Is the thousand years of Revelation chapter 20 symbolic?

Spiritual Jew said:

Yes, it's your fault. You look at everything through a premil lens and you are never objective.

Answer me this. If the only ones who have part in the first resurrection are those who are killed by the beast during a short time in the future, then what about the rest of the dead in Christ from before that time and during that time who were not killed by the beast? They don't have part in the first resurrection? If not, then when are they resurrected?

If the first resurrection is speaking of a mass bodily resurrection that occurs at Christ's second coming, then does that mean 1 Thess 4:13-17 and 1 Cor 15:50-54 are speaking of a resurrection of only those who are killed in the future by the beast? If so, what about the rest of the dead in Christ? Why does Paul indicate in 1 Cor 15:50-54 that the bodies of all believers (including those who are resurrected) will be changed at the last trumpet when Christ returns if the bodies of only some believers will be resurrected and changed?

Also, what about those who are alive and remain when Christ returns? They won't die and will instead be changed. So, that means they won't have part in the first resurrection? If not, then how do they avoid the second death since Rev 20:6 indicates that the second death has no power over those who have part in the first resurrection?

Click to expand...

I cannot believe you cannot define the church any better than that. The church was dead on the Cross in Christ, was buried with Christ, and was raised with Christ. That happened in 30AD.

Revelation 20:4 happens no later than 2028AD. It could happen before that. There is that pesky 42 months of Satan, that should be prayed away, not wished away, or denied, claiming it is not literal. Denying a reality does not make it any less real. That is a personal opinion, and one's mind cannot make magic happen.

Do amil really want people to die and go to the lake of fire because the theology cannot make up it's mind? There is a seed generation chosen directly by God outside of the church in the 5+ years Jesus Christ the Lamb is on earth at the Second Coming. Minus the 42 months. Christ and Satan are not here ruling together. The years leading up to the 42 months is the final harvest of the sheep and wheat. These are NOT THE CHURCH!!! This is the seed generation resurrected in the first resurrection of the Lord's Day. Those beheaded in the 42 months also get to be part of that group. Yeah, beheading is something great to look forward to for all the post trib people who are going to get their heads cut off, because their theology recommends it. It is the end of Adam's flesh, not enduring the Boston marathon, folks.

Yes God is going to rebuild the nations for one last 1000 years, and that first generation can never die again, period. Now their offspring is a different story. They have incorruptible bodies, but can rebel. No rebellion is not in their nature nor natural. It is still a thought process, not a physical or spiritual condition. We are clueless how it works, and some seem jealous and deny God has a Will of His own.

So they make the excuse that Revelation is just symbols, and must admit the Holy Spirit is not capable of showing any one the truth about it, except if a modern private interpretation sounds good, then we will deny, deny, deny, 7 times, no one is right, but themselves.

Spiritual Jew said:

How does Luke 20:34-36 refute amil? And where did I deny the age to come? I did not. I'm saying that the passage teaches that in this temporal age people get married and die and in the eternal age to come people will not get married and will not die because they will be like the angels in that way.

Click to expand...

You added the word eternal. That is not in the originals. There is an age to come after the Second Coming. You deny the word age as alone by itself and add eternal where it does not belong. Now the NHNE may be eternal, but that is not a given either. The only thing eternal is the soul. God reserves the right to make perfect even more perfect. The life of the soul is eternal, not the measurement of time

The church no longer has sex period. The New Jerusalem is already full. But if you read Genesis 2, the sons of God did not have sex either. Explain to me why God took the female out of Adam. The sons of God can multiply, but not by sex. Eve had to have Cain and Abel before sin, because sin even changed the natural birth even further away from sex less offspring. Later in Genesis when the sons of God rebelled, they had sex with Methuselah's daughters somehow, perverting the natural order of things. I mean that is the blunt truth of marrying and given in marriage, for younger than 16 audience.

BABerean2 said:

Try to apply the accusation above to yourself on a regular basis.

Why do you ignore the fact that the Capital "C" "Church" is not found in the entire Book of Revelation?

Have you added the word "Church" to the Book of Revelation in order to make your Pretrib doctrine work?

Click to expand...

I keep telling you the church is not there. Remember pre trib? The church is gone period!! You claim i am wrong yet put the church to the very end of the battle of Armageddon. I removed the word church, not added it. Your symbolism is getting all topsy-turvy on you. You claim Revelation 20 is the current church age. Perhaps you should rethink your position and go back to a literal 1000 years without the church around, cause you clearly place the CHURCH in Revelation 20.

