Where do people come up with Gog not being Antichrist?

[Andrewn]

The church did not give birth to Messiah. Israel did.

I disagree with your separation of Israel and the Church. They are one and the same. But let's move on to the Millennium itself.

as for the Millennial Kingdom itself it fulfills promises made regarding genetic descendants of Abraham, a temple that won't even exist on the New Earth in Ezekiel's later chapters, and the "swords into ploughshares". Look, "swords into ploughshares" depicts a world where war USED to be waged, but is NO LONGER being waged, so weapons are repurposed. . . . So yeah, a period of time on this current Earth, where peace reigns because the prince of peace reigns, where we used to know war, we won't fight anymore.

Thank you for summarizing your view of the Millennial Kingdom. Here are a few questions:

1) Where does Christ reign?
2) Who reigns with Him?
3) Who are the subjects of His reign? Resurrected people? Good people? Bad people? Christians? Non-Christians?
4) Besides the peaceful conditions you described, does anything actually happen during the Millennium?
5) How long do people live?
6) Do they have children?
7) Who are those who fight on Satan's side at the end of the Millennium?
8) What about the Jerusalem temple and Ezekiel's particular temple?
9) Are sacrifices offered in the temple?
10) What happens to people who die during the Millennium?
11) What religions will people practice?
12) What is the purpose of the Millennium?

Answering these questions may raise others. So plz feel free to describe additional information that you find relevant.

 

[Jamdoc]

I disagree with your separation of Israel and the Church. They are one and the same. But let's move on to the Millennium itself.

We're grafted in, but the branches are still distinct. Gentile Christians did not produce the Messiah.
There's a reason that the woman is distinguished from the remnant of the woman's seed: those who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
Satan gets foiled trying to destroy the Jews, a remnant of which are saved. That's who looks on Him who they have pierced. Not Gentile Christians.

John also makes a distinction between the 144,000 of the tribes of Israel, and the uncountable multitude from every tribe, tongue, and nation. They are not the same. This is a blurring of line amillennialists do that should not be done. If the Apostle John separates them and makes them distinct, don't blur them together on your own, you do not have the authority to do so.

Thank you for summarizing your view of the Millennial Kingdom. Here are a few questions:

1) Where does Christ reign?

Jerusalem

2) Who reigns with Him?

We do.

3) Who are the subjects of His reign? Resurrected people? Good people? Bad people? Christians? Non-Christians?

People. There are both bad and good. They are judged at the end.

4) Besides the peaceful conditions you described, does anything actually happen during the Millennium?

There's a lot of references to it in Isaiah, Ezekiel and even in Zechariah 14, admittedly, I don't understand them all because there's passages involving sacrifices still being carried out. But people in the nations, gentiles, come to Jerusalem regularly to bring offerings. This is from Isaiah 2 in particular. I consider that a millennium passage rather than a new earth passage as new earth won't have swords to beat into ploughshares unless you have war being waged on the New Earth.

5) How long do people live?

those resurrected, immortal, those non resurrected, I don't know as I do NOT ascribe Isaiah 65 to being a millennium passage as many premillennials do. Isaiah 65 says it's tne new heavens and new earth, so I consider that new heavens and new earth. I'm not aware of any other passages that discuss a lifespan in the Millennium.

6) Do they have children?

Yes.

7) Who are those who fight on Satan's side at the end of the Millennium?

Non resurrected people.

8) What about the Jerusalem temple and Ezekiel's particular temple?

The fact that Ezekiel's temple has never been built, and the New Jerusalem has no temple are part of why I believe there is a literal millennium on Earth. Would Ezekiel's temple even fit on the Temple mount? it's much larger than the previous temples.

9) Are sacrifices offered in the temple?

According to Zechariah 14.. it seems so. I do not know why. But it's things after the day of the Lord, and has the nations making annual pilgrimages to keep the feast of tabernacles.

10) What happens to people who die during the Millennium?

What happens to people when they die now? Same thing, except they wait for the great white throne of Judgement., as the first resurrection had already taken place.

11) What religions will people practice?

They will worship Jesus. There won't be any other religion.

12) What is the purpose of the Millennium?

Answering these questions may raise others. So plz feel free to describe additional information that you find relevant.

What was the purpose of being crucified vs any other death?
What was the purpose of the 30 pieces of silver?
What was the purpose of riding into Jerusalem on a donkey?

"That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by.."

In other words, to fulfill prophecy.
We have old testament prophecy that speaks of it, and nothing that has happened has fulfilled those prophecies. So. It must be fulfilled.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Let's compare some of that with what the text says in Revelation 12.

Revelation 12:12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.
13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.
14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.
15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.
17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

You also need to include the previous verses:

Rev 12:7-11
(7) And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
(8) And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
(9) And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
(10) And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.
(11) And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.

Michael is a signification for Christ. This word is of Hebrew origin and is [miykael], meaning "whom or he, is surely God". It's taken from three root words, [miy] meaning whom or he, [kiy] meaning surely or assuredly, and ['el], meaning God. [miykael] or Michael is Christ who assuredly is God! He is called the Arch (Chief or Head) Messenger because He is the Messenger of the Covenant (Malachi 3:1) who was prophesied to come.

