Surely Premils must invent 2 future glorifications days separated by 1000 years+?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jesse Dornfeld

Slave to Christ
Supporter
Oct 11, 2020
3,348
1,112
37
Twin Cities
Visit site
✟176,263.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
This does not make sense. Incorruptible means incorruptible. It is free from death and decay. Sin, death and decay are married together.

You have your millennial inhabitants needing new Mark2 incorruptible bodies at the end of the Premil millennium.

With your reasoning, then,, man has the ability to fall again in the NHNE in his incorruptible body?

What's the determining thing here? Is it our bodies or is it Satan who has influence on man? In Genesis, they had "perfect" bodies, yet they still sinned. Isn't that what the NHNE is doing? Creating a whole world like the garden of Eden?

In my view, in the NHNE we can sin, we just will not want to.
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
8,983
3,447
USA
Visit site
✟200,167.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What's the determining thing here? Is it our bodies or is it Satan who has influence on man? In Genesis, they had "perfect" bodies, yet they still sinned. Isn't that what the NHNE is doing? Creating a whole world like the garden of Eden?

In my view, in the NHNE we can sin, we just will not want to.

No. Adam did not have a glorified body like Christ. We will. What is more, there will be no more Satan when Jesus comes. Every enemy of righteousness will finally be destroyed. Read what Rev 21-22 says about the eternal state. There will be no more curse. It will not be like Adam's day therefore. Peter represents it by righteousness.
 
Upvote 0

Jesse Dornfeld

Slave to Christ
Supporter
Oct 11, 2020
3,348
1,112
37
Twin Cities
Visit site
✟176,263.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
No. Adam did not have a glorified body like Christ. We will. What is more, there will be no more Satan when Jesus comes. Every enemy of righteousness will finally be destroyed. Read what Rev 21-22 says about the eternal state. There will be no more curse. It will not be like Adam's day therefore. Peter represents it by righteousness.

So you do not see the NHNE as the same as before Adam sinned. Interesting.
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
8,983
3,447
USA
Visit site
✟200,167.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What's the determining thing here? Is it our bodies or is it Satan who has influence on man? In Genesis, they had "perfect" bodies, yet they still sinned. Isn't that what the NHNE is doing? Creating a whole world like the garden of Eden?

In my view, in the NHNE we can sin, we just will not want to.

The new earth is glorified. Only the glorified are suited and qualified to inherit it.
Glorification occurs at the second coming. Multiple Scripture supports that. Your fight is clearly with God's Word.

1 Corinthians 15:50-55 explains, flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed . For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?”

Interestingly, this Greek word allasso used to describe the glorification of the earth in Hebrews 1:10-12 is also used to describe the glorification of the elect here.

Mortals are not qualified to inherit the new earth, as they are plagued by the blight of corruption – which is expressly forbidden from the new earth. Sinful mortals (in their corruptible bodies) will not even survive the Lord’s climactic coming never mind enter the glorified earth. They cannot abide the glorious presence of Christ at His appearing. It would be totally impossible for flesh and blood to inhabit such a glorious setting. Anyway, there will be no more curse on the world, as death will be swallowed up in victory. The bondage of corruption will finally be banished.

We must note the careful connection between “flesh and blood” and “corruption” (which relates to “this present time”) in comparison to “the kingdom of God” (that appears in all its final glory when “the trumpet shall sound”) and “incorruption.” To secure man’s access to this glorified eternal kingdom, which is inherited alone by the meek (Psalm 37:9-11, 22, Matthew 5:5), “this corruptible must put on incorruption.” This passage, which is speaking of the period immediately following the coming of Christ, confirms that no element of the fall can access the incorruptible eternal kingdom.

This changeover from “this present evil age” blighted with “the bondage of corruption” to the bliss and splendor of “incorruption” and “the glory which shall be revealed in us” doesn’t happen until the return of Christ. The transition from this temporal evil age to the new perfect eternal age happens at Christ’s return. Scripture show this glorious climatic event will see the glorification of God’s people and the glorification of this earth. The means by which God removes corruption from this earth at the end is by fire. People need to be glorified in order to equip them to populate the new perfected environment.

Mortality cannot possess it. The wicked cannot possess it. Premil has billions of both polluting the new earth.
 
Upvote 0

Jesse Dornfeld

Slave to Christ
Supporter
Oct 11, 2020
3,348
1,112
37
Twin Cities
Visit site
✟176,263.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
No. Christ fulfilled a plan that would ensure that would be eternally overcome.

Then you must view when God said his entire creation was "very good" didn't mean it was "perfect." Fair enough.
 
Upvote 0

Marilyn C

Pre-tribulation.
Supporter
Dec 26, 2013
4,814
596
Victoria
✟593,109.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Not so. I am saying the opposite. Natural Israel could never fulfill the demands of God because of sin. That is why Jesus came. He is true Israel. He did what man could never do. We are not waiting for some alleged age for Israel to get their act together. We are watching men of all nations now enter into faithful Israel - the only Israel acceptable unto God.

The old covenant was based upon the faithfulness of man and consequently failed.
The new covenant was based upon the faithfulness of Christ and consequently gloriously succeeded.

