When was Satan bound?

Aldebaran · Oct 14, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
How do you explain Matthew 25:31-46 and passages like these then:

Romans 14:10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. 11 For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. 12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.

2 Corinthans 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

For some reason you were not aware that believers also will be judged according to their works. We know that we are saved by faith and not by works, so you might be asking how this can be explained.

This is how I reconcile the passages that speak about judgment day in terms of being judged by our works with the passages that speak of salvation being based on faith and not works. Our works reflect our faith or lack thereof (read James 2), so it isn't as if these passages about judgment day are contradicting what other scriptures say about how a person is saved. We are saved by faith and not by works, but at the same time our works reflect whether or not we have faith. So, that is why the passages regarding judgment day speak in terms of all people (saved and lost) being judged according to their works.

My view on it may be a bit different from yours, but I think we're still in agreement. From 1 Corinthians 3--

10According to the grace of God which was given to me, like a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building on it. But each person must be careful how he builds on it. 11For no one can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or straw, 13each one’s work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each one’s work. 14If anyone’s work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward. 15If anyone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet only so as through fire.

This passage about judgement seems to be about what happens at the first judgement. It's when the saved are brought before the throne to determine how each saved person lived and how they are rewarded for what they did with their life in Christ. Some will have more faithfully than others, but all would be saved because Christ is their foundation. So, "giving an account" in this case would be believers being rewarded or suffering loss--but not about whether they enter Heaven or Hell.

Aldebaran · Oct 14, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
Who are "these people"? The person you respond to was talking about Amils, so is that who you are talking about as well?

You really need to take the time to learn what Amils actually believe before debating us, otherwise you are just going to constantly misrepresent what we believe, as some premils on this forum do.

Amils could not possibly be deceived by some antichrist while believing he is Christ. We believe that on the day Christ returns we will be changed to have immortal bodies (1 Cor 15:50-54) and will meet Him "in the air" (1 Thess 4:14-17). So, since we believe we will meet Him in the air and not on the earth then it's not possible for us to think any person who would show up on earth claiming to be Christ was actually Christ Himself.

Trust me, there are plenty of people who will see a guy take office as the "president of the world" who manages to bring everyone together for the second time in history, manages to do miracles such as call fire down from the sky, and cause all to worship him as Christ's second coming. (Rev 1:4) "they worshiped the dragon because he gave his authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast, and who is able to wage war with him?”

In fact, (and you can correct me if I'm wrong), but aren't there those of the Amil belief that even this scripture about the beast is referring to something in the first century, and therefore isn't about a future world dictator under a one-world government?

Aldebaran · Oct 14, 2021

sovereigngrace said:
You are trying to examine Amil through Premil glasses. That will never work. That is why you do not understand this position. Start looking at it from an Amil perspective and you will see the spiritual fulfillment today.

When did or will the last days commence?
When did or will the last days terminate?
When is the "last day" of the "last days"?
What occurs on "last day" of the "last days"?

The answer to those questions is as subjective as telling you which letters of the alphabet are the last letters. Would it be from "N to Z" because those are the last half? Or would we be talking about "X, Y and Z" because those are the last few?

Spiritual Jew · Oct 14, 2021

Jamdoc said:
the Millennium.
Obviously.

I actually agree that it's talking about the thousand years, but the problem for you is that, in scripture, the last days always refer to the last days before the return of Christ, not days that follow the return of Christ. Do you think any of these passages refer to "the Millennium"?

Acts 2:16 No, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel: 17 “‘In the last days, God says,
I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. 18 Even on my servants, both men and women,
I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they will prophesy.

Hebrews 1:1 In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.

2 Timothy 3:1 But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. 2 People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3 without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good,

James 5:1 Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming on you. 2 Your wealth has rotted, and moths have eaten your clothes. 3 Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last days.

2 Peter 3:3 Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4 They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.”

and if you compare the characteristics of the days Isaiah is talking about to our current world, it doesn't match, and it has not matched any previous time in human history.
making it still future.

You are not using spiritual discernment to see what it's really talking about. Tell me, do you interpret the following verse as literally as you interpret Isaiah 2 in terms of referring to literally all people in all nations?