Malachi 3:1

• "Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts".

He is not an Angel, but a Messenger. The words translated angel and messenger are the exact same words, do you know that? Christ and His messengers fought, and the Devil and His messengers fought, and Satan and his messengers were defeated by the cross of Christ. At that moment, Christ the Prince strengthened the Covenant by His death (Heb. 9:17, Daniel 9:27).

So often many lose sight of the fact that Revelation is using symbolic language all throughout this chapter. Sun, Moon, Stars, and they being in heaven are all Symbolic of something else, not the Literal heaven, a woman, the sun, or stars. That is quite obvious! The warfare was a Spiritual warfare. When Isaiah says Jerusalem's warfare was accomplished or finished, it wasn't talking about literal war with clubs, swords, literal fighting, or lasers from the eyes. It is warfare infinitely more important. We see this pictured gloriously as Jesus sends the 70 out 2 by 2 with the gospel, and they returned saying Satan couldn't harm them, (ye shall take up serpents) and even the spirits were subject to them. Christ the arch or chief Messenger (not angel) gave his messengers this Power, a prelude to what power they would have because of the cross. Their battle gear was the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God. That was what they fought with. And their victory was assured only in Christ!

Jesus is illustrating that if they fight you, they fight Him, and if they fight Him, they fight against God. i.e., he is telling them they are messengers representing God and any enmity against them is then enmity against God! they are God's army.

Luke 10:17

• And the 70 returned again with joy, saying, LORD, even the DEVILS are SUBJECT unto us through THY name.

Satan had no power to stand against them by the faith that would be secured by the Cross of Christ. It was by the Power of Christ that the devils were subject to the Messengers of the Lord. Christ, the Chief Messenger Michael who assuredly is God, was the reason that they could not stand against these messengers. The 70 Christ sent out rejoiced at this, and note "carefully" in the next verse, Christ's response to their Joy of their Victory over devils:

Luke 10:18

• And He said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from Heaven."

Satan hadn't literally fallen out of the sky (heaven) Christ is signifying that he has been prevented from harming anyone in the Kingdom (Heaven). And that falling is exactly what the next verses of Revelation chapter 12 is referring to. That Satan now had no power over the army of God, and the kingdom of Heaven would go forth to the world because of it. Satan spiritually is cast out of it, and the bondage wherewith he held men would be broken by the Cross. the accuser would not be able to cast down the stars to the earth. This miracle of the 70 was a picture of what the finished work of Christ would do for the Church. It would destroy (bring Him down/Idle) Satan (Hebrews 2:14) so that the saints could be free from his bondage whereby he held death over them. Christ could now build His Church and the gates of Hell could not prevail over it as Satan is defeated, cast out, and bound that the Lord could free his prisoners or captives and build His Church. The same picture of Joy as the Woman being delivered of the man Child which Jesus talked about. It is a victory by the blood of the lamb as the Kingdom suffered violence, but Christ would bring it peace and Safety.

Selah...

The chronology is straightforward. First satan still has access to heaven

Time out. It is NOT literal heaven where God reigns. The heaven here is symbolizing the Kingdom of Heaven where the congregation dwells. In this chapter, it is the Old Testament congregation! This is where the Old Testament congregation fell the moment Christ died on the cross, and the kingdom representation was taken from her and Satan fell with it so that he no longer has power to prevent people from translating into the kingdom. That is why Revelation 12:10 where it says "now come the salvation..." The salvation now goes to the world through the testimony of the church after the fall of the Old Testament congregation as kingdom representative. That is where you missed the point. This has nothing to do with Satan being in heaven which is absurd.

, regardless what sense that might be involving. he then loses access by being cast down unto the earth. And then when he sees he is cast to the earth, the first thing he sets out to do is to persecute the woman that brought forth Jesus. Which you say is the New Testament Israel, the Church, since verses 12-17 undoubtedly are meaning post the cross. And that you indicated it means that post the cross.

You misread the verses. The war broke out in kingdom of heaven between Christ and his messengers (Peter, John, Matthews and followers) v.s. Satan and his messengers (Pharisees, scribes, and Jews against Christ). Obviously Satan and the messengers lost their place in kingdom after Christ defeated them at the Cross. Now Satan is coming after woman who is NOW representing New Testament congregation and her seeds the Christians!

Selah!

Except to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent. Which then leads to what is recorded in verse 17. Therefore, while the woman is being nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent, this then leads to---and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Do you know what the wings symbolize? The wings symbolize the protection of God. The wilderness is typifying the world (a spiritual desert where gospel has not heard yet). This is why God put Church on her journey through the wilderness (world) to the promised land. This wilderness is her place where the Church must first tabernacle before it enters the promised land - just like the Jews did in the wilderness with Moses as an example!!! The wings woman is given symbolize the Care, Protetion and Security that God established for His New Testament COngregation just like He did with Old Testament Israel with Moses! So exactly what the woman is protecting from? SATAN! How did God do that? By bind Satan for a thousand years - for a fullness of time until the building of the church is finished then Satan will be loosened again.

Selah!

IOW, verse 17 is meaning during verse 14, except you have the woman meaning the church and have the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ, also meaning the church.