Sadly, Dispys are fixated with the wrong Israel and the wrong covenant. That is why the have to invent some future age to fulfill the fulfilled promises that have already been realized in Christ.

They want to rebuild a redundant temple, restart the pointless slaughter of countless of innocent animals and resurrect the long abolished Aaronic priesthood. This is an offense to the ministry and achievements of Christ, NT Christianity and the finished work of the cross.

The millennium is here. Christ is reigning over His enemies. True Israel is prospering through the joy of sins forgiven and the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit.

You seem to forget SG that God is omniscient (all knowing) so why would He expect fallen man to do something they could never do? Why? That makes God unfair at the least.

You are too `us` centred and not Christ centred and His purposes. We are a heavenly nation whereas God made Israel an earthly nation and they will fulfil what He made them for with Christ ruling over them through their regent King, David, as God`s word tells us.
 
Upvote 0

DavidPT

Well-Known Member
Sep 26, 2016
8,601
2,106
Texas
✟196,410.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
This is a unitary event. The rescue of the elect sees the simultaneous destruction of the wicked. The resurrection of the wicked immediately follows the resurrection of the righteous.


Amils are speculating big time here, because of what 1 Corinthians 15:52 indicates, apparently. And based on what this indicates, Amils then speculate, rather than actually prove with Scripture, that all of these other events, such as destroying of the wicked, the great white throne judgment, etc, that these also happen in this same moment of time, or if not within that same moment of time, in like manner then, that these other events also are fulfilled from start to finish in a moment's time, even though Amils can't produce a single verse where it tells us, for example, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, the great white throne judgment begins and finishes up entirely.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Marilyn C
Upvote 0

Marilyn C

Pre-tribulation.
Supporter
Dec 26, 2013
4,814
596
Victoria
✟593,109.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The ultimate fulfillment of Israel is found in Matthew 1:1, as confirmed by Paul in Galatians 3:16.
He is the one seed to whom the Abrahamic promise was made.

His ultimate promise was fulfilled at Calvary in John 19:30.

"It is finished."

.

So to you also BB, We know that God is omniscient, so why would He make a nation and call them His own, and expect them to carry out His requirements, when He knew they couldn`t? Why? That makes God unfair at the least.

God has lots of promised for Israel through Christ and they are not promised to us.
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
8,983
3,447
USA
Visit site
✟200,167.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Then you must view when God said his entire creation was "very good" didn't mean it was "perfect." Fair enough.

Creation was made perfect. But the big difference was: He gave man the ability to obey or not obey at the beginning. It will not be like that in eternity. Sin and the curse will not occur on the new earth. Read Rev 21-22.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
8,983
3,447
USA
Visit site
✟200,167.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Amils are speculating big time here, because of what 1 Corinthians 15:52 indicates, apparently. And based on what this indicates, Amils then speculate, rather than actually prove with Scripture, that all of these other events, such as destroying of the wicked, the great white throne judgment, etc, that these also happen in this same moment of time, or if not within that same moment of time, in like manner then, that these other events also are fulfilled from start to finish in a moment's time, even though Amils can't produce a single verse where it tells us, for example, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, the great white throne judgment begins and finishes up entirely.

I would say the opposite. If Amils present more than one Scripture or one paragraph you run. I have debated with you over the years. What I see is: you never want to address the multiple Scriptures that Amils present that support Amil. You just avoid, dismiss or spiritualize the detail. That is why I cannot take your above comments seriously. It is just theological politicking in my opinion.
 
Upvote 0

Jamdoc

Watching and Praying Always
Oct 22, 2019
7,371
2,301
43
Helena
✟203,984.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Actually, I stress both. I made the text bigger for that part to show the part that I believe you are disregarding. The text suggests an ongoing event that occurs every day and had already begun back then rather than just a one time future event. I believe you are not being honest with the text and are allowing doctrinal bias to dictate how you interpret the passage.

Please tell me what you think Jesus meant when he said the time is coming, and has now come...". What does the "and has now come" (KJV: "and now is") part mean to you?
Salvation now, bodily resurrection coming. The promise is now, the delivering is coming.

That is the problem I have with premil's approach to interpreting scripture. Its foundation is on highly debatable, difficult to interpret passages, much of which are written in symbolic language. The amillennial doctrine's foundation, in contrast, is on much more clear, straightforward passages like John 5:28-29 (the previous verses do not talk about the bodily resurrection). Jesus's message in John 5:28-29 is very clear and can only be misunderstood because of doctrinal bias, in my opinion.