Joel 2:28 “And afterward, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your old men will dream dreams, your young men will see visions. 29 Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days.

In Acts 2:17 Peter applied this verse to "the last days" and what was happening on the day of Pentecost. Was the Holy Spirit poured out on literally "all people" that day? No. So, you have to be careful about interpreting scripture too literally at times since it sometimes uses hyperbole to emphasize an important point.

convenient that sovereigngrace decided to ignore the "nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more." part.
Nations.
not the church or ekklesia.
But nations, which in the old testament, meant gentiles and referred to people NOT following the Lord.
sure the gospel spread to the Nations, but it was helped to spread more through the sword, by force.
at no time in history have the gentiles stopped fighting wars.
so, that's still future.

It's referring to Gentile believers joining Israelite believers in the kingdom of God which is a kingdom "of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit" (Romans 14:17). In God's kingdom, we learn to love others as we love ourselves. We are even taught to love our enemies. That is what Isaiah 2 is talking about. You always miss the spiritual application of scripture because you think carnally instead. You don't allow the New Testament scriptures to interpret the Old Testament scriptures for you.

Spiritual Jew · Oct 14, 2021

Aldebaran said:
Trust me, there are plenty of people who will see a guy take office as the "president of the world" who manages to bring everyone together for the second time in history, manages to do miracles such as call fire down from the sky, and cause all to worship him as Christ's second coming. (Rev 1:4) "they worshiped the dragon because he gave his authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast, and who is able to wage war with him?”

That is not what we're talking about, though. In the post you responded to the person was talking about Amils in particular. Amils like myself can't possibly be deceived by such a person that you're talking about into thinking he is Jesus Christ on earth because we believe we will meet Christ "in the air" (1 Thess 4:13-17) and not on earth. Do you understand what I'm telling you?

Spiritual Jew · Oct 14, 2021

Aldebaran said:
My view on it may be a bit different from yours, but I think we're still in agreement. From 1 Corinthians 3--

10According to the grace of God which was given to me, like a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building on it. But each person must be careful how he builds on it. 11For no one can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or straw, 13each one’s work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each one’s work. 14If anyone’s work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward. 15If anyone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet only so as through fire.

This passage about judgement seems to be about what happens at the first judgement. It's when the saved are brought before the throne to determine how each saved person lived and how they are rewarded for what they did with their life in Christ. Some will have more faithfully than others, but all would be saved because Christ is their foundation. So, "giving an account" in this case would be believers being rewarded or suffering loss--but not about whether they enter Heaven or Hell.

First judgment? Where is this taught in scripture? Scripture repeatedly speaks of a singular judgment day, but never of more than one judgment day. Which of your 2 (or more?) judgment days is the following passage referring to?

Acts 17:30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. 31 For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.”

You seem to think that believers will be judged on a completely different day than unbelievers. What do you make of passages like Matthew 13:36-43, Matthew 13:47-50, John 5:28-29 and Matthew 25:31-46 then?

Spiritual Jew · Oct 14, 2021

DavidPT said:
Let's see if the same applies to you.

Why don't you respond directly to what I said first before you change the focus to me? You always do this. You want a one way discussion. I've told you before that I'm not interested in that. I'm not going to respond to anything else you said here unless you first respond directly to the points I made and the questions I asked in my post.

DavidPT · Oct 14, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
That is absolutely a false accusation.

What exactly is false about what I said? Take nations being deceived no more during the thousand years, for example. Amils are not basing this on reality the fact nations are still being deceived to this day. Premils, since they oftentimes tend to base things on reality, disagree that satan is already bound since reality proves otherwise, the fact nations are still being deceived.

Here is something I posed to another Amil but am yet to receive a reply about. Maybe you have some answers?

Per Premil, or at least my version, the nations that were deceived before the thousand years, are no longer deceived during the thousand years, but become deceived once again after the thousand years.

