Are there really any parallels between Revelation 20:7-10 and Revelation 19?

[grafted branch]

Why would I ask if I am under the altar or not?!

I have no idea why you or anyone else would ask that but apparently you are going to ask a question that you already know the answer to which also doesn’t make any sense either, especially when you seem like someone who takes the Bible seriously, alone and in its entirety.

Again I ask you for the second time, do you even know what the altar before the throne signifies?!

The altar is where the prayers of the saints are according to Revelation 8:3.

And now you are accusing these souls of a lack of faith because they dare to ask God how long?? Wow!

Yes, absolutely I dare to say that. Because if the Bible says something is so, that means it absolutely is so. When a person questions what the Bible says they are going the way of the world. If a believer asks God something that has already been declared I personally question whether they truly believe or not.

Would a true believer pray and ask God how long will the two witnesses prophesy or how many months the beast will continue or any other such thing? If someone told me that they pray this way I would have to question their sanity or faith. I’m not judging anyone else but I personally can’t do this sort of thing, I find it irreverent and contemptuous.

I refuse to ask God “how long”, that question has already been asked and I know the answer. I have 100% confidence in that answer.

 

[DavidPT]

I refuse to ask God “how long”, that question has already been asked and I know the answer. I have 100% confidence in that answer.

Either you're not making much sense here, or if you are making sense here, I am misunderstanding you altogether. How could they possibly already know there is still a little season to go before God starts enacting vengeance on their behalf if they are not told this until what is recorded in verse 11? IOW, when they are crying out for an answer, they don't already have the answer before they start crying out for the answer, otherwise they wouldn't be crying out for the answer.

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.

 

[grafted branch]

Either you're not making much sense here, or if you are making sense here, I am misunderstanding you altogether. How could they possibly already know there is still a little season to go before God starts enacting vengeance on their behalf if they are not told this until what is recorded in verse 11? IOW, when they are crying out for an answer, they don't already have the answer before they start crying out for the answer, otherwise they wouldn't be crying out for the answer.

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.

You’re right, they couldn’t know this until verse 11 was written. That’s why I say the fifth seal happened prior to the writing of Revelation.

If you’re trying to place some kind of gap between when they ask “how long” and the answer given in verse 11 then you’re basically saying there is a little season + whatever the time gap is between when the question was asked and the answer was given.

Since we currently already know about the little season, then we would have to come to the conclusion that the question of “how long” would pertain only to how long until you answer the question but if that’s the case then this question went unanswered.

This then becomes nonsensical. The whole problem is we currently have the foreknowledge of the answer if the fifth seal is future which means we don’t have to ask the question in the first place.

 

[DavidPT]

Likewise, Revelation 9:1-2 correlates to Revelation chapter 20 when Satan is loosed from this same bottomless pit to assault the camp of the saints.

No it doesn't, the fact the releasing involving Revelation 9 if for different reasons than it is for Revelation 20 and that releasing.

Revelation 9:2 And he opened the bottomless pit; and there arose a smoke out of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace; and the sun and the air were darkened by reason of the smoke of the pit.
3 And there came out of the smoke locusts upon the earth: and unto them was given power, as the scorpions of the earth have power.
4 And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads.
5 And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man.
6 And in those days shall men seek death, and shall not find it; and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them.

Compared with.

Revelation 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.

How does---those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads---it was given to the locusts that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man---even remotely fit any of the following---And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them?

Does it look like, during the time of the 5th trumpet, the following then happens at that time---and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them? Does it look like---that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man---is involving anything pertaining to deceiving the nations? That's a bizarre way of going about deceiving the nations, by doing what is recorded in Revelation 9 involving the 5th trumpet. Therefore, there is zero correlation between the 5th trumpet and Revelation 20:7-9. You would already know this to begin with if you actually applied Revelation 20:4 correctly, in regards to the saints who don't worship the beast during it's 42 month reign, thus are martyred.

Why do some Amils insist that passages that are obviously not involving the same events, that these are involving the same events?

