Discussion on the 5th Seal

[3 Resurrections]

I went to Exodus to look through some of the references to these "harvest" feasts, and I got the impression that there were "firstfruits" (spring) and the "ingathering" (fall), and Pentecost was listed with them as one of the three times all males were to come to Jerusalem, but it wasn't called a "harvest", nor did it have the additional baggage of other feasts/holy days around it (like Passover/Unleavened Bread in the Spring and Booths/Atonement in the Fall).

The harvest at Passover was the barley harvest in Israel. The harvest at Pentecost was the wheat harvest ("Exodus 34:22 - And you shall observe the feast of weeks, of the first fruits of wheat harvest..."). Then the Feast of Tabernacles celebrated all the rest of the later, varied crops of the field (olives, grapes, etc.)

[1Ti 4:10 KJV] For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

This verse is not saying that God is the Saviour of all men without exception. It says "specially" (malista) which means that "in particular" those who believe are the ones who have God as their Saviour. The "all men" is in reference to Gentiles as well as Jews, as long as they were believers.

That sounds a little grisly. Are you saying that the unjust were resurrected in their previous, corruptible bodies, but they weren't able to get out of their graves, so they died again and their bodies restarted decomposition?

The physical bodies of the wicked dead never get to stand in God's presence in a resurrected form at any time. Their dead bodies never rise. Their spirit is raised from Hades and goes to the judgment, but not having Christ's righteousness, their spirit is not joined to a resurrected body, and the consuming fire of God's presence destroys their spirit as well. That's why the resurrection of the wicked dead is called "the resurrection to damnation" or destruction in John 5:29. Their dead bodies simply remain in the grave where they were put, to continue decomposing into the dust they came from. Isaiah presented this idea back in Isaiah 25:14. Speaking of the wicked, Isaiah said, "They are dead, they shall not live; they are deceased, they shall not rise; therefore hast thou visited and destroyed them, and made all their memory to perish."

In direct contrast to the wicked dead who "shall not rise", Isaiah said of the righteous, "Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise."

Why would you say that only those who are in Christ will receive an immortal body?

Because we are told that Christ is the only one who has immortality (1 Timothy 6:16). The only way humans attain immortality is if they are IN CHRIST. The wicked dead are not "in Christ". Therefore, nothing they are composed of - body, soul, and spirit - can possibly achieve eternal immortality and incorruptibility.

I think the "better" resurrection makes more sense as one that is lasting, rather than one that is temporary (they died again), because it is contrasted with those that were able to save themselves from death but chose not to: "not accepting deliverance". If that's the case, then it could apply to those resurrected with Christ--that they were raised but not in their glorified/incorruptible bodies.

A bodily resurrection is never "temporary". That would directly contradict Hebrews 9:27. Hebrews 11:40 says specifically what the "better resurrection" actually is. The "better thing" God was going to provide was having all those faithful martyrs who did not accept deliverance being "made perfect" along with the massive, resurrected group which the Hebrews author would be a part of. To be "made perfect" included the final step of ascending to God's presence, which those other individual resurrected examples did not yet experience - until AD 70's bodily resurrection for the saints. This is the very same "being made perfect" which applied to Christ's own resurrection and ascension in Hebrews 5:9.

If Eph 4:11-12 is talking about those 144,000, are you saying that nobody else were "prophets, apostles, evangelists, pastors, and teachers"? If not nobody else, why do you say those verses apply at all to those 144,000?

No, certainly not. Of course, other believers were serving in these functions as well in the early church. But this was a specific group of 144,000 who were composed of resurrected Jewish saints serving in those roles. The distinguishing characteristic of this special group of 144,000 is that they were sinlessly perfect, incapable of death, disease, or weakness, with all the same features that Christ's resurrected body displayed. I believe these 144,000 were the ones called "elect" which it would be impossible for the false Christs and false prophets to deceive (Matthew 24:24). The same "elect" souls in Luke 18:7-8 who had been crying day and night for vengeance, who were then given their white robes of resurrected bodies, and told to wait for a "little season" in Revelation 6:11.

