Revelation 20:9 - Are we nearly there?

DavidPT said:

since these 2 beasts couldn't possibly still be alive 2000 years later when Christ returns.

Click to expand...

Exactly. I don't claim to know everything about end time prophecy and I am always studying, but you can't get around these facts. And the scriptures speak for themselves about Christ's return and the beast and the FP being thrown into the lake of fire at that time So any verses about them are future, not past.

grafted branch said:

There is no confusion because the first resurrection has already occurred.

If the first resurrection is spiritual in nature then the Amil view is correct about the millennium.

If the first resurrection is literal then it occurred in Matthew 27:52-53.

So either we are in the millennium or we are post the millennium.

Click to expand...

The first Resurrection was Jesus.
Those Saints who came out of their graves then, have either died again or maybe they are the ones on thrones in Revelation 20:4a.

In no way are we in the Millennium and its impossible for it to have passed. The AMill idea is wrong and a contradiction of much scripture, as well as historical evidence.

keras said:

The first Resurrection was Jesus.
Those Saints who came out of their graves then, have either died again or maybe they are the ones on thrones in Revelation 20:4a.

In no way are we in the Millennium and its impossible for it to have passed. The AMill idea is wrong and a contradiction of much scripture, as well as historical evidence.

Click to expand...

I agree with you that Jesus was the first resurrection. In Revelation 20:5 it has the statement “this is the first resurrection”. The word “this”<3778> is referring to something that was previously stated. I think it’s referring to those who were beheaded. What is your view on what “this” is referring to?

grafted branch said:

I agree with you that Jesus was the first resurrection. In Revelation 20:5 it has the statement “this is the first resurrection”. The word “this”<3778> is referring to something that was previously stated. I think it’s referring to those who were beheaded. What is your view on what “this” is referring to?

Click to expand...

Revelation 20:4-5 refers to those faithful Christians who will be killed by the Anti-Christ during his 3 1/2 year time of total world control. Daniel 7:23-25, Revelation 13:5-8
So 'this is the first resurrection', of humans and is the bringing back to life of the GT martyrs. Not to immortality as yet, as that awaits the GWT Judgment, after the Millennium.

keras said:

So 'this is the first resurrection', of humans and is the bringing back to life of the GT martyrs. Not to immortality as yet, as that awaits the GWT Judgment, after the Millennium.

Click to expand...

Matthew 27:52-53 is the first literal resurrection of humans. Since a future resurrection of GT martyrs can’t be the first resurrection of humans; are you suggesting that the GT martyrs lived and died prior to Christ’s resurrection?

grafted branch said:

Matthew 27:52-53 is the first literal resurrection of humans. Since a future resurrection of GT martyrs can’t be the first resurrection of humans; are you suggesting that the GT martyrs lived and died prior to Christ’s resurrection?

Click to expand...

Actually, the boy who Elijah resurrected and Lazarus, preceded Christs Resurrection.
You are just getting pedantic and trying to make scripture fit your beliefs.
The Bible tells us that the Trib martyrs will be the first general resurrection, - at the Return.

Freedm said:

But doesn't Revelation 20 require that the first resurrection occurs at the beginning of the thousand years? You have it happening at the end.

Click to expand...

Not only the beginning, but the entirety of the 1,000 years. In the vision of revelation ch. 20, the first resurrection = those living and reigning with Christ for 1,000 years.

revelation 20:4-5 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. But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

Freedm said:

But if we are in him, and he is in us, then isn't Christ's resurrection also our resurrection? It seems to me you're agreeing on this point but you don't realize it.

Click to expand...

I view revelation 20:4-5 in the same manner as ephesians 2:5-6.

ephesians 2:5-6 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

In the same way Paul speaks in the past tense about the saints already being raised up in the heavenly realms because of Christ's resurrection, so to John was seeing the saints living and reigning with Christ, within the first resurrection.

keras said:

Actually, the boy who Elijah resurrected and Lazarus, preceded Christs Resurrection.
You are just getting pedantic and trying to make scripture fit your beliefs.

