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

[Spiritual Jew]

What Amils are basically proposing is that the cross was not sufficient in that case, the fact satan doesn't remain bound up until his demise, he is loosed for a season. Which means everything the cross allegedly accomplished in regards to binding satan, are out the window once he is loosed. How can Amils apply the cross to his binding and then still apply the cross to his loosing? IOW, assuming the cross has to do with his binding, what then does the cross have to do with his loosing?

I have explained this to you MANY times already in the past, but I guess you have forgotten everything I told you.

I am not saying that His death on the cross in and of itself is what binded Satan. It is what His death made possible that resulted in the binding of Satan. What His death and His resurrection accomplished is it made it so that the gospel could then be proclaimed throughout the world. The gospel of Christ gives the hope of eternal life to people who formerly had no hope (Ephesians 2:11-13, Hebrews 2:14-15). Satan was bound from preventing this hope that previously did not exist to the entire world. That is what saying that Satan was bound by the cross means.

So, during Satan's little season after he is loosed, we Amils believe that the gospel will largely be silenced and there will be a significant increase in deception and false teaching during that time.

Let me know if you are still confused and I'll try to explain further.

Amils see passages like the following as being related to the binding of Satan:

Hebrews 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; 15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

1 John 3:8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

Acts 26:14 And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. 15 And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest. 16 But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee; 17 Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, 18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

I don't see us being too far apart here, either. Except none of this actually solves what I brought up in prior posts in regards to Revelation 20:4 and Revelation 13, unfortunately.

Look what you, and other Amils like yourself, need to do, in order to make it appear that your Amil view is valid. First you have to dismiss entirely---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)---that this is undeniably involving Revelation 13 and the 42 month reign of the beast, by then pretending it is Revelation 20:7-9 that is involving Revelation 13 and the 42 month reign of the beast instead.

If Amil is the correct view, it should also work with---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)---and that that is involving Revelation 13 and the 42 month reign of the beast. Good luck making Amil compatible with that scenario.

No wonder some Amils need to dismiss the connection between--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)---and that of Revelation 13 and the 42 month reign of the beast, then pretend it is Revelation 20:7-9 that is involving Revelation 13 and the 42 month reign of the beast instead. That's the only way you can make it appear to some that your view is valid. Except it's not working with some of the rest of us. We can easily see that your view is contradicting Revelation 20:4 and it's direct involvement with Revelation 13 and the 42 month reign of the beast.

As long as you insist that the 42 months are a literal future 42 month period of time and that the beast is only a future entity (which contradicts Revelation 17:8), then you will never understand how Amils reconcile our view with Revelation 13 and Revelation 20:4.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Look what you, and other Amils like yourself, need to do, in order to make it appear that your Amil view is valid. First you have to dismiss entirely---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)---that this is undeniably involving Revelation 13 and the 42 month reign of the beast, by then pretending it is Revelation 20:7-9 that is involving Revelation 13 and the 42 month reign of the beast instead.

It is because you DO NOT UNDERSTAND the meaning of the beast, his image, his mark on the forehead, or in the hands. Those are NOT literal! These have been going on since the Cross, only to be amplified more during the GREAT tribulation in the church when the two-horned beast appears. Do you even know who the two horns beast represents?

If Amil is the correct view, it should also work with---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)---and that that is involving Revelation 13 and the 42 month reign of the beast. Good luck making Amil compatible with that scenario.

The 42 months reign of the beast (as well as the 2-horned beast) takes place during the great tribulation period, the "little season" when the beast comes out of the bottomless pit! That does not mean that his image and mark did not exist since the Cross only restrained UNTIL the beast came out and his mark and image INCREASES during the Great Tribulation as he forced everyone in the church who has not been sealed by God to take it! Selah!

No wonder some Amils need to dismiss the connection between--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)---and that of Revelation 13 and the 42 month reign of the beast, then pretend it is Revelation 20:7-9 that is involving Revelation 13 and the 42 month reign of the beast instead. That's the only way you can make it appear to some that your view is valid. Except it's not working with some of the rest of us. We can easily see that your view is contradicting Revelation 20:4 and it's direct involvement with Revelation 13 and the 42 month reign of the beast.