But if they are raised after the "once to die" condition from Heb 9:27, then what else is available to them, but a lasting condition without death, described as the "lake of fire" in Rev 20 (which is why it is given the term "2nd death"--because it isn't like the first death, or "death" at all, but that kind of death is no longer applicable to mankind)

The "second death" / Lake of Fire is not quite what you think it is. It is actually the second time Jerusalem had been destroyed by fire, after its first death when the city, the nation, and the temple were destroyed by the Babylonians back in 586 BC. Back in Isaiah 31:9, the prophet said of the Lord that His "fire is in Zion, and His furnace in Jerusalem." The Temple's altar was where God's fire from heaven had formerly fallen at the Temple's inauguration ceremony, to sanctify it, and to begin its function as His house of worship. Jerusalem in AD 70 literally turned into a "Lake of Fire" at the close of the Roman siege. God sent His fire to this city again, but this time to destroy it utterly for a second and final time.

 

[Derf]

The harvest at Passover was the barley harvest in Israel. The harvest at Pentecost was the wheat harvest ("Exodus 34:22 - And you shall observe the feast of weeks, of the first fruits of wheat harvest..."). Then the Feast of Tabernacles celebrated all the rest of the later, varied crops of the field (olives, grapes, etc.)

Ok, I see what you mean. I was reading Ex 34:22 as if it was describing all three of the feasts, but in a funny order: 1. weeks, 2. wheat, 3. then ingathering.

This verse is not saying that God is the Saviour of all men without exception. It says "specially" (malista) which means that "in particular" those who believe are the ones who have God as their Saviour. The "all men" is in reference to Gentiles as well as Jews, as long as they were believers.

Possibly. Let's see how it plays out below.

The physical bodies of the wicked dead never get to stand in God's presence in a resurrected form at any time. Their dead bodies never rise. Their spirit is raised from Hades and goes to the judgment, but not having Christ's righteousness, their spirit is not joined to a resurrected body, and the consuming fire of God's presence destroys their spirit as well. That's why the resurrection of the wicked dead is called "the resurrection to damnation" or destruction in John 5:29. Their dead bodies simply remain in the grave where they were put, to continue decomposing into the dust they came from. Isaiah presented this idea back in Isaiah 24:14. Speaking of the wicked, Isaiah said, "They are dead, they shall not live; they are deceased, they shall not rise; therefore hast thou visited and destroyed them, and made all their memory to perish."

In direct contrast to the wicked dead who "shall not rise", Isaiah said of the righteous, "Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise."

If their spirit is "raised", then they aren't yet destroyed and their memory perished, right? So Isaiah 24:14 must be either talking about just their bodies, or it must be talking about after the judgment (which you say is the judgment of their spirits). If it's after the judgment anyway, then it could just as easily include their bodies rising.

John 5:29 needs the context of John 5:28 for better understanding:

[Jhn 5:28 KJV] Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
[Jhn 5:29 KJV] And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.​

What is in the graves at this time? spirits? souls? or bodies? Keep in mind that "resurrection" has to be talking about something that is dead coming back to life, else it's not a resurrection. Whether or not the spirits are being held somewhere (surely the normal story isn't that the spirits are held in the graves with the bodies, right?) to be reunited with their bodies, or if the spirit is some life force that is reapplied to a body that has become lifeless (and most likely decayed to dust), the body needs to come back to life if there's to be any sort of resurrection, even if unto damnation.

Thus, if the dead, "small and great" stand before God in judgment, as described in John 5:29, after coming forth from their graves, as in Rev 20:12 (quoted below), then aren't they standing before God in some resurrected form?

Because we are told that Christ is the only one who has immortality (1 Timothy 6:16). The only way humans attain immortality is if they are IN CHRIST. The wicked dead are not "in Christ". Therefore, nothing they are composed of - body, soul, and spirit - can possibly achieve eternal immortality and incorruptibility.

I agree that the only way to achieve immortality is through Christ, but what if Christ's sacrifice were applied to all men, as in 1 Timothy 4:10 in my understanding, yet there is still something else that needs to happen, i.e., that they need to believe in Christ. Then there are some that arise to eternal life, and some that arise to damnation, because they didn't/won't believe in Christ. That would still work with 1 Timothy 6:16. As long as you allow for some kind of life after death for the wicked, even if just a "spiritual" or "soulish" life in Hades, you can't have any kind of "resurrection" that doesn't raise at least one portion to life again, and I maintain that the bodily resurrection is what is being talked about in numerous places, but certainly in John 5:28-29.

A bodily resurrection is never "temporary". That would directly contradict Hebrews 9:27. Hebrews 11:40 says specifically what the "better resurrection" actually is. The "better thing" God was going to provide was having all those faithful martyrs who did not accept deliverance being "made perfect" along with the massive, resurrected group which the Hebrews author would be a part of. To be "made perfect" included the final step of ascending to God's presence, which those other individual resurrected examples did not yet experience - until AD 70's bodily resurrection for the saints. This is the very same "being made perfect" which applied to Christ's own resurrection and ascension in Hebrews 5:9.

I'm not sure you're correct, that a bodily resurrection is never temporary, but perhaps so. And perhaps your "being made perfect" is akin to my "resurrection to eternal life"--it requires not just that we stand before God, but that we are judged worthy through faith in Jesus Christ. But the other option is that we are all "made perfect" in some way, even if some are judged not fit for the next life and are cast into the lake of fire (I know...we'll talk about it some more below).

No, certainly not. Of course, other believers were serving in these functions as well in the early church. But this was a specific group of 144,000 who were composed of resurrected Jewish saints serving in those roles. The distinguishing characteristic of this special group of 144,000 is that they were sinlessly perfect, incapable of death, disease, or weakness, with all the same features that Christ's resurrected body displayed. I believe these 144,000 were the ones called "elect" which it would be impossible for the false Christs and false prophets to deceive (Matthew 24:24). The same "elect" souls in Luke 18:7-8 who had been crying day and night for vengeance, who were then given their white robes of resurrected bodies, and told to wait for a "little season" in Revelation 6:11.

Matthew 24:24 doesn't say it ISN'T possible to deceive them (except in some translations where words are added for "clarity", like the KJV), but that it might be possible. If I'm right, it eliminates your 144,000 from consideration for that verse.
If I'm wrong, and your 144,000 are just sharing those attributes (apostles, teachers, etc.), there's no indication that the pre-resurrected ones were any less capable than the post-resurrected ones of performing the tasks involved, so why would they even be mentioned as a second category by Paul. And it doesn't seem like they were.

The "second death" / Lake of Fire is not quite what you think it is. It is actually the second time Jerusalem had been destroyed by fire, after its first death when the city, the nation, and the temple were destroyed by the Babylonians back in 586 BC. Back in Isaiah 31:9, the prophet said of the Lord that His "fire is in Zion, and His furnace in Jerusalem." The Temple's altar was where God's fire from heaven had formerly fallen at the Temple's inauguration ceremony, to sanctify it, and to begin its function as His house of worship. Jerusalem in AD 70 literally turned into a "Lake of Fire" at the close of the Roman siege. God sent His fire to this city again, but this time to destroy it utterly for a second and final time.

My understanding was that the temple burned, and some of the city near it, but not the whole city. I question the "lake of fire" appellation in 70 AD, and point out that Nebuchadnezzar also burned the temple.

But my focus was more on the "dead" that stood before God's throne, as described prior to the lake of fire image:
[Rev 20:12 KJV] 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.
[Rev 20:13 KJV] 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.
You can see that "the dead" came from three places or states: "death", "hell" (hades), and "the sea". If all people that had died were in Hades, why did the sea need to give up its dead? I think it's because the passage is talking about the bodies--thus, it's a real resurrection of the physical bodies.

 

[3 Resurrections]

But my focus was more on the "dead" that stood before God's throne, as described prior to the lake of fire image:
[Rev 20:12 KJV] 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.
[Rev 20:13 KJV] 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.
You can see that "the dead" came from three places or states: "death", "hell" (hades), and "the sea". If all people that had died were in Hades, why did the sea need to give up its dead? I think it's because the passage is talking about the bodies--thus, it's a real resurrection of the physical bodies.

This is the same occasion of the time of the dead being judged in Revelation 11:18, when God would give reward unto His servants the prophets and the saints that feared His name, both small and great. At the same time, God would destroy them which had corrupted the earth. I propose that all these dead, both small and great, are the righteous dead standing before God (not the wicked dead) having their works judged, in order to receive their rewards, more or less, according to each one's activities while living.

When Revelation 20:13 wrote of the "sea" giving up the dead which were in it, this is not speaking of the ocean. The "sea" in scripture is many times in reference to Gentile lands. It would not just be Jewish graves that released the dead, but all the children of faith that had died and been buried in Gentile nations would also give up the physical bodies of the saints who had died and been buried in those locations. This comparison of the sea to Gentiles is found in Isaiah 60:5, where the "abundance of the sea" being converted unto God is parallel to the forces of the Gentiles coming unto faith.

The dead coming from "Hell" (Hades) is just another name for the grave. Christ went there to Hades for 3 days and nights, but God did not leave His soul in Hell (Hades - the grave) nor suffer His body to see corruption.

My understanding was that the temple burned, and some of the city near it, but not the whole city. I question the "lake of fire" appellation in 70 AD, and point out that Nebuchadnezzar also burned the temple.