 

[Trivalee]

LOL. And, of course, I feel that way about you and your fellow Premillennialists as well. You do not interpret Revelation 20 in such a way that lines up with the rest of scripture. Simple as that. Other scripture teaches that Christ reigns now, that Satan was bound at the cross, that there is one resurrection day and one judgment day, but Premillennialists ignore all of that.

Enjoy your fantasy doctrine. Remember me when you finally come to the knowledge of the truth.

 

[DavidPT]

And I believe that the "everlasting fire" that the goats are cast into (Matthew 25:41) is the same event as what is referenced in Revelation 20:15.

In Matthew 25 it involves being gathered then separated into 2 categories. Where do you see anything like that depicted in Revelation 20:11-15? That account starts out like such.

Revelation 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

Which portion of this is depicting the following---And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

As of Matthew 25:32-33, all that are gathered for that judgment are already gathered and separated prior to the judgment beginning.

In Revelation 20:12 this apparently is not including any of the following yet.

Revelation 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.


If these in verse 13 are initially among those standing before God in verse 12, and that we are already told in verse 12, the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works, why would we then need to be told yet again in verse 13, pretty much the exact same thing---and they were judged every man according to their works?

And like I have pointed out in the past, the goats collectively as a group answer Jesus in the same manner, as do the sheep. Which then has me scratching my head how anyone could take the goats to mean all of the lost in general when some of the things brought to the attention of the goats is pertaining to things they should have done, but failed to do, if they were supposed to be professed servants of His. For example.

Matthew 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?

Then notice how the goats answer in verse 44. How can anyone possibly think, for example, someone in OT times before Christ is ever born, that they would be answering Him in this manner? How could anyone possibly think, for example, an atheist, or a witch, or a satanist, could possibly answer Jesus in that manner by then saying to Him---Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?

The way some of you interpret some of these things at times totally ignores any relevant context leading up to a judgment like this. Context, meaning starting from around verse 40 in Matthew 24 through verse 30 in Matthew 25. That context. Let's just ignore any of that and insist the goats in Matthew 25 are meaning all the lost in general from the beginning of time through the end of time. When how the goats answer Jesus should already prove that all of the lost in general from the beginning of time through the end of time can't possibly be meant here since it makes nonsense out of verse 44, for one.

The goats are meaning unprofitable servants of His, thus NOSAS. The sheep are meaning profitable servants of His. The context leading up to this judgment proves it, as do other passages, such as recorded in Matthew 7.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Right!

Which I personally believe took place for a while now.

It's certainly possible. It's not specifically spelled out for us as to know exactly when that time is taking place. I do believe that Paul alludes to it in 2 Thessalonians 2, so I see it as a time during which many fall away from the faith.

With the gospel silenced, it caused the light of the church to dim which is why we are seeing more hate, division, chaos, lying, etc. in this nation and the world (ie. the love of God grows cold). Plus the proliferation of homosexualities, transgenderism, gender identities, breakdown of families, etc. Signs of time.

I agree. If that time period we call Satan's little season hasn't begun yet, then it has to be very near, at least.

Remember Christ will come when things are business as usual - not when we will experience a massive literal world war or regional war in the Middle East.

Right. That's what He said Himself in Matthew 24:37-39. Unbelievers won't have a clue as to the wrath that will come down on them until it actually happens.

The prophecies are all about God's New Testament congregation of Israel with apostasy and desolations all over the world where the battle of Gog and Magog actually rages right now. This is how I "see" going on. Nothing to do with the nation Israel.

I agree.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Enjoy your fantasy doctrine. Remember me when you finally come to the knowledge of the truth.

LOL. Empty words. Your doctrine is the fantasy doctrine since scripture nowhere teaches two resurrection days and two judgment days. Instead, it teaches that a time (singular) is coming when all the dead will be raised (John 5:28-29) and that God has set a day (singular) to judge all people (Acts 17:30-31). But, your fantasy doctrine ignores scriptures like those.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I'm not insisting the 42 months are a literal 42 months. I'm not fully convinced the 42 months have to be literal months. Maybe they are literal months, maybe they are not. I simply don't know one way or the other.

