I believe I am interpreting it through the lens of the gospel and epistolic narrative. Please don't tell me how I am interpreting scripture. I don't believe what I do because of tradition, I believe it because of my own studies.
The gospels and epistles declare that when satan was cast out (john 12:31-33
) and coming (john 14:30
) following Christ's ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension, he would be: prowling and looking to devour (1 peter 5:8
), scheming (2 corinthians 2:11
), deceiving (2 corinthians 11:14
), hindering the spread of the gospel (1 thessalonians 2:18
), snatching away understanding of the kingdom (matthew 13:19
), ensnaring (2 timothy 2:26
), and working through the sons of disobedience (ephesians 2:1-2
) and eventually through the man of sin (2 thessalonians 2:9
). Effectively, he was warring against the saints (revelation 12:13-17
). But he would be soon be crushed under the Church's feet (Romans 16:20
).
The traditional Amil paradigm forces you to interpret these events as occurring when satan is locked in the pit, which is the exact opposite of what the vision of revelation ch 20 states. You seem to look at the traditional Amil paradigm first, and then see where the events of the gospels/epistles fit in, resulting in a confusing placement of the activities of satan into the verses 1-3 of revelation ch 20 where it says satan has no activities.
revelation 20:1-3 Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the key to the bottomless pit
a and a great chain. And he seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, and threw him into the pit, and shut it and sealed it over him,
so that he might not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand years were ended. After that he must be released for a little while.
I, on the other hand, interpret these events, as recorded in the gospels and epistles, as being a reference to satan's release from the pit. I look at the gospels and epistles first and then look to where they fit in the vision of revelation 20. It seems more plausible to place these events in verse 7, than in verses 1-3.
revelation 20:7 And when the thousand years are ended, Satan will be released from his prison and
will come out to deceive the nations that are at the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog,
to gather them for battle; their number is like the sand of the sea.
Sorry, but this doesn't make any sense to me. I don't know what else to say. You don't view the thousand years as an actual time period and I do. That's a major difference in our perspectives.
Here's the main difference:
Traditional Amils and Premil's interpet the first resurrection as initiating the 1000 years.
IMHO, 1,000 years is the ENTIRETY of the first resurrection because the vision/parable states it as so:
revelation 20:4-5
They lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.
This is the first resurrection.
Therefore, as I view the 1,000 years as WITHIN the entirety of Christ's resurrection, I believe it points to the fulfillment of the Davidic oath, which came literally 1,000 years prior to Christ. The fulfillment of the Davidic Oath at Christ's resurrection and ascension resulted in saints becoming a kingdom of priests to God and satan being cast out to wage war against the them.
What does Christ destroying the devil's works mean to you exactly? What was the effect of that on the world in your view?
1.) Satan no longer holds the power of death
Hebrews 2:14 Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil,
2.) Satan can no longer accuse because the righteous requirements of God are now fulfilled in us through Christ
romans 8:4 in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
romans 8:33-34 Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies.
34Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised—who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us.
3.) We are able to overcome the evil one.
1 john 2:14 I write to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning. I write to you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God abides in you, and you have overcome the evil one.
revelation 12:9-11 And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world—he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him. And I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying, “Now the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ have come, for the accuser of our brothers
b has been thrown down, who accuses them day and night before our God. And they have conquered him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, for they loved not their lives even unto death.
I didn't say it was. But, it is clear to me that Paul teaches that there will be a time of increased, unrestrained wickedness before the return of Christ that is marked by a mass falling away from the faith.
Paul taught nothing that Christ did not already teach was to occur prior to the great tribulation of Jerusalem
Matthew 24:9-12 Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death, and you will be hated by all nations for my name’s sake.
And then many will fall away and betray one another and hate one another. And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray. And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold.
This is a strange response. It's as if you are saying Paul was being dumb for mentioning that they were "without Christ". Was he just ridiculously stating the obivous or is there more to it? It appears that you don't understand why he said that. Do you not know that Christ is God and existed before He was born? I'm sure you know that. He was the spiritual Rock of the Old Testament saints.
Why is this a strange response? Paul clearly states the gentiles being fellow heirs through Christ and the gospel was a mystery not made known in other generations, but was revealed "now". The "now" being after the death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ. Do you believe it was not made known because Satan was hiding it or because God had not yet revealed it?
Ephesians 3:4-6 When you read this, you can perceive my insight into the mystery of Christ, which was not made known to the sons of men in other generations
as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit. This mystery is that the Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel.
It's an "of course" response to your argument because Living 2,000 years post the cross, I am well aware that Jesus Christ existed before creation. Did the gentiles, let alone the jews, prior to the cross, know that Jesus existed prior to creation or were they just learning about this mystery in the 1st century, after the 1st advent?
No, of course not! You can't be born again/saved without receiving the Holy Spirit. I'm saying the church is weakened during that time because of many falling away and unrestrained wickedness. I believe the influence of the church has a weak impact on the world during that time and I think we're already starting to see that. In the U.S. and some other places in the world the increase in wickedness and immorality in more recent years is obvious.
So then the restrainer being taken out of the way is not the removal of the Spirit in general, just the removal of the Spirits restraint against the man of sin? Sorry, for asking all these questions, I'm just trying to clarify.
So do I. And I see the thousand years as the time period that He is proclaimed to the Gentiles. I see Satan's little season as a time when the gospel's impact is significantly descreased because of the increase in wickedness due to Satan being unrestrained.
Right, you see the 1,000 years as a literal unspecified amount of time POST the 1st resurrection, While I see the 1,000 years as symbolic for WITHIN the 1st resurrection.
I take those to mean that His coming was imminent, not literally soon to take place. It is still imminent.
Confused by this statement. Imminent means literally soon to take place.
"ready to take place : happening soon" (
Definition of IMMINENT)
Imminent would not be used for events that are far off. That would be the antonym of imminent.
Do you not get excited at the prospect of the glorious return of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ?
Yes, I am excited that Christ is coming on the clouds and all eyes will see him. I am not a full preterist.