Right. The woman is congregation of Israel. Her seeds are Christians who are saved.

We then end up with this---the church is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent---

The woman is fed by the bread or manna which is the Word of God, just as Israel of old was fed in the wilderness by the manna from heaven (the type). Christ is our manna from heaven. The time, times, and a half are a SPIRITUAL SIGNIFICATION of the midst of the seven or week, or feast of tabernacles. Spiritually 3 and 1/2 or until 1,260 days when the beast shall be loosed (this time illustrated again in Revelation 11).

and at the same time, the church is being made war with by this same dragon that the church has escaped to the wilderness from the face of it.

Wrong. The war takes place during Christ's ministry on Earth. Remember Michael and his messengers fought against Satan and his messages which takes place before Christ went to the Cross. The Cross ends the war where Christ and his messengers won, she is then sent into the wilderness.

Sounds like a contradiction to me, that the church can be both in the wilderness away from the serpent and being made war with at the same time.

It is a contradiction to you because you are reading into Scripture. The book of Revelation, even some chapters, are not to be understood chronology.

Therefore, the woman and the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ, can't be meaning the same thing.

Sorry, the woman is congregaiton of Israel and after the cross, the remnant of her seed are Christians who have been saved by her testimony in the wilderness for almost 2,000 years, until the 1,260 days are fulfilled. That is when her testimony for salvation is finished with all Elect God intended to save has been sealed, THEN Satan will come out and wage war against her. Didn't you read Revelation 11?

Rev 11:7-8
(7) And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them.
(8) And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.

THis is when Satan will come after woman and her seeds after her protection ends after 1,260 days of testimony. This time Satan will come into New Testamnet congregation of Israel, the church, to attack and deceive those who have not yet sealed by God. As a result she as a great city, which is now SPIRITUALLY becomes Sodom and Egypt, just like the spiritual condition of the old testament congregation of Israel in the days of Christ prior to her fall at the Cross. Deja vu!

Selah

 

[TribulationSigns]

I disagree with your separation of Israel and the Church. They are one and the same. But let's move on to the Millennium itself.

Christ came from woman, the congregation of Israel. At that time, it was the nation Israel with kingdom representation. But she fell along with the death of Christ when the kingdom representative was taken from her and gave to the New Testament congregation who now represents Kingdom of Heaven on Earth for almost 2,000 years today.

 

[Andrewn]

Thank you for answering my questions. Plz correct me if I misunderstood any of the answers.

Jerusalem

This is the Dispensational Premillennial view.

We do.

I assume you mean resurrected Christians.

People. There are both bad and good. They are judged at the end.

I assume you mean the subjects of Christ's reign are non-Christians: some have been resurrected, and others who survived Armageddon.

There's a lot of references to it in Isaiah, Ezekiel and even in Zechariah 14, admittedly, I don't understand them all because there's passages involving sacrifices still being carried out. But people in the nations, gentiles, come to Jerusalem regularly to bring offerings. This is from Isaiah 2 in particular.

So animal sacrifices are offered in the Millennium as if Christ's sacrifice were insufficient. We're becoming Jewish again.

those resurrected, immortal, those non resurrected, I don't know as I do NOT ascribe Isaiah 65 to being a millennium passage as many premillennials do.

Do you mean that unresurrected non-Christians have limited life spans while resurrected non-Christians live through the whole Millennium?

Yes.

Do both resurrected and unresurrected people beget children during the Millennium?

Non resurrected people.

Only some unresurrected people will fight on Satan's side at the end of the Millennium indicating that all resurrected non-Christians and most unresurrected non-Christians would have accepted Christ and been saved during the Millennium. Is this what you meant?

The fact that Ezekiel's temple has never been built, and the New Jerusalem has no temple are part of why I believe there is a literal millennium on Earth. Would Ezekiel's temple even fit on the Temple mount? it's much larger than the previous temples.

I assume you mean that Ezekiel's temple will be built during the Millennium, encompassing most of Israel.

According to Zechariah 14.. it seems so. I do not know why. But it's things after the day of the Lord, and has the nations making annual pilgrimages to keep the feast of tabernacles.

You believe that sacrifices will be offered in the newly-built temple and that Jewish rituals will be practiced.

What happens to people when they die now? Same thing, except they wait for the great white throne of Judgement., as the first resurrection had already taken place.

I assume you mean that unresurrected people who die during the Millennium will be sorted into 2 groups that go either to Paradise or Hades until the final resurrection. Does this mean that evil is done during the Millennium?

They will worship Jesus. There won't be any other religion.

I assume you mean that they will worship Jesus with the application of Jewish Law and rituals.

In other words, to fulfill prophecy. We have old testament prophecy that speaks of it, and nothing that has happened has fulfilled those prophecies. So. It must be fulfilled.

I assume you mean to give the Jews specific advantages alluded to in the OT. But some of your answers indicate that the purpose of the Millennium is also that non-Christians (resurrected and unresurrected) will come to believe in Christ and be saved.

 

[Andrewn]

The Revelation 19 war and the Revelation 20 war of Gog are the same conflict... just presented first from the perspective of the human protagonists, and then from a perspective regarding the part Satan and the demonic realm was going to play in this war (and of Satan's past biography leading up to the battle including Gog).