How can you acknowledge that the 42 months are not necessarily literal and at the same time not even allow for the possibility that the thousand years may not be literal? I don't understand the way you look at things at all. There's no consistency in your approach to interpreting the book of Revelation.

What I do know though, it doesn't make sense in the least, that they might be paralleling when the beast is still in the pit.

What's what you THINK. You feel as if you know that, but you don't know that. I don't know otherwise, either, but I strongly think otherwise.

Therefore, that at least tells me that the 42 months don't occur until the beast has ascended out of the pit first, and a 2nd one has risen up out of the earth.

The sea and the pit are not the same thing. We've been over this before more than once, so I don't really feel like going over this in detail again right now.

And that this is relevant in regards to these saints recorded in this verse---which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands(Revelation 20:4)

For the sake of argument, let's assume they are not literal months. And let's also assume the thousand years are meaning the here and now and have been ongoing for the past 2000 years.

where then should we fit this non literal 42 months? Keeping in mind that Amils, like yourself, have both the beast and satan together in the pit during the past 2000 years.

Per that scenario do you then think it is reasonable that any of the following from Revelation 13 below could be meaning when you have the beast and satan in the pit?

According to my understanding of what them being in the pit entails, yes, of course, I think it is reasonable. But not according to YOUR understanding of what them being in the pit entails, which is irrelevant to me.

IOW, since what is recorded below involves it's 42 month reign, plus satan empowering it, does any of that sound like something that is taking place while both the beast and satan are still in the pit?

Revelation 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.
4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?
5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.
6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

Revelation 13:11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.
12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.
13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.
15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.

So, this is talking about Christians being persecuted and unbelievers being deceived. Has that not been going on for the past almost 2,000 years already?

Do you agree with what Paul said here:

2 Timothy 3:12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.

Do you take other scripure into account while interpreting passages in the book of Revelation? It does not seem like you do.

What about this below, in relation to it's 42 month reign?

Revelation 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

This is the same beast as the one described in Revelation 13, so I don't have any different thoughts about this then I do about Revelation 13. What you have never done is explain what it means when it says "the beast was, and is not". What is the beast that "was, and is not"? Can you answer that? If not, then why should I take anything you say about the beast seriously?

What I just submitted from Revelation 13, which state of the beast, thus era of time, do you feel that best fits?

1) was

2) is not

3) ascend out of the bottomless pit

All of them because what is described in Revelation 13 has been going on since the beginning of Christianity. Unless you disagree with Paul that all who live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution? Have you never suffered persecution? If not, then, honestly, you are doing something wrong.

When John initially saw these visions, was it not 2) that was it's status at the time, making 1) meaning in the past, in relation to John seeing these visions, and making 3) to be meaning in the future, in relation to John seeing these visions?

Of course.

I can't speak for you or anyone else,

I'm glad you realize that.

but as to me I reason the following like such.

1) was---meaning the beast was active in the earth prior to John seeing these visions

2) is not---meaning when John saw these visions, it was no longer active in the earth at the time, it is in the pit

3) shall ascend out of the bottomless pit---meaning it will once again be active in the earth once it does this, which then involves it's 42 month reign

Yes, I know that your understanding of both the dragon, Satan, and the beast being in the pit means it renders them to be completely incapacitated. I've know that for a long time. And, of course, I disagree with that. As long as we disagree on that, then our views are going to be far apart on this.

Which brings up something else, 42 months in comparison to a thousand years. No one should think it's reasonable that 42 months can mean the same thing as a thousand years even if both are not meaning in the literal sense.

Look at you, trying to be the ultimate authority on what can or can't be true about symbols. Come on, David. If it's symbolic, then who are you to say what it can or can not symbolize? Do you know that the number seven can sometimes symbolize fullness or completeness? Obviously, 42 months is equivalent to half of seven years. If seven symbolizes completeness, why can't 42 months (half of seven years) symbolize a certain time period out of all time?

Another thing to consider about the 42 months is this:

Revelation 11:1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. 2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months. And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth. 4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth. 5 And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed. 6 These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will. 7 And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them.