I think the problem is that you are looking at things in Revelation as a literal narrative that you are not able to understand the relationship between Revelation 20:4 and Revelation 13.

 

[TribulationSigns]

I have explained this to you MANY times already in the past, but I guess you have forgotten everything I told you.

I am not saying that His death on the cross in and of itself is what binded Satan. It is what His death made possible that resulted in the binding of Satan. What His death and His resurrection accomplished is it made it so that the gospel could then be proclaimed throughout the world. The gospel of Christ gives the hope of eternal life to people who formerly had no hope (Ephesians 2:11-13, Hebrews 2:14-15). Satan was bound from preventing this hope that previously did not exist to the entire world. That is what saying that Satan was bound by the cross means.'

Right!

So, during Satan's little season after he is loosed, we Amils believe that the gospel will largely be silenced and there will be a significant increase in deception and false teaching during that time.

Right!

Which I personally believe took place for a while now. 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. 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. 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.

 

[TribulationSigns]

As long as you insist that the 42 months are a literal future 42 month period of time and that the beast is only a future entity (which contradicts Revelation 17:8), then you will never understand how Amils reconcile our view with Revelation 13 and Revelation 20:4.

We take the numbers as God intended them to be taken. What is at issue with them here is methodology.

I may add that NOTHING in the book of Revelation is just a normal number or time without any symbolic, representational, or spiritual meaning to it. The entire book of Revelation is a collage of cryptic numbers, figures, imagery, enigmatic representations, symbolism, analogies and metaphors. For me to agree with that would be like saying the one thousand year reign was just a normal one thousand years (as some Theologians did before 1000 years had passed). Or that the 7 churches simply spoke concerning those literal seven churches. I can't agree with that because the number seven are a "representation" a symbol of some deeper spiritual truth. Seven is the number of completeness or the totality, so God was talking about ALL of His Church. There's not a single number in the book of Revelation that doesn't carry some symbolic spiritual significance. These numbers, like the imagery of the pit, dragon, smoke, locusts, stings, etc., aren't literal/physical, so how can we think that we can take the 5 months of locusts out of this "symbolic context" and make it literally 5 months?? No more than saying the 2 Witnesses are literally two (men) witnesses. It's contrary to the whole of Scripture. Especially from a book where numbers are so obviously used symbolically. For example the 42 months, the 144,000 sealed of Israel, the 24 elders before the throne, the 1000 year reign, the 10 horns of the Dragon, the 7 Spirits of God, the 2 witnesses, the 4 horsemen, the 12 stars in heaven, and so on and so on. The 5 months "represents" the time period between when God gives authority to open the bottomless bit or abyss and loose the spirit of Antichrist against His rebellious house, and the time when the house is left in ruins or desolated! This is judgment for their rebellion in serving lawless man rather than God. As in Revelation 20 where Satan and his minions come against the camp of the saints, not against the world, which he already has enslaved!! He gathers the nations (unbelievers - professed Christians) against the camp of believers. He wants to extend his rule TO the kingdom of God on earth, the congregation of Israel the Church! 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.

Hope this helps DavidPT see our understanding.

 

[grafted branch]

1.) The fifth seal is at the end of 1,260 days of faithful testimony when the souls cried to God, "How Long"...

Just one problem with this, faithful believers have read Revelation 6:10 and we all know what the answer to the question of “how long” is. A believer asking this question shows lack of faith, if a believer were to see that they were under the altar at the fifth seal they would know with absolute certainty it’s a little season.

This is why this event has already happened in the past, the question of “how long” was asked prior to the writing of Revelation.

If you were under the altar would you ask how long? If so, why would you ask it?

 

[DavidPT]

Just one problem with this, faithful believers have read Revelation 6:10 and we all know what the answer to the question of “how long” is. A believer asking this question shows lack of faith, if a believer were to see that they were under the altar at the fifth seal they would know with absolute certainty it’s a little season.