Timtofly said:

I keep telling you the church is not there. Remember pre trib? The church is gone period!! You claim i am wrong yet put the church to the very end of the battle of Armageddon.

Click to expand...

Thank God, we are not bound by what you are telling us.


The verse below is one of many that kills your Pretrib doctrine.
A person cannot be under the blood of the Lamb and not be a part of the New Covenant Church of Jesus Christ.

Rev 12:11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.


The Church is gathered at the 7th trumpet, which is the last trumpet in the Bible.
See Revelation 10:7, and Revelation 11:15-18.


.

BABerean2 said:

Maybe your biggest problem is the fact that you keep trying to put things in chronological order to make your doctrine work, even though you have admitted the Book of Revelation is not in chronological order.


And then, do you expect us to accept your logic?


Why does your "evidence" keep ignoring Revelation 9:1-2?


.

Click to expand...

When it comes to events involving prophecy in general, I see it making zero sense that chronology doesn't play a major role in anything. Revelation 20:4 and this part---and I saw the souls of them----which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands---is not compatible with Amil. I have yet to see an Amil show that it is. I'm not claiming Amils haven't tried to show that it is, I'm claiming that what they have shown thus far, none of it is remotely convincing, thus not the same as actually showing that it is compatible with Amil.

It is impossible that these particular saints in Revelation 20:4 are not martyred when the beast, where one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast, and a 2nd beast, the false prophet, are working together. Of course they are. That obviously means the beast needs to ascend out of the pit first, and another out of the earth, before anyone recorded in Revelation 20:4 for refusing to worship the beast, neither his image, neither receiving his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands, can even be martyred in this manner.


How could anyone possibly think that what is recorded in Revelation 13, that these events
don't transpire during a time after the beast has ascended out of the pit? Of course they do, and the fact they do, how can anyone then think that what is recorded in Revelation 20:4---which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands---does not involve a single thing recorded in Revelation 13? Where else in all of the Bible, both the OT and NT, do we read about another beast, another image of him, another mark of his, if this one recorded in Revelation 13 is not the same one responsible for the some of the martyrdom recorded in Revelation 20:4? And speaking of his mark, how can there even be this mark to begin with unless a 2nd beast first has them make an image to the first beast, who has the deadly wound that was healed? Yet, Amils are claiming I'm the one not being logical around here.

DavidPT said:

Revelation 20:4 and this part---and I saw the souls of them----which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands---is not compatible with Amil.

Click to expand...

It is perfectly compatible with Amil, if you look at the whole of scripture.
We understand the 1.000 years to include most the history of the Church.


Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.


Rev_6:9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:

You are ignoring the same text from an earlier chapter to make your doctrine work.

.

BABerean2 said:

It is perfectly compatible with Amil, if you look at the whole of scripture.
We understand the 1.000 years to include most the history of the Church.


Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.


Rev_6:9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:

You are ignoring the same text from an earlier chapter to make your doctrine work.

.

Click to expand...

You keep claiming I am ignoring things even though you are ignoring the fact that Revelation 20:4 is showing, thus proving, there are already saints who are martyred during the events recorded in Revelation 13 before the thousand years have even ended, therefore proving that the beast does not ascend out of the pit after the thousand years like Amils propose, but that the beast has already ascended out of the pit way before the thousand years ever end.

I propose that the beast ascends out of the pit before the thousand years even begin. That couldn't possibly be compatible with Amil, the fact Amil has the thousand years beginning 2000 years ago, and that this would place the time of the beast ascending out of the pit before John is even given these visions we see in Revelation, not to mention, John, at the time of these visions indicated that the beast is not, and chronologically, though I know Amils hate that I use chronology to try and determine things, when the beast ascends out of the pit, that this is post his visions, not prior to them instead.

BABerean2 said:

Thank God, we are not bound by what you are telling us.


The verse below is one of many that kills your Pretrib doctrine.
A person cannot be under the blood of the Lamb and not be a part of the New Covenant Church of Jesus Christ.

Rev 12:11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.


The Church is gathered at the 7th trumpet, which is the last trumpet in the Bible.
See Revelation 10:7, and Revelation 11:15-18.

Click to expand...