Your belief is that the beast will ascend out of the bottomless pit/abyss just BEFORE the 42 months. But, this passage has the beast ascending out of the bottomless pit/abyss AFTER the 42 months. So, your understanding of the timing of the 42 months as it relates to the beast contradicts what it indicates about the 42 months in relation to the beast in Revelation 11.

Therefore, one has to follow the other, thus can't parallel one another.

Not so.

Either the 42 months follow the thousand years, or the thousand years follow the 42 months. Per Premil it would be the latter, thus making sense out of Revelation 20:4 and the ones who don't worship the beast during it's 42 month reign.

"Per Premil" are the key words there. Not per Amil.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

No it doesn't, the fact the releasing involving Revelation 9 if for different reasons than it is for Revelation 20 and that releasing.

Revelation 9:2 And he opened the bottomless pit; and there arose a smoke out of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace; and the sun and the air were darkened by reason of the smoke of the pit.
3 And there came out of the smoke locusts upon the earth: and unto them was given power, as the scorpions of the earth have power.
4 And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads.
5 And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man.
6 And in those days shall men seek death, and shall not find it; and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them.

Compared with.

Revelation 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.

How does---those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads---it was given to the locusts that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man---even remotely fit any of the following---And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them?

Does it look like, during the time of the 5th trumpet, the following then happens at that time---and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them? Does it look like---that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man---is involving anything pertaining to deceiving the nations? That's a bizarre way of going about deceiving the nations, by doing what is recorded in Revelation 9 involving the 5th trumpet. Therefore, there is zero correlation between the 5th trumpet and Revelation 20:7-9. You would already know this to begin with if you actually applied Revelation 20:4 correctly, in regards to the saints who don't worship the beast during it's 42 month reign, thus are martyred.

Why do some Amils insist that passages that are obviously not involving the same events, that these are involving the same events?

Why do you not recognize that not every passage related to a certain event (in this case the loosing of Satan) has all the same details about that event? Your argument here is very, very weak, because all it consists of is saying that one passage doesn't have the same details as another passage so they can't be the same event. In that case, we can't relate any two passages of scripture together.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

In Matthew 25 it involves being gathered then separated into 2 categories. Where do you see anything like that depicted in Revelation 20:11-15?

David, this type of argument is the weakest type of argument there is. What you're basically saying here is that two passages can't be speaking of the same event unless they contain the same details regarding that event. Guess what? With that kind of logic, we could not relate passages like 1 Thess 4:14-17 and Matthew 24:29-31 together because the first passage doesn't say anything about Jesus coming with His angels. Can you see how flawed this type of argument is? I can't take it seriously because if this was a valid argument, then we could argue against any two passages of scripture being about the same event if they don't contain the same details.

That account starts out like such.

Revelation 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

Which portion of this is depicting the following---And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

As of Matthew 25:32-33, all that are gathered for that judgment are already gathered and separated prior to the judgment beginning.

In Revelation 20:12 this apparently is not including any of the following yet.

Revelation 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.


If these in verse 13 are initially among those standing before God in verse 12, and that we are already told in verse 12, the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works, why would we then need to be told yet again in verse 13, pretty much the exact same thing---and they were judged every man according to their works?

The Revelation 20 passage focuses on unbelievers. That is not proof that believers are not there any more than saying that 1 Thess 4:14-17 can't be talking about the coming of Christ after the tribulation because it doesn't mention the angels gathering the elect.

The reward for believers at that time is written about just after Revelation 20:11-15. Believers will inherit the new heavens and new earth. That lines up with the "eternal life" in "the kingdom prepared from the foundation of the world" that the sheep will inherit after Christ returns.

And like I have pointed out in the past, the goats collectively as a group answer Jesus in the same manner, as do the sheep. Which then has me scratching my head how anyone could take the goats to mean all of the lost in general when some of the things brought to the attention of the goats is pertaining to things they should have done, but failed to do, if they were supposed to be professed servants of His. For example.

Matthew 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?