This is why this event has already happened in the past, the question of “how long” was asked prior to the writing of Revelation.

If you were under the altar would you ask how long? If so, why would you ask it?

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.


IMO, and I could be wrong of course about some of this below, though I don't feel I am, there are 2 groups here.

1) the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held(verse 9)

2) their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were(verse 11)


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 2 groups here as well.

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

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

In verse 9 in Revelation 6, group 1), these are meaning group 1) in Revelation 20:4.

In verse 11 in Revelation 6, group 2), these are meaning group 2) in Revelation 20:4.

The timing in Revelation 6:9-11 is meaning at the beginning of the little season recorded in verse 11.

Could it also be meaning the little season recorded in Revelation 20:7-9? No. And the reason why is because it is involving group 2) in Revelation 20:4, and that that is meaning before Revelation 20:7-9, not during it. Therefore, it is not reasonable to take the little season meant in Revelation 6:9-11 to be meaning the same little season recorded in Revelation 20:7-9. One little season is involving the martyring of group 2) in Revelation 20:4, the other little season isn't.

Therefore, in regards to Revelation 20:4, the timing is at the end of/after the little season involving Revelation 6:9-11. This is when they live again and begin reigning with Christ a thousand years. And at this point in time we are not even in the era of time involving Revelation 20:7-9 yet. A thousand years have to precede it first, meaning a thousand years following the end of the little season involving Revelation 6:9-11.

 

[grafted branch]

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.


IMO, and I could be wrong of course about some of this below, though I don't feel I am, there are 2 groups here.

1) the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held(verse 9)

2) their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were(verse 11)


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 2 groups here as well.

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

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

In verse 9 in Revelation 6, group 1), these are meaning group 1) in Revelation 20:4.

In verse 11 in Revelation 6, group 2), these are meaning group 2) in Revelation 20:4.

The timing in Revelation 6:9-11 is meaning at the beginning of the little season recorded in verse 11.

Could it also be meaning the little season recorded in Revelation 20:7-9? No. And the reason why is because it is involving group 2) in Revelation 20:4, and that that is meaning before Revelation 20:7-9, not during it. Therefore, it is not reasonable to take the little season meant in Revelation 6:9-11 to be meaning the same little season recorded in Revelation 20:7-9. One little season is involving the martyring of group 2) in Revelation 20:4, the other little season isn't.

Therefore, in regards to Revelation 20:4, the timing is at the end of/after the little season involving Revelation 6:9-11.

I’m not sure I would agree that Revelation 20:4 shows two groups of people, I need to look at the Greek on this, but I do agree with you that the little season in Revelation 6 is not the same little season in Revelation 20.

 

[DavidPT]

I’m not sure I would agree that Revelation 20:4 shows two groups of people, I need to look at the Greek on this, but I do agree with you that the little season in Revelation 6 is not the same little season in Revelation 20.

The reason why I tend to think there are 2 groups in Revelation 20 is because those in alleged group 1) are not martyred for all the same reasons those are in alleged group 2). The only way for someone to be martyred for the reasons group 2) are, this requires that the beast has ascended out of the pit, and a 2nd one out of the earth(Revelation 13).

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.


Most interpreters take this---was---to be meaning before the beast is in the pit. And most interpreters take---and is not---to be meaning the beast is in the pit and that this is meaning during John's day. And finally, most interpreters take---and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit---to be meaning a time in the future post when John saw these visions in the first century.

Clearly, though some interpreters flat out deny it, group 2) in Revelation 20:4 are martyred during this era of time---and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit--and not this era of time--was---nor this era of time---is not.

It only stands to reason, that if the beast ascends out of the pit, it has to first be in the pit in order to ascend out of it. It also stands to reason that the beast is not initially in the pit--thus--was. Therefore, logically making 'is not' to be meaning is in the pit.

 

[grafted branch]

The reason why I tend to think there are 2 groups in Revelation 20 is because those in alleged group 1) are not martyred for all the same reasons those are in alleged group 2). The only way for someone to be martyred for the reasons group 2) are, this requires that the beast has ascended out of the pit, and a 2nd one out of the earth(Revelation 13).