How do the events in Rev 20 correspond with historical divisions according to your system?

 

[DavidPT]

well like I've said, I see it being possibly either one of those times and there's scripture to support either and frankly, I do not know.

I know, yet you're still entertaining the possibility. And we all know what can happen sometimes if we entertain something long enough. And let's not forget, if we apply anything in Ezekiel 38-39 to after the millennium, assuming the millennium is after Christ returns, we then have to apply the 7 year aftermath to the end of satan's little season since that aftermath is involving the same era of time that began in Ezekiel 38:8. Could there be an aftermath of 7 years following satan's little season when the GWTJ is what follows satan's little season?

Some interpreters propose that the 7 years aren't meaning 7 literal years(Ezekiel 39:9), nor is it meaning 7 literal months(Ezekiel 39:12), that it's the number 7 that is significant, not the years nor months. How can they possibly know that for certain? Do they have other examples where the amount of years specified, this it is not to be taken in a literal sense, that it is the number itself that is significant, not the amount of it? Even if the number 7 represents perfection or whatever, so what? Why would prophecies if involving an allotted amount of years for this, an allotted amount of years for that, etc, not be taken in the literal sense?

 

[DavidPT]

Thank you for answering my questions. Plz correct me if I misunderstood any of the answers.


This is the Dispensational Premillennial view.


I assume you mean resurrected Christians.


I assume you mean the subjects of Christ's reign are non-Christians: some have been resurrected, and others who survived Armageddon.


So animal sacrifices are offered in the Millennium as if Christ's sacrifice were insufficient. We're becoming Jewish again.


Do you mean that unresurrected non-Christians have limited life spans while resurrected non-Christians live through the whole Millennium?


Do both resurrected and unresurrected people beget children during the Millennium?


Only some unresurrected people will fight on Satan's side at the end of the Millennium indicating that all resurrected non-Christians and most unresurrected non-Christians would have accepted Christ and been saved during the Millennium. Is this what you meant?


I assume you mean that Ezekiel's temple will be built during the Millennium, encompassing most of Israel.


You believe that sacrifices will be offered in the newly-built temple and that Jewish rituals will be practiced.


I assume you mean that unresurrected people who die during the Millennium will be sorted into 2 groups that go either to Paradise or Hades until the final resurrection. Does this mean that evil is done during the Millennium?


I assume you mean that they will worship Jesus with the application of Jewish Law and rituals.


I assume you mean to give the Jews specific advantages alluded to in the OT. But some of your answers indicate that the purpose of the Millennium is also that non-Christians (resurrected and unresurrected) will come to believe in Christ and be saved.

My reasons for thinking the millennium is after Christ returns is based on that the following that I will submit below this paragraph, the fact these things are meaning after Christ returns, that something then has to make sense of it, otherwise we are left to conclude that these things continue in this manner forever. Your idea of getting around these things, let's ask Premils things they can't possibly know one way or the other, such as, are people born during the millennium, do people die during the millennium, are lost people saved during the millennium, so on and so on, instead of having to deal with how any of the following can make sense unless there is a time period following Christ's return that can explain it. BTW, below is only one example, there are plenty more examples, yet this alone should be sufficient to make the point I'm trying to make.

Matthew 19:28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.


Matthew 25, for one, tells us when He shall sit in the throne of His glory.

Matthew 25:31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory

Now that we have established the time frame that Matthew 19:28 is involving, there is the matter of what do we then do with this---ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel? In light of the following.

1 Corinthians 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.


IOW, is---ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel---meaning before verse 28 above is fulfilled, or is it involving all of eternity since nothing would be preventing it from involving all of eternity unless there is a time period after Christ returns and before verse 28 is fulfilled, that can prevent it from involving all of eternity.

You or someone else for that matter, might argue that it's verse 28 itself that prevents it from involving all eternity, therefore, a time period after Christ returns is not needed.

Except look what that would mean, though. It would mean---ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel---is only involving 24 hours or less, which makes zero sense, if within 24 hours or less of them beginning to do this, 1 Corinthians 15:28 is fulfilled. Keeping in mind, per Amil there are no more days following Christ's return, only eternity. And this is not even factoring in the great white throne judgment that Amils take to mean occurs the day Christ returns. As if, within 24 hours or less of Christ having returned, not only has Matthew 19:28 been entirely fulfilled, so has the GWTJ been entirely fulfilled, then within that same 24 hours, 1 Corinthians 15:28 is then fulfilled.

 

[3 Resurrections]

How do the events in Rev 20 correspond with historical divisions according to your system?

I'm a little foggy on your meaning behind "historical divisions" for Revelation 20. Can you perhaps rephrase? Everything in Revelation 20 has a historical date on it, if that is what you are requesting, but in this forum I can only go so far at submitting those dates.

 

[Jamdoc]

I know, yet you're still entertaining the possibility. And we all know what can happen sometimes if we entertain something long enough. And let's not forget, if we apply anything in Ezekiel 38-39 to after the millennium, assuming the millennium is after Christ returns, we then have to apply the 7 year aftermath to the end of satan's little season since that aftermath is involving the same era of time that began in Ezekiel 38:8. Could there be an aftermath of 7 years following satan's little season when the GWTJ is what follows satan's little season?

