Contrary to what Premil teaches: Revelation 20 does not locate Jesus on earth!

DavidPT · Apr 24, 2021

sovereigngrace said:
Pretribbers repeat this view without the slightest of evidence. They notably never furnish us with hard quotes, just misleading fly-by theological sound-bites that have been long exposed as error.

Where is a rapture of the Church mentioned in Jeremiah? Where is it linked to Jacob's Trouble?
Where is a literal seven-year tribulation mentioned in Jeremiah? Where is it linked to Jacob's Trouble?
Where is a 3rd coming of Christ mentioned in Jeremiah? Where is it linked to Jacob's Trouble?

Earlier you somewhat jumped on me claiming I was derailing your thread, but what you are discussing in this post, is not derailing your thread---lol? Pretrib has zero to do with if Christ is on earth in Revelation 20. Per Premil, though I strongly disagree with Pretrib, Pretrib is meaning before the time of the thousand years, not during it instead, and that the OP is meaning during the thousand years, and that Premils think Revelation 20 places Jesus on the earth in that chapter. So quit derailing your own thread---lol.

Timtofly · Apr 24, 2021

sovereigngrace said:
That is simply not true!

Premil is always exaggerating the power and influence of Satan. That is an error. Amil on the other hand has a triumphant reigning Christ who is ruling over His enemies as sovereign King in majesty and glory.

So death is defeated and we all have incorruptible bodies (end of the transgression) that cannot die? Or is that just theological spiritualization to make amil better than actual life?

Until Death is defeated not all has been made subject. The 7th Trumpet is the fulfillment of Daniel 9. You claim Daniel 9 is already complete, yet sin is still in this world and we have corruptible bodies, not incorruptible bodies. This is not the Millennium, because it comes after the 7th Trumpet and Daniel 9. Unless you move Revelation 20 to perhaps right after chapter 3 and put it in the verses to the 7 churches, you fail at making your case.

Timtofly · Apr 24, 2021

sovereigngrace said:
As has been ably explained by others: the living waters is the Holy Spirit. The former sea represents Old Testament Israel and the hinder sea represents the overwhelmingly Gentile New Testament Church.

Or we can just read God's Word, and leave the specifics to God. Spiritual application is not a sin. You have no proof God is bound by your spiritual application. Otherwise God will do physically just as described. Then the world will benefit both physically and spiritually equally.

sovereigngrace · Apr 24, 2021

Timtofly said:
You mean Revelation 20, that your private interpretation and opinion of Recapitulation literally changes the text of Revelation even though John warned:

"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."

Premil do not add Christ to the text of Revelation 20. We just see it as a continuation of John's writings, despite the added chapter and verse markings. I wonder if adding numbers to John's letter counts towards that curse? Recapitulation is an addition to the reading of the text. We do not even have to interpret symbolic terms. Satan, the FP, and the beast show up at Armageddon. The FP and the beast are defeated by Jesus on the earth. Satan is bound for 1000 years. The FP and beast are in the lake of fire for 1000 years. Simple reading comprehension. It is the NT. Do not even need the OT for corroboration, since you take issue with comparing Scripture with Scripture, unless it suits your theology.

All Premils would agree that Revelation 17-19 sees Satan stirring up his wicked army against Christ approaching Armageddon. But there is no mention of Satan in these chapters. That is because Revelation series of detailed parallels/cycles/recap focusing on different aspect of the overall conflict in the invisible realm between the kingdom of darkness and the kingdom of God. Revelation 17-19 is the 6th of 7 recaps. Revelation 20-22 is the 7th of 7. Revelation 17-19 focused on the character, influence and evil of Babylon, and depicts their final fate, the false prophet and the beast, Revelation 20-22 focuses in on the the character, influence and evil of Satan and describes his fate of Satan. Revelation takes us right back to the first resurrection 2000 years ago.

Timtofly · Apr 24, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
The beast is mentioned 30+ times in the book of Revelation. Does that make it a literal beast rather than a symbolic one?

It certainly does not make it human. Does God waste time casting symbolism into the lake of fire?

sovereigngrace · Apr 24, 2021

Timtofly said:
Why apply specifics from the OT and change the reading of the NT arbitrarily? You imply an animal sacrifice, but deny the literal description that has nothing to do with sacrifices. No one knows the specifics of how the Temple will work. Just declaring speculative strawman points is avoiding the actual words of the text. Do you think God has it under control and knows what He is Doing? Why tell God, "there just cannot be sacrifices"? He does know what you are posting.

