Contrary to what Premil teaches: Revelation 20 does not locate Jesus on earth!

TribulationSigns said:

No, you need to read our earlier posts above.

Click to expand...

I have.

TribulationSigns said:

Christ ascended into heaven and to his throne.

Click to expand...

Look at the passage again more closely.
Does it not say that Christ was caught up to Heaven to God's throne?

That is where He is, sitting at the right hand of His Father, is it not?
He was caught p to God, and to His ( God's ) throne.

Navair2 said:

That is why I don't interact with a-millennialists very often...
Because of the disagreement with what the words of Revelation 20 actually say.

Click to expand...

As with me, it took only until God was ready to open your eyes and enlighten you to the truth. Man does not come to abandon his obstinate heart and finally accept the truth through tiring on the constant witness and a mindset on eventually finding truth, but in spite of his obstinate heart through the work of the Spirit breaking through our stubborness. We witness, God convicts. And my witness is that Premillennialism is a cancer, growing and eating away at the body while the Physicians between naps wax poetic about the benefits of company, strangers, stroking and rest.

Jeremiah 8:22

• "Is there no balm in Gilead; is there no physician there? why then is not the health of the daughter of my people recovered?"

Is there no balsam to be applied to the wounds of God's people, or is it just that it might sting a little and therefore deemed not worth the effort for recovery?

Navair2 said:

I have.

Click to expand...

Then why did you ask us if we believe Zechariah 14 to be understood literally?

TribulationSigns said:

As with me, it took only until God was ready to open your eyes and enlighten you to the truth. Man does not come to abandon his obstinate heart and finally accept the truth through tiring on the constant witness and a mindset on eventually finding truth, but in spite of his obstinate heart through the work of the Spirit breaking through our stubborness. We witness, God convicts. And my witness is that Premillennialism is a cancer, growing and eating away at the body while the Physicians between naps wax poetic about the benefits of company, strangers, stroking and rest.

Click to expand...

Then you will be forever on a quest to stomp out this "cancer" as long as we both shall live, and we will have to go our separate ways, won't we?

In the end we will have to disagree, and leave it at that.

Navair2 said:

No.
Again, He is awaiting the time until His Father sends Him to earth the second time.
He will then take up His throne at Jerusalem.

Click to expand...

I asked you if you thought He was reigning now and you said "No". You don't think He is reigning now in any sense? You said "Yes" to my question of whether He is the King now. Is He a king who is not reigning and has no kingdom?

He said Himself that His kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36) and does not come with observation (Luke 17:20). Why then is it that you believe His kingdom will be of this world and will come with observation?

Again, His physical reign will be at Jerusalem.
Do you believe the prophecies of Zechariah 12, Zechariah 14, Micah 4 and several other will be fulfilled literally, or not?

Click to expand...

No, He will deliver the kingdom to the Father when He comes at the end of the age (1 Cor 15:22-24, Matt 13:40-43) and they together will reign on the new earth.

We need to allow the New Testament to interpret the Old Testament prophecies for us. That is a major weakness of premillennialism. It attempts to interpret Old Testament prophecies without any aid from the New Testament. The only support that premils ever reference from the New Testament for their view is Revelation 20 based on an assumption that what is described there follows what is described in Revelation 19. No other New Testament scripture supports premil at all. Which is why premils are always referencing Old Testament prophecies to try to support their view.

You think Zechariah 14 will be fulfilled literally in the future when Christ returns? That means you believe animal sacrifices will be re-instituted at that time. Are you comfortable with believing that, keeping in mind that Christ made His once for all sacrifice long ago while putting an end to the animal sacrifices that God did not desire and was not pleased with and that could not take away sins? Why would animal sacrifices be re-instituted when Christ already made the once for all sacrifice for sins long ago?

As for Zechariah 12, were you aware that Zechariah 12:10 is quoted in John 19:37?

John 19:33 But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:
34 But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water.
35 And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe. 36 For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken. 37 And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.

Why would you see a future fulfillment of Zechariah 12 when John 19:37 places the fulfillment of Zechariah 12:10 at the time of Christ's death?

TribulationSigns said:

Then why did you ask us if we believe Zechariah 14 to be understood literally?

Click to expand...

Because I was hoping that you would actually take a long hard look at it and do that very thing.
Micah 4 as well.

I guess I was wrong.
I also can see that we will never agree on this.

Good evening to you as well, sir.

Navair2 said:

Look at the passage again more closely.
Does it not say that Christ was caught up to Heaven to God's throne?

That is where He is, sitting at the right hand of His Father, is it not?
He was caught p to God, and to His ( God's ) throne.