Some interpreters propose that the 7 years aren't meaning 7 literal years(Ezekiel 39:9), nor is it meaning 7 literal months(Ezekiel 39:12), that it's the number 7 that is significant, not the years nor months. How can they possibly know that for certain? Do they have other examples where the amount of years specified, this it is not to be taken in a literal sense, that it is the number itself that is significant, not the amount of it? Even if the number 7 represents perfection or whatever, so what? Why would prophecies if involving an allotted amount of years for this, an allotted amount of years for that, etc, not be taken in the literal sense?

I entertain possibilities when there's some biblical support for those possibilities and I can see and understand where the different possibilities come from, because I understand my own fallacies as a human being.

I throw out "possibilities" like pretrib gog/magog because it doesn't fit the text. I don't see it as possible then.

 

[Andrewn]

Everything in Revelation 20 has a historical date on it, if that is what you are requesting, but in this forum I can only go so far at submitting those dates.

Yes, this is what I meant. You can submit the dates in the forum or send me a PM.

 

[Jamdoc]

Thank you for answering my questions. Plz correct me if I misunderstood any of the answers.


This is the Dispensational Premillennial view.

It's the literal biblical view.

Isaiah 2

2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.
3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
4 And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

So, a time where on this planet previously existed weapons, but they are repurposed because peace reigns, and He is reigning from Jerusalem.

I assume you mean resurrected Christians.

Resurrected people, yes, if you want to call them Christians sure, but it will also include saints who looked forward to Messiah but predated the incarnation like the patriarchs and Job, and possibly even some gentiles that had been saved prior to the incarnation, like Naaman the Syrian (who Jesus gave as an example that infuriated the Pharisees), and even possibly Nebuchadnezzar after he was humbled by God.

I assume you mean the subjects of Christ's reign are non-Christians: some have been resurrected, and others who survived Armageddon.

No, I mean people. Everyone will be a subject of Jesus even if they are a king of a dominion granted to them. Jesus is the King of KINGS and Lord of LORDS. That is there is delegated authority among the redeemed, but they all are ultimately subjects of King Jesus themselves, and likely there will be hierarchy and regional orders. You might be a king of a city who answers to a king of a larger region who answers to Jesus who is king of all. You could be a king who rules no human beings as well. Adam and Eve were granted dominion....... over no people, but they had dominion over the animals.

So animal sacrifices are offered in the Millennium as if Christ's sacrifice were insufficient. We're becoming Jewish again.

I didn't say the sacrifices were for the forgiveness of sin or salvation. Jesus' sacrifice was for salvation. The old testament prophets talking about offerings I don't think are talking about them being salvific but perhaps memorial, or symbolic, such as communion and water baptism, or passover. Do you think the blood of lambs on the first passover is really what saved them or was it a symbol of the blood of THE Lamb? You're an Amillennialist, surely you like your symbols.

Do you mean that unresurrected non-Christians have limited life spans while resurrected non-Christians live through the whole Millennium?

I don't think the label "Christians" is particularly useful.
There are unsaved people who call themselves Christians
there are saved people who lived and died before Christ was incarnated, who never set foot in a Church

If they were Resurrected, they were saved. They cannot die anymore. If they are unresurrected, they will still die, because it is appointed for them to die and then be judged.

Do both resurrected and unresurrected people beget children during the Millennium?

This is going to be controversial but yes.

Isaiah 65 (and this is actually new earth, not the millennium)

23 They shall not labour in vain, nor bring forth for trouble; for they are the seed of the blessed of the Lord, and their offspring with them.

I know Matthew 22:30 well, but it doesn't rule out children, only the covenant relationship of marriage.
I do not know how it works.
But even IF Isaiah 65 were about the Millennium, as many premillennialists believe and they believe only unredeemed unresurrected can still have children during the Millennium that verse poses a problem to their view, as it's not unredeemed people's children in that verse, it's children of the seed of the blessed of the Lord (Jesus).

Only some unresurrected people will fight on Satan's side at the end of the Millennium indicating that all resurrected non-Christians and most unresurrected non-Christians would have accepted Christ and been saved during the Millennium. Is this what you meant?

The number of those who fight on Satan's side will outnumber the saints, "the number of whom is as the sand of the sea"

Resurrected people will all be "Christians" even though I think that's a poor term that gets thrown around a lot incorrectly, it seems to be the one you want to use.
I am not sure how many unresurrected "Christians" there will be, but the GWT of Judgement does have some people who are in the lamb's book of life, having been resurrected at the second resurrection, so.. it's possible there are some, it's possible they will have been dead for hundreds of years at that point and wait for the second resurrection, but there may be some still alive at that point. I don't know.

I assume you mean that Ezekiel's temple will be built during the Millennium, encompassing most of Israel.

Yes, I don't believe Ezekiel was a liar, I believe he was a prophet.

You believe that sacrifices will be offered in the newly-built temple and that Jewish rituals will be practiced.