In other words, if Rev 20 didn't exist, I strongly believe there is no way you would interpret it the way you do. But, why not interpret Rev 20 according to what the more clear passage of John 5:24-29 says instead of the other way around?
Because interpreting it as you do means sucking the meaning out of it and making glorious things in scripture to just be hyperbole/exaggeration of very mundane things. If God truly meant that by Satan "deceiving the nations no more" means that oh, People can evangelize and preach the gospel?
I'd be disappointed in God "is that the best you can do?" I'd have doubts in His future promises because if THIS is "deceive the nations no more" and "ruling and reigning with Christ"? I'm unimpressed, and "eternal life" stops sounding eternal, and all the promises seem... less promising.
You know on the far end of this millennial debate, are the postmillennialists, and especially the full preterists. How depressing that they think this fallen world we're in is the "new heavens and new earth" that was promised after they believe Jesus returned in AD70. Not only did they see all prophetic scripture about a worldwide event "fulfilled" in a regional skirmish, just assuming the bible was embellishing "just a little", but the new heavens and new earth are still filled with sin and death. They just explain "oh but sin is forgiven now, so that's how there's no sin" and "you go to heaven after you die, that's how there's no death"
In that view God Himself sounds more like a used car salesman than the person who created the universe and will recreate it anew someday.
Just some guy slapping the earth to show its sturdiness "ah-yup, this here's a new one, brand spankin new", as the dust flies off from the impact of His hand.
So yeah, I have a higher view of God and His promises, than that.
That is another reason I am premillennial, having a literal view of God's promises is also having a higher view of God's promises.... most the time. I do struggle with my literal view of what heaven is like, a lot of falling on our faces and singing.

Here is something you have probably not considered before. In my view, the text implies that the only way one can avoid the second death is by having part in the first resurrection. I believe Christ's resurrection is the first resurrection unto a glorified, immortal body (1 Cor 15:20-23, Acts 26:23) and that all believers from all-time spiritually have part in His resurrection.

So, again going back to the idea that having part in the first resurrection is the only way to avoid the second death, how would that work in your view when only some believers are part of the first resurrection and not all of them? What about the rest of the dead believers who you think would be resurrected at other times? How do they avoid the second death, which occurs upon being cast into the lake of fire (Rev 20:14-15)?
I'm fully aware of the amillennial interpretation, but, I don't like to treat the bible as hyperbole as I explained above. If I was resurrected before I was even born? If I'm now "ruling and reigning"? If THIS is a glorified body? I'm unimpressed.
As to your question your doctrine makes you unable to understand what I was trying to convey apparently.
The first resurrection, does not have judgement connected to it, only reward and blessings. God's not going to go through our sins before the white throne of judgement if He's already resurrected us to life in glorified bodies. If God was going to put us on trial, then has He truly removed our sin from us as far as the east is from the west?
Now at the bema seat, it's not our sins that are on trial, but rather just, how we used our lives. All the time we wasted watching TV, playing video games, doing worldly things, that's all shown to be vanity and to count for nothing in eternity. Only the work we do for the Lord counts for anything in eternity, and gets rewarded. But it is not a trial with death on the line.
Now the second resurrection, will have some people who got saved after the first resurrection, and most people who were never saved.
So the people who got saved after the first resurrection (and are among the "rest of the dead" that "lived not again" until after the millennium), will be written in the book of life, They'll go up to the throne, it'll be announced that they are in the book of life, and they will get a glorified body like those in the first resurrection. Those who are unsaved, who are not in the book of life, will be judged by their sins, before being condemned to the lake of fire.

Again, I think the key thing, is whether you believe time continues to happen after Jesus returns and when Jesus returns, before the trumpets and vials, or after. If before, well then, some people will cry out for salvation, so they need a resurrection to show that they are in the book of life. Taking an extremely literal approach to "the day of the Lord" being a literal 24 hour day, and somehow thinking the vials are not the wrath of God, is basically the only way you can't see a requirement for 2 end time bodily resurrections.

(skipping ahead cause the posts just get too long and frankly it's reduntant, it's your reluctance to see "the day of the Lord" as figurative and seeing us as being subject to the wrath of God that is really the source of everything.)

I am, too, but just not in the way you are. Christ's was first long ago and then those who are His at His coming, which is what Paul taught in 1 Cor 15:20-23. But the difference is how you and I understand what it means to have part in the first bodily resurrection (which I believe was Christ's resurrection).
I mean two mass bodily resurrections, two waves of resurrection. John 5:25 is those who are DEAD that hear His voice.
Also this brings me back to the first question. the "and now is". Jesus had resurrected people who had died in His earthly ministry. He did it by calling out to them with His voice. He wasn't resurrecting EVERYONE, but some to show the glory of God.

Of course believers will not be condemned and will instead be rewarded, but as I said earlier, the book of life implies that believers are present there and other scripture indicates that as well (Rom 14:10-12, Matt 25:31-46, etc.).
Correct, I believe there will be new believers made after the rapture, and those new believers will still get saved in the 2nd resurrection, shown to be in the book of life, the book of all their sins probably doesn't even get opened, and they go to eternal life.

Dunno how you can see believers getting their rewards 1000+ years before unbelievers do. The rewards are different for believers and unbelievers at the time, but all are present there. And, yes, the punishment that unbelievers receive at that time will be their "reward". The word "reward" isn't always necessarily positive.

Matthew 6: Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

Again, there is no basis for thinking that 2 Cor 5:10 is speaking of some other judgment besides the GWT judgment.

2 Cor 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each of us may receive what is due us for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.

This speaks of being judged based on the things we have done. Which is no different than this:

Romans 14:10 You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister? Or why do you treat them with contempt? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat. 11 It is written: As surely as I live,’ says the Lord,‘every knee will bow before me; every tongue will acknowledge God.’” 12 So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God.