Josephus wrote that the entire city of Jerusalem was torn down and the local towers destroyed, excepting the Fortress Antonia which garrisoned the troops left in the city after the war. The Temple in AD 70 was burned down for the second time on the very same day that Nebuchadnezzar had burned the Temple during the Babylonian attack. That is why this "Lake of Fire" in Jerusalem was called its "second death".

I agree that the only way to achieve immortality is through Christ, but what if Christ's sacrifice were applied to all men, as in 1 Timothy 4:10 in my understanding, yet there is still something else that needs to happen, i.e., that they need to believe in Christ.

Christ being the "Saviour of all men" in 1 Timothy 4:10 spoke directly to the great issue in the days of the early church: that issue being Gentiles included as the children of faith along with the Jews, without the need for circumcision. This idea was debated hotly in the church, until Paul and Peter put the matter to rest, and the church sent out decrees that Gentiles were to be included in fellowship without needing to be circumcised as proselytes. This was Jesus as the Saviour of "all men" without discrimination, and not "all men" without exception.

As to the wicked rising bodily from the grave for the judgment, I really don't see scripture teaching this, as you are proposing it does in John 5:28-29. As Matthew 10:28 says, we are not supposed to fear them which kill the body, but we are to fear Him who can destroy both body and soul in Hell (Hades - the grave). Sounds as if the grave ends up claiming both body and soul of the wicked for destruction.

We are told that the Lord knows how to reserve the unjust for the day of judgment to be punished (2 Peter 2:9). We are also told that "the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous (Psalms 1:5). We are also told that "The foolish shall not stand in thy sight; thou hatest all workers of iniquity." (Psalms 5:5). All this doesn't sound as if the dead bodies of the wicked are to be resurrected and stand shoulder to shoulder in God's presence with the righteous for judgment.

 

[Derf]

This is the same occasion of the time of the dead being judged in Revelation 11:18, when God would give reward unto His servants the prophets and the saints that feared His name, both small and great. At the same time, God would destroy them which had corrupted the earth. I propose that all these dead, both small and great, are the righteous dead standing before God (not the wicked dead) having their works judged, in order to receive their rewards, more or less, according to each one's activities while living.

Except remember that at least some portion of "the righteous dead" were resurrected in the first resurrection of Rev 20, and told that they would not be harmed by the 2nd death of Rev 20.
[Rev 20:6 KJV] Blessed and holy [is] he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
So 1000 years later, when the judgment of Rev 20:12 takes place, the righteous appear to have already been resurrected and promised no harm from the second death. That means that the ones that are being judged in Rev 20:12 are not righteous, but are judged according to their works. There's a subtle twist here: they are judged according to their works, but they are punished (thrown in lake of fire) according to something else.

When Revelation 20:13 wrote of the "sea" giving up the dead which were in it, this is not speaking of the ocean. The "sea" in scripture is many times in reference to Gentile lands. It would not just be Jewish graves that released the dead, but all the children of faith that had died and been buried in Gentile nations would also give up the physical bodies of the saints who had died and been buried in those locations. This comparison of the sea to Gentiles is found in Isaiah 60:5, where the "abundance of the sea" being converted unto God is parallel to the forces of the Gentiles coming unto faith.

The dead coming from "Hell" (Hades) is just another name for the grave. Christ went there to Hades for 3 days and nights, but God did not leave His soul in Hell (Hades - the grave) nor suffer His body to see corruption.

I agree with your Hades/grave conflation, but not "hell" (unless it's where "hell" is used for "Hades", which is only some places in the KJV). When "hell" is associated with fire or damnation, I believe it is always translated from "gehenna", rather than "Hades". Laying aside "hell" for now, there are 3 places the bodies come from, the sea, death, and Hades (the grave). Let's say you're correct about "the sea" meaning gentiles. That still leaves either 2 places for the Jews to be resurrected from, or "the sea" doesn't mean all gentiles, but surely some gentiles are coming from graves, right? The passage doesn't give any other clue to divisions of categories than those three. If "the sea" doesn't mean all gentiles, you have to divide them into two groups, those that are coming from the sea, and those that are coming from death and Hades. The passage doesn't really make sense that way, imho.

I propose that "the sea", "death", and "Hades" are three categories of dead people:
1. Those that are drowned or buried at sea ("the sea")
2. Those that are buried in a grave or tomb or sepulcher of some sort ("Hades" or "the grave")
3. Those that died and weren't buried at sea or in the grave (birds picked their flesh, or they were burned up, or exploded into small bits, etc.)