Amils interpret the OT in the light of the clearer and broader NT. So, my answer is:

· Because the New Testament forbids the reintroduction of this abolished Old Testament system.
· Because Christ's atoning death met all the holy demands of the Old Testament Law.
· Because Jesus said "it is finished" as He gave up the ghost on the cross.
· Because Christ's sacrifice is the final sacrifice for sin.

Scripture describes the old covenant sacrificial system as “that which is done away” (2 Corinthians 3:11) and “that which is abolished” (2 Corinthians 3:13). It makes clear: “the old testament … vail is done away in Christ" (2 Corinthians 3:14). Hebrews 10:9 confirms: “He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.” Hebrews 10:2 confirms they “ceased to be offered?

Timtofly · Apr 24, 2021

TribulationSigns said:
Matthew 12:29

"Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house."

The pertinent questions here are:

#1. Who the Strong man is
#2. Who is He who seeks to spoil his house
#3. What is this House, and
#4. what are the possessions of this strong man that he wanted to spoil (seize or take by conquest)

Understanding this you will comprehend why God says that FIRST he had to bind him. If you come to understand that parable, you'll answer your own question. Or rather, God will answer it for you if you receive it, Selah.

Is Satan going to bind Christ and sneak into the millennial kingdom in order to decieve the nations?

Satan is loosed. Number 1: Why all the violence? This could be a peaceful protest March across the land as easily as a violent one. We are not told the specifics. Satan wanted battle, but it never states the mindset of the many who were marching across the land. Why would there be any weapons at all?

Does Satan make them while bound and bring them with him?

Foisting this event into the here and now is conflating the issue, even more than claiming Christ is not on the earth. Amill assume Christ has to come, but missing the point Christ already came. You cannot argue the specifics, and make them up from a faulty view. Why would God need weapons to keep the peace when Christ has a rod of iron, to simply send people immediately to Death who disobey. The Millennium is not Satan's kingdom God is sneaking into. The Millennium is the Kingdom of Christ, Satan is loosed into.

Timtofly · Apr 24, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
It looks like you just assume that what is described in Revelation 20 chronologically follows what is described in Revelation 19. Do you think the entire book is chronological? Clearly, what is described in Revelation 12 does not follow what is described at the end of Revelation 11 chronologically, right? So, why assume that what is described in Revelation 20 has to chronologically follow what is described in Revelation 19?

There are several passages of scripture which indicate that all of the wicked will be killed when Christ returns, such as 2 Peter 3:3-13, 1 Thess 5:1-6, 2 Thess 1:7-10, Matt 24:35-39 and Revelation 19:11-21 (verse 18 in particular). Why do you interpret Revelation 20 in such a way that contradicts all these other passages?

So nothing about Satan is ever chronological? Using chapter 12 is a lame excuse. Are chapters 17 and 18 referring to a time before Creation in the gap of Genesis 1:1? Did Satan have an earthly kingdom before time? Has Satan been bound with the rest of the angels? How far do you want to take this chronological excuse?

Timtofly · Apr 24, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
So, you believe that people who had just spent 1000 years with Jesus in all His glory on the earth will think that they can go up against Him in Jerusalem and defeat Him? They would somehow not be aware that defeating Him would be impossible?

They had not read Revelation 20?

Timtofly · Apr 24, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
I've seen premils try to reconcile this passage with their view and fail miserably many times. Would you like to try?

Amils also fail.

"But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."

"Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work; But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work."

Timtofly · Apr 24, 2021

TribulationSigns said:
False.

Rev 12:4-5
(4) And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.
(5) And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.

Christ ascended into heaven and to his throne. He already a ruling king of the kingdom he established through the Church.

False. He is already ruling a spiritual kingdom called "New Jerusalem" He will not rule a physical kingdom with a physical capital city of Jerusalem as premillennialists believe.

How is Paradise considered New Jerusalem now? That claim states we are in the NHNE already. Jesus is currently reigning in Paradise, next on earth, then in the New Jerusalem. The new is after the current Jerusalem, not prior to the Second Coming.