At which point? The 7th Trumpet starts when Satan is cast out of heaven, and ends 42 months later at the battle of Armageddon. Why no one accepts the Word of God that declares, THE DAYS OF THE SOUNDING, of the 7th Trumpet. Revelation 10:7

7 "on the contrary, in the days of the sound from the seventh angel when he sounds his shofar, the hidden plan of God will be brought to completion, the Good News as he proclaimed it to his servants the prophets.”

You keep posting your verse where the church is rewarded (in Paradise) and the living dead (outside of Christ) are destroyed. Yet you refuse the word DAYS. Why would God bring all of sheol out of their graves to destroy them again before the battle of Armageddon. They have already been destroyed in sheol for up to 6000 years. He is going to send the last of Adam's sinful race to sheol or Death at the final harvest. The final point is the battle of Armageddon. The 7th Trumpet does not take a 42 month hiatus, no it Blairs annoyingly the whole time reminding those earth destroyers they cannot win and will be destroyed. That is what Revelation 11:18 says,

"But now your rage has come,
the time for the dead to be judged,
the time for rewarding your servants the prophets
and your holy people,
those who stand in awe of your name,
both small and great.
It is also the time for destroying
those who destroy the earth.”

It is not a 1 second event. It is an 8 day, and 42 month event. God in long-suffering lets Satan have 42 months and he even gives some humans an out: death by beheading.

"And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for testifying about Yeshua and proclaiming the Word of God, also those who had not worshipped the beast or its image and had not received the mark on their foreheads and on their hands. They came to life and ruled with the Messiah for a thousand years."

These people are beheaded in Revelation 13. It is specified, they did not take the mark or worship Satan. Does the church avoid worship of Satan or the mark for 1990 years? How can this resurrection be at the Cross, cause that would mean the Jews prior to the Cross avoided taking the mark and worshipping Satan in the OT. The only time this can happen is the 42 months, and the resurrection of Revelation 20:4 can only be after the 42 months. That is your post trib resurrection. You get there by dying, not by being alive in Christ.

BTW, Revelation 12 is a history briefing. By the blood of the Lamb is Christ as our advocate. Only Christ can defeat Satan. Satan can only defeat humans who give Satan control. Why would a member in Christ give Satan any control? "They defeated" is symbolic, not literal. Why are you forcing it to be literal? Christ defeated Satan on the Cross, yes, we also in Christ, not by ourselves literally. The church does not have to be forced any where into Revelation to prove Amil or post trib, so why force it to prove your theology is correct? Both Amil and post trib are wrong, because the church is not literally nor symbolically in the final harvest or Satan's 42 months.

You use the "souls under the alter" as a point. That is the whole church waiting in Paradise for the Rapture in the 6th seal. Is only a part of the church covered by the alter? This is symbolic of the Blood of Christ. Unless you are under the alter, you are not in Christ, period!! Or still alive physically, your soul not yet in Paradise. Your soul is still symbolically under the alter. Explain to me why those who die naturally are complaining because they were killed? Those martyred have a reason to wait vengeance. Was John wrong in not being specific about dying of cancer or in pain? Was John wrong in not including those who die peacefully?

Fullness of the Gentiles said:

However, Amil cannot sufficiently explain how these saints who are seen living and reigning with Christ a thousand years, who were "beheaded for the witness of Jesus and for the Word of God, and who had not worshiped the beast nor his image, nor had received his mark on their foreheads, nor in their hands", were beheaded before:

* The beast's ascension out of the abyss.
* The image of the beast has been erected.
* Those who refuse to worship the beast, his image, or received his mark or the number of his name, are killed.

Which is what I understand your post to be saying, and which I fully agree with.

Click to expand...

Sure we can.

"souls" are found in heaven.

The texts below prove the Saints in Revelation 20 can span the entire age of the Church, which would include the Apostle Paul.


Rev_6:9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:


Rev_20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.


.

Spiritual Jew said:

And I believe using scripture to interpret scripture that the end of the age could not possibly have occurred in 70 AD.

Click to expand...

And I would disagree. Just like how we can compare scripture in Luke 21:20-21, Matthew 24:15-16, and Mark 13:14 and see that the abomination of desolation is related to the armies encompassing Jerusalem, by comparing scripture, we can see that "the sign that they are about to be fulfilled" = "the sign of your coming and end of the age".

Mark 13:4 “1.) Tell us, when will these things happen? 2.) And what will be the sign that they are about to be fulfilled?”

