Revelation 20 Bible Study:

BobRyan said:

Rev 19, 20, 21 say that is exactly what happens and Peter resolves it by pointing out that the day of the Lord is a 1000 year period of time.

Click to expand...

In no way, shape or from was Peter talking about the length of the day of the Lord in 2 Peter 3:8. You are not looking at the context of that verse. The context of the verse can be seen in the verse which follows it.

2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

The reason Peter pointed out how one day and a thousand years make no difference to the Lord is to show that "the Lord is not slack concerning His promise", which is the promise of His second coming that was referenced in verse 4. So, what Peter said in verse had absolutely nothing to do with the duration of the day of the Lord that he describes in verses 10-12. Nothing whatsoever. Instead, it had to do with how long it is taking for Him to come. Which, from the Lord's perspective, is not long at all since He exists outside of time and no amount of time, including one day or a thousand years, makes any difference to Him.

At Christ's appearing the saints are taken to heaven

Click to expand...

Where does scripture teach this? Nowhere. Please don't make claims like this unless you can show scripture which teaches it.

and the wicked destroyed - 1000 years later at the end of that symbolic "day" in 2 Peter 3 terms - the wicked are resurrected, judged and cast into the lake of fire. This is the real second coming where Jesus comes to Earth to reign.

Click to expand...

On the day of the Lord the heavens and earth will be burned up. That will not take long. Another thing you're missing is what Peter said right after describing the burning up of the heavens and earth:

2 Peter 3:13 Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.

Notice that it is "according to His promise" that we look for new heavens and a new earth. Which promise? The promise of His second coming. That means we look for the new heavens and new earth to be ushered in at His second coming. If the new heavens and new earth weren't ushered in until 1000+ years later then what Peter said in 2 Peter 3:13 would not make any sense.

Spiritual Jew said:

In no way, shape or from was Peter talking about the length of the day of the Lord in 2 Peter 3:8.

Click to expand...

hmmm --- let's see.

2 Peter 3:
3 Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, 4 and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue just as they were from the beginning of creation.” 5 For when they maintain this, it escapes their notice that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water, 6 through which the world at that time was destroyed by being flooded with water. 7 But by His word the present heavens and earth are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly people.

8 But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. 9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not willing for any to perish, but for all to come to repentance.

10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be discovered.

=======================

yep he appears to be talking about the "Day of the Lord" and wouldn't you know it - Rev 19 and 20 agree - there is 1000 years separating the appearing of Christ in Rev 19 for the Second death event in Rev 20.

So while it is true that the formula in 2 Peter 3 does show that God has all the time in the world that He needs to accomplish His plan -- it also shows why Peter in 2 Peter 3 - is treating that 1000 year span in Rev 20 -- as though it hall happens on one day.

Thinking out loud here.

Assuming the day of the Lord is a thousand years, that would obviously mean the following in regards to Revelation 20. The following would have to be the logic. Which then demonstrates there is no logic to it at all, that the day of the Lord includes the millennium.

A) Only Revelation 20:1-6 involve a thousand years.

B) Revelation 20:7-10 do not involve a thousand years. Those verses are meaning after the thousand years.

C) Nor does Revelation 20:11-15 involve a thousand years. Those verses are meaning after the thousand years.

Which this means this in 2 Peter 3.

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?


These verses make it crystal clear, which means it can't get any clearer than this, everything recorded in these verses are fulfilled during the day of the Lord, not after the day of the Lord. Which then means if the day of the Lord is a thousand years, thus includes the millennium, everything recorded in 2 Peter 3:10-12 have to be fulfilled before satan's little season begins. Because, once again, only Revelation 20:1-6 involve a thousand years. Revelation 20:7-15 certainly don't.

BobRyan said:

hmmm --- let's see.

2 Peter 3:
3 Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, 4 and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue just as they were from the beginning of creation.” 5 For when they maintain this, it escapes their notice that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water, 6 through which the world at that time was destroyed by being flooded with water. 7 But by His word the present heavens and earth are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly people.

8 But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. 9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not willing for any to perish, but for all to come to repentance.

10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be discovered.

Click to expand...

You apparently ignored what I said since you didn't address anything I said, so I'll say it again.

2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

The reason Peter pointed out how one day and a thousand years make no difference to the Lord is to show that "the Lord is not slack concerning His promise", which is the promise of His second coming that was referenced in verse 4. So, what Peter said in verse had absolutely nothing to do with the duration of the day of the Lord that he describes in verses 10-12. Nothing whatsoever. Instead, it had to do with how long it is taking for Him to come. Which, from the Lord's perspective, is not long at all since He exists outside of time and no amount of time, including one day or a thousand years, makes any difference to Him.

DavidPT said:

Thinking out loud here.

Assuming the day of the Lord is a thousand years, that would obviously mean the following in regards to Revelation 20. The following would have to be the logic. Which then demonstrates there is no logic to it at all, that the day of the Lord includes the millennium.

A) Only Revelation 20:1-6 involve a thousand years.

B) Revelation 20:7-10 do not involve a thousand years. Those verses are meaning after the thousand years.

C) Nor does Revelation 20:11-15 involve a thousand years. Those verses are meaning after the thousand years.

Which this means this in 2 Peter 3.

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?


These verses make it crystal clear, which means it can't get any clearer than this, everything recorded in these verses are fulfilled during the day of the Lord, not after the day of the Lord. Which then means if the day of the Lord is a thousand years, thus includes the millennium, everything recorded in 2 Peter 3:10-12 have to be fulfilled before satan's little season begins. Because, once again, only Revelation 20:1-6 involve a thousand years. Revelation 20:7-15 certainly don't.

Click to expand...

I can't figure out what your point was here. Are you trying to argue that the day of the Lord refers to the thousand years or are you arguing against that?

DavidPT said:

Thinking out loud here.

Assuming the day of the Lord is a thousand years, that would obviously mean the following in regards to Revelation 20. The following would have to be the logic. Which then demonstrates there is no logic to it at all, that the day of the Lord includes the millennium.

A) Only Revelation 20:1-6 involve a thousand years.

B) Revelation 20:7-10 do not involve a thousand years. Those verses are meaning after the thousand years.

C) Nor does Revelation 20:11-15 involve a thousand years. Those verses are meaning after the thousand years.

Which this means this in 2 Peter 3.

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

These verses make it crystal clear, which means it can't get any clearer than this, everything recorded in these verses are fulfilled during the day of the Lord, not after the day of the Lord. Which then means if the day of the Lord is a thousand years, thus includes the millennium, everything recorded in 2 Peter 3:10-12 have to be fulfilled before satan's little season begins. Because, once again, only Revelation 20:1-6 involve a thousand years. Revelation 20:7-15 certainly don't.

Click to expand...

David, the way we can correctly understand the Day of the Lord is to realize it has a beginning and an end. The Day of the Lord began with the advent of Christ coming to earth, and it will end when He comes again the second time.

We who live after the cross and resurrection are able to see/understand in a way the Old Covenant faithful saints could not, that the Day of the Lord comes in time, which John likens to a thousand years and will be finished when the seventh trumpet begins to sound. Then after Satan's little season, still happening in time, but not a thousand symbolic years that has finished, but for a "little season" of time. When this little season for Satan is fulfilled, the Day (single) of the Lord will come once more for Christ to gather His elect from throughout the earth, then fire from heaven will destroy the old/first earth and ETERNITY with no more time, will begin on the new earth.

The Old Testament prophets could not have possibly understood the Day of the Lord would come in two stages at two different times. How could they when they speak of only one coming of the Lord when all that is written of Christ, the Messiah/Savior would be fulfilled at this time called the Day of the Lord.

Spiritual Jew said:

I can't figure out what your point was here. Are you trying to argue that the day of the Lord refers to the thousand years or are you arguing against that?

Click to expand...

I did say this---The following would have to be the logic. Which then demonstrates there is no logic to it at all, that the day of the Lord includes the millennium---which indicates that I'm arguing that it is illogical that the day of the Lord includes the millennium. Keeping in mind, per Premil the millennium is after the 2nd coming and some Premils, which doesn't include me in this case, argue that 2 Peter 3:10-12 is not something that happens during the 2nd coming, but happens much later after the thousand years, such as during or after the great white throne judgment.

Which then contradicts what they are arguing, that the day of the Lord is a thousand years and involves the future millennium. Except like I already pointed out, only Revelation 20:1-6 involve a thousand years. Verses 7-15 are meaning after the thousand years. Per this scenario it would no longer be the day of the Lord once satan's little season begins. Therefore, it is not reasonable to apply anything recorded in 2 Peter 3:10-12 to anything but the 2nd coming.

rwb said:

The Day of the Lord began with the advent of Christ coming to earth, and it will end when He comes again the second time.

Click to expand...

Even this contradicts 2 Peter 3:10-12 because that passage indicates the DOTL comes as a thief in the night, accompanied by--the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up---which clearly did not happen during the first advent. I find it unreasonable that something that is allegedly already here, that it can also somehow still come as a thief in the future. The day of the Lord recorded in the NT is one time event only. Granted, it may involve more than a single 24 hour day, but even so, it's still a one time event only, that comes as a thief in the night in the future.

DavidPT said:

I did say this---The following would have to be the logic. Which then demonstrates there is no logic to it at all, that the day of the Lord includes the millennium---which indicates that I'm arguing that it is illogical that the day of the Lord includes the millennium.

Click to expand...

Okay. So, what does the day of the Lord include, in your view?

Keeping in mind, per Premil the millennium is after the 2nd coming and some Premils, which doesn't include me in this case, argue that 2 Peter 3:10-12 is not something that happens during the 2nd coming, but happens much later after the thousand years, such as during or after the great white throne judgment.

Click to expand...

Right. And that view seems to not take into account Satan's little season. It seems to have what is recorded in Revelation 20:9 as happening at the end of the thousand years instead of at the end of a little season that follows the thousand years.

Which then contradicts what they are arguing, that the day of the Lord is a thousand years and involves the future millennium. Except like I already pointed out, only Revelation 20:1-6 involve a thousand years. Verses 7-15 are meaning after the thousand years. Per this scenario it would no longer be the day of the Lord once satan's little season begins. Therefore, it is not reasonable to apply anything recorded in 2 Peter 3:10-12 to anything but the 2nd coming.

Click to expand...

Okay, I see your point now. Thanks for clarifying it. And I agree with your point. But, then there is the matter of how you interpret 2 Peter 3:10-12, but we don't have to get into that here.

DavidPT said:

Even this contradicts 2 Peter 3:10-12 because that passage indicates the DOTL comes as a thief in the night, accompanied by--the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up---which clearly did not happen during the first advent. I find it unreasonable that something that is allegedly already here, that it can also somehow still come as a thief in the future. The day of the Lord recorded in the NT is one time event only. Granted, it may involve more than a single 24 hour day, but even so, it's still a one time event only, that comes as a thief in the night in the future.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I think we have to be careful about the terms we use. In passages like 1 Thess 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12, the day of the Lord refers to the day Christ returns and things that will happen on that day. Scripture does indicate that "the last days" have been ongoing since the day of Pentecost (see Acts 2:16-21), but I would not describe that as "the day of the Lord" since that just makes things confusing when looking at passages that talk about the day of the Lord coming like a thief in the night in the future.

DavidPT said:

Even this contradicts 2 Peter 3:10-12 because that passage indicates the DOTL comes as a thief in the night, accompanied by--the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up---which clearly did not happen during the first advent. I find it unreasonable that something that is allegedly already here, that it can also somehow still come as a thief in the future. The day of the Lord recorded in the NT is one time event only. Granted, it may involve more than a single 24 hour day, but even so, it's still a one time event only, that comes as a thief in the night in the future.

Click to expand...

How does understanding the Day of the Lord that came at Pentecost in TIME symbolized as a thousand years and the final ONE Day of the Lord that will come as a thief in the night contradict 2 Pe 3:10-12? Both are the Day of the Lord that was prophesied would come when the Messiah came. The prophets did not conceive of the Day of the Lord coming twice, they write as though He would come but once in time and accomplish all that was written He would do when He came.

I don't find any of the prophets of old indicating the promised Messiah would come more than once. All of their prophesy indicates but one coming of the Lord. Yet as we read the prophesies it is apparent that the prophets believed with this one coming Day of the Lord, not only whosoever calls upon the name of the Lord would be saved, but also speak of wrath, vengeance, and judgment upon the earth when He comes again. But how could they know He would come again to judge? They write as though they believe He will come only once in TIME when all that is written of Him will be fulfilled.

It's only those who live after the cross and resurrection that have understanding of the Day of the Lord that came at Pentecost with the fulfillment of the prophet Joel and the outpouring of the Spirit. We clearly see the prophesy of Joel beginning to be fulfilled in those days at Pentecost, and after but we know his prophesy was not fulfilled fully on that one day but is being fulfilled in the days since Pentecost. Because the prophesy is fulfilled in the Gospel age when many people will call upon the name of the Lord and be saved. That's why Luke speaks of Joel's prophesy as last days that will come to an end when the Lord comes again on ONE day. Both are the Day of the Lord, spoken of coming in time and also when we see the signs in heaven and earth.

Acts 2:16-21 (KJV) But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable [day] of the Lord come: And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Joel 2:1 (KJV) Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in my holy mountain: let all the inhabitants of the land tremble: for the day of the LORD cometh, for it is nigh at hand;

Joel 2:28-32 (KJV) And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those [days] will I pour out my spirit. And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible [day] of the LORD come. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call.

Spiritual Jew said:

Yeah, I think we have to be careful about the terms we use. In passages like 1 Thess 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12, the day of the Lord refers to the day Christ returns and things that will happen on that day. Scripture does indicate that "the last days" have been ongoing since the day of Pentecost (see Acts 2:16-21), but I would not describe that as "the day of the Lord" since that just makes things confusing when looking at passages that talk about the day of the Lord coming like a thief in the night in the future.

Click to expand...

But that is how the prophets of old describe the Day of the Lord. When Luke writes of all that happened at Pentecost, he says it is fulfillment of the Day of the Lord that Joel foretells would come.

rwb said:

But that is how the prophets of old describe the Day of the Lord. When Luke writes of all that happened at Pentecost, he says it is fulfillment of the Day of the Lord that Joel foretells would come.

Click to expand...

But, the day of the Lord that is referenced in passages like 1 Thess 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12 is a reference to the future day of Christ's return. We need to be able to differentiate between that day and an ongoing day of the Lord somehow without causing confusion. How do you propose we do that? My suggestion is to refer to the time period since Pentecost as "the last days" since that is how Peter described what was happening on the day of Pentecost. He said what was happening at that time was the beginning of the fulfillment of "the last days" that Joel prophesied about.

Acts 2:16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; 17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

We know that the last days lead up to the day of the Lord when Christ returns, as 2 Peter 3:3-13 indicates.

Spiritual Jew said:

But, the day of the Lord that is referenced in passages like 1 Thess 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12 is a reference to the future day of Christ's return. We need to be able to differentiate between that day and an ongoing day of the Lord somehow without causing confusion. How do you propose we do that? My suggestion is to refer to the time period since Pentecost as "the last days" since that is how Peter described what was happening on the day of Pentecost. He said what was happening at that time was the beginning of the fulfillment of "the last days" that Joel prophesied about.

Acts 2:16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; 17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

We know that the last days lead up to the day of the Lord when Christ returns, as 2 Peter 3:3-13 indicates.

Click to expand...

These last days don't lead up to the Day of the Lord when Christ returns, they usher in the Day of the Lord that will come. The Day of the Lord is the age/era/time when the Kingdom of heaven is being built as the Gospel is proclaimed unto all the earth. That age/era/time has an end date the Old Covenant prophets foretell, but only as the Day of the Lord that would come in time when the promised Messiah came. For the prophets it was written as an age/era/time when the Messiah would come both as Savior/Redeemer and also as Judge in great wrath. The prophets had no historical event (cross & resurrection) to show them there would be a final Day of the Lord that must come again for the prophesy to be fully fulfilled. The prophets believed that when the promised Messiah finally came it would be forever.

It is only by living after the cross and resurrection that believers are given to understand through the power of the Word and Spirit that this age of building the Kingdom of heaven is the Day of the Lord and that this day/age/era ends with Christ coming again to fulfill all that will come after time is no more and Christ comes again. The fulfill of wrath and judgment against all who remain in unbelief will finally fulfill the Day of the Lord all the prophets anticipated would usher in a new, final, single day of the Lord with a new heaven and new earth that Peter writes will come on that day.

rwb said:

These last days don't lead up to the Day of the Lord when Christ returns, they usher in the Day of the Lord that will come.

Click to expand...

I don't know what that means. What is the difference? What Paul and Peter indicated in passages like 1 Thess 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12 is that the day of the Lord comes unexpectedly, just like Jesus Himself said about the day of His return, and on that day believers will be caught up to Christ and unbelievers will experience "sudden destruction" from which "they will not escape". Then the judgment occurs and the new heavens and new earth are ushered in. I'm describing the typical Amil belief here. Is this not how you see it?

The Day of the Lord is the age/era/time when the Kingdom of heaven is being built as the Gospel is proclaimed unto all the earth.

Click to expand...

That is not what is described in passages like 1 Thess 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12 that speak about the future day of the Lord that will arrive unexpectedly like a thief in the night. We need to differentiate between what you're talking about and what those passages describe and I'm not seeing where you're doing that.

Spiritual Jew said:

Jesus was not crucified in Jerusalem

Click to expand...

Jesus Christ:
"Nevertheless I must journey on today and tomorrow and the next day; for it cannot be that a prophet would perish outside of Jerusalem. (Lk 13:33)

Spiritual Jew said:

Jesus was not crucified in Jerusalem

Click to expand...

Luke the Inspired Gospel Writer:
"One of them, named Cleopas, answered and said to Him, 'Are You the only one visiting Jerusalem and unaware of the things which have happened here in these days?'" (Luke 24:18)

parousia70 said:

Jesus Christ:
"Nevertheless I must journey on today and tomorrow and the next day; for it cannot be that a prophet would perish outside of Jerusalem. (Lk 13:33)

Click to expand...

Does this verse somehow trump Hebrews 13:12 and John 19:20 which both indicate that Jesus was crucified outside of Jerusalem? Do you not have any interest in telling me how you reconcile Hebrews 13:12 and John 19:20 with your view? Or do you think you don't need to reconcile your view with Hebrews 13:12 and John 19:20?

Anyway, I think you're missing the context here.

Luke 13:31 At that time some Pharisees came to Jesus and said to him, “Leave this place and go somewhere else. Herod wants to kill you.” 32 He replied, “Go tell that fox, ‘I will keep on driving out demons and healing people today and tomorrow, and on the third day I will reach my goal.’ 33 In any case, I must press on today and tomorrow and the next day—for surely no prophet can die outside Jerusalem!

Jesus was talking to the Pharisees in that verse. I believe He was speaking to them facetiously. In Matthew 23 He talked about how they and their forefathers killed all the prophets. So, He was alluding to that fact. He was, in effect, saying that since their ancestors had killed all the prophets in Jerusalem then they should kill Him there, too. But, in no way was it actually a requirement for a prophet to die in Jerusalem. He wasn't saying that He had to die there. He was only alluding to the fact that the prophets before them had been killed there and I believe, because of that, He was jokingly acting as if a prophet could not be killed anywhere else. I believe He was saying, in effect, "for surely no prophet can die outside Jerusalem since that is where your forefathers killed the prophets, right?". Yet, John the Baptist was a prophet and he died in Galilee, so it can't possibly be the case that Jesus was saying it wasn't possible for a prophet to be killed outside of Jerusalem.

If there was some law that a prophet could only be killed in Jerusalem, then your interpretation of that verse might be valid, but there was not. Not all prophets were killed there, including John the Baptist.

Another thing that shows that Jesus was not saying that all prophets, including Him, had to die in Jerusalem, is this:

Matthew 23:33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? 34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:

Jesus said He would be sending them more prophets and they would kill some of them "from city to city". So, clearly, Jesus could not possibly have been saying in Luke 13:33 that a prophet must die in Jerusalem.

Luke the Inspired Gospel Writer:
"One of them, named Cleopas, answered and said to Him, 'Are You the only one visiting Jerusalem and unaware of the things which have happened here in these days?'" (Luke 24:18)

Click to expand...

Is John not also an Inspired Gospel Writer?

John 19:20 Many of the Jews read this sign, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and the sign was written in Aramaic, Latin and Greek.

Was the following not written by an Inspired Bible Writer:

Hebrews 13:12 And so Jesus also suffered outside the city gate to make the people holy through his own blood.

I'm sure you can discern that being "near the city" and "outside the city gate" is not being in the city, right? But, you still want to insist that He was crucified in the city? I use verses that explicitly state that Jesus was crucified outside the city. You use verses that, at best, only possibly could imply what you believe about where Jesus was crucified.

Are you aware that people can talk like Cleopas did there in Luke 24:18 about things that happen near where they are located? That happens all the time. I live in a suburb of a good sized city and I have often talked about things happening "here" even though it didn't technically happen in my suburb but happened in the nearby bigger city instead. If you accept that Jesus was crucified outside the city of Jerusalem as Hebrews 13:12 and John 19:20 indicate, as I do, then that is the only way to understand what Cleopas must have meant.

Spiritual Jew said:

I don't know what that means. What is the difference? What Paul and Peter indicated in passages like 1 Thess 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12 is that the day of the Lord comes unexpectedly, just like Jesus Himself said about the day of His return, and on that day believers will be caught up to Christ and unbelievers will experience "sudden destruction" from which "they will not escape". Then the judgment occurs and the new heavens and new earth are ushered in. I'm describing the typical Amil belief here. Is this not how you see it?

Click to expand...

Paul and Peter lived after the cross and resurrection, so naturally the Day of the Lord they longed for is the final Day of the Lord that will finally fulfill the Day of the Lord the Old Testament prophets foretold would come. I see the final Day of the Lord in the same way you describe, but I also see we are now and have been since the first advent of Christ living in the Day of the Lord the prophets foretold would come.

We know the Day of the Lord the prophets foretold began at Pentecost because Luke tells us in Acts 2 that what happened at Pentecost was fulfillment of that which the prophet Joel foretold. Though the prophesy came on that day, it was not completely fulfilled on that day. But Joel writes as though the Messiah's coming at Pentecost and His second coming all come to pass on the Day Christ came. Therefore, it seems that when prophesying of the Day of the Lord coming, Joel anticipated an age/era and not one day but the whole age/era of the Gospel. The time John likens to a thousand years. The prophets write of the coming Day of the Lord as eternity. They believed that when the promised Messiah finally did come that He would redeem them and there would be no end of time after His coming.

The prophets had it right! Because the cross did not end the Day of the Lord. It simply changed the location of the Lord because His Day/Age/Era never ended because He is since His resurrection and ascension still ruling and reigning over His Kingdom from heaven.

Spiritual Jew said:

That is not what is described in passages like 1 Thess 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12 that speak about the future day of the Lord that will arrive unexpectedly like a thief in the night. We need to differentiate between what you're talking about and what those passages describe and I'm not seeing where you're doing that.

Click to expand...

They, we, and all who live and believe after the cross and resurrection have been living in the Day of the Lord since Christ came. All that the prophets foretold would come to pass when this day/age/era came have been fulfilled since He came. The only thing yet to be fulfilled in this Day of the Lord is the Day, not age/era/ or more time, but the last Day of the Lord all the New Testament writers foretell will come but write as if the last day of the Lord was also the time when His Holy Spirit was poured upon all who are of faith. The Old Covenant prophets never foretell Messiah's coming as two separate comings. They knew of only ONE coming of the Messiah when all that was foretold of Him would be fulfilled.

The way we differentiate between Christ's first and second coming is through His Spirit in us. The Day of the Lord we are now living in is spiritually discerned, because the Kingdom Christ came with is not physical but a spiritual Kingdom of heaven. All who are of faith, believing Christ has come and He is ruling, and reigning are, through His Spirit in us, ruling and reigning in time (1000 yrs) with Him. We (believers) are living in the Day of the Lord in time, likened to a thousand years NOW in physical bodies. And if we die in faith we will still be living with Christ, but in heaven as living (spirit) soul. So for believers, as with Christ, death has no power over us because death cannot keep us from being with the Lord in His Day/Age/Era and finally eternally.

rwb said:

Paul and Peter lived after the cross and resurrection, so naturally the Day of the Lord they longed for is the final Day of the Lord that will finally fulfill the Day of the Lord the Old Testament prophets foretold would come. I see the final Day of the Lord in the same way you describe,

Click to expand...

Okay, that works for me.

but I also see we are now and have been since the first advent of Christ living in the Day of the Lord the prophets foretold would come.

Click to expand...

I think it just causes confusion when the same terms are used for different things, so I don't personally make a practice of doing that. I instead refer to the time since the first coming of Christ as "the last days" since Peter indicated that "the last days" (or the New Testament time period/era) had begun on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:16-21). The last days will continue until the last day when Christ returns. I prefer to do this just so that no one needs to wonder what I'm talking about when I refer to "the last days" and what I'm talking about when I refer to "the day of the Lord". I do that for the purpose of trying to save the time of having to explain what I'm talking about repeatedly.

Spiritual Jew said:

I think it just causes confusion when the same terms are used for different things, so I don't personally make a practice of doing that. I instead refer to the time since the first coming of Christ as "the last days" since Peter indicated that "the last days" (or the New Testament time period/era) had begun on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:16-21). The last days will continue until the last day when Christ returns. I prefer to do this just so that no one needs to wonder what I'm talking about when I refer to "the last days" and what I'm talking about when I refer to "the day of the Lord". I do that for the purpose of trying to save the time of having to explain what I'm talking about repeatedly.

Click to expand...

I understand and the prophets also speak of things that come to pass in these last days. The reason I continue to speak of this time as the Day of the Lord is because the last days speak of physical time between the two advents of Christ. But that does not show how the Day of the Lord in time is not physical but spiritual reality. It's apparent on these boards that many don't believe we are currently living in the Day of the Lord. That's partly because there are some things that cannot be understood physically fulfilled. Like for example beating plows into pruning hooks. Many believe this is something that must physically come to pass in the Day of the Lord. So rather than trying to understand the spiritual fulfillment the Day of the Lord is pushed into the future for ONE thousand physical years when it is assumed this will be physically fulfilled then.

I believe it is vital to understand that we are now and have been living in the Day of the Lord spiritually since the first advent of Christ. Then we can understand how the Kingdom Christ came with is not a physical Kingdom but a spiritual Kingdom and that these last days have an end. But the spiritual Kingdom of heaven never ends for it is eternal, and all who are born again are now in His Kingdom through the Spirit in us living and reigning with Christ in His Day/Age/Era/Time that has no end. So, when we die, we are still living in the Day of the Lord's coming, spiritually alive in heaven, and when He comes again His Day will not end, it will simply never again be measured by time for then it will be eternal.