Click to expand...

Maybe you need to read passage again...

Rev 12:5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.

Joh 10:30 I and my Father are one.

Do you even know what the right hand in Scripture signifies? A literal right hand, or is it the will and purpose of the Father that His Son sits on His Throne and rules all nations? Think about it.

Navair2 said:

Because I was hoping that you would actually take a long hard look at it and do that very thing.

Micah 4 as well.
I guess I was wrong.

Good evening to you as well, sir.

Click to expand...

No, we hope that you would take a long hard look at our posts and read carefully where we have alrady explained Zechariah 14 and other passages to be understood spiritually, especially the living waters.

Navair2 said:

Then you will be forever on a quest to stomp out this "cancer" as long as we both shall live, and we will have to go or separate ways, won't we?

In the end we will have to disagree, and leave it at that.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I will continue to testify against any false cancerous doctrine here as long as God wills.

Navair2 said:

And you get all that of of just 2 Peter 3:13, all by itself?
I disagree.

This passage alone and by itself gives me hope that He is coming again, and I also look for the new heavens and the new earth.
Yet, the prophecies in Zechariah, Ezekiel and Micah have yet to be fulfilled.

Click to expand...

It seems to me that you are looking for an earthly kingdom, not the new heavens and new earth.

And, no, I don't just get my understanding from 2 Peter 3:13 by itself. The entirety of the passage in 2 Peter 3:3-13 indicates that He will come to take vengeance on those scoffing at the idea of His coming and He will destroy all of them with fire. The heavens and the earth itself will be burned up. The result of the burning up of the earth will be the new earth. That is where He and the Father will reign for eternity. Peter said we are looking forward to the new heavens and new earth, not an earthly kingdom.

Navair2 said:

I respect your opinion, but, yet again, I disagree.
That same fire can and will come down and devour the armies that surround Jerusalem ( the camp of the saints ) at the end of the 1,000 years.

See Revelation 20:7-10.

The Scriptures are clear, at least to me.

Click to expand...

We all think that Scriptures are clear to us. That goes without saying.

Do you see that the number that surrounds "the camp of the saints" is "as the sand of the sea"? How can that many people surround Jerusalem and how do they all get there? Remember, it says they are from "the four quarters of the earth". You're not recognizing the symbolic language there. It's talking about Christ's enemies opposing the church throughout the world. But fire will come down from heaven to destroy them all, just as 2 Peter 3 indicates.

sovereigngrace said:

Even though we may disagree on Revelation 20, it should not prevent fellowship or even discussion.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, sir, but I find that I cannot have fellowship with those who would cast doubt on the Lord's coming again to take His father David's throne at Jerusalem, and for the prophecies of His second coming to be literally fulfilled as those of His first coming were.

As for the discussion, that was not my intention when I entered this thread...

Me presenting my position and the Scriptures involved was, to see what the reaction to it ( and them ) would be.
I've found my answer and it's been very educational.

On a side note,
I'd never heard of this teaching before about 5-10 years ago, and I don't really know where it originally comes from;
But I do know that, while I do agree with the Reformed view of salvation, I cannot find it within myself to agree with their teaching ( and the Roman Catholic Church's teaching ) on end times.

Simply put,
When two people stand on opposite sides of an issue ( and they forever remain on opposite sides ), there really is nothing to discuss.
That is what Amos 3:3 says to me;
Two cannot walk together unless they are agreed.


I wish you well in your studies,
and perhaps someday things will change between us.

Navair2 said:

Our belief of the Gospel does not secure salvation for us...
We believe because we are ordained to eternal life ( Acts 13:48 ).

Click to expand...

I have no interest in debating that topic here in this thread. There are a lot of other threads on this site where we can talk about that.

Douggg said:

Satan convinced a third of the angels to rebel against God, in God's presence there in heaven. So it will be nothing new that Satan will deceive the nations likewise for a short period of time at the end of the 1000 years. The heathen, i.e. them who won't like not being able to do as they please, as Jesus rules the nations with a rod of iron during that 1000 years, will be susceptible to Satan's cunning lies.

Click to expand...

I'm not just talking about deception, I'm talking about them thinking that they can go and destroy Christ Himself. The angels did not try to attack and destroy God. So, that's not a good comparison. Do you really think that mortal humans will see Jesus in all His glory and think that they can defeat Him?

Navair2 said:

And I think you have a bad habit of labeling questions that people ask, as being worthy of riducule by saying that they are ridiculous.

I'm not trying to offend you, I'm simply asking questions to provoke thought.

Click to expand...

How is asking me if I think there's something wrong with what Revelation 20 says thought provoking? You have to be kidding. Do you think I would say that I think there is something wrong with what Revelation 20 says? Of course not. So, why ask me a question like that?

That's fine, and I don't hold that against you in any way.

However, can two walk together unless they be agreed ( Amos 3:3 )?
No.
That is why I don't interact with a-millennialists very often...
Because of the disagreement with what the words of Revelation 20 actually say.

Good evening to you, sir, and may God bless you in many ways.

Click to expand...

If you need someone to agree with you on everything in order to fellowship with them, then that is just sad. I highly doubt there is anyone who agrees with all of your understanding of scripture, so I guess you must not have any fellowship with other believers.

DavidPT said:

Allow me to explain my thinking then. Maybe you will see my point, or maybe not.


Zechariah 14:8 And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.


This is what the text says in the KJV, so IOW....

And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of the living waters toward the former sea, and half of the living waters toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.

In this particular case, how can that be understood any other way but literal? Though I'm not convinced that everything recorded in Zechariah 14 should be taken in the literal sense, that doesn't mean some of it is not meaning in the literal sense, though.
'

In Zechariah 14:8 the text says half of them, then it says half of them again. Half of what? Living waters of course. Not living water, living waters. That means if we have the Holy Spirit meaning the living waters, we have to replace the 2 'them' in that verse with Holy Spirit, thus we end up with--- half of the Holy Spirit toward the former sea, and half of the Holy Spirit toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be--this is what I find renders the text nonsensical. But if that actually still makes sense to you, explain in what way that it does?

And it shall be in that day, that the Holy Spirit shall go out from Jerusalem. At this point I wouldn't say this necessarily renders the text nonsensical, though I still disagree that the Holy Spirit is meant here. It's when we add the rest of the verse like such---half of the Holy Spirit toward the former sea, and half of the Holy Spirit toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be----that's what renders the text nonsensical, thus telling us that the Holy Spirit cannot be meant in this verse, because if the Holy Spirit was meant in this verse, the entire verse would be making good sense, not nonsense.

Click to expand...

I believe the verse as a whole figuratively represents the gospel going out to the Jews and the Gentiles through the power of the Holy Spirit. You're looking at it as if only the living waters are figurative and the rest is to be taken literally which leads to the ridiculous notion of the Holy Spirit being divided in half. No, the whole thing is figurative, so if you don't take it all figuratively then of course it won't make sense.

TribulationSigns said:

I believe that your understanding of Revelation chapter 20 is clouded by what you have been taught.

This witness of Matthew 12 to Revelation Chapter 20 helps show the TRUTH of this often-misunderstood chapter of the Bible. There Christ explains the binding of Satan, and who did it and WHY.

Matthew 12:29

• "Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house."

The pertinent questions here are:

#1. Who the Strong man is
#2. Who is He who seeks to spoil his house
#3. What is this House, and
#4. what are the possessions of this strong man that he wanted to spoil (seize or take by conquest)

Understanding this you will comprehend why God says that FIRST he had to bind him. If you come to understand that parable, you'll answer your own question. Or rather, God will answer it for you if you receive it, Selah.

Now...the Kingdom of God was never established to make all the whole world righteous, that is the error of Premillennialism and also to a degree of Postmillennialism. The Kingdom of God is in fact the prevailing influence in how the church runs their lives. It never was, and never will be the prevailing influence of how the "world" runs their lives. They are two separate and "distinct" Kingdoms, which are adversarial to one another. Keep in mind that Satan was not bound for the world's sake, Satan was bound for the elect of the Kingdom of Heaven's sake. For the world, Satan is still the god of this world, working through the unsaved and goes about as a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour. For the true believers, he has no more power over us. His power over us has been broken. It is because Christ as spoiled us from the bondage of Satan! Christ has wounded the head of this Beast for us. Not for the world.

John 17:9

• "I pray for them: I pray not for the world but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine."

Yes, Satan has been evil to the world and have been attacking God's People over the years. Killing and doing all manner of evil, this has always been the case, and always will be as long as we are on this sin cursed earth! It does NOT mean that Satan was not bound. It means that Satan was not bound "for the unsaved world whom God has not choosen to save," Because, they are unsaved world whom Satan rules over, thus he is god of this world.

Click to expand...

And he’s therefore not bound, for most of the world, thus he’s not bound in the bottomless pit in chains.

And Satan hindered Paul:

1Th 2:18 Wherefore we would have come unto you, even I Paul, once and again; but Satan hindered us.

Looks like you need to examine your view more thoroughly.