Matthew 24:3 While Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately. “Tell us,” they said, 1.) “when will these things happen, 2.) and what will be the sign of Your coming and of the end of the age?”

Luke 21:7 “Teacher,” they asked, 1.) “when will these things happen? 2.) And what will be the sign that they are about to take place?”

Spiritual Jew said:

Please tell me how this has already been fulfilled:

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.

Click to expand...

IMHO, it is upon the destruction of Jerusalem, that those in Christ began to heaven upon physical death.

Do you believe the dead in Christ are separated from the rest of the dead to go heaven upon death, or do you believe the all the dead go to the same place?

Spiritual Jew said:

At the end of the age there will no longer be marriage or death. Has that occurred yet?

Luke 20:34 Jesus replied, “The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. 35 But those who are considered worthy of taking part in the age to come and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, 36 and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God’s children, since they are children of the resurrection.

Click to expand...

IMHO, the age to come has arrived, with the initiation of the new covenant at Christ's first advent and the destruction the temple system in 66-70ad. Thus, those worthy to partake in going to heaven upon death no longer partake in marriage.

Spiritual Jew said:

No, that is not correct. Why would you think that? Clearly, Luke 21:20-21 is parallel to Matthew 24:15-16 and Mark 13:14. Only someone desperate to keep their doctrine afloat would think those are not speaking of the same event. I have seen some premils do just that.

Click to expand...

I absolutely agree. Although it seems contradictory that you would accuse premils of being desperate to keep their doctrine afloat in regards to Luke 21:20-21 being a different event than matthew 24:15-16 and Mark 13:14, especially when you turn around and do the exact same thing with the 2nd question of Matthew 24:3 compared to Mark 13:4 and Luke 21:7.

Again, by using the same interpretive method to interpret luke 21:20-21, matthew 24:15-16, and Mark 13:14 as the same event, I interpret question 2 of the olivet discourse as "the sign that they are about to be fulfilled" = "the sign of your coming and end of the age".

Mark 13:4 “1.) Tell us, when will these things happen? 2.) And what will be the sign that they are about to be fulfilled?”

Matthew 24:3 While Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately. “Tell us,” they said, 1.) “when will these things happen, 2.) and what will be the sign of Your coming and of the end of the age?”

Luke 21:7 “Teacher,” they asked, 1.) “when will these things happen? 2.) And what will be the sign that they are about to take place?”

Spiritual Jew said:

Because I believe Matthew's account contains the most detail about what Jesus said than the other 2 accounts. Note that the Olivet Discourse covers all of Matthew 24 and 25. Mark and Luke did not include any of the details found in Matthew 25. So, I believe Matthew is worded the way it is to show that it wasn't just the destruction of the temple that Jesus talked about in the Olivet Discourse. He also talked about His future second coming at the end of the age.

Click to expand...

So then the coming of the son of man in Matthew 24 is different that the coming of the son of man in matthew 25?

Spiritual Jew said:

All those passages were saying is that the last days began way back then. And they are still going on now. When they said things like "the coming of the Lord is at hand" it simply meant that it could occur at any time. They were not saying they knew when it would occur. Otherwise, Jesus saying that no one knew the day or hour of His coming would not be true.

Click to expand...

I agree the apostles were living in the last days, at the end of the age, as the they clearly stated they were, in their epistles.



But let's be clear, "at hand", does not mean at any time.

According to strong's : to make near, to come near

According to HELPS: 1448 eggízō (from 1451 /eggýs, "near") – properly, has drawn close (come near). 1448 (eggízō) occurs 14 times in the Greek perfect tense (indicative mood) in the NT which expresses "extreme closeness, immediate imminence – even a presence ('It is here') because the moment of this coming happened (i.e. at the beginning of Jesus' ministry)" (J. Schlosser)

While the apostles did not know the hour in which the son of man would come, they did not teach that he would come prior to certain events occurring, such as the falling away, the man of sin being revealed, the gospel being proclaimed throughout the whole world, and the destruction of Jerusalem.

