Amils have some explaining to do.

[BABerean2]

The argument of the A-mills goes around "it's the first (protos) resurrection, and Christ's resurrection is the first (protos) resurrection, and therefore it's talking about a 'spiritual resurrection' (which apparently takes place when some is born (gennao) of the Spirit from above)

Is the "first resurrection" in Revelation chapter 20 the only bodily resurrection in the Book of Revelation, or is there another found in chapter 11?


.

 

[Zao is life]

Is the "first resurrection" in Revelation chapter 20 the only bodily resurrection in the Book of Revelation, or is there another found in chapter 11? .

The one in chapter 11 is the same and occurs at the same time. The two witnesses rise from the dead. Paul told us that the dead in Christ will rise first and whoever is still alive will be changed.

It's you who has the chronology in the Revelation jumbled up. The beast from the abyss who kills the two witnesses is the same beast who makes war against the saints and overcomes them and the same beast that attacks the harlot city and the same beast that gathers his armies for the battle of Armageddon and goes to war against the Lamb. The souls who John sees in heaven afterwards are those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Christ and refusal to worship the beast or receive his mark.

It's all there in the Revelation - but when your understanding is partially blinded by your own programming with your own beliefs, you will continue to interpret all parts of the Revelation and the entire N.T "in the 'light' of" your starting premise, and continue to get it jumbled up - all the while believing you have it upright and see it all clearly.

Praise the Lord Jesus He told His APOSTLES not to call one another "Teacher", "Teacher" because only ONE is our Teacher - JESUS.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Yes, anyone who is born of the Spirit is filled with the Spirit - but still, many walk around filled with the Spirit, and blindfolded by their own interpretations of certain aspects of scripture, all at the same time. That's the wine that makes us drunk - the power of belief in our own beliefs.

Everyone apart from you.

 

[sovereigngrace]

.. says the one who clearly does not grasp apocalyptic language, or only partially grasps it. Says the one who sees just as darkly through the dim stained glass as anyone else, yet claims he sees clearly.

If you have nothing of substance to bring to the table, keep your ad hominem to yourself.

 

[Zao is life]

Everyone apart from you.

Nope. But I don't continuously attempt to prove my point by claiming superior understanding (the way you do) - I'm only responding to your false claims regarding your 'superior' understanding. If you and every single Christian would go back to the position of "I don't know I'm right, I think I'm understanding this aright, but I'm willing to learn and to change my mind if necessary", then the Lord will bless us all with a depth of knowledge and understanding that by now His church should have (but doesn't, because of erroneous doctrines engraved in stone).

 

[Zao is life]

If you have nothing of substance to bring to the table, keep your ad hominem to yourself.

Likewise. Just bear your words in mind next time you do it again to anyone.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Nope. But I don't continuously attempt to prove my point by claiming superior understanding (the way you do) - I'm only responding to your false claims regarding your 'superior' understanding. If you and every single Christian would go back to the position of "I don't know I'm right, I think I'm understanding this aright, but I'm willing to learn and to change my mind if necessary", then the Lord will bless us all with a depth of knowledge and understanding that by now His church should have (but doesn't, because of erroneous doctrines engraved in stone).

You should start taking your own advice before calling Amils drunken and blind. This is vicious ad hominem that is barred on this forum. We are not going to take lectures from you.

 

[Zao is life]

You should start taking your own advice before calling Amils drunken and blind. This is vicious ad hominem that is barred on this forum. We are not going to take lectures from you.

I was using figurative language - as most here will have picked up and as ALL A-mills should understand - 'the thousand years is figurative language. It's symbolic for 2,000 years or more".

AND I spoke to an A-miller here and explained to him that we ALL are drunk on our own beliefs and it shows the power of belief.

 

[Zao is life]

You have been told countless times and ignored the truth countless times.

Until you grasp apocalyptic language you are never going to comprehend the book Revelation. What is more: until you grasp the various recaps you are never going to comprehend the book Revelation. You reject both. That is why you hold on for grim death to the Premil theory.

You should start taking your own advice before calling Amils drunken and blind. This is vicious ad hominem that is barred on this forum. We are not going to take lectures from you.

I'm not attacking you, personally. Merely addressing the balls you throw into the court. Claiming superior knowledge/understanding does not prove anything to anyone.

 

[Christian Gedge]

Just to fill you in here. I was born into the Open Brethren whose founder, John Darby, popularized the Dispensational theory. My grandfather traveled around New Zealand with a tent preaching that Mussolini was the Antichrist. (very convincingly too) My adult conversion was in the Assemblies of God - another staunchly premill denomination.

My first book on eschatology was by Oral Roberts. Then I went to Bible college where the lecturers were all Premil except the dean who was Amill. I thought he was one confused puppy.

After about 40 years of searching the scriptures I came to an Amil understanding. It was quite a journey. Anyone wanting to understand Amill needs to start looking at the Bible through New Covenant eyes. Recommended is "The Case for Amillennialism" by Kim Riddlebarger.

 

[Timtofly]

Human beings don't require a loosed Satan roaming around in order to do evil deeds.
We are fully capable of that all on our own.

That is really not the point. The point is:

"because the Accuser of our brothers,
who accuses them day and night before God, has been thrown out!"

That is us, brethren, not OT believers.

 

[sovereigngrace]

I'm not attacking you, personally. Merely addressing the balls you throw into the court. Claiming superior knowledge/understanding does not prove anything to anyone.

Yes you are. I do not claim superior knowledge, and you know that. I am simply relaying to you the biblical narrative that you always seem to struggle with. Countless passages are dismissed or ignored if they interfere with your Premil doctrine.

 

[Zao is life]

Yes you are. I do not claim superior knowledge, and you know that. I am simply relaying to you the biblical narrative that you always seem to struggle with. Countless passages are dismissed or ignored if they interfere with your Premil doctrine.

I'm not going to come back with a retort (hopefully you'll understand that I genuinely mean this): We should not be attacking one another - especially because this debate will not end until one of us is proved wrong by the return of the Lord.

I apologize to you for my tone.

Romans 3:4
"For what? If some did not believe, will not their unbelief nullify the faith of God? Let it not be! But let God be true, and every man a liar; as it is written, "That You might be justified in Your sayings, and will overcome when You are judged."

We can apply the same thing to:

"For what? If some did not believe the truth regarding the millennium of the Revelation, will their misunderstanding nullify the truth? Let it not be! But let God be true, and every man a liar; as it is written, "That You might be justified in Your sayings, and will overcome when You are judged."

Your Lord and my Lord is the same Lord. And He is our Savior - we ought to be so grateful regarding what He did for us that we would never argue about differences of opinion about something like this. The only One with superior knowledge/understanding is Jesus. Sometimes we forget that.

 

[sovereigngrace]

I'm not going to come back with a retort (hopefully you'll understand that I genuinely mean this): We should not be attacking one another - especially because this debate will not end until one of us is proved wrong by the return of the Lord.

I apologize to you for my tone.

Romans 3:4
"For what? If some did not believe, will not their unbelief nullify the faith of God? Let it not be! But let God be true, and every man a liar; as it is written, "That You might be justified in Your sayings, and will overcome when You are judged."

We can apply the same thing to:

"For what? If some did not believe the truth regarding the millennium of the Revelation, will their misunderstanding nullify the truth? Let it not be! But let God be true, and every man a liar; as it is written, "That You might be justified in Your sayings, and will overcome when You are judged."

Your Lord and my Lord is the same Lord. And He is our Savior - we ought to be so grateful regarding what He did for us that we would never argue about differences of opinion about something like this. The only One with superior knowledge/understanding is Jesus. Sometimes we forget that.

Ok. I accept it. Let's move on and keep to the issues.

 

[DavidPT]

That dude lied deliberately and knowingly. I'm 100% Pre-mill, but I do not believe that all A-mills are trying to deceive. They just think we don't get it because they don't get it.

That said, there are some people who will knowingly and deliberately ignore scripture wherever and whenever scripture proves them wrong - maybe because they think they will have egg in their face in front of a whole lot of people if they admit they were wrong, and maybe because their salary comes from a congregation where teaching anything else will get them fired.

There are lots of motives for not following scripture, for those who deliberately and knowingly choose to follow what they know is a misinterpretation - but I don't think that that motive can be ascribed to all a-mills. I just think they're drunk on something (but it's not alcohol).

What does any of this have to with Amils deceiving or not deceiving someone? That's not the point of the OP or this thread. Even though I presently don't agree with Amil, I would never charge them with trying to deceive anyone. They simply believe they are correct, the same way Premils believe they are correct. That doesn't mean anyone from either side is trying to deceive anyone. It just means both sides are stubborn, and neither side wants to admit it might be the other side that is correct, and not their side instead.

The point of the OP is this. Amils believe we are in the thousand years presently. So I provided 7 verses where they need to explain how there can be no contradictions in those verses if satan is bound at the time. The verse you brought up from the OP, that involves lying and deceiving, and according to the verse, satan was the one that put it in their hearts to do so. So how did he manage to do that if he is supposed to be in the pit at the time, this assuming Amil? Doesn't Revelation 20 indicate he's bound in the pit so that he can deceive the nations no more? Yet, that verse in Acts looks like he's still deceiving ppl to me, though .

 

[Timtofly]

There is no teaching about "Adam's 6000 years of physical punishment and spiritual separation" in the sacred pages. That is invented by people like you to support false doctrine.

Obviously to you it is still a hidden plan.

Revelation 10:6-7
“There will be no more delay; on the contrary, in the days of the sound from the seventh angel when he sounds his shofar, the hidden plan of God will be brought to completion, the Good News as he proclaimed it to his servants the prophets.”

The hidden plan will be completed. Ask God what that hidden plan is.

 

[Timtofly]

Is the "first resurrection" in Revelation chapter 20 the only bodily resurrection in the Book of Revelation, or is there another found in chapter 11?


.

The two witnesses have a body that can not be destroyed until the second it happens. How can two humans under current conditions stand in the same spot for 42 months non stop. That death is after the longest job in history before lunch (death) break.

 

[DavidPT]

The argument of the A-mills goes around "it's the first (protos) resurrection, and Christ's resurrection is the first (protos) resurrection, and therefore it's talking about a 'spiritual resurrection' (which apparently takes place when some is born (gennao) of the Spirit from above)

Below is one part of the truth regarding which souls that were beheaded are seen to live and reign with Christ - but I'm posting it in a reply to your comment - because when the A-mills see something like this, they automatically immediately pull their blindfolds back over their eyes, like most of us pull our masks up over our mouths and noses these days, the moment we get into a crowded place:

-----------------------------------------------------------------​

We know that Adam died (spiritually) when he sinned - He was cut off from the life of God which is birthed by the Spirit of God, and his body would eventually die also - but Adam was still a man with a body and a soul - and the noun anastasis (resurrection) wherever it's found in the N.T, is referring to the resurrection of the body, when it is raised from the dead and changed into a spiritual body (I've inserted the passages below):-

Genesis 2:7
"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed [ nâphach ] into his nostrils the breath [ neshâmâh ] of life; and man became a living soul [nephesh]."

John 3:7
"That which is born (γεννάω [gennáō]) of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born (γεννάω gennáō) of the Spirit ( πνεῦμα [pneûma] ) is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born (Greek: γεννάω [gennáō]) from above (Greek: ἄνωθεν [ánōthen]). "

In the passage below, the New Testament teaches us very clearly and unambiguously that it is the body (σῶμα sōma) that will be raised (ἐγείρω egeírō) a spiritual (πνευματικός pneumatikós) body (σῶμα sōma).

1 Corinthians 15:35-38 & 42-57
"But someone will say, How are the dead (νεκρός nekrós) raised (ἐγείρω egeírō) up, and with what body (σῶμα sōma) do they come? Foolish one! What you sow is not made alive (ζωοποιέω zōopoiéō) unless it dies..

.. And what you sow, you do not sow the body (σῶμα sōma) that is going to be, but a bare grain (perhaps of wheat or of some of the rest)..

..And God gives it a body (σῶμα sōma) as it has pleased Him, and to each of the seeds its own body (σῶμα sōma)."

"So also the resurrection (ἀνάστασις anástasis) of the dead (νεκρός nekrós)..

..It is sown in corruption, it is raised (ἐγείρω egeírō) in incorruption; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised (ἐγείρω egeírō) in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised (ἐγείρω egeírō) in power;..

..it is sown a natural (ψυχικός psychikós) body (σῶμα sōma), it is raised (ἐγείρω egeírō) a spiritual (πνευματικός pneumatikós) body (σῶμα sōma).

There is a natural (ψυχικός psychikós) body (σῶμα sōma), and there is a spiritual (πνευματικός pneumatikós) body (σῶμα sōma).

And so it is written, "The first man, Adam, was made a living (ζάω dzah'-o) soul (ψυχή psychḗ)," the last Adam was a life-giving (ζωοποιέω zōopoiéō) Spirit (πνεῦμα pneûma)..

..But not the spiritual (πνευματικός pneumatikós) first, but the natural (ψυχικός psychikós); afterward the spiritual (πνευματικός pneumatikós).

The first man was out of earth, earthy; the second Man was the Lord from Heaven. Such the earthy man, such also the earthy ones. And such the heavenly Man, such also the heavenly ones..

..And according as we bore the image of the earthy man, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man..

..And I say this, brothers, that flesh (σάρξ sárx) and blood (αἷμα haîma) cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does corruption inherit incorruption.

Behold, I speak a mystery to you; we shall not all fall asleep, but we shall all be changed; in a moment, in a glance of an eye, at the last trumpet..

..For a trumpet shall sound, and the dead (νεκρός nekrós) shall be raised (ἐγείρω egeírō) incorruptible, and we shall all be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality..

..But when this corruptible shall put on incorruption, and when this mortal shall put on immortality, then will take place the word that is written, "Death (νεκρός nekrós) is swallowed up in victory.

O death (νεκρός nekrós), where is your sting? O grave, where is your victory?"

The sting of death (νεκρός nekrós) is sin, and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ."

Wherever it appears in the New Testament (in every single verse where it appears), the Greek word ἀνάστασις (anástasis) is always and only used in reference to rising again from death in the body, albeit when Christ appears, the body of the one who rises from death in his body will be a changed body. The same goes for the verbs used for rise, risen, raised, whenever they are used in reference to the resurrection - they are always and only referring to rising again from the dead in the body:

1. Christ is the first (πρῶτον prōton) to have risen from the dead; and

2. those who have been birthed (γεννάω gennáō) by the Spirit [πνεῦμα pneûma] from above (ἄνωθεν ánōthen), are

3. spiritually in Christ, and have therefore risen with (συνεγείρω synegeírō) Him; and

4. He is therefore the firstborn (πρωτότοκος prōtótokos) from the dead; and

5. the firstborn (πρωτότοκος prōtótokos) among many brothers; and

6. the first-fruits (ἀπαρχή aparchḗ') of the resurrection, which is a resurrection from death.

The word resurrection implies that something had died - as the apostle Paul stated:

Romans 8:10-11
"And if Christ is in you, indeed the body [σῶμα sōma] is dead because of sin, but the Spirit [πνεῦμα pneûma] is life because of (Christ's) righteousness

- but if the Spirit [πνεῦμα pneûma] of the One who raised up [ἐγείρω egeírō] Jesus from the dead dwells in you, the One who raised up [ἐγείρω egeírō] Christ from the dead shall also vitalize [ζωοποιέωby zōopoiéō] your mortal [θνητός thnētós] bodies [σῶμα sōma] by His Spirit [πνεῦμα pneûma] who dwells in you."

-----------------------------------------------------------------​

The argument of the A-mills which goes around those who had been beheaded is referring to the first (protos) resurrection, and Christ's resurrection is the first (protos) resurrection, and therefore it's talking about a 'spiritual resurrection' (which apparently takes place when some is born (gennao) of the Spirit from above).

Amils are clearly confused about the first resurrection, no doubt.

But when it comes to prophetic events involving before the thousand years, during the thousand years, and after the thousand years, there are certain events, such as the 42 month reign of the beast, and the martyrdom Revelation 20:4 records it caused, that have to fit this timeline. There is chronology here that can't be ignored or denied. Such as, before the thousand years there is a time period where satan is not yet in the pit. During the thousand years satan is in the pit the entire thousand years. After the thousand years he is no longer in the pit. But Amils have him in and out of the pit during the thousand years, because if they are correct about when the thousand years are meaning, there are numerous Scriptures, such as I brought up in the OP, that show satan couldn't possibly be in the pit at the time. Yet Amils claim he is.

These martyred by the beast, according to Revelation 20:4, is key in determining where the thousand years actually fit. Their martyrdom can only occur after the beast has ascended out of the pit first. Yet, Amils claim, or at least some of them appear to, that the beast ascends out of the pit after the thousand years. If that's true, is one to believe something silly, such as, those in Revelation 20:4 who are martyred because of this beast, they are martyred while the beast is not, while it's in the pit, that they are martyred before a beast ever rises out of the sea, and another out of the earth?

 

[DavidPT]

Could it include John the Baptist, who was beheaded during the first century?
Where is his soul now?


.

Let's think this through. There are 3 aspects of the beast in question. 1) It was. 2) Is not. 3) Shall ascend out of the bottomless pit. Clearly, in regards to it's 42 month reign, that only fits 3). But assuming Amil is correct about the timing of the thousand years, that it began around the time of the cross, and that John the Baptist was beheaded before the time of the cross, per this scenario, that would place John the Baptist's martyrdom during 1), and certainly not during 3). But what about a martyr, such as Stephen? He was martyred post the cross, and that when John was given these visions, it was also post the cross. This would indicate, assuming Amil, that Stephen is martyred during the thousand years. But during the thousand years, assuming Amil, the status of the beast at the time would be is not. One can't then claim Stephen's martyrdom was directly because of this beast.

Per Premil though, and maybe other Premils might agree, and maybe they won't, but here's what I propose.

Revelation 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

There are two groups of martyrs seen here.

1) them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God

2) which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands

As to someone, such as Stephen, his martyrdom fits 1).

Revelation 6:9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:
10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?
11 And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.

In this passage here, we see these same 2 groups.

Verse 9 is referring to the martyrs in 1) above, which include martyrs, such as Stephen, and John the Baptist, as some examples. This part in verse 11 is referring to 2) above, and that the beast has to ascend of the pit before they can even be martyred because of it, and that they are undeniably already martyred before satan is even loosed from the pit----their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.

Forget to add the rest of that verse, so I did so now. Notice what it says---should be fulfilled. Apparently, as of Revelation 20:4, and this is before satan is ever loosed from the pit, this has been fulfilled. Thus, no martyrdom of saints happening after the thousand years, except Amils need that be happening after the thousand years in order for their position to even work.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Amils are clearly confused about the first resurrection, no doubt.

But when it comes to prophetic events involving before the thousand years, during the thousand years, and after the thousand years, there are certain events, such as the 42 month reign of the beast, and the martyrdom Revelation 20:4 records it caused, that have to fit this timeline. There is chronology here that can't be ignored or denied. Such as, before the thousand years there is a time period where satan is not yet in the pit. During the thousand years satan is in the pit the entire thousand years. After the thousand years he is no longer in the pit. But Amils have him in and out of the pit during the thousand years, because if they are correct about when the thousand years are meaning, there are numerous Scriptures, such as I brought up in the OP, that show satan couldn't possibly be in the pit at the time. Yet Amils claim he is.

These martyred by the beast, according to Revelation 20:4, is key in determining where the thousand years actually fit. Their martyrdom can only occur after the beast has ascended out of the pit first. Yet, Amils claim, or at least some of them appear to, that the beast ascends out of the pit after the thousand years. If that's true, is one to believe something silly, such as, those in Revelation 20:4 who are martyred because of this beast, they are martyred while the beast is not, while it's in the pit, that they are martyred before a beast ever rises out of the sea, and another out of the earth?

Who is "the first resurrection" in Acts 26:23?

Who is "the firstborn from the dead" in Colossians 1:18?

Who is "the firstfruits of them that slept" in 1 Corinthians 15:20?

Who is "first begotten of the dead" in Revelation 1:5?