Then notice how the goats answer in verse 44. How can anyone possibly think, for example, someone in OT times before Christ is ever born, that they would be answering Him in this manner? How could anyone possibly think, for example, an atheist, or a witch, or a satanist, could possibly answer Jesus in that manner by then saying to Him---Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?

I remember you saying that in the past. But, guess what? I have already responded to this in the past as well. So, I remember a lot of things that you have already said, but you seem to forget most things that I tell you for some reason.

Do you not know that even unbelievers will one day kneel before the throne and confess that Jesus is Lord?

Philippians 2:9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: 10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

So, the reason that even unbelievers will call Him Lord at that point is because He will be seen in all His glory and it will be undeniable that He is Lord. People deny it now because they can't see Him and demand proof, but they won't be able to deny it when they see Him in all His glory.

The way some of you interpret some of these things at times totally ignores any relevant context leading up to a judgment like this.

Wrong.

Context, meaning starting from around verse 40 in Matthew 24 through verse 30 in Matthew 25. That context. Let's just ignore any of that and insist the goats in Matthew 25 are meaning all the lost in general from the beginning of time through the end of time.

Do you have any scripture to support the idea of unbelievers being cast into the lake of fire on two separate occasions? How do you interpret this passage:

Matthew 13:47 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind: 48 Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away. 49 So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just, 50 And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

This has all people, represented here by fish in the sea, being gathered at the same time with the bad being cast into the fire at that time (at the end of the world/age). How can you conclude that groups of unbelievers will be cast into the lake of fire at two different times in light of passages like this? This passage indicates that all people will be gathered at the same time and then judged. So, why would Matthew 25:31-46 be understood any differently?

When how the goats answer Jesus should already prove that all of the lost in general from the beginning of time through the end of time can't possibly be meant here since it makes nonsense out of verse 44, for one.

The goats are meaning unprofitable servants of His, thus NOSAS. The sheep are meaning profitable servants of His. The context leading up to this judgment proves it, as do other passages, such as recorded in Matthew 7.

It does not indicate that the goats are servants of His as if they were once Christians and fell away. You are inserting that idea into the text. Also, every person is expected to serve Him since He is God. So, from His perspective, all people that He has created are His servants whether they acknowledge it or not.

 

[DavidPT]

Why do you not recognize that not every passage related to a certain event (in this case the loosing of Satan) has all the same details about that event? Your argument here is very, very weak, because all it consists of is saying that one passage doesn't have the same details as another passage so they can't be the same event. In that case, we can't relate any two passages of scripture together.

Except the passages I submitted have zero in common with each other in regards to the reasons why the pit is opened. Just because they both involve the same pit, that doesn't necessarily mean that when the pit is initially opened in Revelation 9, that this is meaning when satan is loosed in Revelation 20, and vice-versa. But I do get your point, thus don't disagree with your point, it's just that I don't see your point being relevant in this particular case.

 

[DavidPT]

How can you acknowledge that the 42 months are not necessarily literal and at the same time not even allow for the possibility that the thousand years may not be literal? I don't understand the way you look at things at all. There's no consistency in your approach to interpreting the book of Revelation.

I have already explained in the past. Throughout both testaments when a cardinal number is followed by years, every single time it is literally meaning the amount specified. Therefore, the same has to be true about a thousand years since it too is a cardinal number followed by years. As to days, weeks, months, etc, I'm not aware of any set pattern for them where they would be meaning in the literal sense every single time. Therefore, it's possible that a literal 42 months are not meant. Yet, it's also possible a literal 42 months are meant.

One reason why it might be possible is because most interpreters take Jesus' ministry to have involved a literal 42 months. So, why would Jesus be allotted less time for His ministry than the beast is allotted for his unholy ministry, assuming a literal 42 months are not meant?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Except the passages I submitted have zero in common with each other in regards to the reasons why the pit is opened. Just because they both involve the same pit, that doesn't necessarily mean that when the pit is initially opened in Revelation 9, that this is meaning when satan is loosed in Revelation 20, and vice-versa. But I do get your point, thus don't disagree with your point, it's just that I don't see your point being relevant in this particular case.

If you at least understand my point then that seems to be the best I can hope for.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I have already explained in the past. Throughout both testaments when a cardinal number is followed by years, every single time it is literally meaning the amount specified.

This means nothing. Most other books of the Bible are not like the book of Revelation which undeniably contains a good amount of symbolism. Certainly a higher percentage of symbolism within it than almost any other book of the Bible has. So, comparing the other books to the book of Revelation in this way is pointless.

Therefore, the same has to be true about a thousand years since it too is a cardinal number followed by years.

I completely disagree. This would be like me saying that because all of the other verses in scripture that reference a number of generations are referencing a literal number of generations, the verses which reference "a thousand generations" must be referring to a literal thousand generations. But, even you recognize that those verses are not referencing a literal thousand generations.

Here is one example where "a thousand generations" is referenced:

Deuteronomy 7:9 Know therefore that the Lord your God is God; he is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commandments.

Clearly, this is not referring to a literal "thousand generations" because if it was that would mean God only keeps his covenant for a limited amount of time (one thousand generations) and but no longer would keep it once the 1,001st generation arrived.

As to days, weeks, months, etc, I'm not aware of any set pattern for them where they would be meaning in the literal sense every single time. Therefore, it's possible that a literal 42 months are not meant. Yet, it's also possible a literal 42 months are meant.

We're talking about a book that contains a lot of symbolism. If you are going to take the 42 months in a non-literal way then what is the basis for taking any of the time periods in the book literally? None. You have no consistency to your approach to interpreting the book of Revelation. You interpret it with doctrinal bias. It makes no sense to think one time period might be non-literal and another literal and so on. It makes much more sense, when interpreting a book like Revelation, to either see all the time periods as being literal or all of them being non-literal.

One reason why it might be possible is because most interpreters take Jesus' ministry to have involved a literal 42 months.

Scripture itself seems to indicate that it was 3 years rather than 3.5 years, but there's no way to really know for sure.

So, why would Jesus be allotted less time for His ministry than the beast is allotted for his unholy ministry, assuming a literal 42 months are not meant?

David, the beast was around already before John wrote the book of Revelation (Rev 17:8 - the beast "once was"). What does that mean to you?

 

[TribulationSigns]

It's certainly possible. It's not specifically spelled out for us as to know exactly when that time is taking place. I do believe that Paul alludes to it in 2 Thessalonians 2, so I see it as a time during which many fall away from the faith.

We do not know exactly when that time takes place because first, we do not know when the last Elect is secured, we do not know when Satan is loosened from the bottomless pit, we do not know when God starts judging His unfaithful church and finally we do not know when Christ returns. We will know that we are living in "a little season", "a great tribulation", "a judgment of the harlot" etc. when we see the "SIGNS" of these taking place just like when we see fig trees and all other trees starting to bring forth leaves, we will "mentally" know that summer is near so likewise when we see all those times, we will know but cannot pinpoint the dates.

I agree. If that time period we call Satan's little season hasn't begun yet, then it has to be very near, at least.

Doubtfully, but again, we do not know when the little season starts. We just see the signs or see the abomination of desolation for example.

Right. That's what He said Himself in Matthew 24:37-39. Unbelievers won't have a clue as to the wrath that will come down on them until it actually happens.

Yes, just like the Jews of Old Testament as an example.

 

[DavidPT]

We do not know exactly when that time takes place because first, we do not know when the last Elect is secured, we do not know when Satan is loosened from the bottomless pit, we do not know when God starts judging His unfaithful church and finally we do not know when Christ returns. We will know that we are living in "a little season", "a great tribulation", "a judgment of the harlot" etc. when we see the "SIGNS" of these taking place just like when we see fig trees and all other trees starting to bring forth leaves, we will "mentally" know that summer is near so likewise when we see all those times, we will know but cannot pinpoint the dates.

The question is---and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands(Revelation 20:4)---when these are initially martyred, are or are they not martyred during the little season involving Revelation 6 and the 5th seal?

If they are martyred during that little season, guess what that would undeniably mean? It would mean the following. Everything that you have brought up would be involving these I brought up in Revelation 20:4. Which then makes it impossible that anything you submitted here, that it could be involving satan's little season after the thousand years.