Ok, here’s the Greek for Revelation 20:4 …



Then
Καὶ (Kai)
Conjunction
Strong's 2532: And, even, also, namely.



I saw
εἶδον (eidon)
Verb - Aorist Indicative Active - 1st Person Singular
Strong's 3708: Properly, to stare at, i.e. to discern clearly; by extension, to attend to; by Hebraism, to experience; passively, to appear.



[the] thrones,
θρόνους (thronous)
Noun - Accusative Masculine Plural
Strong's 2362: From thrao; a stately seat; by implication, power or a potentate.



and
καὶ (kai)
Conjunction
Strong's 2532: And, even, also, namely.



those seated
ἐκάθισαν (ekathisan)
Verb - Aorist Indicative Active - 3rd Person Plural
Strong's 2523: Another form for kathezomai; to seat down, i.e. Set; intransitively, to sit; figuratively, to settle.



on
ἐπ’ (ep’)
Preposition
Strong's 1909: On, to, against, on the basis of, at.



them
αὐτούς (autous)
Personal / Possessive Pronoun - Accusative Masculine 3rd Person Plural
Strong's 846: He, she, it, they, them, same. From the particle au; the reflexive pronoun self, used of the third person, and of the other persons.



had been given
ἐδόθη (edothē)
Verb - Aorist Indicative Passive - 3rd Person Singular
Strong's 1325: To offer, give; I put, place. A prolonged form of a primary verb; to give.



authority to judge.
κρίμα (krima)
Noun - Nominative Neuter Singular
Strong's 2917: From krino; a decision ('crime').



And [I saw]
καὶ (kai)
Conjunction
Strong's 2532: And, even, also, namely.



the
τὰς (tas)
Article - Accusative Feminine Plural
Strong's 3588: The, the definite article. Including the feminine he, and the neuter to in all their inflections; the definite article; the.



souls
ψυχὰς (psychas)
Noun - Accusative Feminine Plural
Strong's 5590: From psucho; breath, i.e. spirit, abstractly or concretely.



of those who
τῶν (tōn)
Article - Genitive Masculine Plural
Strong's 3588: The, the definite article. Including the feminine he, and the neuter to in all their inflections; the definite article; the.



had been beheaded
πεπελεκισμένων (pepelekismenōn)
Verb - Perfect Participle Middle or Passive - Genitive Masculine Plural
Strong's 3990: To behead (with an axe). From a derivative of plesso; to chop off, i.e. Truncate.



for
διὰ (dia)
Preposition
Strong's 1223: A primary preposition denoting the channel of an act; through.



[their]
τὴν (tēn)
Article - Accusative Feminine Singular
Strong's 3588: The, the definite article. Including the feminine he, and the neuter to in all their inflections; the definite article; the.



testimony
μαρτυρίαν (martyrian)
Noun - Accusative Feminine Singular
Strong's 3141: Witness, evidence, testimony, reputation. From martus; evidence given.



of Jesus
Ἰησοῦ (Iēsou)
Noun - Genitive Masculine Singular
Strong's 2424: Of Hebrew origin; Jesus, the name of our Lord and two other Israelites.



and
καὶ (kai)
Conjunction
Strong's 2532: And, even, also, namely.



for
διὰ (dia)
Preposition
Strong's 1223: A primary preposition denoting the channel of an act; through.



the
τὸν (ton)
Article - Accusative Masculine Singular
Strong's 3588: The, the definite article. Including the feminine he, and the neuter to in all their inflections; the definite article; the.



word
λόγον (logon)
Noun - Accusative Masculine Singular
Strong's 3056: From lego; something said; by implication, a topic, also reasoning or motive; by extension, a computation; specially, the Divine Expression.



of God,
θεοῦ (theou)
Noun - Genitive Masculine Singular
Strong's 2316: A deity, especially the supreme Divinity; figuratively, a magistrate; by Hebraism, very.



and
καὶ (kai)
Conjunction
Strong's 2532: And, even, also, namely.



those who
οἵτινες (hoitines)
Personal / Relative Pronoun - Nominative Masculine Plural
Strong's 3748: Whosoever, whichsoever, whatsoever.



had not worshiped
προσεκύνησαν (prosekynēsan)
Verb - Aorist Indicative Active - 3rd Person Plural
Strong's 4352: From pros and a probable derivative of kuon; to fawn or crouch to, i.e. prostrate oneself in homage.



the
τὸ (to)
Article - Accusative Neuter Singular
Strong's 3588: The, the definite article. Including the feminine he, and the neuter to in all their inflections; the definite article; the.



beast
θηρίον (thērion)
Noun - Accusative Neuter Singular
Strong's 2342: Properly: a wild beast, hence: any animal; met: a brute. Diminutive from the same as thera; a dangerous animal.



[or]
οὐδὲ (oude)
Conjunction
Strong's 3761: Neither, nor, not even, and not. From ou and de; not however, i.e. Neither, nor, not even.



its
αὐτοῦ (autou)
Personal / Possessive Pronoun - Genitive Neuter 3rd Person Singular
Strong's 846: He, she, it, they, them, same. From the particle au; the reflexive pronoun self, used of the third person, and of the other persons.



image,
εἰκόνα (eikona)
Noun - Accusative Feminine Singular
Strong's 1504: An image, likeness, bust. From eiko; a likeness, i.e. statue, profile, or representation, resemblance.



and
καὶ (kai)
Conjunction
Strong's 2532: And, even, also, namely.



had not received
ἔλαβον (elabon)
Verb - Aorist Indicative Active - 3rd Person Plural
Strong's 2983: (a) I receive, get, (b) I take, lay hold of.



[its]
τὸ (to)
Article - Accusative Neuter Singular
Strong's 3588: The, the definite article. Including the feminine he, and the neuter to in all their inflections; the definite article; the.



mark
χάραγμα (charagma)
Noun - Accusative Neuter Singular
Strong's 5480: Sculpture; engraving, a stamp, sign. From the same as charax; a scratch or etching, i.e. Stamp, or scupltured figure.



on
ἐπὶ (epi)
Preposition
Strong's 1909: On, to, against, on the basis of, at.



[their]
τὸ (to)
Article - Accusative Neuter Singular
Strong's 3588: The, the definite article. Including the feminine he, and the neuter to in all their inflections; the definite article; the.



foreheads
μέτωπον (metōpon)
Noun - Accusative Neuter Singular
Strong's 3359: The forehead, front. From meta and ops; the forehead.



[or]
καὶ (kai)
Conjunction
Strong's 2532: And, even, also, namely.



hands.
χεῖρα (cheira)
Noun - Accusative Feminine Singular
Strong's 5495: A hand.



And
καὶ (kai)
Conjunction
Strong's 2532: And, even, also, namely.



they came to life
ἔζησαν (ezēsan)
Verb - Aorist Indicative Active - 3rd Person Plural
Strong's 2198: To live, be alive. A primary verb; to live.



and
καὶ (kai)
Conjunction
Strong's 2532: And, even, also, namely.



reigned
ἐβασίλευσαν (ebasileusan)
Verb - Aorist Indicative Active - 3rd Person Plural
Strong's 936: (a) I rule, reign, (b) I reign over. From basileus; to rule.



with
μετὰ (meta)
Preposition
Strong's 3326: (a) gen: with, in company with, (b) acc: (1) behind, beyond, after, of place, (2) after, of time, with nouns, neut. of adjectives.



Christ
χριστοῦ (christou)
Noun - Genitive Masculine Singular
Strong's 5547: Anointed One; the Messiah, the Christ. From chrio; Anointed One, i.e. The Messiah, an epithet of Jesus.



for a thousand
χίλια (chilia)
Adjective - Accusative Neuter Plural
Strong's 5507: A thousand. Plural of uncertain affinity; a thousand.



years.
ἔτη (etē)
Noun - Accusative Neuter Plural
Strong's 2094: A year. Apparently a primary word; a year.