Did the apostles generation experience wars and rumors of wars? Yes
Did the apostles generation experience famine and earthquakes? Yes
Did the apostles generation experience false prophets? Yes
Did the apostles generation experience the gospel going to the whole world? Yes
Did the apostles generation experience persecution? Yes
Did the apostles generation experience apostacy and lawlessness? Yes
Did the apostles generation live through the destruction of the temple? Yes


When the apostles were to see the signs as listed in the olivet discourse, then they would know that He is near, right at the door. James must have been seeing the events of the olivet discourse playing out in order for him to make such a statement:

Matthew 24:33 So also, when you see all these things, you will know that He is near, right at the door.

James 5:8-9 You, too, be patient and strengthen your hearts, because the Lord’s coming is near. Do not complain about one another, brothers, so that you will not be judged. Look, the Judge is standing at the door!

claninja said:

IMHO, it is upon the destruction of Jerusalem, that those in Christ began to heaven upon physical death.

Do you believe the dead in Christ are separated from the rest of the dead to go heaven upon death, or do you believe the all the dead go to the same place?

Click to expand...

Obviously, the dead in Christ go to heaven and the lost go to hell. I can't believe you would ask me that question.

But, I see Matthew 13:40-43 as describing a one time event, not an ongoing event. The same event as Matthew 25:31-46. A day of judgment is coming in the future when all people will be separated into 2 groups and all the saved will inherit eternal life on the new earth while all the lost will be cast into "everlasting fire" which is the lake of fire (Matt 25:41, Rev 20:15).

IMHO, the age to come has arrived, with the initiation of the new covenant at Christ's first advent and the destruction the temple system in 66-70ad. Thus, those worthy to partake in going to heaven upon death no longer partake in marriage.

Click to expand...

This is where I have a strong disagreement with you.

The new covenant was established immediately upon the death of Christ when He shed His blood as a sacrifice for "the sins of the whole world" (1 John 2:1-2). The veil of the temple was torn in two by God for a reason. It showed that the physical temple building had no use anymore because Christ made His "once for all" sacrifice which established the new covenant of salvation through faith in Christ and His death and resurrection.

I absolutely agree. Although it seems contradictory that you would accuse premils of being desperate to keep their doctrine afloat in regards to Luke 21:20-21 being a different event than matthew 24:15-16 and Mark 13:14, especially when you turn around and do the exact same thing with the 2nd question of Matthew 24:3 compared to Mark 13:4 and Luke 21:7.

Again, by using the same interpretive method to interpret luke 21:20-21, matthew 24:15-16, and Mark 13:14 as the same event, I interpret question 2 of the olivet discourse as "the sign that they are about to be fulfilled" = "the sign of your coming and end of the age".

Mark 13:4 “1.) Tell us, when will these things happen? 2.) And what will be the sign that they are about to be fulfilled?”

Matthew 24:3 While Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately. “Tell us,” they said, 1.) “when will these things happen, 2.) and what will be the sign of Your coming and of the end of the age?”

Luke 21:7 “Teacher,” they asked, 1.) “when will these things happen? 2.) And what will be the sign that they are about to take place?”

Click to expand...

Yes, I understand that you view it that way, but I obviously disagree and I've explained why.

So then the coming of the son of man in Matthew 24 is different that the coming of the son of man in matthew 25?

Click to expand...

No, definitely not. How did you think I was saying that?

I agree the apostles were living in the last days, at the end of the age, as the they clearly stated they were, in their epistles.

Click to expand...

There is a sense that the last days refers to all of the days between Christ's first coming and second coming. That doesn't mean His second coming had to arrive in their lifetimes. Jesus said no one knew the day or hour, so how can you think that His coming had to occur at any certain time?

But let's be clear, "at hand", does not mean at any time.

Click to expand...

Let's be clear that everything you're saying here is your opinion and not fact. Same for me. Don't lose sight of that. What was it that would be "at hand" when certain things happened? Remember, I see Jesus as speaking of 2 different events, not one. So, I'm not obligated to understand this the way you do. There were certain things that would happen that would show that the destruction of Jerusalem was at hand and they are also things that will happen in the future that will show that Christ's second coming is at hand.

According to strong's : to make near, to come near

According to HELPS: 1448 eggízō (from 1451 /eggýs, "near") – properly, has drawn close (come near). 1448 (eggízō) occurs 14 times in the Greek perfect tense (indicative mood) in the NT which expresses "extreme closeness, immediate imminence – even a presence ('It is here') because the moment of this coming happened (i.e. at the beginning of Jesus' ministry)" (J. Schlosser)

While the apostles did not know the hour in which the son of man would come, they did not teach that he would come prior to certain events occurring, such as the falling away, the man of sin being revealed, the gospel being proclaimed throughout the whole world, and the destruction of Jerusalem.

Did the apostles generation experience wars and rumors of wars? Yes
Did the apostles generation experience famine and earthquakes? Yes
Did the apostles generation experience false prophets? Yes
Did the apostles generation experience the gospel going to the whole world? Yes
Did the apostles generation experience persecution? Yes
Did the apostles generation experience apostacy and lawlessness? Yes
Did the apostles generation live through the destruction of the temple? Yes


When the apostles were to see the signs as listed in the olivet discourse, then they would know that He is near, right at the door. James must have been seeing the events of the olivet discourse playing out in order for him to make such a statement:

Matthew 24:33 So also, when you see all these things, you will know that He is near, right at the door.

James 5:8-9 You, too, be patient and strengthen your hearts, because the Lord’s coming is near. Do not complain about one another, brothers, so that you will not be judged. Look, the Judge is standing at the door!

Click to expand...

I understand why you believe what you do, but you're still missing some things that your interpretation can't explain, in my opinion. There are more questions to ask than the ones you listed.

Did the apostles generation experience the gathering of the elect from throughout the earth and throughout heaven (Mark 13:27)? No.

Did the apostles generation experience Jesus coming quickly like the lightning flashes from the east to the west? No.

Did the apostles generation experience the day of judgment when all people are gathered before Christ's throne with believers inheriting eternal life in the kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world while unbelievers were cast into "everlasting fire" for "eternal punishment"? No.

Did the apostles generation experience heaven and earth passing away (Matt 24:35)? No.

Fullness of the Gentiles said:

Amils don't believe that Rev 20 follows chronologically after:

* The beast's ascension out of the abyss.
* The image of the beast has been erected.
* Those who refuse to worship the beast, his image, or received his mark or the number of his name, are killed.

As you have correctly pointed out, the thing that marks the beginning of the "thousand years" is the fact that the passage begins with speaking about certain saints who had been "beheaded for the witness of Jesus and for the Word of God, and who had not worshiped the beast nor his image, nor had received his mark on their foreheads, nor in their hands.", and it is these who John saw as having ""lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years".

The passage also states that the above saints are blessed in that the second death has no power/authority over them.

The passage also states that the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.

Amil can explain the rest of the dead not living again until the thousand years are finished by associating these with all those who had refused Christ during this current age.

Amil, if it holds only to OSAS, can also explain how the second death has no power over those who have part in the first resurrection mentioned in Rev 20 (but only if Amil holds to OSAS, which is a fact well-spotted by you, which you also brought up in your OSAS thread).

However, Amil cannot sufficiently explain that these saints who are seen living and reigning with Christ a thousand years, were beheaded "for the witness of Jesus and for the Word of God", and because they had not worshiped the beast nor his image, nor had received his mark on their foreheads, nor in their hands even before:

* The beast's ascension out of the abyss.
* The image of the beast has been erected.
* Those who refuse to worship the beast, his image, or received his mark or the number of his name, are killed.

Which is what I understand your post to be saying, and which I fully agree with.

Click to expand...

That's exactly what I'm saying. Revelation 20:4 is key, between this Premil vs Amil debate, the fact the false prophet has to still be around when the 2nd coming occurs, in order to be taken alive then cast into the LOF during the 2nd coming. There is no way that the following martyrdom---which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands(Revelation 20:4)---does not happen without it involving the beast ascending out of the pit first, and another rising out of the earth. And since it seems unreasonable that the beast can ascend out of the pit during the thousand years, the only other option is, the beast ascends out of the pit before the thousand years even begin. That can only work with Premil. That cannot work with Amil.

BABerean2 said:

Sure we can.

"souls" are found in heaven.

The texts below prove the Saints in Revelation 20 can span the entire age of the Church, which would include the Apostle Paul.


Rev_6:9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:


Rev_20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.


.

Click to expand...

You all still don't get it. Those souls seen under the altar are not even meaning the saints who are martyred for not worshiping the beast, nor his image, etc,----the other ones, meaning these---their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were(Revelation 6:11)---are meaning them.