When do you believe what is described here will happen and who exact do you believe will be part of the judgment described here? Paul indicates that it is a judgment at which he himself would be present ("each of us" includes Paul himself), so it would have to be the same judgment as 2 Cor 5:10, right? I say that because Paul indicated in 2 Cor 5:10 that he would be included ("each of us") in what is described in 2 Cor 5:10 as well.

So, with the understanding that 2 Cor 5:10 and Romans 14:10-12 are speaking of the same judgment, what can we deduce from that (besides that Paul himself will be there)? Does this judgment, which you call the bema seat judgment, only include unbelievers as you believe is the case?
All 3 of those references from the Pauline Epistles use the words bemati and bematos. A bema seat, an awards ceremony. Note that death isn't connected with any of these 3 passages. Remember that all of these are written to believers. People that as far as Paul knew, were saved, and would be getting rewarded, not put on trial for their sins.

The great white throne of judgement, is NOT the bema seat. Totally different thing The bema seat is a medal ceremony, the great white throne is a criminal trial with the death sentence on the line.

We're talking about God here. Why are you talking about what He will do as if He was merely human? Time does not affect Him like it does us (2 Peter 3:8). To think that it would take Him the same amount of time to judge everyone as it would a human is just silly nonsense (sorry if that comes across as too harsh, but that's just how I see it).
You missed the part where yes God can make a judgement instantly, but humans cannot HEAR their rap sheet and convictions instantly. God is just, and not unfair, and we will have to hear everyone's convictions to show that not a single person was thrown into the lake of fire unjustly, that every single one of them deserves it. The limitation is not on God. The limitation is on us.
I have no idea how long it will take us to hear the sins of billions of people. Good thing we'll have an eternity to hear it.

I showed above how everyone will be appearing before the bema seat (not just believers) and how it is no different than the Great White Throne. Just 2 different ways of referring to the same throne/seat of judgment.
Not really because death and hell were not shown as possibilities in the 3 references to the bema seat that Paul made, in fact, the only one showing the negative outcome of the bema seat is 1 Corinthians 3:15 where they lose rewards, but still have eternal life.

I don't recall saying that they're not the wrath of God. Probably because I didn't. They are the wrath of God, but I don't believe they should be taken literally. There's a lot of symbolic/figurative language in Rev 16. For example,[/quote]

So you believe that those events are the wrath of God, then it contradicts 1 Thessalonians 5:9, and also Isaiah 26:19-21 showing that God has not appointed us to wrath, and that we're invited to hide from the indignation (wrath), also showing a resurrection taking place before the wrath.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
7,394
2,496
MI
✟308,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I'm not saying there is no bodily resurrection of the dead recorded in that passage. Of course there is. But in context it is only involving the saved dead and not also the unsaved dead as well, therefore this doesn't even involve the great white throne judgment recorded in Revelation 20. It involves a judgment though, and is recorded in both Daniel 7:22 and Revelation 20:4, and is meaning when the time has come that the saints have possessed the kingdom. After all, does not Revelation 11:15 indicate--The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever?
I think you need to look at the passage more closely.

Rev 11:15 The seventh angel sounded his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, which said:
The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah, and he will reign for ever and ever.”16 And the twenty-four elders, who were seated on their thrones before God, fell on their faces and worshiped God, 17 saying:“We give thanks to you, Lord God Almighty, the One who is and who was, because you have taken your great power and have begun to reign. 18 The nations were angry, and your wrath has come. The time has come for judging the dead, and for rewarding your servants the prophets and your people who revere your name, both great and small—and for destroying those who destroy the earth.”

There are a few things to notice here. First, it says the kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Messiah. It doesn't say it will become the kingdom of just the Messiah at that point as if this could be used as evidence for an earthly millennial kingdom of Christ. It says it will become the kingdom of "our Lord and of His Messiah". So, the Lord should be understood as referring to the Father there in contrast to His Messiah, who is obviously His Son, Jesus Christ.

Paul taught that the kingdom would not be delivered to the Father until "the end" when Jesus comes.

1 Cor 15:22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. 24 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power.

Notice that the end comes as a result of Jesus destroying "all dominion, authority and power". That is what He will do when He comes at the last trumpet. Going back to what it says regarding the last trumpet of the seven trumpets, notice that it signals the time "for destroying those who destroy the earth". It seems to me that if He destroys those who have destroyed the earth at the seventh trumpet then that will mean He has "destroyed all dominion, authority and power". Which would mean the seventh trumpet signals "the end". The end of what?

The end of this wicked, temporal age. Scripture teaches that Jesus will come at the end of the age (Matt 24:3). What will happen at that point? Will Jesus began to reign in a temporal, earthly millennial kingdom at that point? What does scripture say?

Matt 13:40 “As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. 42 They will throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Whoever has ears, let them hear.

Notice that at the end of the age when Christ returns (Matt 24:3), the wicked get punished and thrown into the fire and "the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father". Remember, Paul said that Jesus will deliver the kingdom to the Father when He comes. Notice that the kingdom will be called "the kingdom of their Father" at the end of the age.

