bottomless Pit
It is NOT saying he has physical chains binding him in a physical "bottomless" Pit.

Instead, it represents Satan being "bound" so that he could not prevent all the elect being "sought, found and saved"
during the Great Commission of the (3rd) "Kingdom of Heaven" [Mat 13, in 7 verses]...
which lasted to the "End of the Age" [Mat 28:18-20]

Satan is "bound" at the Cross so that he is LIMITED in what evil he can bring against the Saints. We still have spiritual warfare during
the (3rd) Christian Kingdom but ALL of "His Sheep" are saved BEFORE the (4th) Great Tribulation "Kingdom of Heaven" [Mat 25:1]
COULD BEGIN.


Rev 7:1-3
And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth,
that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree. And I saw another angel ascending from the east,
having the seal of the living God: and he cried with a loud voice to the four angels, to whom it was given to hurt the earth and the sea,
Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.

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?

(2) I am not sure what you are asking here.
If you are asking whether the FIRST resurrection is our regeneration, then the answer is yes.

We were spiritually DEAD when born (the result of Adam's sin) and we are "born again" when we are "indwelt"
with the Holy Spirit. This reality is an essential element of the Gospel of Grace and has been understood (and taught)
since the Apostles.

Eph 2:1
And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;

Eph 2:5
Even when WE WERE DEAD in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved

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?

(3) Yes, good question.

The Gospel teaches the History of Mankind consists of four (4) separate and distinct "Kingdoms/Beasts"

The FIRST BEAST is the Pre-Flood Kingdom consisting of all the Saints from Adam to Noah
when this Kingdom was finished, God "harvested" all the living Saints on the Ark.
The Ark represented Jesus, teaching we can only find salvation within Christ.

The SECOND BEAST was the Jewish "Kingdom of Heaven" [Mat 22:2]
when this Kingdom was finished, God "harvested" all the living (Jewish) Saints
into the (3rd) Christian Kingdom as they followed Jesus into the Church Age [Jn 4:35, 10:16]

The THIRD BEAST was the Christian "Kingdom of Heaven" [Mat 13, in 7 verses]
this is the Great Commission of the Church Age [Mat 28:18-20] or the A-Millennial Kingdom
when the Saints "lived and reigned with Christ for one thousand years" WHILE SATAN IS BOUND.

The FOURTH BEAST is the Great Tribulation "Kingdom of Heaven" [Mat 25:1]
which is also shown as (1) Daniel's Fourth Beast and (2) the Revelation Beast and
(3) the RULE of the Anti-Christ ("Little Horn", "False Prophet" and "Man of Sin")
during (4) Satan's "Little Season" which happens AFTER BEING RELEASED FROM THE PIT.


So you see.... Great Tribulation events and Revelation Beast events "camp of the saints" and "beloved city"
could not have possibly happened during the SECOND BEAST where God was saving Jews but not Gentiles.
Instead, it is the LAST "wheat and tares" in the church that "went forth" into the Great Tribulation Kingdom,
as they followed the Anti-Christ. Therefore, the "camp of the saints" and the "beloved city" represents those
Last Saints as they are protected by God at the END of the Great Tribulation of the FOURTH BEAST.

Please ask any questions you may have.
I understand this is NEW INFORMATION to many


Dan 12:4
But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the TIME-OF-THE-END:
many [Last Saints] shall run to and fro, and knowledge [of the Gospel] shall be increased.


Dan 12:8-10
And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things?
And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the TIME-OF-THE-END.
Many [Last Saints] shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly:
and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise [Last Saints] SHALL UNDERSTAND.


When the Lord Returns, the Last Saints are NOT preaching the Gospel of the (2nd) Jewish Kingdom,
and they are NOT preaching the Great Commission Gospel of the (3rd) Christian "Kingdom of Heaven".
Instead, when the Lord Returns the Last Saints are preaching the historical fulfillment of Great Tribulation
prophecies that Jesus PROMISED "ye shall see ALL these things" [Mat 24:33] and they are preaching Biblical
mysteries that remained "closed-up" and "sealed" to all Saints (both OT and NT) until the Last Saints
"shall understand" during a period specifically named the "Time-of-the-End".


Jim

 

[5thKingdom]

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.

Regarding the A-Millennial Kingdom which has been faithfully preached by Protestant churches since the Reformation
and by Catholic and Orthodox churches from their start. The A-Millennial Kingdom has been offered as refutation of both
Pre-Millennialism (in the early church) and Post-Millennialism (much later). The A-Millennial Kingdom is the "traditional"
doctrine because it has always been recognized (by the Saints) as the ONLY Biblically correct position.