Click to expand...

So in the strictest sense the first resurrection should be attributed to the boy that Elijah raised, correct? I know of no one who uses this to explain Revelation 20, so you yourself then have to admit “the first resurrection” has to be interpreted using other verses or in some other way.

So who’s being pedantic here? When an interpretation points to Christ and the work he did on the cross and can be substantiated by using well understood verses then I give that interpretation a very high probability of being correct.

Having a futuristic view with many points that are based on speculation produces a red flag for me and I give it a low probability of being correct.

keras said:

The Bible tells us that the Trib martyrs will be the first general resurrection, - at the Return.

Click to expand...

The Bible tells use exactly what is written in it, you are giving your interpretation of the Bible when you say “The Bible tells us that the Trib martyrs will be the first general resurrection”.

grafted branch said:

The Bible tells use exactly what is written in it,

Click to expand...

If that's truly the case for you, what do you think the bible is telling us with these verses when read altogether as they should be as to not lose context?

Revelation 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."

Revelation 20:5 "But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

Revelation 20:6 "Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years."

It seems pretty straightforward to me, needing no interpretation when read as is on what "is" the first resurrection.

JulieB67 said:

If that's truly the case for you, what do you think the bible is telling us with these verses when read altogether as they should be as to not lose context?

Revelation 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."

Revelation 20:5 "But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

Revelation 20:6 "Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years."

It seems pretty straightforward to me, needing no interpretation when read as is on what "is" the first resurrection.

Click to expand...

My current line of thinking on this, which I admit can’t be proven or substantiated 100% with other scriptures, is …

Those who are beheaded, <3990> to cut off with an axe, I associate with Matthew 3:10 where the axe is laid to the root of the trees and Mark 11:20 where the fig tree was dried up from the roots. So I see those who have been cut off with an axe (beheaded) as Israel, which can also be seen in Daniel 9:26 where Messiah (the root) is cut off.

There has always been a believing element in Israel which held the testimony of the examples in the scriptures that pointed to Christ. So my view has them as the saints that are resurrected in Matthew 27:52-53, and again they are seen as beheaded in Revelation 20:4 because Messiah was cut off. This is the first literal resurrection of many humans.

As for the rest of the dead that lived not again till the 1,000 years were finished, I’m interpreting as the rest of Israel (which has had the axe taken to its root) being blind in part until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in.

This view then has the beast rising up out of the sea in Revelation 13:1 occurring prior to the cross. From 2 Corinthians 11:14 we know that Satan has the ability to transform himself and IMHO the dragon, beast, and false prophet are all Satan or Satan transformed.

grafted branch said:

My current line of thinking on this, which I admit can’t be proven or substantiated 100% with other scriptures, is …

Those who are beheaded, <3990> to cut off with an axe, I associate with Matthew 3:10 where the axe is laid to the root of the trees and Mark 11:20 where the fig tree was dried up from the roots. So I see those who have been cut off with an axe (beheaded) as Israel, which can also be seen in Daniel 9:26 where Messiah (the root) is cut off.

There has always been a believing element in Israel which held the testimony of the examples in the scriptures that pointed to Christ. So my view has them as the saints that are resurrected in Matthew 27:52-53, and again they are seen as beheaded in Revelation 20:4 because Messiah was cut off. This is the first literal resurrection of many humans.

As for the rest of the dead that lived not again till the 1,000 years were finished, I’m interpreting as the rest of Israel (which has had the axe taken to its root) being blind in part until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in.

This view then has the beast rising up out of the sea in Revelation 13:1 occurring prior to the cross. From 2 Corinthians 11:14 we know that Satan has the ability to transform himself and IMHO the dragon, beast, and false prophet are all Satan or Satan transformed.

Click to expand...

Your error is to think ethnic Israel still has a part to play now and in the end times.
This idea is a direct contradiction of Ephesians 2:11-18, plus many other scriptures that say only the true faithful believers are the people of God.

The prophecy about the axe to the roots, is another of the many prophesies that tell of the virtual demise of the Jewish State of Israel. Only a remnant will survive. Romans 9:27

There IS a difference between the 'beast' and the 'false prophet'. Plainly they are two entities. Revelation 13:11-16

JulieB67 said:

Revelation 20:5 "But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection

Click to expand...

According to non symbolic and non- apocalyptic passages , Christ is the first resurrection. (John 11:25, Colossians 1:18, 1 Corinthians 15:20, acts 26:33, revelation 1:5).

Any resurrection after Christ’s would not be first.

claninja said:

Any resurrection after Christ’s would not be first.

Click to expand...

Of course he was the first one. But there are two resurrections after he returns and they are divided by 1000 years. Do we really believe Christ/John would have to list every resurrection up to this point? We are talking a specific timeframe -Christ's return and 2 resurrections after that. And we are told specifically who takes part in the first resurrection. And then we are told the rest of the "dead" lived not again until after the thousand years.

Revelation 20:4 "And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgement 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."

We can clearly see who it will be that will be reigning with Christ for a thousand years. It's the people that survived the mark of the beast timeframe. This is future because we see in Revelation 19 that after Christ returns, this very same beast that's mentioned above is set to do battle with him. So again, the mark of the beast period is future. To say otherwise is a direct contradiction to scripture. We also see in verse 4 that "judgment was given" so there's even a judgement here that's not the great white throne judgement which is listed later on down.

Revelation 20:5 "But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection

We were just told what the first resurrection "is". To add Christ to these verses would be adding to scripture.

Revelation 20:6 "Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

Again, it's not talking Christ here being the first resurrection, it's talking about the people in verse 4 that went through the mark of the beast that will be reigning with Christ. It specifically says "they"

And again Revelation 19 has that in the future because the beast is preparing for battle after Christ returns and that's also when the beast and FP are thrown into the lake of fire.

keras said:

Your error is to think ethnic Israel still has a part to play now and in the end times.

Click to expand...

I think ethnic Israel was either killed or dispersed in 70 AD and I don’t think Israel, nationally or ethnically, has any part in a still future end time scenario.

keras said:

There IS a difference between the 'beast' and the 'false prophet'. Plainly they are two entities. Revelation 13:11-16

Click to expand...

I agree that the 1st beast and 2nd beast or false prophet in Revelation 13 can appear to be two separate entities but this can’t be determined for certain.

From Matthew 12:25-26 we can know that every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation … and if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? Since Satan’s kingdom will not stand it would appear that he could very well cast himself out and/or be divided against himself.

It would be a miracle if Satan is cast out, and the false prophet deceives through the miracles he does. So if Satan did cast out Satan this would indeed be a very deceptive miracle.

So I think it does remain a possibility that the beast and false prophet are both Satan, although I don’t think this can be proven.

Freedm said:

It was future to the time of writing. Not future to us.

Click to expand...

Christ's return is not future?

This is Christ returning and bringing his armies with him.

Revelation 19:11 "And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war."

Revelation 19:12 "His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself."

Revelation 19:13 "And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God."


Revelation 19:14 "And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean."

The beast is preparing to battle against him, so this is indeed future.


Revelation 19:19 "And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse and against his army.

Revelation 19:20 "And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a like of fire burning with brimstone."

How is this not future? Christ has just returned. And the beast and FP that deceived them with the mark of the beast are thrown into the lake of fire.

JulieB67 said:

Of course he was the first one. But there are two resurrections after he returns and they are divided by 1000 years.

Click to expand...

If Christ is the first resurrection (john 11:25, colossians 1:18, 1 corinthians 15:20, Acts 26:33, Revelation 1:5), then any other resurrection following His, is not a first resurrection.