The words “those who” <3748> is translated as just “who” in some translations and other translations use “those who”. I’m not a Greek expert by any means so I suppose it depends on how this is translated. If it does mean there are two groups then a problem might be who the word “they came to life” <2198> is referring to when it says they lived and reigned with Christ for the thousand years.

 

[keras]

You do not take any of this to be involving His wrath, thus He can just destroy them all without being wrathful about it? Does not it say the coming of the Son of man, not only once, but twice in those verses? Are you going to argue like Preterists typically argue, that a literal bodily coming is not meant here?

The Prophesied disaster of the Sixth Seal, is the wrath of God and the Lamb and it is clear from verses like Psalms 11-4-6 and Habakkuk 3:4, that Day is not the glorious Return of Jesus, but just the sending of His judgment and punishment to His enemies.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Just one problem with this, faithful believers have read Revelation 6:10 and we all know what the answer to the question of “how long” is. A believer asking this question shows lack of faith, if a believer were to see that they were under the altar at the fifth seal they would know with absolute certainty it’s a little season.

Do you know what the altar represents?
It is the prayers of the saints, including us. This has nothing to do with "lack of faith" by asking God how long before he do something to avenge His people. WE do not know how long little season last since we do not know when Christ returns.

This is why this event has already happened in the past, the question of “how long” was asked prior to the writing of Revelation.

False!

If you were under the altar would you ask how long? If so, why would you ask it?

Because. Now I know that the little season need to take place first. Nothing to do with 70AD.

 

[DavidPT]

The words “those who” <3748> is translated as just “who” in some translations and other translations use “those who”. I’m not a Greek expert by any means so I suppose it depends on how this is translated. If it does mean there are two groups then a problem might be who the word “they came to life” <2198> is referring to when it says they lived and reigned with Christ for the thousand years.

I don't see why it should matter how many groups verse 4 is involving or not involving. We already know from the text it is involving the souls of them John sees in this verse. Therefore, making the 'they' in they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years, to be meaning all the ones John sees the souls of.

The question is, when they start living and reigning with Christ a thousand years, what state are they doing this in? A bodiless state, or a bodily state? I would think verse 6 might help us in that regard, meaning this---but they shall be priests of God and of Christ. What state does that make Biblical sense? A bodiless state? Or a bodily state?

Not only that, which place makes Biblical sense where they would be doing this? In a bodiless state in heaven? Or in a bodily state upon the earth? Are there any Scriptures that support the former in both cases? I don't know of any, do you? Meaning Scripture that supports being priests of God and of Christ while in a bodiless state, and while in a bodiless state in heaven. To accomplish exactly what? As if heaven is in need of priests in a bodiless state.

 

[grafted branch]

Do you know what the altar represents?
It is the prayers of the saints, including us. This has nothing to do with "lack of faith" by asking God how long before he do something to avenge His people. WE do not know how long little season last since we do not know when Christ returns.

So you’re saying you would ask the question because you would be unsure if you’re under the altar or not, and if the answer is “a little season” then you’ll know you are under the altar?

We both know the Bible doesn’t explicitly say how long the little season is and we both know the answer to “how long” is going to be a little season. Also we both know who created the universe but I don’t plan on asking God that question because it would show lack of faith.

 

[grafted branch]

Not only that, which place makes Biblical sense where they would be doing this? In a bodiless state in heaven? Or in a bodily state upon the earth? Are there any Scriptures that support the former in both cases? I don't know of any, do you? Meaning Scripture that supports being priests of God and of Christ while in a bodiless state, and while in a bodiless state in heaven. To accomplish exactly what? As if heaven is in need of priests in a bodiless state.

I don’t have a good answer here but Luke 19:11-27 comes to mind in regards to this. Where the nobleman receives the kingdom and when he returns some of those to whom he gave money to will have authority over cities.

Perhaps this authority has to do with the being priests?

 

[DavidPT]

So you’re saying you would ask the question because you would be unsure if you’re under the altar or not, and if the answer is “a little season” then you’ll know you are under the altar?