Are you even spiritualizing reality that is to come as if it literally will not happen, but only we think it is happening now? This is beginning to sound like Hindu mysticism, and there is no literal reality period. Every thing in God's Word is just a spiritual realm of existence, we can just think about, but never apply it literally to the physical?

Timtofly · Apr 24, 2021

TribulationSigns said:
Maybe you need to read passage again...

Rev 12:5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.

Joh 10:30 I and my Father are one.

Do you even know what the right hand in Scripture signifies? A literal right hand, or is it the will and purpose of the Father that His Son sits on His Throne and rules all nations? Think about it.

Are you saying when Jesus is in heaven there is no physical distinction between God on the throne and Christ? They are literally the same being? If that is the case, then Christ is not reigning now. He is reigning only as God like all of history. So any reigning of the being of Jesus Christ can only take place on earth, where there is a physical distinction. You can use no Scripture in God's Word to prove the reign of Christ is ever in heaven. That is only God reigning in heaven. Christ can only reign on earth, according to your own definition of only one being on the throne in heaven.

Timtofly · Apr 24, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
We all think that Scriptures are clear to us. That goes without saying.

Do you see that the number that surrounds "the camp of the saints" is "as the sand of the sea"? How can that many people surround Jerusalem and how do they all get there? Remember, it says they are from "the four quarters of the earth". You're not recognizing the symbolic language there. It's talking about Christ's enemies opposing the church throughout the world. But fire will come down from heaven to destroy them all, just as 2 Peter 3 indicates.

Not literal fire then? They just spiritually vanish into the lake of fire? Teleported?

Should this not be an ongoing generational thing for the last 1991 years? Why does only the last generation on earth benefit from this victory?

Timtofly · Apr 24, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
I'm not just talking about deception, I'm talking about them thinking that they can go and destroy Christ Himself. The angels did not try to attack and destroy God. So, that's not a good comparison. Do you really think that mortal humans will see Jesus in all His glory and think that they can defeat Him?

Did Eve really think she would gain wisdom by eating a piece of fruit? Why did she believe Satan?

Timtofly · Apr 24, 2021

sovereigngrace said:
Sorry you cannot engage with those who disagree with your beliefs, especially when you have been unable to biblically prove what you believe. The Op remains unchallenged by you or any other Premiller.

The Op actually articulates the classic evangelical Protestant position since the Reformation until the error of Dispensational Pretrib Premil infiltrated the US in a significant way in the early 1900s. Thankfully, Dispensational Pretrib Premil is in free-fall today. It will hopefully die a slow death.

So the soon return of Christ has to wait for the "slow death" of anticipating the return when Christ will set up His throne in Jerusalem?

I am waiting for the quick defeat of amillennialism at any second now.

Timtofly · Apr 24, 2021

sovereigngrace said:
It matters little if it is mentioned 666 times. It is a figurative number located in the most symbolic setting in Scripture. Revelation is saturated in obscure symbolism. When it comes to the future, Premillennialists tend to explain the rest of Scripture on this subject through the prism of Revelation 20. I found this a problematic approach.

Lampstands = churches (1:20)
Eyes = spirits (5:6)
Incense = Prayers of the saints (5:8)
Serpent = Satan (12:9)
Heads = Mountains (17:9)
Horns = kings (17:12)
Waters = People (17:15)

Creatures full of eyes with 6 wings (4:6)
A 7-eyed lamb (5:6)
People talking to mountains (6:16)
People being washed clean by blood (7:14)
Locusts with human faces (9:7)
Lion-headed horses (9:17)
Fire-breathing prophets (11:5)
A woman clothed with the sun while standing on the moon (12:1)
7-headed dragon that pulls stars down from heaven (12:3-4)
A woman with two wings flying like a great eagle (Rev 12:14)
A serpent vomiting out a river (12:15)
7-headed beast with 10 horns (13:1)
Frogs coming out of the mouth of a dragon (16:13)
A blood-drinking harlot (17:6)

Moses employs `a thousand' in Deuteronomy 7:9 saying, "Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

1 Chronicles 16:13-17 also states, "O ye seed of Israel his servant, ye children of Jacob, his chosen ones. He is the LORD our God; his judgments are in all the earth. Be ye mindful always of his covenant; the word which he commanded to a thousand generations; Even of the covenant which he made with Abraham, and of his oath unto Isaac; And hath confirmed the same to Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

A thousand and ten thousand are used together in Psalm 91, saying, "Thou shalt not be afraid for the terror by night; nor for the arrow that flieth by day; Nor for the pestilence that walketh in darkness; nor for the destruction that wasteth at noonday. A thousand shall fall at thy side, and ten thousand at thy right hand; but it shall not come nigh thee" (vv 5-7).