For you to try to refute what I've said here, you'd have to show that the end of the age comes after the return of Christ and after a future earthly millennial kingdom of Christ rather than when Christ returns. Can you do that?

The last point I wanted to make regarding Rev 11:15-18 is related to it being the time "for judging the dead, and for rewarding your servants the prophets and your people who revere your name".

You acknowledged that the passage involves the judgment but then related it to what I believe are unrelated passages (I'll get to that in a bit if I have time). What I think you're missing here is that the reference to judging the dead is meant to be taken in contrast to "rewarding your servants the prophets and your people who revere your name" rather than speaking of the same thing. It's talking about judging and condemning the unbelieving dead who are raised at the judgment like it talks about in Rev 20:11-15. It's referring to the ones who get cast into the lake of fire.

If you look at how the Greek word krinō, translated as "judging" (KJV: judged) in Rev 11:18, in the rest of the book, it's always used with a negative connotation. I'll give you a few examples.

Rev 6:10 They called out in a loud voice, “How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge (Greek: krinō) the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?”

Rev 18:8 Therefore in one day her plagues will overtake her: death, mourning and famine. She will be consumed by fire, for mighty is the Lord God who judges (Greek: krinō) her.

Rev 19:1 After this I heard what sounded like the roar of a great multitude in heaven shouting: Hallelujah! Salvation and glory and power belong to our God, 2 for true and just are his judgments.
He has condemned (Greek: krinō) the great prostitute who corrupted the earth by her adulteries. He has avenged on her the blood of his servants.”

Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged (Greek: krinō) according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged (Greek: krinō) according to what they had done.

Doesn't Daniel 7:22 say this---Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High?

And that Revelation 20:4 says this---And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them?

And does not Daniel 7:22 mean chronologically after Daniel 7:21 has been fulfilled first---I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them

And are not the martyrs recorded in Revelation 20:4, who are martyred for refusing to worship the beast, martyred during the period of time specified in Daniel 7:21? And is not the period of time specified in Daniel 7:21 meaning the 42 month reign of the beast, Revelation 13?
I don't think Daniel 7:22 should be directly related to Rev 20:4. I see you referenced the KJV translation of the verse, but I believe the NKJV, NIV and NASB translations are more accurate in this case.

Dan 7:22 until the Ancient of Days came, and a judgment was made in favor of the saints of the Most High, and the time came for the saints to possess the kingdom.

Dan 7:22 until the Ancient of Days came and pronounced judgment in favor of the holy people of the Most High, and the time came when they possessed the kingdom. (NIV)

Dan 7:22 until the Ancient of Days came and judgment was passed in favor of the saints of the Highest One, and the time arrived when the saints took possession of the kingdom.

So, the verse should not be understood as authority and judgment being given to the saints like we see in Rev 20:4, but rather should be understood as talking about the Ancient of Days pronouncing judgment in the saints' favor. That lines up with what it says in Rev 11:15-18 because it's the time of the judgment where unbelievers are condemned and believers are rewarded (judgment made in the saints' favor).

And the fact there has to be a gap between when the just rise and when the unjust rise, well, a gap is a gap, right? If it can be a gap of seconds, or minutes, or even hours, why can't it also be a gap involving years?
Because scripture doesn't teach that and your argument here makes no sense. Do you realize that you're trying to argue that we should not see any difference between seconds and 1000+ years? And this is supposed to be a convincing argument?

Let me ask Amils this then. Who is it that Amils don't think will rise first, yet are still saved saints, but will instead rise when the rest of the dead do after Revelation 19:21 has at least been fulfilled first? Can Amils think of anyone?
I'm not sure if I understand this question. Are you asking if any believers are included among "the rest of the dead" that John mentions in Rev 20:5? If so, the answer is no. It's clear to me that "rest of the dead" are contrasted with the dead souls of saved saints that John saw.

Do Amils think the dead in Christ would also include OT saints, such as Adam, Abel, Job, Daniel, so on and so on?
Absolutely.

If Amils perhaps do, what saints would still need to rise, but not during when the dead in Christ rise first, but when the rest of the rest of the dead rise last? None, right?
That is correct.

Based on this alone, assuming Amils agree that Adam and all other OT saints are included with those in Christ that rise first, how could it possibly be incorrect to conclude that there are two types of resurrections, and that there is a gap between these, therefore none of the unjust rise when the just do, nor do any of the just rise when the unjust do?
Again, I'm not sure if I understand your question. Certainly, there are two types of destinations that people go to after being resurrected (believers unto eternal life in God's kingdom on the new earth and unbelievers to the lake of fire). If that's what you mean, then we all believe that.

What is the point you're trying to make relating to the gap between believers rising and unbelievers rising? Are you just trying to prove that there is a gap? Amils believe that, too.

We probably should word it a little differently when we say the saved and the lost are resurrected at the same time when we give John 5:28-29 and other passages as the evidence for that. We don't mean the same exact time with not even a millisecond in between. Our point regarding passages like John 5:28-29 is that one 24 hour day or one event is coming during which all the dead will be raised. That event is the second coming of Christ.