We both know the Bible doesn’t explicitly say how long the little season is and we both know the answer to “how long” is going to be a little season. Also we both know who created the universe but I don’t plan on asking God that question because it would show lack of faith.

Daniel 8:13 Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?

Daniel 12:6 And one said to the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?

Per these examples, do you apply the same logic here as well, that because one is asking how long, this means the one asking this lacks faith?

In Revelation 6:9-11 did you not notice that the ones crying out for an answer, that they received an answer in verse 11? And did you not also notice that when they were informed they were to rest yet a little season, that they didn't then require an answer for how long a little season would be involving. They pretty much got quiet after receiving their answer.

Sometimes I just can't figure out why you reason some things in the manner you do at times? There is no one being faithless in Revelation 6:9-11. No more than there is anyone being faithless in the two examples I supplied from the book of Daniel involving asking another saint a question pertaining to how long.

 

[grafted branch]

Daniel 8:13 Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?

Daniel 12:6 And one said to the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?

Per these examples, do you apply the same logic here as well, that because one is asking how long, this means the one asking this lacks faith?

In Revelation 6:9-11 did you not notice that the ones crying out for an answer, that they received an answer in verse 11? And did you not also notice that when they were informed they were to rest yet a little season, that they didn't then require an answer for how long a little season would be involving. They pretty much got quiet after receiving their answer.

Sometimes I just can't figure out why you reason some things in the manner you do at times? There is no one being faithless in Revelation 6:9-11. No more than there is anyone being faithless in the two examples I supplied from the book of Daniel involving asking another saint a question pertaining to how long.

The information of how long was not known prior to it being asked in Daniel 8:13 and 12:6. Notice that after being told how long, the question wasn’t asked again.

Should we pray to God and repeat the questions of how long that are already answered for us in the Bible?

 

[DavidPT]

I don’t have a good answer here but Luke 19:11-27 comes to mind in regards to this. Where the nobleman receives the kingdom and when he returns some of those to whom he gave money to will have authority over cities.

Perhaps this authority has to do with the being priests?

Since that parable involves a return, which means Jesus has left heaven and is returning to the same earth He departed from in Acts 1, we at least know it doesn't support anyone being in a bodiless state while in heaven. The fact He is in heaven now, He doesn't need to return to where He already is, since that doesn't make any sense, therefore, He needs to return to somewhere He previously was at an earlier time. Obviously, the earth.

Which then raises yet another problem. There are Amils that take 2 Peter 3 in the absolute literal sense involving verses 10-12. Which then means if they are correct, Jesus has no habitable earth to return to per the parable you submitted. As if it makes sense to inform us per the parable that He returns, except there is no place for Him to return to if the earth is literally engulfed in flames like some of these Amils insist will be the case. If they instead propose His return is meaning on the new earth, what do they then do with verse 27 since that involves death, and that that is clearly meaning after He has returned?

It is questions like this that I am having to deal with, yet getting nowhere when discussing/debating with Amils. We just can't seem to get on the same page in regards to some of these things.

 

[TribulationSigns]

So you’re saying you would ask the question because you would be unsure if you’re under the altar or not, and if the answer is “a little season” then you’ll know you are under the altar?

We both know the Bible doesn’t explicitly say how long the little season is and we both know the answer to “how long” is going to be a little season. Also we both know who created the universe but I don’t plan on asking God that question because it would show lack of faith.

LOL!! You don't get it.

Why would I ask if I am under the altar or not?! Gee-whiz! Again I ask you for the second time, do you even know what the altar before the throne signifies?! And now you are accusing these souls of a lack of faith because they dare to ask God how long?? Wow!

 

[DavidPT]

As long as you insist that the 42 months are a literal future 42 month period of time and that the beast is only a future entity (which contradicts Revelation 17:8), then you will never understand how Amils reconcile our view with Revelation 13 and Revelation 20:4.

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. 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. 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. 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? 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.


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.


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

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?

I can't speak for you or anyone else, 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

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