Perhaps as memorial, really all sacrifices were symbolic of Jesus' ultimate sacrifice anyway, even when they were given it was all to be a picture of the cost of sin (death) and representing Jesus' death for our sins.
The actual sacrifices themselves didn't actually save anyone, Hebrews 10:4

But .. the Old Testament prophets talked about sacrifices during the reign of Messiah, and I am not going to call them liars, but prophets.

I assume you mean that unresurrected people who die during the Millennium will be sorted into 2 groups that go either to Paradise or Hades until the final resurrection. Does this mean that evil is done during the Millennium?

During Satan's little season for sure, before that, I don't know, Satan will be bound like, actually bound and unable to influence the nations. You believe he's currently bound, and evil saturates this world.
If Satan were currently bound according to God? I start doubting His power to restrain evil, because it seems rather unchecked.
Amillennialists seem to have God having an extremely weak power to restrain evil.

I assume you mean that they will worship Jesus with the application of Jewish Law and rituals.

It seems the feast of tabernacles will at least be observed and sacrifices will be done, but again, I believe them to be memorial rather than have any kind of sanctifying power (I don't believe they ever really had any sanctifying power other than illustrating concepts like the cost of sin and symbolize Christ's death). I don't understand it fully but I don't call the prophets liars, I call them prophets.

I assume you mean to give the Jews specific advantages alluded to in the OT. But some of your answers indicate that the purpose of the Millennium is also that non-Christians (resurrected and unresurrected) will come to believe in Christ and be saved.

that "Christians" label again, and the idea of "resurrected non-Christians"

Everyone resurrected will already believe in Christ.
Job 19

23 Oh that my words were now written! oh that they were printed in a book!
24 That they were graven with an iron pen and lead in the rock for ever!
25 For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:
26 And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God:
27 Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my reins be consumed within me.

Job may not have known the name Jesus yet, but He believed the promises of God that a Redeemer would rule the Earth, and that Redeemer already lived even though He had not been born yet. Would you consider him a Christian or non-Christian?

as for he and other old testament saints, 1 Peter 3:

18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;

Those who were saved before the incarnation, who were at Abraham's side as Lazarus in Luke 16, were ministered to by Jesus after Jesus died. There were 3 days between the death and resurrection of Jesus. What do you think He did for those 3 days? I believe Peter tells us the answer, He ministered to those that would be His in the grave, those who looked forward to His coming but had not known His name.

as for the Jews, those who are redeemed, the physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob will live in the land that God gave to them, ALL of it, which is beyond the boundaries that the Jews have ever controlled in history, they have NEVER achieved the entire promised land that the Lord gave them. Gentiles who are in Christ, will rule the nations outside of Israel.

In the past, after the fall, God divided up the nations among those referred to as the powers and principalities, the ones Paul refers to in Ephesians.
But man was supposed to have dominion, not angels, we gave up dominion by obeying an angel rather than obeying God. Thus, legally, angels, and most of them wicked ones at that (Michael is given charge over Israel at least, and he is holy, but the Prince of Persia and the Prince of Greece, are not so, and impeded Gabriel from delivering the answer to Daniel's prayer, Michael had to fight with them according to Daniel 10), are granted dominion of the world. Jesus, restores our dominion, the way it was meant to be.

anyway, the Millennial Kingdom, it'll be men ruling alongside Christ that have dominion, not angels, and Israel will finally possess the entire land that God gave to them.

 

[Jamdoc]

I suppose I have 1 question for you Andewen:
If right now is the Millennial Kingdom, why does the current reality of the world line up with passages like 2 Timothy 3

1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

why does the current reality of the world line up with Romans 1?

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

If this is the Millennium and Satan is currently bound, why is the world so evil? Why is it getting worse and worse?

2 Timothy 3

13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

 

[keras]

This is going to be controversial but yes.

Isaiah 65 (and this is actually new earth, not the millennium)

Right, both resurrected and un... peoples in the Millennium can have children. Because they will all be mortal humans.
Proved by how the resurrected GT martyrs physical second death has no effect on their final Judgment . Revelation 20:4-6, and immortality; Rev 20:11-15

Isaiah 65:17 is a prophecy about the Eternal state, to come after the Millennium, Proved by Revelation 20-21
That verse does not say when the new earth will come.

Israel will finally possess the entire land that God gave to them.

The Israelites of God, the faithful Christian peoples will possess all of the holy Land before Jesus Returns. Jeremiah 23:3, Isaiah 60:4-12, Ezekiel 30:8-12, Romans 9:24-26
They are there when Satan conquers them; Daniel 7:25, Revelation 13:7

 

[Jamdoc]

Right, both resurrected and un... peoples in the Millennium can have children. Because they will all be mortal humans.
Proved by how the resurrected GT martyrs physical second death has no effect on their final Judgment . Revelation 20:4-6, and immortality; Rev 20:11-15

Isaiah 65:17 is a prophecy about the Eternal state, to come after the Millennium, Proved by Revelation 20-21
That verse does not say when the new earth will come.

The Israelites of God, the faithful Christian peoples will possess all of the holy Land before Jesus Returns. Jeremiah 23:3, Isaiah 60:4-12, Ezekiel 30:8-12, Romans 9:24-26
They are there when Satan conquers them; Daniel 7:25, Revelation 13:7

Isaiah 65 says.. new heavens and new earth.