Regarding the A-Millennial Kingdom
The Gospel teaches the History of Mankind consists of four (4) separate and distinct "Kingdoms/Beasts"


The FIRST BEAST is the Pre-Flood Kingdom consisting of all the Saints from Adam to Noah
when this Kingdom was finished, God "harvested" all the living Saints on the Ark.
The Ark represented Jesus, teaching we can only find salvation within Christ.


The SECOND BEAST was the Jewish "Kingdom of Heaven" [Mat 22:2]
when this Kingdom was finished, God "harvested" all the living (Jewish) Saints
into the (3rd) Christian Kingdom as they followed Jesus into the Church Age [Jn 4:35, 10:16]


The THIRD BEAST was the Christian "Kingdom of Heaven" [Mat 13, in 7 verses]
this is the Great Commission of the Church Age [Mat 28:18-20] or the A-Millennial Kingdom
when the Saints "lived and reigned with Christ for one thousand years" WHILE SATAN IS BOUND.


The FOURTH BEAST is the Great Tribulation "Kingdom of Heaven" [Mat 25:1]
which is also shown as (1) Daniel's Fourth Beast and (2) the Revelation Beast and
(3) the RULE of the Anti-Christ (the "Little Horn", "False Prophet" and "Man of Sin")
during (4) Satan's "Little Season" which happens AFTER BEING RELEASED FROM THE PIT.


So, as you can easily see, the A-Millennial Kingdom happens during the (3rd) Christian Kingdom WHILE SATAN IS BOUND,
during the Great Commission of the Church Age when the Saints "lived and reigned with Christ for one thousand years".
While the (4th) Great Tribulation Kingdom happens AFTER SATAN IS RELEASED, during Satan's "Little Season"
when the Anti-Christ RULES over the Saints.


Please ask any questions you may have.
I understand this is NEW INFORMATION to many


Dan 12:4
But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the TIME-OF-THE-END:
many [Last Saints] shall run to and fro, and knowledge [about the Gospel] shall be increased.


Dan 12:8-10
And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things?
And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the TIME-OF-THE-END.
Many [Last Saints] shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly:
and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise [Last Saints] SHALL UNDERSTAND.


When the Lord Returns, the Last Saints are NOT preaching the Gospel of the (2nd) Jewish Kingdom,
and they are NOT preaching the Great Commission Gospel of the (3rd) Christian "Kingdom of Heaven".
Instead, when the Lord Returns the Last Saints are preaching the historical fulfillment of Great Tribulation
prophecies that Jesus PROMISED "ye shall see ALL these things" [Mat 24:33] and they are preaching Biblical
mysteries that remained "closed-up" and "sealed" to all Saints (both OT and NT) until the Last Saints
"shall understand" during a period specifically named the "Time-of-the-End".


Jim

 

[5thKingdom]

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.

You could not be more wrong.

Jesus was very clear [Mat 13]
that the Christian "Kingdom of Heaven" [7 verses] consists of BOTH
(1) saved "wheat/sheep" IN THE CHURCH sown by God and destined to eternal life and
(2) unsaved "tares/goats" IN THE CHURCH sown by Satan and destined to eternal torment.


Outline of the A-Millennial Kingdom


In Matthew 13 the Lord Jesus reveals several different perspectives about the (3rd) New Testament "Kingdom of Heaven".
The Lord reveals [v3-8] the "Kingdom of Heaven" (Christian Kingdom) is like a man sowing seed, and the Christian Gospel
is called [v19] the "Word of the Kingdom". The Lord reveals [v24-30] the "Kingdom of Heaven" (Christian Kingdom) includes
both saved "wheat" (sown by Christ), and unsaved "tares" (sown by Satan). Moreover, these wheat and tares look very similar,
and they are allowed to grow together - until they are separated during the "Final Harvest", which occurs at the "End-of-the-Age".


The Lord reveals [v47-50] the "Kingdom of Heaven" (Christian Kingdom) is like casting a net to gather both good fish ("wheat")
and bad fish ("tares"), which are later separated during the "Final Harvest". And finally, the Lord reveals [v52] that the GOSPEL
of the Christian "Kingdom of Heaven" includes the Saints ("wheat") understanding the Harmony of Scripture between mysteries
which were revealed during the (2nd) Old Testament Kingdom (represented as "old treasure") and mysteries now being revealed
during the "testimony" of the Great Commission, during the (3rd) New Testament Kingdom (represented as being "new treasure").


(1) The "Kingdom of Heaven" is an earthly Kingdom
(2) The sower of good seed represents the Lord Jesus Christ
(3) The sower of bad seed represents Satan, the King of Babylon
(4) The "Word of the Kingdom" (the seed) is the Gospel of the New Testament
(5) The "field" represents the world, as the Gospel goes forth to both Jew and Gentile
(6) The "fruit" of the field (both wheat and tares) represents the (3rd) "Kingdom of Heaven"
(7) The "Word of the Kingdom" gathers good fish and bad fish during the (3rd) Christian Kingdom
(8) The (saved) "wheat" and the (unsaved) "tares" LOOK similar, and grow together until the End-of-the-Age
(9) At the End-of-the-Age, the "wheat and tares" (the good fish and bad fish) are separated during a "Harvest"


In Matthew 13 the Lord explains the THIRD "Kingdom of Heaven" (the Christian Kingdom -or- New Testament Church)
is an earthly Kingdom consisting of both (saved) "wheat" and (unsaved) "tares". This Biblical Truth also harmonizes with
the (2nd) Jewish Kingdom containing both saved "wheat" and unsaved "tares" within the "Kingdom" of national Israel and
the (4th) Great Tribulation Kingdom containing both saved "wheat" (shown as "Wise Virgins" and "Toes/Kings" of IRON),
along with unsaved "tares" (shown as "Foolish Virgins" and "Toes/Kings" of CLAY), in the Fourth "Kingdom of Heaven".


In the Bible, the "Kingdom of Heaven" represents the many unsaved "tares", and/or the few saved "wheat"
associated with the "Word of the Kingdom" (preaching the Gospel) during the FOUR KINGDOMS on earth.
However, the (5th) Eternal "Kingdom of Heaven" contains only the "wheat" from each of those Four Kingdoms.
Again, notice the “Word of the Kingdom” (the Gospel) was unique in each of the “Kingdoms of Heaven” on earth.


The Saints “lived and reigned with Christ” [Rev 20:4] during the A-Millennial Kingdom, until all the Saints are “sealed” [Rev 7:1-3].
Then, when the Great Commission is finished and the Church is complete, the Holy Spirit is “taken out of the way” [2Thess 2:6-8]
(at the “End of the Age”) so Satan can be “loosened” from the “Bottomless Pit” to RULE during his “Little Season” [Rev 20:3].


Satan’s “Little Season” is also shown as (1) Daniel’s Fourth Beast, (2) The 7-Headed Revelation Beast,
(3) The Great Tribulation “Kingdom of Heaven” [Mat 25:1] and (4) the reign of the “Little Horn”
or “False Prophet” or “Man of Sin” … a man most commonly known as THE Anti-Christ.


Satan could never be “loosened” from the Bottomless Pit [Rev 9:1-3] to RULE over Daniel’s Fourth “Kingdom”, [Dan 7:25]
the Great Tribulation “Kingdom”, [Mt 25:1] and the Revelation “Beast” [Rev 17:17] while the “Saints” of the Christian “Kingdom”
were still “living and reigning with Christ”. Christ and Satan cannot rule at the same time. This is very important to understand.


Jim

 

[RoadoftheGypsy]

It is a total contradiction. This age is the millennial kingdom. It started with Christ’s "first resurrection." It will finish with the coming of Christ and the general resurrection of the dead and general judgment. Premil duplicates everything. Two kingdom ages, two Gospel ages, two ages of death, sin, rebellion, funerals. 2 resurrection days and 2 judgment days. There is nowhere in Scripture that talks about 2 resurrection days (plural) and 2 judgment days (plural), including Revelation 20. They invent 2 Gog/Magog wars at the end of two last days periods. They invent two "first resurrections," 2 new heavens and new earths, 2 “last days” periods. They duplicate the "last day." They have 2 bindings of Satan. They have 2 weddings of the elect (Revelation 19:7-8 and Revelation 21:2), 2 future glorifications and 2 raptures (to facilitate their millennial earth passing away 1,000 years+ after the second coming). What is next? Is anything safe from this faulty mode of interpretation?

LOL that is funny actually. Interesting way to phrase it. I never thought of it like that, there really is two of everything huh. I don't know how that jives with what someone said earlier in the thread that those who are worthy to attain the resurrection will not marry or die etc. Btw, how can someone be "worthy to attain a resurrection" isnt EVERYONE resurrected? even the wicked? OR maybe its talking about the resurrection of the RIGHTEOUS. is what I assume.

Its also true that if there was no Revelation 20, this debate wouldnt even exist