No way can the little season in Revelation 6 and Revelation 20, which you take to be meaning the same little season, be involving the martyrs recorded in Revelation 20:4 who don't worship his image and satan's loosing after the thousand years.

In order to prove Amil, you have to convincingly prove with Scripture to back up your assertions, how the saints recorded in Revelation 20:4 that don't worship the beast, that they are not martyred during the era of time the little season recorded in Revelation 6 is involving, that they are martyred during an earlier era of time.

Then there is this to deal with, the following, which obviously requires that everyone that the vials of wrath get poured out on, they are all living in the same era of time.

Revelation 16:2 And the first went, and poured out his vial upon the earth; and there fell a noisome and grievous sore upon the men which had the mark of the beast, and upon them which worshipped his image.

and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands(Revelation 20:4)

Common sense says, if these in verse 4 above are martyred for refusing to worship the beast, neither his image, this means there were others doing what Revelation 16:2 indicates some are doing---the men which had the mark of the beast, and upon them which worshipped his image. Common sense also says, if someone had the mark of the beast, and worshipped his image, in a different era of time not involving the era of time the vials of wrath are involving, this means none of the vials can be poured out on them as well. Which then makes one wonder about some of the following.

Why is it that one can have his mark, worship his image, in one era of time and never have to face any of the vials of wrath, but in another era of time where they are doing the exact same thing, they have to face the vials of wrath? How is that an example of God being fair and just, where during one era of time He basically winks at what they are doing, thus doesn't unleash wrath upon them, but in another era of time when they are doing the exact same thing, now all of a sudden God is taking these things seriously, thus the vials of wrath on those doing these things?

 

[DavidPT]

David, the beast was around already before John wrote the book of Revelation (Rev 17:8 - the beast "once was"). What does that mean to you?

Eric, what also needs to be factored in here, IMO, is this. Is the same also true of the 2nd beast, the false prophet? As to an image and a mark in particular, is not the false prophet behind most of that? And does not Revelation 20:4, for instance, involve not worshiping his image, not taking his mark? How would that be relevant when the beast 'was' unless the following was fulfilled when the beast 'was'?

Revelation 13:14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.
15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.
16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

 

[DavidPT]

We do not know exactly when that time takes place because first, we do not know when the last Elect is secured, we do not know when Satan is loosened from the bottomless pit, we do not know when God starts judging His unfaithful church and finally we do not know when Christ returns. We will know that we are living in "a little season", "a great tribulation", "a judgment of the harlot" etc. when we see the "SIGNS" of these taking place just like when we see fig trees and all other trees starting to bring forth leaves, we will "mentally" know that summer is near so likewise when we see all those times, we will know but cannot pinpoint the dates.



Doubtfully, but again, we do not know when the little season starts. We just see the signs or see the abomination of desolation for example.


Yes, just like the Jews of Old Testament as an example.

You tend to think you have a lot of these things figured out. I tend to think I have a lot of these things figured out. Someone else tends to think they have a lot of these things figured out. So on and so on. Now all we need to figure out and agree about, is who exactly it is that has a lot of these things figured out. If we ever figure that out we'll be getting somewhere finally. Guess what, though? We're never going to figure it out. It figures.

 

[DavidPT]

David, this type of argument is the weakest type of argument there is. What you're basically saying here is that two passages can't be speaking of the same event unless they contain the same details regarding that event. Guess what? With that kind of logic, we could not relate passages like 1 Thess 4:14-17 and Matthew 24:29-31 together because the first passage doesn't say anything about Jesus coming with His angels. Can you see how flawed this type of argument is? I can't take it seriously because if this was a valid argument, then we could argue against any two passages of scripture being about the same event if they don't contain the same details.



The Revelation 20 passage focuses on unbelievers. That is not proof that believers are not there any more than saying that 1 Thess 4:14-17 can't be talking about the coming of Christ after the tribulation because it doesn't mention the angels gathering the elect.

The reward for believers at that time is written about just after Revelation 20:11-15. Believers will inherit the new heavens and new earth. That lines up with the "eternal life" in "the kingdom prepared from the foundation of the world" that the sheep will inherit after Christ returns.


I remember you saying that in the past. But, guess what? I have already responded to this in the past as well. So, I remember a lot of things that you have already said, but you seem to forget most things that I tell you for some reason.

Do you not know that even unbelievers will one day kneel before the throne and confess that Jesus is Lord?

Philippians 2:9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: 10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

So, the reason that even unbelievers will call Him Lord at that point is because He will be seen in all His glory and it will be undeniable that He is Lord. People deny it now because they can't see Him and demand proof, but they won't be able to deny it when they see Him in all His glory.


Wrong.


Do you have any scripture to support the idea of unbelievers being cast into the lake of fire on two separate occasions? How do you interpret this passage:

Matthew 13:47 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind: 48 Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away. 49 So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just, 50 And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

This has all people, represented here by fish in the sea, being gathered at the same time with the bad being cast into the fire at that time (at the end of the world/age). How can you conclude that groups of unbelievers will be cast into the lake of fire at two different times in light of passages like this? This passage indicates that all people will be gathered at the same time and then judged. So, why would Matthew 25:31-46 be understood any differently?


It does not indicate that the goats are servants of His as if they were once Christians and fell away. You are inserting that idea into the text. Also, every person is expected to serve Him since He is God. So, from His perspective, all people that He has created are His servants whether they acknowledge it or not.

That aside since we obviously can't come to an agreement in regards to how to interpret the the sheep and goats judgment properly, thus a big waste of time for both of us if we were to continue discussing/debating this, but since I already brought Matthew 25 up anyway, maybe we can discuss it via a different angle, such as the following.

Matthew 25:31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:


Anyone understanding this correctly should be able to easily see that this means Christ has bodily left heaven and is bodily coming somewhere else. Where would the logical place be that He is coming to? Would it not be the earth? Except Amils, such as yourself, have no habitable earth for Him to return to, thus making nonsense out of this part---then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory. Which then presents even further nonsense when taking Matthew 19:28 into account as well. So, where, though? Up in the sky? On the moon? On Mars? How about this instead? Upon the earth in Jerusalem in the middle east.

Are Amils, such as you, maybe going to argue that He sits upon His throne of glory on the new earth when you have this sheep and goats judgment meaning the same judgment recorded in Revelation 20:11-15 but that Amils typically have Revelation 21:1 chronologically following Revelation 20:11-15? Not to mention, Revelation 21-22 involves no more death while Matthew 25:46 clearly still involves death, the 2nd death.


Not to mention as well, what about the parable recorded in Luke 19? What do Amils do with some of that if they are correct that the entire planet is literally engulfed in flames once Jesus returns?

Luke 19:12 He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return

Return to where???

Luke 19:15 And it came to pass, that when he was returned , having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.

That He returned to where???

Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.



Being brought before Him, where? Obviously, this is either meaning before the great white throne judgment has been fulfilled, or it is maybe meaning the great white throne judgment, but it certainly isn't meaning post the great white throne judgment. I'm pretty sure we both can at least agree with the latter if nothing else.

If verse 27 is meaning the great white throne judgment, doesn't that judgment involve bringing the dead back to life, not putting the living to death instead? Of course though, if it is involving that judgment, the 2nd death might be meant by this. I'm not agreeing it's involving the great white throne judgment. I'm basically reasoning through this, that if it is involving that judgment, is there any logic to it. Maybe there is, maybe there isn't. Still doesn't help explain where He returns to per the parable in Luke 19 if the earth is not meant.

How is it reasonable to initially be on the earth, then leave, then return and when you return it is not even where you initially were before you left? lol. Yet another reason why a lot of us Premils can't make sense out of Amil sometimes. Keeping in mind, according to the parable in Luke 19, He returns first, then everything recorded after that is meaning after He has already returned.

Imagine initially being in Dallas, TX then leaving, then returning. Except when you return it is New York City where you end up arriving at. I don't do drugs anymore, but if I still did drugs, give me some of what this person is smoking. Talk about a wild trip.