Why not just believe what the text says? Why try to insert something else into it to deny what it says? Do you know better than the prophet who is speaking the Words of the Lord?

again, yeah I know Matthew 22:30
but Isaiah 65:23 says something that does not CONFLICT Matthew 22:30, but definitely challenges most people's views on the New Earth.

I don't know how it works.
all I know is no marriage, but offspring on the New Earth.
Both passages are true, authoritative, and both refer to after the resurrection.
It seems contradictory to our assumptions of us thinking we know how the universe works, but somehow it's not going to be.

 

[keras]

Why not just believe what the text says? Why try to insert something else into it to deny what it says? Do you know better than the prophet who is speaking the Words of the Lord?

Isaiah 65:17 See; I am creating new heavens and a new earth, the past will no more be remembered or come to mind.
It is you who wrongly inserts that the NH,NE happens when Jesus Returns. Revelation 21:1 is crystal clear - it comes AFTER the Millennium.

Only in Eternity will the past no longer be remembered.

all I know is no marriage, but offspring on the New Earth.

A demonstration of the confusion and weird notions of the AMill believers.,

 

[Andrewn]

Thank you for the answers. You covered most issues and I have only one subject to inquire about.

Resurrected people, yes, if you want to call them Christians sure, but it will also include saints who looked forward to Messiah but predated the incarnation like the patriarchs and Job, and possibly even some gentiles that had been saved prior to the incarnation, like Naaman the Syrian (who Jesus gave as an example that infuriated the Pharisees), and even possibly Nebuchadnezzar after he was humbled by God.

Since all salvation is through Christ, I used the word "Christians" to include all who are saved after Christ and before Christ, both Jews and Gentiles, including those who were saved through Christ's preaching in Hades. I also used the word "non-Christians" to include non-believers as well as false Christians. I could have written "the saved" and the "unsaved" instead.

If they were Resurrected, they were saved. They cannot die anymore. If they are unresurrected, they will still die, because it is appointed for them to die and then be judged.

Resurrected people will all be "Christians" even though I think that's a poor term that gets thrown around a lot incorrectly, it seems to be the one you want to use.

Everyone resurrected will already believe in Christ.

I assume you mean that the "unsaved/non-Christians" will not be resurrected until after the end of the Millennium and the last war of Gog and Magog? You don't think they would have another chance to believe in Christ during the Millennium? But the Apostle Paul said:

Act 24:15 and I have the same hope in God that they themselves cherish, that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked.

Job may not have known the name Jesus yet, but He believed the promises of God that a Redeemer would rule the Earth, and that Redeemer already lived even though He had not been born yet. Would you consider him a Christian or non-Christian? as for he and other old testament saints, 1 Peter 3:

Yes, I would consider them Christians/saved.

If this is the Millennium and Satan is currently bound, why is the world so evil? Why is it getting worse and worse?

The belief that Satan is currently bound is based on many biblical passages:

Christus Victor

Christus Victor is the element of the atoning work of Christ that emphasizes the triumph of Christ over the evil powers of the world.

www.thegospelcoalition.org

We need to look at things like the abolishment of slavery, which existed from immemorial time, worldwide social services, and advances in science and medicine to appreciate that there is a difference between conditions before and after Christ.

Having said this, a majority of Amillennialists expect, just like you do, that things will get worse and tribulations will happen, and a world war would take place before the 2nd advent of Christ. Then there will be peace. The difference is that Amillennialists do not expect that another falling away and war of Gog and Magog happens after another 1000 years. When Christ returns, He rules forever.

As for the Jewish twist in Dispensationalists' beliefs, neither Amillennialists nor historical Premilliannialist believe this.

 

[Andrewn]

Your idea of getting around these things, let's ask Premils things they can't possibly know one way or the other, such as, are people born during the millennium, do people die during the millennium, are lost people saved during the millennium, so on and so on,

Do you have a habit of assuming the worst motives in people? Can you read my mind? @Jamdoc has done a good job answering my questions. They were not trick questions. We should all assume a posture of "learned ignorance" when discussing controversial issues.

 

[DavidPT]

Do you have a habit of assuming the worst motives in people? Can you read my mind? @Jamdoc has done a good job answering my questions. They were not trick questions. We should all assume a posture of "learned ignorance" when discussing controversial issues.

The point I'm basically trying to make is not what you are thinking I'm doing, but is the following instead. By Amils asking Premils some of the questions pertaining to the millennium they do at times, such as you have been doing, solves nothing one way or the other in regards to when the millennium is meaning. That's not the right way to go about it, IMO. Plus, just like Amils where there are some Amils that conclude this or that, and that there are also other Amils that come to entirely different conclusions about this same this or that, the same is true of Premils as well.

For example. Even though there might be Premils that insist a 3rd temple is built and that animal sacrificing resumes post the 2nd coming, not all Premils conclude that, thus some Premils disagree with it. I know I do. So why do some Amils apparently try and disprove Premil by using a 3rd temple to disprove it when not all Premils agree a 3rd temple is involved during the millennium? It might be different if all Premils agreed that 3rd temple(the Ezekiel temple) involves the millennium, except some Premils don't believe that.