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

A similar contrast between these two numbers or ideas is seen in Deuteronomy 32:30, where a rhetorical question is asked, "How should one chase a thousand, and two put ten thousand to flight, except their Rock had sold them, and the Lord had shut them up?"

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

Joshua affirms, on the same vein, in chapter 23, "One man of you shall chase a thousand: for the LORD your God, he it is that fighteth for you, as he hath promised you" (v 10).

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

Isaiah the prophet similarly declares in Isaiah 30:17, "one thousand shall flee at the rebuke of one."

This incidentally is the only passage in Scripture that makes mention of the actual number "one thousand," albeit, the term is used to impress a spiritual truth.

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

Psalm 84:9-10 says, "Behold, O God our shield, and look upon the face of thine anointed. For a day in thy courts is better than a thousand. I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

The figure a thousand is also employed in Psalm 50:10-11 saying, "For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills. I know all the fowls of the mountains: and the wild beasts of the field are mine."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

Ecclesiastes 7:27-28 succinctly says, "one man among a thousand have I found."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

In the same vein, Job 33:23 declares, "If there be a messenger with him, an interpreter, one among a thousand, to shew unto man his uprightness."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

The distinct contrast between one and a thousand is again found in Job 9:2-3, where Job declares, "I know it is so of a truth: but how should man be just with God? If he will contend with him, he cannot answer him one of a thousand."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

The same idea is intended in Isaiah 60:21-22, where the prophet instructs, in relation to the New Earth, "Thy people also shall be all righteous: they shall inherit the land for ever, the branch of my planting, the work of my hands, that I may be glorified. A little one shall become a thousand, and a small one a strong nation: I the Lord will hasten it in his time."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

Amos 5:1-4 says, "The virgin of Israel is fallen; she shall no more rise: she is forsaken upon her land; there is none to raise her up. For thus saith the Lord GOD; The city that went out by a thousand shall leave an hundred, and that which went forth by an hundred shall leave ten, to the house of Israel."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

Posting the above 1000 times will not change God's Word about the 1000 year reign of Christ on earth, from Jerusalem, after the Second Coming. Matthew 24 25. Revelation 6.

Timtofly · Apr 24, 2021

sovereigngrace said:
Again, zero evidence. Just more ongoing personal opinion. This reinforces the error of your position. You are reinforcing the Op.

The OP is not your personal opinion? You do not hold to your own words you type?

Timtofly · Apr 24, 2021

sovereigngrace said:
The day of the Lord ushers in a perfect and eternal day, not more of the same. Time is completed.

You are the one claiming more of the same. If everything is over, the Millennium is not more of the same. Your excuse why there cannot be a Lord's Day is pointless without merit.

Of course everything is over. Daniel 9 is complete. The 7th Trumpet is complete. The Lord's Day can now start after the 6000 years of Adam's punishment has been satisfied. God does not use 2 days of man's sin as the Lord's Day. That is ridiculous!

"Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work."

It does not say:

"Four days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
But the last 3 days are the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work."

Why conflate the blessing with the punishment? The Lord's Day is holy unto the Lord, not part of Adam's punishment.

Timtofly · Apr 24, 2021

sovereigngrace said:
I deny what is not in Scripture. You or no Premil has showed Christ on earth in Revelation 20. That is because it doesn't exist. You cannot prove what is not there.

Revelation 20 does exist. It comes after Revelation 19. It does not come after Revelation 3, where you claim it belongs with the church.

Timtofly · Apr 24, 2021

sovereigngrace said:
I understand your frustration but you have proved nothing yet. Presenting Scripture that shows Him leaving heaven to receive His bride is a core belief of every view. That does not prove Jesus is on earth in Revelation 20, and you know that. You are therefore arguing from silence.

Jesus is reigning now with His elect in heaven in matchless glory.

Not according to TribulationSigns. He is reigning as God on God’s throne. No literal or useful application to those on earth.

Contrary to what Premil teaches: Revelation 20 does not locate Jesus on earth!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency