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

DavidPT said:

[


The way I tend to reason things, this assuming there are a literal thousand years after the 2nd coming, Adam in this present age almost lived an entire literal thousand years, and that he was a mortal when this happened. If he as a mortal could almost fulfill a literal thousand years, why would it be unreasonable to think mortals still alive during the thousand years can't live the entire thousand years and then some? If the thousand years are meaning post the 2nd coming, obviously, mortals have to still be alive after the thousand years in order to fulfill satan's little season. Some or maybe even most Premils might argue that there are births taking place during the thousand years, and these, their offspring, are the main ones fulfilling satan's little season, therefore indicating that their biological parents don't even need to still be alive after the thousand years. As to me, I have never held that position myself, or if I had, I guess I forgot that I used to hold that position. Assuming the thousand years are post the 2nd coming, I see no reason to think procreation among mortals continue post the 2nd coming.

Click to expand...

Can you show me where scripture teaches that there will be mortal human beings living for up to 1000 years at some point in the future? And can you show me where scripture teaches that there will be no procreation during a future millennium?

Your millennium is starting to resemble the eternal new earth more and more where there is no more death and no marriage (which implies no procreation - Luke 20:34-36, Rev 21:4).

As to my entire post, including what you quoted above, some of that is not even my position, I'm basically attempting to debunk some of these conclusions Premils are coming to. Assuming a mortal enters the thousand years unsaved, then becomes saved during the millennium, there should be no reason that this mortal would need to die during the thousand years. And if this mortal who is saved during the thousand years is still alive when satan is loosed from the pit, but is not among those surrounding the camp of the saints, thus is not destroyed by fire out of heaven from God, how is it that they can get resurrected and be among the dead standing in front of God at the GWTJ, if they haven't even physically died yet?

Click to expand...

Obviously, people who are saved during a proposed future thousand years and have not died by the end of it would not need to be resurrected. But, again, where does scripture teach about this scenario? What happens to those people at that point (when Rev 20:9 occurs)?

And if they have never physically died at any point, how do they then manage to live for forever on the new earth while in a mortal state? Premils might argue, the book of life is opened during the GWTJ, they receive eternal life because their name is now found in the book of life---but how could that apply to these though, that they receive immortality during that judgment, if they are not even dead leading up to that judgment, thus not even resurrected in order to be at that judgment?

Click to expand...

Their bodies would clearly need to be "changed" to be immortal like Paul talks about in 1 Cor 15:50-54. Paul said "we will all be changed" at the last trumpet, so as far as I'm concerned that means no one else gets changed at any other time.

Spiritual Jew said:

That wasn't my point. I'm wondering why these mortal human beings who have just witnessed His power and majesty for a thousand years would be so stupid as to think they could defeat the King of kings and Lord of lords on the earth in all His glory? And why would they even want to?

Click to expand...

A lot of things that people do are irrational. They'll see someone with a lot of power, but God has sent strong delusion, one of those strong delusions might be, and you can see in our pop culture today that we're being trained for it, is alien invasion. Many people will not see these beings coming from the sky and causing destruction on earth, as being Jesus and angels, but as aliens. They won't think of them as supernatural, but just aliens with advanced technology. What do they do in the movies when the aliens invade earth? They fight back. So from their point of view, Earth just suffered an alien invasion, and they now conquered earth, and rule it under martial law, and it's like "invasion of the body snatchers" because the alien and their leader, look like humans but in their minds, they must really be some reptillian alien who is wearing human skin. There's all kinds of sci fi with that concept, we've been groomed to accept it. Just as all world religions have been groomed to accept antichrist.
Just like we are right now, being groomed to accept the mark of the beast. Credit cards, cryptocurrency, using your phone to pay (and keeping a phone that can track your location and habits 24/7), and that's progressed to biometric scans, just scan your hand to pay.

That can't be. I believe you need to read the text much more carefully.

Yes, Lazarus was bodily resurrected, but he later died again. So, this passage cannot possibly be referring to the resurrection of people like Lazarus because verse 24 makes it clear that it has to do with obtaining "eternal life". What John was talking about in John 5:24-25 is the same thing he was talking about here which has nothing to do with someone's bodily resurrection:

Click to expand...

Are we sure that Lazarus died a second time? Not that I think he's walking around today but, Hebrews 9:27. Those that Jesus resurrected in His ministry may have been taken bodily into heaven. There is precedent in that with Enoch and Elijah (which I know some people think the two witnesses are Moses and Elijah, but I favor Enoch because Moses has already died, and you'd be subjecting Moses to another death). The bible doesn't record a second death for either him or the girl that Jesus raised.

But, it's not about him having a total lack of deceiving the world. That's what you miss.

I know it is and it's obvious, but you continue to miss the point which is that he was bound from preventing the gospel from being preached in those areas and the gospel was preached there long ago before Islam became more popular. Look this up for yourself and you will see.

Yes, they were deceived by Islam to a large extent, but that doesn't mean the gospel wasn't ever preached there. You can't base your entire understanding of scripture solely based on what's happening today or what you think will happen in the future.

Click to expand...

That's what I mean by being unimpressed if that's the definition of "deceive the nations no more" if that's what we're seeing now, it makes one have to call into question all of God's promises, is eternal life really forever? Is there really going to be no sin and no death on the new earth? Because if God has spoken in hyperbole before, then how are we to expect him to speak literally about other things? Some people think that all the talk about hell being eternal must be just hyperbole. To be honest, sometimes it's amills doing it and they won't accept Revelation 20:10 as a prooftext that the lake of fire is eternal the way a premill will. A premill will see oh the beast and false prophet were thrown into the lake of fire 1000 years ago and they're still there, and they'll be there forever. an amill will see that not as proof of eternal torment, because they don't see them as having been there for 1000 years. They see Jesus throwing Satan in the lake of fire at basically the same time as the beast and the false prophet.

No, I did not use a preterist argument. I do not interpret that phrase the way they do. Can you not see that? I explained my understanding of it and how it's different than theirs. Did you somehow miss that?

Click to expand...

It's the same words as a preterist argument. I know you meant it differently, but I've had to debate with preterists and it gets annoying when they use that language to "prove" Jesus came in AD70. Hence the sigh emojis.

Why? That day won't arrive until God has given people all the chances they need to repent.

Click to expand...

Some people are just gonna need more than what is currently given. Children are conditioned to believe other things these days, people are raised up in other religions. Some muslims convert based on the bible alone, but most do not. Some jews convert based on the bible alone, but most do not. Jews in Jesus' life witnessed Him raise the dead and cure sickness, they still didn't believe. A roman soldier believed Jesus was the Son of God only after he witnessed the earthquake that happened when Jesus died, while the Jews who watched Him crucified did not. Sometimes it simply takes a miracle. Maybe that Roman centurion is saved and in heaven right now. I'd like to think he is.

As I pointed out before, the phrase "the day of the Lord" can refer to different things, which you don't seem to understand. The phrase was used to refer to what started on the day of Pentecost long ago (Acts 2:16-21 - fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32), so it meant the day of the Lord's salvation by the power of the Holy Spirit in that sense. But, it can also refer to the 24 hour day in which the destruction of the earth will occur, which is how Paul and Peter used it in 1 Thess 5 and 2 Peter 3.

Click to expand...

and Isaiah 34 and 63 have the wrath of God playing out as the day of the Lord's vengeance, and year of recompences.

We're just never going to agree on that. This idea of Him descending from heaven more than once to deliver wrath on His enemies makes no sense to me.

Click to expand...

a lot of things God has done, or will do, make no sense to us.

at least we both believe preterists are off their rockers.

DavidPT said:

Apparently, I don't understand it either, and I too am Premil.

Even though I too am Premil, I don't conclude the 2nd resurrection will include the saved and non saved, where I'm assuming, by believers you are meaning ones who end up being saved during the millennium. Let's suppose for a moment that that is true. In order for them to be resurrected means they obviously have to die first. Why would they need to die during the millennium if they became saved during the millennium? Why not just let them live an entire thousand years then test them once the millennium is over? As to that though, everyone that dies after the millennium, none of them could possibly still be saved, assuming some of them are saved during the millennium, the fact Revelation 20:9 shows fire coming down from God out of heaven, thus devouring anyone that dies after the millennium. And if none of these mortals allegedly saved during the millennium, die after the millennium via being devoured by fire from God out of heaven, why do they then need to be resurrected during the 2nd resurrection? Only dead people need to be resurrected, not someone still alive.

Click to expand...

Those who get saved after the first resurrection are not transformed into immortality yet. So if they missed the rapture, they must at some point die, and are among the "rest of the dead".
As to why I believe that, it is because there is a second resurrection, and the great white throne of judgement, and the book of life is still opened there. Those who had been raptured have already been resurrected into immortality, the second death, is not hanging over their heads at judgement. Only the bema seat, the medal ceremony, rewards.
Those who stand before the GWT that's a trial. if you're in the book of life your trial is obviously over very quickly.
But if not in the book of life, well, the other book detailing all their sins is used as evidence against them in judgement. But when you stand at the GWT, the second death, is a real possibility.
If we as believers stood there, how can the second death be a real possibility? We've already been given eternal life, we already know we weren't judged by that standard.
To not see some saved and some unsaved standing before the GWT, you have to believe that either those who were raptured still stand at the GWT and have death hanging over their heads as a judgement, and that nobody can be saved after the rapture.. or you have to believe that when someone is saved after the rapture they're immediately translated into glorified bodies. Which would be a little bit too good to be true. Obviously if after the rapture everyone who believed in Jesus transformed into glory and shot up into the sky to avoid the rest of the wrath of God, there'd be no faith involved, it'd be reproducible science.

There can still be faith involved if after the rapture, which the world will probably consider to be alien abduction, especially with the alien invasion happening afterward, people who believe it's Jesus and not aliens and believe in the gospel, and... everyone sees that they're still there and die.. well, there's still faith required, maybe they were wrong, and maybe it's just aliens.

Spiritual Jew said:

Your millennium is starting to resemble the eternal new earth more and more where there is no more death and no marriage (which implies no procreation - Luke 20:34-36, Rev 21:4).

Click to expand...

Unlike a lot of other Premils, and I'm not the only Premil that might conclude this BTW, I tend to believe the thousand years are the first thousand years of the NHNE, where the NHNE continues forever, of course. There are numerous things that lead me to conclude that, and one thing in particular would be the following.

Isaiah 66:15 For, behold, the LORD will come with fire, and with his chariots like a whirlwind, to render his anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire.
16 For by fire and by his sword will the LORD plead with all flesh: and the slain of the LORD shall be many.
17 They that sanctify themselves, and purify themselves in the gardens behind one tree in the midst, eating swine's flesh, and the abomination, and the mouse, shall be consumed together, saith the LORD.

This I tend to take involving the 2nd coming in the end of this age.

Isaiah 66:18 For I know their works and their thoughts: it shall come, that I will gather all nations and tongues; and they shall come, and see my glory.
19 And I will set a sign among them, and I will send those that escape of them unto the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, and Lud, that draw the bow, to Tubal, and Javan, to the isles afar off, that have not heard my fame, neither have seen my glory; and they shall declare my glory among the Gentiles.
20 And they shall bring all your brethren for an offering unto the LORD out of all nations upon horses, and in chariots, and in litters, and upon mules, and upon swift beasts, to my holy mountain Jerusalem, saith the LORD, as the children of Israel bring an offering in a clean vessel into the house of the LORD.
21 And I will also take of them for priests and for Levites, saith the LORD.

This I'm not entirely certain what to do with it, in light of how I'm interpreting Isaiah 66:15-17.

Isaiah 66:22 For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain.
23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.
24 And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.

As to this this though, I take verse 24 to be meaning the ones slain in verse 16 to be meaning the ones these others go forth to look upon, and that they appear to be doing this during the time of the NHNE. Which then brings up the following question, the fact many take the following to literally mean what it says.

Isaiah 65:17 For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.

Obviously, Isaiah 66:15-17 would be meaning a time during the former heavens and earth. And this verse indicates, that as of this NHNE, the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind. How do we then square that if we take that to literally mean what it says, with that of Isaiah 66:24, where that seems to be happening during this same NHNE mentioned in Isaiah 65:17? Doesn't sound like to me, as of the NHNE, the former literally shall not be remembered, nor literally come into mind, if they are seen doing these things in Isaiah 66:24 during the NHNE.

What I have decided to conclude is this. The reason they go forth like that in Isaiah 66:24, is because this serves as a warning for these, that if you too rebel against me after I have spared you from among the nations that came against Jerusalem, the same thing will happen to you as well.

What one needs to ask themselves at this point, how could something like this possibly happen during the NHNE, the eternal age? If we factor in a thousand years here, and factor in satan's little season after this thousand years, this explains exactly how this could happen.

Jamdoc said:

Are we sure that Lazarus died a second time? Not that I think he's walking around today but, Hebrews 9:27.

Click to expand...

Your hyper-literalness is causing problems again. Hebrews 9:27 is a general rule that is true for the vast majority of people. That there are a few exceptions of people dying twice doesn't mean the verse isn't true. If Jesus came today, that would mean you and I wouldn't ever die (1 Cor 15:50-54), so would that mean Hebrews 9:27 isn't true?

Those that Jesus resurrected in His ministry may have been taken bodily into heaven. There is precedent in that with Enoch and Elijah (which I know some people think the two witnesses are Moses and Elijah, but I favor Enoch because Moses has already died, and you'd be subjecting Moses to another death). The bible doesn't record a second death for either him or the girl that Jesus raised.

Click to expand...

Just because it doesn't record it doesn't mean they didn't die. Where does it indicate that any of them were resurrected unto bodily immortality?

Don't you understand that if Jesus was not the first person to be resurrected unto bodily immortality then that would take away the significance of His resurrection? It is because He died and rose again unto bodily immortality that He conquered death that day. How could anyone else take that honor before Him?

If Christ's resurrection was not the first unto bodily immortality then what do you make of this passages:

1 Cor 15:20 But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 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.

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

Revelation 1:5 and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth.

If Jesus wasn't the first to be resurrected unto bodily immortality then in what other way was His resurrection the first?

That's what I mean by being unimpressed if that's the definition of "deceive the nations no more" if that's what we're seeing now, it makes one have to call into question all of God's promises, is eternal life really forever? Is there really going to be no sin and no death on the new earth? Because if God has spoken in hyperbole before, then how are we to expect him to speak literally about other things?

Click to expand...

You don't think God ever speaks in hyperbole? Of course, we know Jesus is God. Look at a couple of the things He said:

Matthew 19:23 And Jesus said to His disciples, “Truly I say to you, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24 Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” 25 When the disciples heard this, they were very astonished and said, “Then who can be saved?” 26 And looking at them Jesus said to them, “With people this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

This is a clear case of Jesus, who is God, using hyperbole. It is literally impossible, from a human standpoint, for a camel to go through the eye of a needle. That is hyperbole. But "with God all things are possible".

Here is one more:

Matthew 5:29 If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.

Was Jesus really saying here that we should literally gouge out our right eye if it causes us to stumble or cut off our right hand if it causes us to stumble? If you think so, then He would expect all of us to have one eye and one hand. But, no, He was using hyperbole to illustrate how seriously He took sin.

Some people think that all the talk about hell being eternal must be just hyperbole. To be honest, sometimes it's amills doing it and they won't accept Revelation 20:10 as a prooftext that the lake of fire is eternal the way a premill will.

Click to expand...

What now? Where are you getting this from? Amil doctrine doesn't teach that the lake of fire isn't eternal. I have no idea where you came up with that.

A premill will see oh the beast and false prophet were thrown into the lake of fire 1000 years ago and they're still there, and they'll be there forever. an amill will see that not as proof of eternal torment, because they don't see them as having been there for 1000 years.

Click to expand...

What are you talking about? This shows that you still don't understand amill.

They see Jesus throwing Satan in the lake of fire at basically the same time as the beast and the false prophet.

Click to expand...

So what? What difference does it make when they are thrown in? Once they are then they'll be there forever. Please slow down and think before you post. Honestly, you're making a fool of yourself here with these false accusations toward amils.

It's the same words as a preterist argument. I know you meant it differently, but I've had to debate with preterists and it gets annoying when they use that language to "prove" Jesus came in AD70. Hence the sigh emojis.

Click to expand...

Why take your frustration with them out on me? Since that isn't the way I'm using the verse, you shouldn't lump me in with them.

at least we both believe preterists are off their rockers.

Click to expand...

Yeah, at least we agree on a few things when it comes to end times doctrine.

Spiritual Jew said:

Your hyper-literalness is causing problems again. Hebrews 9:27 is a general rule that is true for the vast majority of people. That there are a few exceptions of people dying twice doesn't mean the verse isn't true. If Jesus came today, that would mean you and I wouldn't ever die (1 Cor 15:50-54), so would that mean Hebrews 9:27 isn't true?

Just because it doesn't record it doesn't mean they didn't die. Where does it indicate that any of them were resurrected unto bodily immortality?

Don't you understand that if Jesus was not the first person to be resurrected unto bodily immortality then that would take away the significance of His resurrection? It is because He died and rose again unto bodily immortality that He conquered death that day. How could anyone else take that honor before Him?

If Jesus wasn't the first to be resurrected unto bodily immortality then in what other way was His resurrection the first?

Click to expand...

First to be resurrected into a glorified body. Lazarus and the girl Jesus resurrected were not in glorified bodies yet. But natural bodies have been taken into heaven in Enoch and Elijah.
If Enoch and Elijah were in glorified bodies when they were taken, then that takes THAT honor away from Christ.
But being that they're in heaven, do you think Enoch and Elijah died in heaven?

What now? Where are you getting this from? Amil doctrine doesn't teach that the lake of fire isn't eternal. I have no idea where you came up with that.

What are you talking about? This shows that you still don't understand amill.
So what? What difference does it make when they are thrown in? Once they are then they'll be there forever. Please slow down and think before you post. Honestly, you're making a fool of yourself here with these false accusations toward amils.

Click to expand...

Not you, another amill, don't remember who exactly, wouldn't take Revelation 20:10 as proof of eternal torment because to him, they had only just been thrown in, not 1000 years before. For premil, they take that as the False Prophet and Beast have been in hell for 1000 years since they were thrown in, which lends more to the idea that it is an ongoing torment, rather than just being deleted from existence when thrown in the lake of fire. An annihilationist amill.
If you can show that they endured torment for 1000 years, they can't be just instantly deleted from existence, make sense?

Why take your frustration with them out on me? Since that isn't the way I'm using the verse, you shouldn't lump me in with them.

Click to expand...

It's not taking out my frustration on you, it's sighing over that same language, even though it's being used in a different way. Sorry that you took it to be that way, that wasn't my intent. I don't really know how to put it but as "you should try arguing with a preterist sometime about the meaning of 'behold I come quickly'"

DavidPT said:

Unlike a lot of other Premils, and I'm not the only Premil that might conclude this BTW, I tend to believe the thousand years are the first thousand years of the NHNE, where the NHNE continues forever, of course.

Click to expand...

First of all, I highly recommend that you read post #24 in this thread if you haven't already.

Can you be the first who believes this way to clearly explain how your understanding of Isaiah 65-66 can be reconciled with this:

Revelation 21:1 Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,” for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. 2 I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. 3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. 4 ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”

If the new heavens and new earth already existed at this point then why did John say "the first heaven and first earth had passed away"? Why did he give the impression that the new heaven and new earth he saw was the result of the first heaven and first earth passing away (just like 2 Peter 3:10-13) if the first heaven and first earth had actually already passed away 1000+ years earlier?

Why would he even mention the first heaven and first earth there if the new heaven and new earth were already ushered in 1000+ years before that?

Also, why would he imply that at that point there would be no more mourning or crying if mourning and crying already ended 1000+ years before that?

Isaiah 65:17 See, I will create new heavens and a new earth. The former things will not be remembered,
nor will they come to mind. 18 But be glad and rejoice forever in what I will create, for I will create Jerusalem to be a delight and its people a joy. 19 I will rejoice over Jerusalem and take delight in my people; the sound of weeping and of crying will be heard in it no more.

There are numerous things that lead me to conclude that, and one thing in particular would be the following.

Isaiah 66:15 For, behold, the LORD will come with fire, and with his chariots like a whirlwind, to render his anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire.
16 For by fire and by his sword will the LORD plead with all flesh: and the slain of the LORD shall be many.
17 They that sanctify themselves, and purify themselves in the gardens behind one tree in the midst, eating swine's flesh, and the abomination, and the mouse, shall be consumed together, saith the LORD.

This I tend to take involving the 2nd coming in the end of this age.

Isaiah 66:18 For I know their works and their thoughts: it shall come, that I will gather all nations and tongues; and they shall come, and see my glory.
19 And I will set a sign among them, and I will send those that escape of them unto the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, and Lud, that draw the bow, to Tubal, and Javan, to the isles afar off, that have not heard my fame, neither have seen my glory; and they shall declare my glory among the Gentiles.
20 And they shall bring all your brethren for an offering unto the LORD out of all nations upon horses, and in chariots, and in litters, and upon mules, and upon swift beasts, to my holy mountain Jerusalem, saith the LORD, as the children of Israel bring an offering in a clean vessel into the house of the LORD.
21 And I will also take of them for priests and for Levites, saith the LORD.

This I'm not entirely certain what to do with it, in light of how I'm interpreting Isaiah 66:15-17.

Isaiah 66:22 For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain.
23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.
24 And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.

As to this this though, I take verse 24 to be meaning the ones slain in verse 16 to be meaning the ones these others go forth to look upon, and that they appear to be doing this during the time of the NHNE. Which then brings up the following question, the fact many take the following to literally mean what it says.

Isaiah 65:17 For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.

Obviously, Isaiah 66:15-17 would be meaning a time during the former heavens and earth. And this verse indicates, that as of this NHNE, the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind. How do we then square that if we take that to literally mean what it says, with that of Isaiah 66:24, where that seems to be happening during this same NHNE mentioned in Isaiah 65:17? Doesn't sound like to me, as of the NHNE, the former literally shall not be remembered, nor literally come into mind, if they are seen doing these things in Isaiah 66:24 during the NHNE.

Click to expand...

That should tell you that it should not be all taken literally because doing so causes contradictions, including contradicting Revelation 21:1-4.

What I have decided to conclude is this. The reason they go forth like that in Isaiah 66:24, is because this serves as a warning for these, that if you too rebel against me after I have spared you from among the nations that came against Jerusalem, the same thing will happen to you as well.

What one needs to ask themselves at this point, how could something like this possibly happen during the NHNE, the eternal age? If we factor in a thousand years here, and factor in satan's little season after this thousand years, this explains exactly how this could happen.

Click to expand...

It's not meant to be taken literally. Isaiah 66:24 contains figurative language which you always have trouble recognizing. It's a figurative way of saying that God's enemies will never live again. And the reason is because they have suffered the second death, which is what results from being cast into the lake of fire (Rev 20:14-15).

Jamdoc said:

It's not taking out my frustration on you, it's sighing over that same language, even though it's being used in a different way. Sorry that you took it to be that way, that wasn't my intent. I don't really know how to put it but as "you should try arguing with a preterist sometime about the meaning of 'behold I come quickly'"

Click to expand...

I have many times. I understand your frustration.

Spiritual Jew said:

Show me where Him mediating has anything to do with Him and Satan both standing before God with Jesus mediating while Satan accuses then I will see your point.

Instead, what I see in Revelation 12 is a description of Christ's ascension to heaven immediately followed by a war in heaven between Michael and his angels and Satan and his angels which ended up with Satan being cast out of heaven long ago. So, tell me how Satan can be in heaven accusing us still when he was cast out long ago?

Click to expand...

“Now have come God’s victory, power and kingship, and the authority of his Messiah;
because the Accuser of our brothers,
who accuses them day and night before God,
has been thrown out!

It says Satan accuses our brothers, fellow Christians, day and night.

BABerean2 said:

Were all of the Israelites "partially" hardened, or were part hardened, and part were not hardened? The answer is found in the "remnant" of Romans 11:5.

Based on Luke 21:24-28, the times of the Gentiles comes to fulness at the Second Coming of Christ.


Based on John 19:37and Acts chapter 2, Zechariah 12:10 was fulfilled at Calvary and on the Day of Pentecost.

Joh 19:33 But when they came to Jesus and saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs.
Joh 19:34 But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out.
Joh 19:35 And he who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you may believe.
Joh 19:36 For these things were done that the Scripture should be fulfilled, "NOT ONE OF HIS BONES SHALL BE BROKEN."
Joh 19:37 And again another Scripture says, "THEY SHALL LOOK ON HIM WHOM THEY PIERCED."


There is no Plan B of salvation for Orthodox Jews found in the Bible.

Your claims above are often promoted by Dispensationalists, and are proven wrong by scripture.

.

Click to expand...

So when God made the nation of Israel, a new nation and gave them the promise that they would rule the nations of the world, was God lying, or was it that sinful man had the power to stop God fulfilling His purpose for that nation?

sovereigngrace said:

First of all, I was not trying to be rude. I am sorry if it came across like that. I was simply highlighting the error and contradictions involved in Dispensationalism. It is a man-centered theology that misrepresens God's Word. You are trying to turn that around and rewrite what Dispensationalism actually is and teaches. This is disingenuous. In doing so, you are misrepresenting what Amil is and teaches. That is is wrong. I feel you are wanting Dispensationalism to be what Amil is (which is Christ-centered and new covenant based) but it is not or ever can be. It is obsessed with with Israel and the old covenant. It has also zero support in the NT.

As of yet, you have totally ignored every point I previously made. I feel you have to to sustain your beliefs.

Click to expand...

Glad you didn`t mean to be rude. Thank you. I am only going on what I was taught and looked into and believe. I know I do see things differently than the usual taught premill. However thus said I do have valid concerns with what you are presenting.

Fair enough I realise that `the sacrifices` are difficult for you to understand. Think about it. When God instituted sacrifices they never took away any sin, they were a `lesson` in what was to come. I have just finished a new blog series which I will post soon on the Tabernacle and how it reveals Christ`s ministries. You would be aware of all that. So it is in the millennium that people on earth will need `lessons` in what it meant for Christ to die and pay for their sins.

You are trying to make those people like us, the Body of Christ with all our special privileges.

God made the nation of Israel with the full understanding that they as a nation could never do what He expected them to do. And we know that it is only through Christ that they will be able to rule the other nations of the world.

sovereigngrace said:

This is more avoidance.

Click to expand...

No I was just using the opportunity to post a very good diagram of the trib.

sovereigngrace said:

Premil teaches that there will be righteous converts still in their fallen mortal bodies during their millennium who are distinguished from the immortals. They also argue many of these will be converted in their so-called future millennium. Surely Premils are going to have to create another catching away (“rapture”) for the "mortal believers" that get saved during their millennium in order to allow them to enter the glorified state and eternal bliss? After all, where does all the mortal saints in the millennium go when the earth flees away (Revelation 20:11) or passes away (Revelation 21:1-5)? Surely, they are not going to pass away when the earth passes away?

So, when do all the millennial mortal converts get glorified? Please give Scripture. Surely there needs to be another glorification of the "the mortal saints" after Satan's little season to make them fit and prepared for the eternal state? After all, “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption” (1 Corinthians 15:50).

Surely there needs to be another “day of redemption” after the “day of redemption” at the second coming (Luke 21:28, Romans 8:19-23 and Ephesians 1:13-14) in order to redeem the bodies of the millennial mortals that put their trust in Christ?

Click to expand...

Hi SG,

I have returned to your OP. I am a premill, but do not believe all that some others do, or the generally accepted view. Still I have a valid reason for discussing.

I agree that the Body of Christ in their glorified bodies DO NOT return to earth and rule from there. That is a great error and brings the Lordship of Christ to an earthly level, whereas He is ruling above all in this age and the one to come. (Eph. 1: 21)

Those who turn to God in the millennium are not `Christians, part of the Body, ` but believers in God. The prophet Micah tells us how many will go up to Jerusalem to learn the ways of the God of Jacob. They don`t have a personal relationship with Christ, as that purpose has gone when the Body becomes mature, (by the Holy Spirit) and taken to its eternal setting in glory. Those on the earth can become believers in the God of Jacob and learn of His ways. They have an earthly inheritance.

So when they die they will be in the grave till the Great White Throne and then with all those in the graves they will come forth to be judged on what they did.

`And they were judged, each one according to his works.` (Rev. 20: 13) That would be their motives.

Those in the book of life will go onto the new earth and be the nations of the saved. (Rev. 21: 24)

We need to remember that the Body of Christ is not judged (just given rewards) because the Lord has taken our judgments. Also the just men, (righteous) OT saints are not judged either as they are in the General Assembly awaiting the city which will come down out of heaven.

So all God`s people/family, however there are different inheritances for different groups. Christ made different realms and He will have His rulership under Him in each realm.

sovereigngrace said:

Where does it teach this in Revelation 20 or anywhere else in the NT?



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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Click to expand...

The prophet Ezekiel reveals this `lesson.` eg. `And they shall teach my people the difference between the holy and the unholy. and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean. In controversy they shall stand as judges and judge according to my judgments. They shall keep my laws and my statutes in all my appointed meetings and they shall hallow my Sabbaths....

And on the day that he (priest goes to the sanctuary to minister in the sanctuary, he must offer his sin offering in the inner court, says the Lord God. It shall be, in regard to their inheritance, that I am their inheritance....` (Ez. 44: 23, & 24, 27 & 28)

As to the Body of Christ being grafted in to Israel, God`s word does not say that. The root is holy, and nourishes the branches. Israel is certainly never holy and can never nourish us only Christ is holy and can nourish us.

`...the root is holy.......grafted in among them, and with them become a partaker of the root and fatness of the olive tree.` (Rom. 11: 16 & 17)

sovereigngrace said:

There is nothing more unbiblical in this new covenant period than trying to divide up the people of God on the grounds of ethnicity. That is spiritual apartheid. It runs completely to the New Testament plan of God to bring Jew and Gentile together equally in Christ. The whole mission of Jesus Christ in introducing the new covenant was to unite Jew and Gentile in salvation. Nothing could be clearer in the New Testament!

The New Testament makes clear; there is only one elect people. There is only one good olive tree, not two; one body, not two; one bride, not two; one spiritual temple, not two; one people of God, not two; one household of faith, not two; one fold, not two; one man, not “twain,” and one elect of God throughout time.

Click to expand...

It is not division on ethnicity, but for God purposes through Christ.

Christ is the new covenant for all people not just us. I hear you making US the centre of God`s purposes.

Actually the word `bride` is used for `a time purpose,` and for an eternal purpose. (Rev. 19: 9, 21: 2)
The Body of Christ is NEVER called the bride.

Spiritual Jew said:

But, don't all premils believe that believers can die during the thousand years? If so, then they would be the ones that are resurrected in his scenario (with which, I, of course, disagree).

This is interesting. I didn't realize before that premils (or at least you) don't believe that any people who get saved during a future millennium will die. But, aren't they mortal? Do you have any scripture to back up what you're saying here?

I agree. Premils should seriously reconsider how they understand the nature of a future millennium as it relates to what will happen to believers during that time, Would they die or not? If so, when are they resurrected? If they don't die (even the ones who are around the whole thousand years) then how can they be considered mortal?

Click to expand...

The ones resurrected have incorruptible bodies. They procreate offspring with incorruptible bodies. It is not the sinful flesh that desires sin. It is the soul, mind, that thinks like Satan. It is the knowledge part that Eve thought she was missing out on. What is the need for the knowledge of good and evil? Can you comprehend never knowing evil? Rebellion is delta with by literal death. The point is why do we want to rebel against good? If evil never happens how can humans still not be satisfied? Eve was not satisfied and nothing evil ever happened to her. Yet for some reason she wanted to experience evil, even though she did not know what is was. Now withholding rain from a nation, is technically not evil. It is a discomfort and leads to having to deal with a national emergency: to obtain food from a neighboring nation. All know that if they rebel, rain will be withheld. Why test Jesus Christ to see if it will actually happen? That is philosophical logic. God's Law just states, disobey and X will happen. But it is human philosophy that will cause humans to test the Law, even though the consequences will be known and immediate.

The first generation should know better, if they remember anything about the former life of sin or if it comes out in the judgment, they do not get a pass to be disobedient. They may not be capable of disobedience? But each generation will get farther removed from the life of the first generation. This is the point; where the edges of the earth is, is where rebellion comes from. Each generation will be further away geographically from Jerusalem. If Christ is in charge, the way life is lived will be different either way. But saying sin and death is genetically passed down in our sinful flesh is not a point of resurrection, judgment and being given new life. Life that can only fit incorruptible bodies, and offspring with incorruptible bodies. No one will be left alive in their Adam offspring bodies in sinful flesh after the battle of Armageddon. The 144k will be sealed. They may be changed into incorruptible bodies at the point of being sealed, but they remain on earth carrying out the harvest. How that happens can only be death of this body from Adam. That is why the church is not left on earth in a glorified state. All humanity will die, and some even beheaded during Satan's 42 months. But after the 7 vials, any one still alive has to be killed at the battle of Armageddon.

Still not what being mortal and immortal is. Mortal is not having God's complete image. Immortality is the complete glorified image. A robe of bright light, our spirit (The God part of us) is light. Immortality is what we are in the New Jerusalem. Those in the Millennium will keep on living in incorruptible bodies on the new earth. They pass from one reality to the next in the blink of an eye. They do not stand to be judged. They never disobeyed or died. Neither were they in Adam's sinful body of flesh and blood. They are not immortals though. And the church is not living on the earth either. That is the difference between the resurrection in Revelation 20:4 and the resurrection of the Cross for the church. The one nobody accepts as being bodily for the OT saints who just came out of sheol heading for Paradise and an incorruptible body.

Jesus said in Paradise though this incorruptible body will be like the angels and will not procreate. Procreation is only an earthly phenomenon to fill the earth with humanity. The church is not glorified yet, because the 5th seal indicates the process has not happened until immediately before the 6th seal is opened. Procreation will not be a thing after glorification either.

But the Cross resurrection is ongoing nonstop since the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. When the Second Coming happens at the 6th seal, that is it. The living, at that second, in Christ, will be made complete, and the church will be complete and presented to God in the presence of the whole world. That is why all humanity will cry out, "Woe is me, who can save us from God’s wrath?". Jesus gives the answer in Revelation 16:15
(“Look! I am coming like a thief! How blessed are those who stay alert and keep their clothes clean, so that they won’t be walking naked and be publicly put to shame!”)

Some of them at the 6th seal will no doubt remember that warning to their question, during the 7 vials. The answer, will be, nobody.

Thus the first resurrection in Revelation 20:4 can only be after the earth is wiped clean from the consequences of Adam's disobedience in the Garden. Those resurrected can only live in a new evironmemt other than the one 2 days prior when Satan and his followers were celebrating the death of the 2 witnesses and receiving the 7 vials of God’s wrath.