Per Amil who is it Amils think are deceived after the thousand years? Do Amils think it are the ones that remained deceived during the thousand years? Since Amils take the thousand years to be the here and now, let's assume this thousand years ends tomorrow, thus satan is loosed. Who is it that Amils see being the ones satan deceives, the number which are as the sand of the sea? Someone already deceived, or someone no longer deceived?

The point being, is the idea, to deceive someone already deceived, or is the idea, to deceive someone no longer deceived? Which makes more sense? To deceive the already deceived? Or to deceive those that are no longer deceived? Once again, if Amil's millennium ends tomorrow, thus satan's little season begins, who is it currently living on this planet that satan deceives, the number which is as the sand of the sea? Is it billions and billions of already deceived ppl? Or is it billions and billions of ppl who are no longer deceived? If it's the former how did they manage to be deceived during the millennium when the text states that satan is bound in order that the nations are no longer deceived? If it is the former why is satan deceiving someone already deceived rather than someone who is no longer deceived?

Spiritual Jew · Oct 14, 2021

Aldebaran said:
Nor did I say it specifically did. I was pointing out that verse, and the fact that the years of biblical history have a way of meshing together to lay out a long-term pattern that, if it continues along the same path, has the Millennial reign of Christ in our near future.

What does this even mean? You brought up 2 Peter 3:8 for some reason. Can you clearly explain why? I certainly can't tell from what you said here.

Aldebaran · Oct 14, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
That is not what we're talking about, though. In the post you responded to the person was talking about Amils in particular. Amils like myself can't possibly be deceived by such a person that you're talking about into thinking he is Jesus Christ on earth because we believe we will meet Christ "in the air" (1 Thess 4:13-17) and not on earth. Do you understand what I'm telling you?

Yes, but I'm not Amil and I also believe He will meet us in the air. That's the rapture, which takes place before the Great Tribulation.

sovereigngrace · Oct 14, 2021

Jamdoc said:
You didn't address my post, so why bother with your wall?
The "Nations" are not the Ekklesia, it's not talking about the Church, it's talking about the world.

You are fudging the issue! Premils cannot address the simple relevant biblical rebuttals, thus their constant avoidance. Your evasion does not advance your cause but exposes it. That is why Amil is growing so much. Premils have no answer to the most basic passages. And, yes, the kingdom has reached out and embraced the nations as the OT predicted and the NT constantly confirms. This proves we are looking at a current ongoing fulfilment.

Jesus said in Mark 11:17: “Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? but ye have made it a den of thieves.”

Nationalities are brought together in the kingdom of God "in Christ." Before the cross there was largely only one physical nationality. After the cross there are many.

Aldebaran · Oct 14, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
First judgment? Where is this taught in scripture? Scripture repeatedly speaks of a singular judgment day, but never of more than one judgment day. Which of your 2 (or more?) judgment days is the following passage referring to?

Acts 17:30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. 31 For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.”

You seem to think that believers will be judged on a completely different day than unbelievers. What do you make of passages like Matthew 13:36-43, Matthew 13:47-50, John 5:28-29 and Matthew 25:31-46 then?

I meant first resurrection.

Spiritual Jew · Oct 14, 2021

DavidPT said:
What exactly is false about what I said?

Everything. You can't just make blanket statements like you did about Premil and Amil. What you said is simply not true.

You said "One of the biggest differences between Premil and Amil is that Premil attempts to interpret and apply passages according to reality while Amils at times do not.".

You just said this as a blanket statement, so that means you're not allowing for any exceptions to this. That's wrong. You're acting as if Amils never take scripture literally and that is not true.

A major example is how we interpret 2 Peter 3 to be saying that the heavens and earth will be literally burned up when Christ returns. You take that figuratively, which is not actually the norm for premils. Regardless, the point remains that you don't take it literally like Amils do. And Amils take a passage like 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10 very literally to be speaking of Jesus taking vengeance on literally all people who don't know God and don't obey the gospel of Christ when He returns and Premils do not. And there are plenty of other examples like this that I can point to where Amils take scripture more literally than Premils do.

Take nations being deceived no more during the thousand years, for example. Amils are not basing this on reality the fact nations are still being deceived to this day.

Your use of the term "reality" here is inappropriate and offensive. You interpret the passage to be literally referring to deception in general while Amils see it as referring to Satan no longer having the ability to keep the nations in spiritual darkness like he was able to do in Old Testament times.

Amils believe Revelation 20 speaks of reality, but in a figurative or symbolic way. The symbolism symbolizes reality. It's not as if we see it all as being fictional instead of real. That's why I don't like your use of the term "reality" here. Revelation 20 speaks of spiritual reality using figurative language.

Premils, since they oftentimes tend to base things on reality

No, premils tend to take things literally rather than figuratively. Both views base things on reality. You seem to have this false perception that figurative language equates to fictional language, which is not the case.

disagree that satan is already bound since reality proves otherwise, the fact nations are still being deceived.

That is how you interpret his binding. You can't force us to understand the nature of his binding the way you do. In the way we interpret his binding he is bound in reality. He really was bound in reality from preventing the light of the gospel to spread to the Gentile nations.

Here is something I posed to another Amil but am yet to receive a reply about. Maybe you have some answers?

Per Premil, or at least my version, the nations that were deceived before the thousand years, are no longer deceived during the thousand years, but become deceived once again after the thousand years.

There's already a problem with what you're saying here. It's not nations that are deceived. It's unfortunate that our English Bible translated the Greek word "ethnos" as nations in Revelation 20. Remember, it says they number "as the sand of the sea" (Revelation 20:8). So, it's referring to people. Ethnos can also be translated as "people" or "heathen" and that makes much more sense in this case since obviously the number of nations would not be "as the sand of the sea". Maybe this is a bit besides the point that we're talking about here, but I felt like this was worth pointing out, anyway.

Per Amil who is it Amils think are deceived after the thousand years? Do Amils think it are the ones that remained deceived during the thousand years? Since Amils take the thousand years to be the here and now, let's assume this thousand years ends tomorrow, thus satan is loosed. Who is it that Amils see being the ones satan deceives, the number which are as the sand of the sea? Someone already deceived, or someone no longer deceived?

See, you're looking at this from the standpoint of his ability to deceive at all and that is not how Amil looks at this. You're always trying to get Amils to explain our view according to how YOU see things. That makes no sense! Of course our view isn't going to make any sense according to how YOU look at things. Why don't you try to look at things the way we do so you can actually understand how we understand things for once?

You're asking the wrong question here that doesn't apply to Amils. The way YOU look at things, what Satan does when he is loosed is go out and deceive people who are not yet deceived. But, that is not how Amils look at it. What we believe he was bound from doing is not deceiving people in general, but from keeping the light of God's word, of the gospel, from spreading throughout the world. If you don't grasp what I just said, then nothing I say will make any sense to you. Let me say it one more time. Amils do not believe Satan is bound from deceiving people in general the way YOU understand his binding. We believe he was bound from keeping the light of God's word and the gospel from spreading throughout the world like he was able to in Old Testament times. Do you understand that? Please let that sink in and try to look at this from the Amil perspective if you truly want to understand what we believe and why.

So, from the Amil perspective, when he is loosed it doesn't mean he goes from not being able to deceive people to then being able to deceive people the way Premil looks at it. It means that he will be allowed again to largely silence the preaching of the gospel and keep people from understanding it and what is expected of them. I see Satan's little season as being equivalent to the time Paul wrote about in 2 Thess 2 when wickedness is no longer restrained and a mass falling away from the faith occurs.

The point being, is the idea, to deceive someone alreasdy deceived, or is the idea, to deceive someone no longer deceived?

Neither. You're only looking at this from your own Premil perspective and not from the Amil perspective. Until you try to look at things from the Amil perspective, you will continue to not even understand what we believe whether you agree with it or not. It's amazing to me that after all these years, you still really don't even understand what we believe.

I think I know now why the person didn't respond to your question. This took a lot of effort on my part to try to answer your question. And you probably still won't get it, so I suppose I've wasted my time trying to explain it to you.

sovereigngrace · Oct 14, 2021

Aldebaran said:
The answer to those questions is as subjective as telling you which letters of the alphabet are the last letters. Would it be from "N to Z" because those are the last half? Or would we be talking about "X, Y and Z" because those are the last few?

That is the wrong question though. The appropriate question is, what is "the last day" (singular) in Scripture? It's a very simple question with a very simple answer.

sovereigngrace · Oct 14, 2021

Aldebaran said:
Yes, but I'm not Amil and I also believe He will meet us in the air. That's the rapture, which takes place before the Great Tribulation.

Really? Most of us where taught that but found through study that not to be true. Can you show me one Scripture that teaches (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a 3rd coming?

Just The Facts · Oct 14, 2021

Hello

sovereigngrace said:
Not so! You invent an age that is unknown to Scripture, that is marked by justice and injustice, righteousness and unrighteousness, sin and perfection, glorification and corruption, in order to support your beliefs.

I do nothing of the sort. You do not get to say what I believe and then say that is wrong.

I say there is The Kingdom of God and the 1,000 years Which has not yet begun and the Eternity after Judgement of the Wicked

The difference is I say the imperfect 1,000 years is with the Kingdom on Earth.

You say the 1,000 years is now.... in heaven........... with an Earth that is marked by justice and injustice, righteousness and unrighteousness, sin and perfection, glorification and corruption, in order to support your beliefs.

sovereigngrace said:
You then stretch "the last days" (which refers to the intra-Advent period) out 1000 years after the last day. That is ridiculous and makes no sense. This teaching should be rejected by every Bible-believing Christian. This is your own private interpretation and it conflicts with the inspired pages.

Please you position is ridiculous. I noticed when I pointed out your hypocrisy on this you just avoided it all together. So lets try again and see if you can actually address Scripture put to you instead of dancing all around and changing the subject.

[20] He who testifies to these things says, "Surely I am coming soon." Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!

This is written in 96 AD Jesus says he is "Coming Soon" Here we are 2,000 years later Jesus still has not returned. So what does Soon mean? Maybe it means Jesus returns in THE LAST DAYS ie:SOON.

To me the last days include the last days of this age. We are still in the same age Since Jesus left. The New age begins at his return. Despite what you believe the Promise is not split into two parts

sovereigngrace · Oct 14, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
Everything. You can't just make blanket statements like you did about Premil and Amil. What you said is simply not true.

You said "One of the biggest differences between Premil and Amil is that Premil attempts to interpret and apply passages according to reality while Amils at times do not.".

You just said this as a blanket statement, so that means you're not allowing for any exceptions to this. That's wrong. You're acting as if Amils never take scripture literally and that is not true.

A major example is how we interpret 2 Peter 3 to be saying that the heavens and earth will be literally burned up when Christ returns. You take that figuratively, which is not actually the norm for premils. Regardless, the point remains that you don't take it literally like Amils do. And Amils take a passage like 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10 very literally to be speaking of Jesus taking vengeance on literally all people who don't know God and don't obey the gospel of Christ when He returns and Premils do not. And there are plenty of other examples like this that I can point to where Amils take scripture more literally than Premils do.

Your use of the term "reality" here is inappropriate and offensive. You interpret the passage to be literally referring to deception in general while Amils see it as referring to Satan no longer having the ability to keep the nations in spiritual darkness like he was able to do in Old Testament times.

Amils believe Revelation 20 speaks of reality, but in a figurative or symbolic way. The symbolism symbolizes reality. It's not as if we see it all as being fictional instead of real. That's why I don't like your use of the term "reality" here. Revelation 20 speaks of spiritual reality using figurative language.

No, premils tend to take things literally rather than figuratively. Both views base things on reality. You seem to have this false perception that figurative language equates to fictional language, which is not the case.

That is how you interpret his binding. You can't force us to understand the nature of his binding the way you do. In the way we interpret his binding he is bound in reality. He really was bound in reality from preventing the light of the gospel to spread to the Gentile nations.

There's already a problem with what you're saying here. It's not nations that are deceived. It's unfortunate that our English Bible translated the Greek word "ethnos" as nations in Revelation 20. Remember, it says they number "as the sand of the sea" (Revelation 20:8). So, it's referring to people. Ethnos can also be translated as "people" or "heathen" and that makes much more sense in this case since obviously the number of nations would not be "as the sand of the sea". Maybe this is a bit besides the point that we're talking about here, but I felt like this was worth pointing out, anyway.

See, you're looking at this from the standpoint of his ability to deceive at all and that is not how Amil looks at this. You're always trying to get Amils to explain our view according to how YOU see things. That makes no sense! Of course our view isn't going to make any sense according to how YOU look at things. Why don't you try to look at things the way we do so you can actually understand how we understand things for once?

You're asking the wrong question here that doesn't apply to Amils. The way YOU look at things, what Satan does when he is loosed is go out and deceive people who are not yet deceived. But, that is not how Amils look at it. What we believe he was bound from doing is not deceiving people in general, but from keeping the light of God's word, of the gospel, from spreading throughout the world. If you don't grasp what I just said, then nothing I say will make any sense to you. Let me say it one more time. Amils do not believe Satan is bound from deceiving people in general the way YOU understand his binding. We believe he was bound from keeping the light of God's word and the gospel from spreading throughout the world like he was able to in Old Testament times. Do you understand that? Please let that sink in and try to look at this from the Amil perspective if you truly want to understand what we believe and why.

So, from the Amil perspective, when he is loosed it doesn't mean he goes from not being able to deceive people to then being able to deceive people the way Premil looks at it. It means that he will be allowed again to largely silence the preaching of the gospel and keep people from understanding it and what is expected of them. I see Satan's little season as being equivalent to the time Paul wrote about in 2 Thess 2 when wickedness is no longer restrained and a mass falling away from the faith occurs.

Neither. You're only looking at this from your own Premil perspective and not from the Amil perspective. Until you try to look at things from the Amil perspective, you will continue to not even understand what we believe whether you agree with it or not. It's amazing to me that after all these years, you still really don't even understand what we believe.

I think I know now why the person didn't respond to your question. This took a lot of effort on my part to try to answer your question. And you probably still won't get it, so I suppose I've wasted my time trying to explain it to you.

This is spot on. It is not ignorance. It is a willful misrepresenting of our position. That is what I do not like.

Jamdoc · Oct 14, 2021

sovereigngrace said:
You are fudging the issue! Premils cannot address the simple relevant biblical rebuttals, thus their constant avoidance. Your evasion does not advance your cause but exposes it. That is why Amil is growing so much. Premils have no answer to the most basic passages. And, yes, the kingdom has reached out and embraced the nations as the OT predicted and the NT constantly confirms. This proves we are looking at a current ongoing fulfilment.

Jesus said in Mark 11:17: “Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? but ye have made it a den of thieves.”

Nationalities are brought together in the kingdom of God "in Christ." Before the cross there was largely only one physical nationality. After the cross there are many.

I'm not fudging the issue, I'm saying it's pointless when you take any verse given and twist it so hard that I'm surprised juice isn't coming out of it.
Your position is entirely built on private interpretation and trying to twist scripture to say what you want it to say.

I threw Isaiah 2:4 at you, you twisted it to mean what you want it to mean.

sovereigngrace · Oct 14, 2021

Just The Facts said:
Hello

I do nothing of the sort. You do not get to say what I believe and then say that is wrong.

I say there is The Kingdom of God and the 1,000 years Which has not yet begun and the Eternity after Judgement of the Wicked

The difference is I say the imperfect 1,000 years is with the Kingdom on Earth.

You say the 1,000 years is now.... in heaven........... with an Earth that is marked by justice and injustice, righteousness and unrighteousness, sin and perfection, glorification and corruption, in order to support your beliefs.

Please you position is ridiculous. I noticed when I pointed out your hypocrisy on this you just avoided it all together. So lets try again and see if you can actually address Scripture put to you instead of dancing all around and changing the subject.

[20] He who testifies to these things says, "Surely I am coming soon." Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!

This is written in 96 AD Jesus says he is "Coming Soon" Here we are 2,000 years later Jesus still has not returned. So what does Soon mean? Maybe it means Jesus returns in THE LAST DAYS ie:SOON.

More avoidance. I'm afraid to say, that is the Premil MO. That is why Amils get so frustrating debating with Premils. I have been (and am) on various boards like this since 2000 and this is the norm. The only good news is: i have saw many turn because of this. So, ultimately it backfires on those who duck around the issues. I believe that is why Amil is a strong force online today.

The word interpreted quickly is tachu meaning shortly, i.e. without delay, soon, or (by surprise) suddenly, or (by implication, of ease) readily. Even if we were to take the word quickly, a thousand yrs with the Lord is as one day. He has therefore been away for about two days in heavenly terms.

Quite frankly, our perception of time, whether brief or long, is totally irrelevant. We cannot foist that upon God. The swiftness or “slowness” of the time depends on one’s vantage point. While 2000 years may seem a long time to us in time and on earth, to God in heaven, it is but a brief period in the light of eternity.

DavidPT · Oct 14, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
That is absolutely a false accusation. The biggest difference between Premil and Amil is that Premil often takes scripture out of context by interpreting figurative text literally while Amil properly recognizes figurative text and interprets it as such.

Isaiah 2:1 This is what Isaiah son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem: 2 In the last days
the mountain of the Lord’s temple will be established as the highest of the mountains;
it will be exalted above the hills, and all nations will stream to it.

What are "the last days" that Isaiah 2:2 references? When do you think they occur? Aren't reference to "the last days" in scripture normally in reference generally to the last days before Christ's return? Is that how you interpret Isaiah 2? Are the last days of Isaiah 2 different than the last days referenced in these passages:

The last days could be, in my view, pertaining to both the last days in this age and also be involving the millennium in the next age. IOW, the last days involve the past 2000 years through the 2nd coming and then the days concerning the millennium. Or if not that, the last days are only involving what you are taking them to involve, but that some of the verses in question in Isaiah 2, some of it is meaning post the last day of this age, the fact two advents of Christ are involved. If there is no millennium after the 2nd coming though, it would simply mean that----nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more---is being applied to eternity. It certainly doesn't make sense to apply that between the first advent and the 2nd advent since that contradicts what Jesus plainly said in Matthew 24:6-8, for one.

Spiritual Jew said:
Acts 2:16 No, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel: 17 “‘In the last days, God says,
I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. 18 Even on my servants, both men and women,
I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they will prophesy.

Hebrews 1:1 In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.

If you think the last days referenced in these passages are not the same last days referenced in Isaiah 2, then how do you explain that?

I'm certain some of what is recorded in Isaiah 2 applies to this same time period. It is clear that the time period involving these verses you submitted, that this is meaning between the first and 2nd advent and not after the 2nd advent instead. It is not clear, in Isaiah 2:1-4, that every single bit of it only involves the time period between His first and 2nd advent. It's possible that some of it can be meaning after His 2nd advent.

Spiritual Jew said:
Do you see in Acts 2:17, which quotes Joel 2:28, how it says God would pour out His Spirit on all people in the last days? Do you take that to be speaking of literally all people the same way that you take Isaiah 2 to literally be talking about all people and all nations being at peace and not learning war anymore? I doubt that you do. Why not? Don't you want to be consistent in your literal approach to interpreting scripture?

Just because I don't take Acts 2:17, which quotes Joel 2:28, in the literal sense like you described, yet I interpret some of Isaiah 2 a bit differently, I don't see how that's making me inconsistent here? I'm factoring in other things as well, such as what I submitted above. Plus, to me, the fact the text in Isaiah 2:4 clearly does not say only some nations shall not lift up sword against only some nations, neither shall only some nations learn war any more---it does not say that----it says nation shall not lift sword against nation, therefore, there is zero reason to think it's not meaning every single nation.

When was Satan bound?

NCC-1701-A

NCC-1701-A

NCC-1701-A

Amillennialist

Amillennialist

Amillennialist

Amillennialist

Well-Known Member

Amillennialist

NCC-1701-A

Well-Known Member

NCC-1701-A

Amillennialist

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Watching and Praying Always

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads