Adventist view on the thousand years of the Millennium

Hm, it looks like this references the account.

tall73 said:

Thank you. Do you have a source on that? There appears to be competing info:

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: St. Lazarus of Bethany

Reputed first Bishop of Marseilles, died in the second half of the first century

www.newadvent.org

Click to expand...

I find it amusing that the newadvent article starts out stating things confidently as if they are fact, but then admits there is no real evidence and that the earliest claims occur quite late.

prodromos said:

I find it amusing that the newadvent article starts out stating things confidently as if they are fact, but then admits there is no real evidence and that the earliest claims occur quite late.

Click to expand...

How does it start off stating things confidently as if they are fact? It says "According to a tradition, or rather a series of traditions combined at different epochs..." and then gives the account, then afterwards explains issues with the account. Where is the "stating things confidently as if they are fact" in this?

tall73 said:

I was noting the specific criteria we were disagreeing on. My statement regarding your expanding the group granted that the people who died for their testimony of Jesus and the word ARE believers. And of course it has the sentence. I was zeroing in on the portion where you were changing it.

The ones who were beheaded because of, (dia in the accusative) their testimony of Jesus or the word of God​

​

are not the same as

​

all the people who have died as believers.​

​

Martyrs for their testimony or the word of God are a specific group of people who died because of their faith.

You have then equated that with all believers who have died. They are not the same.

Click to expand...

With the exception of Romans 2, do you believe those that came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years, some are non believers?

JSRG said:

How does it start off stating things confidently as if they are fact? It says "According to a tradition, or rather a series of traditions combined at different epochs..." and then gives the account, then afterwards explains issues with the account. Where is the "stating things confidently as if they are fact" in this?

Click to expand...

Is tradition not considered factual in the Catholic Church?

Capbook2 said:

With the exception of Romans 2, do you believe those that came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years, some are non-believers?

Click to expand...

With the exception of Revelation 20 I don't see a 1k years to begin with. Romans 2 does not indicate a 1k years.

As I noted at the outset of my participation in this thread, I am open to various interpretations at the moment on the subject of the 1k years, including Amil, primarily because I have not been able to reconcile all the texts in Revelation 20 with all the texts in the rest of Scripture.

I previously held the Adventist view, but am not able to reconcile Rev. 20:4-6 with their view, or to reconcile the great white throne judgment with their view, due to the particulars of the text.

To answer your question, and I can't tell if we are talking past each other, or there is some other issue going on, yes, I think whoever is raised and reigns with Christ for a thousand years, if such thousand years are literal, or even if the are symbolic of some other period, are believers.

And as I have been noting, Rev. 20 does appear to be speaking of believers who died--but not all believers who died.

Moreover, the great white throne judgment indicates that those who were not found in the book of life were cast in the lake of fire. It does not say all that were there were unbelievers, or that they were lost, or that all were thrown in the lake of fire.

In this respect it is more similar to other texts that spell out a resurrection of the believers and unbelievers:




Now if Revelation didn't exist I would have no reason to think the resurrection of the believers and unbelievers are 1k years apart.

Though some texts suggest they may be two distinct resurrections, but it is unclear if this is based on timing or outcome:

If Revelation 20:4-6 showed all of the dead believers rising at that time, if the great white throne judgment did not say "all those not found written in the book of life" then I would think these parallel, and look at the 1k years in between as not spelled out until that point.

But the problem is Revelation 20:4-6 does not seem to say that, but limits which believers come alive at that time--those who died for the testimony of Jesus and the word of God, and who did not receive the mark.

That is not all believers. That appears to be speaking of a select group who endured the testing being spoken of in the rest of the book regarding the mark of the beast, and the image of the beast.

reddogs said:

If you are left behind on earth, that won't be good to say the least. Its a lie the devil has spread so he can lead the haters of God again after the resurrection of damnation but they will instead go to perdition in the lake of fire..

Click to expand...

Are you trying to tell me that my belief will cause me to be left behind?

We differ again in beliefs: I believe in post tribulation of what is referred to as the rapture - not PRE-tribulation.

2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 says now we beseech you bretheren by the coming of our Lord and our gathering together unto him...... Let no man deceive you by any means, FOR THAT DAY SHALL NOT COME except they're coming falling away first and that man of sin be revealed. (((Speaking of the beast AKA Satan and his Antichrist)))



1 Corinthians 15:52 say in a moment in a twinkling of an eye - AT THE LAST TRUMP - the trumpet will sound and the dead in Christ shall be raised uncorruptible ....... what happens at the last Trumpet ------ Revelation 11:15 the seventh trumpet sounded
the THE KINGDOMS OF THIS WORLD HAVE BECOME THE KINGDOMS OF GOD ........ (((he's here - no returning three and a half years later))

1 Corinthians 15:52 KJV - In a moment, in the twinkling of an - Bible Gateway https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/search=1 Corinthians 15:52&version=KJV

Revelation 11 KJV - And there was given me a reed like unto - Bible Gateway Bible Gateway passage: Revelation 11 - King James Version

What John Nelson Darby started in the 18th century of the pre-rapture was made popular by evangelists like Billy Graham, Hal Lindsey, Oral Roberts, and I'll add Jack Van Impe to this and it's sad because many will be looking to be raptured away - but instead will be here at the rise of the beast and the Antichrist and just may will fall because of the miracles they will see.

prodromos said:

Is tradition not considered factual in the Catholic Church?

Click to expand...

The term "tradition" has several meanings, as my dictionary indicates:

1 the transmission of customs or beliefs from generation to generation, or the fact of being passed on in this way: every shade of color is fixed by tradition and governed by religious laws.
• a long-established custom or belief that has been passed on from one generation to another: Japan's unique cultural traditions.
• [in singular] an artistic or literary method or style established by an artist, writer, or movement, and subsequently followed by others: visionary works in the tradition of William Blake.
2 Theology a doctrine believed to have divine authority though not in the scriptures.
• (in Christianity) doctrine not explicit in the Bible but held to derive from the oral teaching of Jesus and the Apostles.
• (in Judaism) an ordinance of the oral law not in the Torah but held to have been given by God to Moses.
• (in Islam) a saying or act ascribed to the Prophet but not recorded in the Qur'an. See Hadith

It seems fairly obvious to me that the article (an entry from the 1906 Catholic Encyclopedia) was using tradition in the first sense--that is, simply something passed from one generation to another, more specifically in the sense of a story about someone. Indeed, I have often seen "tradition" used to talk about stories about historical figures, often (though not always) with an implication that the story in question is of dubious accuracy. And the article in question precedes the story description with "According to a tradition, or rather a series of traditions combined at different epochs..." as if to further hammer home, even before it explicitly says there is no solid foundation, that it is a dubious one in this case. This isn't using "tradition" in the sense of formal church tradition, or "Sacred Tradition" as some call it.

As this Catholic source says:

Furthermore, Catholics distinguish capital “T” Tradition, which comes from God, either through Christ or the apostles (Luke 10:16), from lowercase “t” human traditions or customs. While the latter may (although need not) contradict the Word of God, the former cannot, and it is capital “T” Tradition about which Catholicism is principally concerned.

Not all differentiate the idea with capital or lowercase letters but the difference is still clear. I believe the same basic idea applies to your own church. So the simple usage of the word "tradition" in that particular paragraph of that Catholic Encyclopedia article is not a statement that the story it then gives is factual. It thus was not in any way confidently stating that the story about Lazarus was true, and indeed even if I were to ignore the next paragraph I would, simply on the second paragraph, view it as saying that the basis for that particular tradition (story) was a questionable one.

tall73 said:

With the exception of Revelation 20 I don't see a 1k years to begin with. Romans 2 does not indicate a 1k years.

Click to expand...

That's a non comparison, in Romans 2, I mean those without the Law be excluded as believers in Revelation 20:4-6.
The "one thousand years" in Revelation 20 is explicitly recorded but the beheaded martyrs as you said includes non believers though not stated in the text but the fact that they will came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years, proves they're all believers.

tall73 said:

As I noted at the outset of my participation in this thread, I am open to various interpretations at the moment on the subject of the 1k years, including Amil, primarily because I have not been able to reconcile all the texts in Revelation 20 with all the texts in the rest of Scripture.

I previously held the Adventist view, but am not able to reconcile Rev. 20:4-6 with their view, or to reconcile the great white throne judgment with their view, due to the particulars of the text.

Click to expand...

May we know what made them irreconcilable?

tall73 said:

To answer your question, and I can't tell if we are talking past each other, or there is some other issue going on, yes, I think whoever is raised and reigns with Christ for a thousand years, if such thousand years are literal, or even if the are symbolic of some other period, are believers.

And as I have been noting, Rev. 20 does appear to be speaking of believers who died--but not all believers who died.

Click to expand...

May we know what's in the text that made non-believers included in;
1. Beheaded because of the testimony of Jesus,
2. Beheaded because of the word of God,
3. Beheaded because had not worshiped the beast or his image,
4. Beheaded because had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand?
May we know where we can insert the nonbelievers just in verse 4?

tall73 said:

Moreover, the great white throne judgment indicates that those who were not found in the book of life were cast in the lake of fire. It does not say all that were there were unbelievers, or that they were lost, or that all were thrown in the lake of fire.

Click to expand...

I believe Revelation 20:4-6 will be irreconcilable with Revelation 20:11-15 if you can answer these questions positively;
1. How can we insert the inclusion of non-believers in Revelation 20:4? As they will came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
We must bear in mind that Revelation 20:4 will transpire before the 1000 years.
2. How can we insert the inclusion of believers in Revelation 20:11-15 thrown into the lake of fire, where the first resurrected believers are to reigned with Christ for a thousand years, means they will be with Christ or they shall always be with the Lord. (1Thes 4:17)
And also to be reminded that this will happen after the 1000 years. Proven by Revelation 20:5.

Rev 20:5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection.

tall73 said:

In this respect it is more similar to other texts that spell out a resurrection of the believers and unbelievers:

Daniel 12:1-3​

1 “At that time shall arise Michael, the great prince who has charge of your people. And there shall be a time of trouble, such as never has been since there was a nation till that time. But at that time your people shall be delivered, everyone whose name shall be found written in the book. 2 And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. 3 And those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky above; and those who turn many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever. (ESV)​

Click to expand...

Yes, there are two resurrection;
1. First for the believers, Revelation 20:4, before the 1000 years, - as they will came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
2. Second for the non-believers, Revelation 20:11-15, after the 1000 years, - The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed.

tall73 said:

John 5:27-29

27 And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man. 28 Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice 29 and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment. (ESV)​

​

Acts 24:14-15​

14 But this I confess to you, that according to the Way, which they call a sect, I worship the God of our fathers, believing everything laid down by the Law and written in the Prophets, 15 having a hope in God, which these men themselves accept, that there will be a resurrection of both the just and the unjust. (ESV)​

​

Acts 24:14-15​

14 But this I confess to you, that according to the Way, which they call a sect, I worship the God of our fathers, believing everything laid down by the Law and written in the Prophets, 15 having a hope in God, which these men themselves accept, that there will be a resurrection of both the just and the unjust. (ESV)​

​

Luke 11:31-32​

31 The queen of the South will rise up at the judgment with the men of this generation and condemn them, for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and behold, something greater than Solomon is here. 32 The men of Nineveh will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here. (ESV)​

​

Now if Revelation didn't exist I would have no reason to think the resurrection of the believers and unbelievers are 1k years apart.

Though some texts suggest they may be two distinct resurrections, but it is unclear if this is based on timing or outcome:

Luke 14:12-14​

12 He said also to the man who had invited him, “When you give a dinner or a banquet, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, lest they also invite you in return and you be repaid. 13 But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, 14 and you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you. For you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.” (ESV)​

​

If Revelation 20:4-6 showed all of the dead believers rising at that time, if the great white throne judgment did not say "all those not found written in the book of life" then I would think these parallel, and look at the 1k years in between as not spelled out until that point.

But the problem is Revelation 20:4-6 does not seem to say that, but limits which believers come alive at that time--those who died for the testimony of Jesus and the word of God, and who did not receive the mark.

That is not all believers. That appears to be speaking of a select group who endured the testing being spoken of in the rest of the book regarding the mark of the beast, and the image of the beast.

Click to expand...

The distinction of the two resurrection are both recorded in Revelation, the just and unjust will not be resurrected at one time.
1. First for the believers, Revelation 20:4, before the 1000 years, - as the martyrs will came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.(Rev 20:4)
2. Second for the non-believers, Revelation 20:11-15, after the 1000 years, - The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed.(Rev 20:5)

Capbook2 said:

That's a non comparison, in Romans 2, I mean those without the Law be excluded as believers in Revelation 20:4-6.
The "one thousand years" in Revelation 20 is explicitly recorded but the beheaded martyrs as you said includes non believers though not stated in the text but the fact that they will came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years, proves they're all believers.

Click to expand...

You don't seem to be able to understand anything I am saying. So probably no need to continue.

I stated those raised are among believers--but are a more specific group among believers, not all believers.

Capbook2 said:

May we know what made them irreconcilable?

Click to expand...

If you haven't figured that out after all this time then we are wasting our energy.

Go back and re-read or don't. Up to you.

Capbook2 said:

May we know what's in the text that made non-believers included in;
1. Beheaded because of the testimony of Jesus,
2. Beheaded because of the word of God,
3. Beheaded because had not worshiped the beast or his image,
4. Beheaded because had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand?

Click to expand...

They aren't. Go back and re-read or don't.

Capbook2 said:

Yes, there are two resurrection;
1. First for the believers, Revelation 20:4, before the 1000 years, - as they will came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.

Click to expand...

For the MARTYRS among the believers. Which you won't address. So we are probably wasting our time.

Capbook2 said:

2. Second for the non-believers, Revelation 20:11-15,

Click to expand...

Which it doesn't say, and you won't acknowledge, so we are probably wasting our time.

Go back and re-read if you want answers, or don't. Up to you. I am tired of answering questions when you will not, or cannot, engage with what I am saying.