It's real simple.

until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled(Revelation 6:11)---equal these----which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands(Revelation 20:4)---not these instead---under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held(Revelation 6:9)


Are you or any other Amils going to argue that Revelation 6:9-11 doesn't show two entirely different groups of martyrs, where one group has already been martyred, and that the other group is yet to be martyred? Seriously, how can the martyrs in Revelation 20:4---which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands---not be meaning this other group of saints that are yet to be martyred? If it's not meaning them, who is it meaning, then?

DavidPT said:

You all still don't get it. Those souls seen under the altar are not even meaning the saints who are martyred for not worshiping the beast, nor his image, etc,----the other ones, meaning these---their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were(Revelation 6:11)---are meaning them.

It's real simple.

Click to expand...

We get it just fine.

It is real simple to make the Premill doctrine work, if you force the text of Revelation 20 not to include any of the same Martyrs found in Revelation 6.


Forget Revelation 9:1-2, and it will be real simple.

Forget Matthew 25:31-46, and it will be real simple.

Forget Revelation 11:15-18, and it will be real simple.

Forget 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10, and it will be real simple.

Forget 2 Timothy 4:1, and it will be real simple.


We totally understand how to get the Premill doctrine to work, because some of us used to believe it ourselves.

.

DavidPT said:

When it comes to events involving prophecy in general, I see it making zero sense that chronology doesn't play a major role in anything. Revelation 20:4 and this part---and I saw the souls of them----which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands---is not compatible with Amil. I have yet to see an Amil show that it is. I'm not claiming Amils haven't tried to show that it is, I'm claiming that what they have shown thus far, none of it is remotely convincing, thus not the same as actually showing that it is compatible with Amil.

Click to expand...

Nothing you have shown is remotely convincing, either, so the feeling is mutual.

It is impossible that these particular saints in Revelation 20:4 are not martyred when the beast, where one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast, and a 2nd beast, the false prophet, are working together. Of course they are. That obviously means the beast needs to ascend out of the pit first, and another out of the earth, before anyone recorded in Revelation 20:4 for refusing to worship the beast, neither his image, neither receiving his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands, can even be martyred in this manner.

Click to expand...

Revelation 13 says the beast comes out of the sea, not the pit. If you can show that the sea is the same thing as the pit, then you would have a point. Otherwise, you don't.

Look at Revelation 12. It shows the dragon, Satan, waging war against God's people, right? When? Right after he is kicked out of heaven which occurred when Christ ascended to heaven.

Why would the timing of the beast waging war with God's people using the power the dragon, Satan, gives it, not be the same timing as Revelation 12:17? There's no reason why not because in both cases the war against the saints is led by the dragon, Satan. They are clearly parallel passages.

How could anyone possibly think that what is recorded in Revelation 13, that these events
don't transpire during a time after the beast has ascended out of the pit?

Click to expand...

Because it says it happens when the beast comes out of THE SEA.

And speaking of his mark, how can there even be this mark to begin with unless a 2nd beast first has them make an image to the first beast, who has the deadly wound that was healed? Yet, Amils are claiming I'm the one not being logical around here.

Click to expand...

Is it logical to equate the pit with the sea? Why wouldn't Rev 13:1 just say that the beast comes out of the pit if that's what it was talking about? It refers to the beast coming out of the pit after the two witnesses finish their testimony in Rev 11:7 and it says the beast would come out of the pit at some point in Rev 17:8.

So, why would John have not specified that he saw the beast coming out of the pit in Rev 13:1 if that's what he was seeing? Instead, he saw the beast coming out of THE SEA. There has to be a reason why he said he saw the beast coming out of the sea rather than the pit.

And, again, Rev 12 depicts the dragon waging war with God's people right after being kicked out of heaven after Christ's ascension and Rev 13 depicts the beast waging war with God's people using the dragon's power and authority, so that tells me that the beast came out of the sea when the dragon, Satan, was kicked out of heaven long ago.

DavidPT said:

You all still don't get it. Those souls seen under the altar are not even meaning the saints who are martyred for not worshiping the beast, nor his image, etc,

Click to expand...

How do you know that? You're just saying that, but where is your evidence to support that?

---the other ones, meaning these---their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were(Revelation 6:11)---are meaning them.

Click to expand...

What is your basis for coming to this conclusion?

It's real simple.

until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled(Revelation 6:11)---equal these----which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands(Revelation 20:4)---not these instead---under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held(Revelation 6:9)

Click to expand...

I see you making claims here without showing how or why you are making them.

Are you or any other Amils going to argue that Revelation 6:9-11 doesn't show two entirely different groups of martyrs, where one group has already been martyred, and that the other group is yet to be martyred?

Click to expand...

Of course it does, but it doesn't say that some of them are martyred by the beast and some aren't. You are making that assumption based on...I don't know what. Just premil bias as far as I can tell.

Seriously, how can the martyrs in Revelation 20:4---which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands---not be meaning this other group of saints that are yet to be martyred? If it's not meaning them, who is it meaning, then?

Click to expand...

Why does it have to be that the martyrs of Rev 20:4 are just the ones that weren't martyred yet as depicted in Rev 6:11? Why can't it be depicting all of the martyrs portrayed in Rev 6:9 as well? All I can see is that you are assuming that without providing any evidence to back it up.

Remember, you already acknowledged before that there are more who have part in the first resurrection, as you understand it, than are depicted in Rev 20:4 because we know from passages like 1 Thess 4:13-17 and 1 Cor 15:50-54 that all of the dead in Christ will be resurrected when Christ returns. So, why are you willing to acknowledge that, but not willing to acknowledge that the slain souls John saw in Rev 6:9 were slain by the beast?

BABerean2 said:

We get it just fine.

It is real simple to make the Premill doctrine work, if you force the text of Revelation 20 not to include any of the same Martyrs found in Revelation 6.


Forget Revelation 9:1-2, and it will be real simple.

Forget Matthew 25:31-46, and it will be real simple.

Forget Revelation 11:15-18, and it will be real simple.

Forget 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10, and it will be real simple.

Forget 2 Timothy 4:1, and it will be real simple.


We totally understand how to get the Premill doctrine to work, because some of us used to believe it ourselves.

.

Click to expand...

What per the following might you not agree with and why?

their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were(Revelation 6:11)---are meaning these in the following--and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ(Revelation 12:17)---which are also meaning these in the following---as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed(Revelation 13:15)------which are also meaning these saints in the following---the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them(Daniel 7:21)----which are also meaning these in the following---which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads(Revelation 20:4)---which are then meaning these in the following---them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name(Revelation 15:2).

This should be plenty for now, in order to show who exactly--their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were(Revelation 6:11)---are meaning.

And something else I should maybe point out---that they should rest yet for a little season(Revelation 6:11)----this little season is meaning the following back on earth---and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months(Revelation 13:5)----which is also meaning the following---And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them(Revelation 13:7)----which is also meaning the following---the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them(Daniel 7:21)----which is also meaning the following---Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God(2 Thessalonians 2:4)----which is also meaning the following------For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened(Matthew 24:21-22).

BABerean2 said:

Sure we can.

"souls" are found in heaven.

The texts below prove the Saints in Revelation 20 can span the entire age of the Church, which would include the Apostle Paul.
Rev_6:9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:


Rev_20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

Click to expand...

Are you attempting to prove souls are not in sheol? The word soul does not guarantee the group nor the location. Soul does not mean saint.

Revelation 6 is prior to the Second Coming in the 6th seal.

Revelation 20 is after the battle of Armageddon and sin is eradicated.

Two different groups, two different times, and two different locations. The only thing in common: they are physically dead and sinful nature is no longer present.

BTW: the term soul is more ambiguous than the term 1000. 1000 is placed with years. The soul in both cases are associated with under the alter or beheaded. Where is the consistency in interpretation for Amil? We have time, location, and condition, yet we should be able to tell the difference between each application and not leave it up to guess work or private interpretation.

No matter how many verses you post with the word soul in them. You cannot take them out of context and prove your private point.

BABerean2 said:

We get it just fine.

It is real simple to make the Premill doctrine work, if you force the text of Revelation 20 not to include any of the same Martyrs found in Revelation 6.


Forget Revelation 9:1-2, and it will be real simple.

Forget Matthew 25:31-46, and it will be real simple.

Forget Revelation 11:15-18, and it will be real simple.

Forget 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10, and it will be real simple.

Forget 2 Timothy 4:1, and it will be real simple.


We totally understand how to get the Premill doctrine to work, because some of us used to believe it ourselves.

.

Click to expand...

Why are we forcing any thing. The souls in Revelation 6 are given robes of white, glorified in Paradise. Where in Revelation 20 does it say souls are given robes of white and glorified in Paradise. NO WHERE!!! So who is forcing Revelation 20 to say what Revelation 6 says?