So I disagree with your interpretation about a future "first resurrection" because by the gospels and epistles declaring Christ is the 1st resurrection, any resurrection after Christ is not, by simple math, the first.

JulieB67 said:

We were just told what the first resurrection "is".

Click to expand...

Correct, WITHIN the context of the vision of revelation ch. 20, those who lived and reigned with Christ for 1,000 years are labeled the first resurrection.

JulieB67 said:

To add Christ to these verses would be adding to scripture.

Click to expand...

What do you mean? Christ is found found in vs 4:

Revelation 20:4 "And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgement 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."

JulieB67 said:

Again, it's not talking Christ here being the first resurrection, it's talking about the people in verse 4 that went through the mark of the beast that will be reigning with Christ. It specifically says "they"

Click to expand...

Well, from the gospels and epistles and even revelation, we know that:

1.) Christ is the 1st resurrection (john 11:25, colossians 1:18, 1 corinthians 15:20, Acts 26:33, Revelation 1:5)

2.) Those that partake in Christ's resurrection (the 1st resurrection) have been raised from being dead in in sin to walk in newness of life (ephesians 2:5, romans 6:2-4), have been seated in the heavenly realms with him (ephesians 2:5-6), can no longer be hurt by the 2nd death (John 11:25-26), and are a kingdom of priests to God (1 peter 2:9).

I believe using the gospels and epistles shed light on how to interpret revelation ch. 20 vs 1-6.

JulieB67 said:

And again Revelation 19 has that in the future because the beast is preparing for battle after Christ returns and that's also when the beast and FP are thrown into the lake of fire.

Click to expand...

I disagree that all of revelation 19 is future.

The early church declared psalm 2 fulfilled in the first century with Herod, Pilate, the gentiles, and Jews Crucifying Christ

Acts 4:25-28 who through the mouth of our father David, your servant,d said by the Holy Spirit,
“‘Why did the Gentiles rage,
and the peoples plot in vain?
The kings of the earth set themselves,
and the rulers were gathered together,
against the Lord and against his Anointed’e—
for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.

As revelation 19:19 is an allusion to psalm 2, it seems appropriate to remain in agreement with the early church's declaration that psalm 2 was fulfilled at the crucifixion.

revelation 19:19 And I saw the beast and the kings of the earth with their armies gathered to make war against him who was sitting on the horse and against his army.

claninja said:

What do you mean? Christ is found found in vs 4:

Click to expand...

I mean adding to Christ within the context of who takes part in the first resurrection. It's talking about a certain people, not Christ. Christ is mentioned because the people who take part in the first ressurection will be reigning with him.
If you claim that these verses are talking about Christ being the first resurrection in these verses, than you are adding to the scriptures. It's clearly talking about the people that overcame the mark of the beast. There's nothing about Christ being the first resurrection in these verses.
And yes, he was the first, but we are talking the first of two resurrections "after" his return.

claninja said:

I disagree that all of revelation 19 is future.

Click to expand...

It's impossible for Revelation 19 to have been already fulfilled because the entire basis for the chapter is his return on a white horse with his armies from Heaven to do battle with the beast and his armies. The very same beast that people took the mark of. It has nothing to do with his work on the cross.

You're putting him back on the cross and this chapter is all about his magnificant return.

What verses in 19 have already been fulfilled?

Verse 19 is about the beast preparing for Christ on the white horse and his army. He's not on the cross, just the opposite.

Revelation 19:19 "And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse and against his army."

Again, he's not on the cross, he's on a horse and has an army with him.

Revelation 19:20 "And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a like of fire burning with brimstone."

And to not lose context you have to read verse 20 to see that it is indeed future.

Freedm said:

This is not future because it referred to Christ's coming in judgment in 70 AD, but I believe he will return physically at the end of the thousand years.

Click to expand...

So you believe Christ already returned, his armies with him and threw the beast and the FP into the lake for fire already even though when he returns every eye shall see him? ...Ok

I guess we'll all see at some point.