We believe that dead unbelievers are raised very shortly after the dead in Christ are raised. When the dead in Christ are raised and then meet the Lord in the air, then the destruction of the living unbelievers and the earth itself occurs (2 Peter 3:10-13), which I would think won't take long at all. God can easily just burn up the earth very quickly if He wants and I see no reason why He won't.

Think about how quickly the bodies of all believers will be changed (1 cor 15:50-54). In the twinkling of an eye. God can make things happen very quickly when He wants to. Jesus said He is "coming quickly" (Rev 22:12,20) "as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west" (Matt 24:27). When He comes, He is not going to mess around and take His time doing what He's coming to do.

Once the wicked are destroyed, then all of the dead unbelievers will be raised and the judgment will take place (Matt 25:31-46, Rev 11:15-18, Rev 20:9-15).
 
Upvote 0

Jesse Dornfeld

Slave to Christ
Supporter
Oct 11, 2020
3,348
1,112
37
Twin Cities
Visit site
✟176,263.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Creation was made perfect.

Then I am not sure how it works for you. For me, I see that either Eden was not "perfect" or it was. How can something be better than perfect?

I would say the reason Adam sinned is because Satan influenced things. In the NHNE, it will be only those who believed the message of Christ and no Satan. Hence, Satan cannot influence things. Hence, there will be no sin.

That's how I see it at least. Not sure how things can get better than "perfect".
 
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
7,394
2,496
MI
✟308,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Salvation now, bodily resurrection coming. The promise is now, the delivering is coming.
No, that is not what John 5:24-25 means. Jesus did not refer to bodily resurrection there at all. Jesus doesn't get around to talking about the bodily resurrection of the dead until verse 28. So, He was only speaking about spiritual salvation in John 5:24-25.

To say something "is coming and now has come" is simply another way of speaking about something that is already happening and will continue to happen after that time. Just like we can see here:

John 4:23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”

Would you agree that what Jesus was saying here is that from that point on true worshipers would be expected to "worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth"? If so, then can you now see that you have been interpreting John 5:24-25 incorrectly since it is speaking of something that was happening then and would continue to happen from that point on?

I'll have to get to the rest of your post later.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
8,983
3,447
USA
Visit site
✟200,167.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Then I am not sure how it works for you. For me, I see that either Eden was not "perfect" or it was. How can something be better than perfect?

I would say the reason Adam sinned is because Satan influenced things. In the NHNE, it will be only those who believed the message of Christ and no Satan. Hence, Satan cannot influence things. Hence, there will be no sin.

That's how I see it at least. Not sure how things can get better than "perfect".

It is more than that. There is no curse or corruption after Christ comes. Read Romans 8, 1 Cor 15 and Rev 21-22. To think otherwise is to fight with Scripture and argue against Scripture in favor of the possibility of ongoing incorruption.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Jamdoc

Watching and Praying Always
Oct 22, 2019
7,371
2,301
43
Helena
✟203,984.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
That phrase can be figurative, but it can also be used to describe the day Christ returns as Paul did in 1 Thess 5 and Peter did in 2 Peter 3. The phrase does not always refer to the same thing, which is what you miss. The phrase even can refer to what began on the day of Pentecost (compare Acts 2:16-21 to Joel 2:28-32).

That's correct. You are making a straw man argument here which is a complete waste of time. The only thing I have contended is that the way Paul and Peter used the phrase "the day of the Lord" in 1 Thess 5 and 2 Peter 3 had to do with the day (24 hour day) that Christ will return. It is you that is trying to say that the phrase "the day of the Lord" has to always refer to the same thing. If that's the case then explain why Peter indicates that Joel 2:28-32 was being fulfilled (or least starting to be) on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:16-21)?
....The Isaiah verses I quoted were about the end times where God dealing out His wrath to the world, at the end of the world... similar imagery of Jesus having His clothes soaked in blood after having tread the winepress of the wrath of God... same imagery given in Revelation 14 and 19. It's the same "day of the Lord" your referring to, the second coming, the heavens rolling up like a scroll, etc etc...
and in those verses it's given as both a day and a year...
... and you still insist on literal 24 hour day.
Exhausting. Read Isaiah rather than assume it's referring to something different.

Is there not already a great multitude of believer's souls in heaven? It seems like you are only able to think of people with bodies for some reason. The timing of what John saw in Revelation 7 is not indicated.

To assume that it is a scene before any of the trumpets and vials is nothing more than speculation. Revelation 7 is just a parenthetical section of the book like Revelation 12. Also, there are a number of parallel sections within the book, so it should not be read in such a way as if it was one, long chronological book. For example, what is described in Rev 12 clearly does not follow what is described in Rev 11 chronologically.
2 points.
#1. In revelation 6 after the 5th seal John described souls, in Revelation 7, they're not described as souls just people, I think the distinction, is that they have bodies, where before, they did not. Before, they were complaining, there was still suffering. After, nothing but praise.
#2. Leading into chapter 7 after the 6th seal in chapter 6, is the words "and after these things". Does Chapter 12 state that what he saw came after? No. That means a continuity break is possible, and in that case, it is a break in continuity.
I see 2 cycles of tribulation, rapture, wrath, and final judgement. Chapters 6-11 with 10 being definitely parenthetical, and chapters 12-20, with chapter 17 definitely being parenthetical. I'd almost be willing to listen to an argument that chapter 20 was not part of the second vision and could be a 3rd vision but...
Revelation 20:10 shows the beast and false prophet. People who were introduced in this second vision that John saw of end times events, and so it connect it to chapter 13, and logic would dictate, places it after chapter 19, when Jesus throws the beast and false prophet into the lake of fire.
Note the false prophet wasn't mentioned in the first vision, and the beast was only mentioned once. The beast is only formally introduced in the second vision.
So I do see recapitulation, but more continuity than you do.

That's the problem. It only sounds like that. It's all figurative language, unlike 2 Peter 3:3-13. Trust me, if i believed it was all literal I would believe like you do. But, the problem with interpreting it like you do is that it contradicts other scripture.
Only when you interpret "day of the Lord" literally.

Sure, it says that to me, too. But, that doesn't have anything to do with whether it's literal or figurative. Again, I give "the beast" as an example. The beast is mentioned 35 times. Seems like "the beast" must be something important to understand. But, it's not a literal beast with seven literal heads and seven literal horns.
When I believe there are 2 end time's resurrections, because I believe that the wrath of God happens after the rapture, I have no reason whatsoever, to see the 1000 years as anything other than literal, Because I know that there's a resurrection before the wrath, and another resurrection after the wrath before the final judgement, that gives time between resurrections, not to mention those resurrections have different characteristics. one is blessed and not under judgement where the second death is a possible outcome, the other is judgement and death is on the line.
Because there has to be some time between, why not go with what the bible says is the time between and believe it is 1000 years?
It doesn't have to be exactly 1000 years, but that's the only scripture to go off of that gives any length of time between the two resurrections, so sure, 1000 years. I'll believe the word of God on that until God says otherwise.

Yeah, he's waiting to deliver His kingdom to the Father when He comes at the end of the age as 1 Cor 15:20-24 and Matt 13:40-43 indicate.
and for the fullness of the gentiles.

I don't believe that people can't be saved during Satan's little season (which I equate to the time when iniquity will no longer be restrained), so in my view that time period could potentially have already started.

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

This verse is in regards to the Lord's desire for more people to repent and be saved. But, to me, it indicates that people can be saved right up until the day His keeps the promise of Christ's coming. But, during Satan's little season it seems that it will be more difficult to reach people with the truth because of the increase in deception and wickedness.
Perhaps that's why angels end up finishing the job for us.

But, you have Jesus descending from heaven and then going back to heaven for a period of time and then descending from heaven again. The problem with that is scripture never teaches that He would be descending form heaven twice in the future.
The bible also doesn't say that we'll be on the earth yet protected from the wrath of God (aside from the 144k) yet you seem to believe that.
Jesus will return, it doesn't mean He is forbidden from going back to Heaven after to get married and come back down with His bride on whatever sweet ride the horse is supposed to be if that's figurative. Isaiah 34 describes unicorns so.. who knows.
I do think because of Isaiah 63 though, that Jesus will have been participating in the wrath of God over however long it took, His clothes get stained red with blood, and.... Revelation 19, He rides down, and His clothes are also, already stained in blood.
So as far as I can interpret the second vision, Tribulation from the second half of chapter 12 through chapter 13.. Jesus coming in the clouds and the rapture in chapter 14... then Jesus is participating in the wrath of God, all the way through chapter 18.. then back to Heaven (or simultaneously in Heaven and on Earth, He is God) for the wedding supper of the lamb, and then back down to earth to finish off the false prophet and beast, His clothes already stained in blood.

As far as there being a series of events connected to Jesus returning, have I not said that several things happen on the day He comes back? You make so many straw man arguments and I can only assume that is because this is the first time in your life that you've debated an amillennialist. The difference between us isn't that you see several events happening in relation to His second coming and I don't. No. Instead, the difference is that you see those things happening over a prolonged period of time, but I don't. And, as I pointed out above, you see Him descending from heaven twice while I believe scripture clearly teaches that He will descend from heaven only once.
What's your proof texts that He is only allowed to come down once? Again all events after He comes in the cloud are the second coming just like all events after His birth are the first coming.
The 5th trumpet lasts 5 months.

Yet another straw man argument. Where did I say that some event involving an individual antichrist during the 70th week already happened? I didn't. Don't put words in my mouth. I don't interpret the 70th week the way you do, so I have no obligation to see the fulfillment of it the way you do in terms of it having anything to do with an individual antichrist confirming some future covenant for a week and all that.
Sin and transgression haven't ended yet.

I could write 10 more pages about why I interpret the 70 week prophecy the way I do, but I don't have the desire to do that right now. For now, I will just say that I believe Jesus is the prince/ruler who confirmed the new covenant long ago. It has nothing to do with an antichrist confirming some 7 year peace treaty. To insert a huge time gap into a prophecy that never gives any indication that the 70 weeks would not be consecutive just boggles my mind.
Messiah was cut off in the 69th week, leaving 1 week remaining.

That is how you interpret it, but I disagree. I see no reason to assume that it's speaking of his ability to deceive in general. You interpret it that way because you are what they call a hyper-literalist.

And here is your next straw man argument. I never said that no Gentiles at all believed the truth in OT times. Stop putting words in my mouth. I'm saying that very few did. In Noah's day, only 8 people did and they were not Jews. The people of Nineveh in Jonah's day were Gentiles and they repented and believed. Did you somehow think I wasn't aware of that as well?

But, what I'm saying is that a far lower percentage believed in those times than in NT times and that is a fact.

You just aren't understanding my point. Please tell me how you interpret theses passages:

Heb 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.

Eph 2:11 Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called “uncircumcised” by those who call themselves “the circumcision” (which is done in the body by human hands)— 12 remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

What do you think passages like these say about the impact Christ had on Satan and on the ability of the Gentiles to be set free from spiritual darkness?
If this is "deceive the nations no more" then color me unimpressed.

Where does scripture itself indicate to us that since the first coming involved events over more than 30 years then we should understand the events related to the second coming as happening over a significant period of time as well? If scripture itself does not make that comparison, then I won't, either.
Because the 5th trumpet lasts 5 months by itself.

Why would it take that long? If Jesus is coming back to take vengeance on "them that don't know God and don't obey the gospel of Christ" (2 Thess 1:7-10) then what would be the point of Him taking His time doing so? And how exactly would it take that much time when this time it will be by fire instead of water?
Because if it takes time, then people can come to repentence, I know you're going to quote that people DIDN'T come to repentence, but as we both agree, just like Gentiles could fear God in the OT despite most of the OT treating gentiles like they're totally in darkness and none know the Lord, most people won't repent, but some will repent, if you drag things out for some time, some of those people, those prepper types or people living in isolation types that are self sufficient who didn't take the mark out of necessity might just say as they see fire raining down from the sky "I have a bible here somewhere, maybe it's all real afterall". It is worth it to the Lord to drag things out if even 1 more sheep gets saved.

Please clarify something. You said, in relation to Noah and the flood, that the destruction lasted over a year. It rained for 40 days and 40 nights, so the earth was certainly already destroyed by the floodwaters by the time the 40th day came. So, I have to assume that you're not trying to say it took over a year to destroy the earth and all the wicked living on the earth.

So, I assume you're talking about how long it took the floodwaters to recede and all that? Does this mean you think God will just let the earth burn for over a year when He sends fire down upon it? Why would that be and what difference does that really even make?

As far as the length of time of the fire actually coming down upon the earth and killing all the unbelievers on the earth, I see no basis for thinking that would take very long at all (certainly not longer than it took for the flood to do so).

Genesis 7:11
Second month of the year, 17th day
40 days means over a month right there
and then
Genesis 7:24
the earth was flooded for 150 days after the 40 days and 40 nights. So this is already about 200 days.
Then it took awhile for it all to drain away, Noah was sending doves and ravens to see if the water was low enough to come down off the mountains, and so on, until finally
Genesis 8:14
2nd month, 27th day, the earth was dry, and Noah left the Ark
1 year, 10 days.

also, not everyone is destroyed by fire during the wrath of God, that's why there's other judgements than fire, and, the first doesn't REALLY come down and become all consuming until Revelation 20, and referencing the beast and false prophet being in the lake of fire, I take it to mean after armageddon and they've been being tortured for 1000 years.
Revelation 20 is where you have an instant destruction, with no events happening afterward, just fire comes down from heaven, satan gets thrown into hell, and then the resurrection and final judgement. So there's your 2 Peter 3:10, your Zephaniah, etc.
If it weren't for the book of Revelation I'd maybe believe in instantaneous destruction at the return like you do.
But Revelation exists for a reason. It wraps up most of the old testament day of the lord prophecies and the olivet discourse and shows them in concert. It makes sense out of scramble.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
7,394
2,496
MI
✟308,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The word soul is not mentioned once. In fact Paul seems to think both have bodies. Bodies come with Christ, bodies rise to meet Christ. Dead and alive in Christ both with bodies. Unless your body stays on the ground and just your soul rises into the air?
So, when it talks about those who have fallen asleep being with Jesus when He comes in 1 Thess 4:14, who do you think that refers to?
 
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
7,394
2,496
MI
✟308,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
How can there be a Mediator without a lawyer bringing accusations? He is our Mediator because Satan is constantly accusing the church on earth of wrong doing.
There are no accusations left for Satan to make against us because our sins have been washed away by the blood of Christ.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
7,394
2,496
MI
✟308,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
On the "unmitigated disaster"
what's a disaster about 1000 years where more people will get saved?
How many would get saved? As many as the sand on the seashore, which must be a huge number? Because that's how many unsaved it says there will be at the end of the thousand years.

Rev 20:7 When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—and to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. 9 They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God’s people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them.

How does it make sense that despite Christ being on the earth in all His glory for 1000 years, a number "like the sand on the seashore" rebel at the end? What would be the reason for that? Seems like seeing Christ in all His glory and seeing peace on the earth would be appealing to people and make them want to worship Him forever, not rebel against Him.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.