The way to go about things in order to prove Premils are incorrect that the millennium is after Christ returns, and that Amil is correct about the millennium instead, is by proving passages, such as Matthew 19:28, how and why that doesn't support Premil but how and why that supports Amil instead. Then there is Zechariah 14:16-19 as well.

Then there is the 42 month reign of the beast and false prophet, where Scripture tends to show is meaning before the thousand years rather than after the thousand years, thus making Amil impossible since Amil needs the 42 month reign of the beast and false prophet to be after the thousand years in order for their view to work. Except Revelation 20:4 already proves the 42 month reign of the beast and false prophet can't be meaning after the thousand years since the following saints have already been martyred during this same 42 months before satan is ever loosed from the pit--- which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands

Compare that with some of the following.


Revelation 13:5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months

Revelation 13:7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them : and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

Revelation 13:15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.
16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads

It's undeniable, what I have underlined from Revelation 20:4 above, that is involving the same events, the same time period, that I have underlined in Revelation 13, thus what I have underlined in Revelation 13 is meaning before the thousand years not after the thousand years. And the martyrs I have underlined in Revelation 20:4 proves it.

How then can Amil be correct about when the millennium is meaning when the 42 month reign of the beast and false prophet can't be meaning after the thousand years, plus the fact that Christ returns at the end of that 42 month reign? Therefore, Christ can't return after the thousand years, after the 42 month reign, if the 42 month reign is not even meaning after the thousand years, being the point.

 

[Jamdoc]

Thank you for the answers. You covered most issues and I have only one subject to inquire about.


Since all salvation is through Christ, I used the word "Christians" to include all who are saved after Christ and before Christ, both Jews and Gentiles, including those who were saved through Christ's preaching in Hades. I also used the word "non-Christians" to include non-believers as well as false Christians. I could have written "the saved" and the "unsaved" instead.

Yeah that would be better, people just throw around the term and often I don't find it a useful term because there are things like "cultural Christians" or "I was raised Christian" okay sure, but do you believe Jesus is God come in the flesh? Because that's kinda important.
or "I got baptized as a baby" to which my response is "oh, so you got wet"

I assume you mean that the "unsaved/non-Christians" will not be resurrected until after the end of the Millennium and the last war of Gog and Magog? You don't think they would have another chance to believe in Christ during the Millennium? But the Apostle Paul said:

Act 24:15 and I have the same hope in God that they themselves cherish, that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked.

Hebrews 9:27, no the second resurrection, which also includes the wicked, is not for "another chance to be saved" it's for judgement, and the second resurrection is after the apparent destruction of the current Earth. The first resurrection is of the righteous in Christ only.

Yes, I would consider them Christians/saved.


The belief that Satan is currently bound is based on many biblical passages:

Christus Victor

Christus Victor is the element of the atoning work of Christ that emphasizes the triumph of Christ over the evil powers of the world.

www.thegospelcoalition.org

We need to look at things like the abolishment of slavery, which existed from immemorial time, worldwide social services, and advances in science and medicine to appreciate that there is a difference between conditions before and after Christ.

Things that are better from a human perspective is not the bar to mark by, it's sin that is the bar to mark by. Legalized abortion? No fault divorces? Premarital sex? Homosexuality? Transgenderism? Murder? Theft?

While my flesh agrees that slavery was a horrible thing, and it was almost always practiced in a non biblical way, there are provisions in the bible for slavery, so, God allowed it and did not consider it sin per say. Even in the New Testament, the word bondservant? That's a slave. They're owned, that's the bond.
In fact we are ALL supposed to be bond servants of Jesus Christ, His slaves in other words.
Yes I'm aware "He who the Son frees is free indeed"
But the context was sin and it's wages of death, not that you won't be working for a master, just changing which master you work for.

Having said this, a majority of Amillennialists expect, just like you do, that things will get worse and tribulations will happen, and a world war would take place before the 2nd advent of Christ. Then there will be peace. The difference is that Amillennialists do not expect that another falling away and war of Gog and Magog happens after another 1000 years. When Christ returns, He rules forever.

As for the Jewish twist in Dispensationalists' beliefs, neither Amillennialists nor historical Premilliannialist believe this.

I'm aware some of my beliefs on it are atypical of what is taught. But I came to those beliefs because my own bible study challenged what I had been taught.

Look at how keras wrestles against Isaiah 65:23 for instance. Christians had been taught we'd all be eternal eunuchs for hundreds of years.
a lot of people and I'd say the majority of Christians have been taught it's a 24/7 praiseathon basically extending Revelation 7 into eternity. I was taught that myself.

@DavidPT to be honest I don't mind and I don't mind admitting I don't have all the answers. I admit I have some atypical beliefs from most premillennialists, the fact that I believe pre-wrath rather than pre-trib or "post trib" is a minority position in itself.
But sometimes scripture challenges what I've been taught and I will believe scripture over what men teach even if it somehow seems to contradict, both passages have to be true, trying to reconcile seemingly conflicting truths is how a lot of eschatological positions form.