Josephus wrote that the entire city of Jerusalem was torn down and the local towers destroyed, excepting the Fortress Antonia which garrisoned the troops left in the city after the war. The Temple in AD 70 was burned down for the second time on the very same day that Nebuchadnezzar had burned the Temple during the Babylonian attack. That is why this "Lake of Fire" in Jerusalem was called its "second death".

That might make sense, but then why are the beast, the false prophet, and Satan all thrown in there, and Satan not until 1000 years after the beast and false prophet. And then a bunch of other people are thrown in to the fire (also 1000 years after beast and false prophet).

As to the wicked rising bodily from the grave for the judgment, I really don't see scripture teaching this, as you are proposing it does in John 5:28-29. As Matthew 10:28 says, we are not supposed to fear them which kill the body, but we are to fear Him who can destroy both body and soul in Hell (Hades - the grave). Sounds as if the grave ends up claiming both body and soul of the wicked for destruction.

Except "hell" in Matthew 10:28 is not from "Hades", but from "gehenna", as per my previous distinction. This is important, it seems, because it delineates between a killing to the grave that is not permanent, and a destroying in gehenna that is permanent.

We are told that the Lord knows how to reserve the unjust for the day of judgment to be punished (2 Peter 2:9). We are also told that "the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous (Psalms 1:5). We are also told that "The foolish shall not stand in thy sight; thou hatest all workers of iniquity." (Psalms 5:5). All this doesn't sound as if the dead bodies of the wicked are to be resurrected and stand shoulder to shoulder in God's presence with the righteous for judgment.

I would normally think that "shall not stand" in both of those cases means "shall not be able to stay" in the congregation of the righteous or in God's sight. This makes sense if He is to judge the unrighteous, and if there is actually a judgment time for the unrighteous, which can be seen from John 5:28-29.

2 Peter 2:9 is referring to the difference between Lot and the people of Sodom, and their respective fates. But remember that His angels went down into Sodom to see if they were as wicked as reported. Thus there was a judgment of the men of Sodom (they refused to repent when begged by Lot), there was a judgment of Lot (he tried to protect the angels), and there was a salvation of the godly (the fire didn't harm Lot, because he was removed from it) and punishment of the ungodly.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Except "hell" in Matthew 10:28 is not from "Hades", but from "gehenna", as per my previous distinction. This is important, it seems, because it delineates between a killing to the grave that is not permanent, and a destroying in gehenna that is permanent.

You're right, of course, that "Hell" in this Matthew 10:28 verse is "Gehenna". That was sloppy on my part for not looking it up as I typed. The KJV translators didn't help when they translated almost everything as simply "Hell", when the Greek and Hebrew use varied terms. And the context of "Gehenna" in this verse does indicate that this destruction is a permanent one for these individuals. No conscious, perpetual torment for the wicked going on here.

If you are still convinced that the verse about the "sea" giving up the dead refers to the ocean, here are some texts in Revelation where that can't be a possibility. Try Revelations 12:12, where John was warning the first-century believers, "Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and the sea! For the devil has come down to you, having great wrath, because he knows that he has a short time." Does this mean that Satan was incensed against the whale, octopus, and shark populations of the ocean? Or was his anger directed against mankind who was dwelling in both the earth (land of Israel) and the sea (pagan Gentile nations)? People do not "inhabit" the literal ocean, but they did inhabit Gentile lands.

What about the mighty angel in Revelation who has His right foot set upon the sea, and His left foot upon the earth? This, of course, has symbolic meaning attached to it. The mighty angel was not standing on the literal ocean. He declared an oath with hand raised to heaven, promising that "there shall be no more delay". This meant that both the earth (land of Israel) and the sea (pagan Gentile nations) which He was standing upon would no longer have a delay regarding the "hour of trial which was about to come upon the whole habitable world" - both Israel and the Gentile nations of the known world included (back in Rev. 3:10).

Also, when John announced in Revelation 21:1that "there was no more sea", this was not really the extermination of all oceans on the planet. It was the extermination of the category of Gentiles in contrast to Jews. God desired no more category distinctions between Jews and Gentiles, since He intended for there to be "one fold and one Shepherd" incorporating believers of both backgrounds within it.

That might make sense, but then why are the beast, the false prophet, and Satan all thrown in there, and Satan not until 1000 years after the beast and false prophet. And then a bunch of other people are thrown in to the fire (also 1000 years after beast and false prophet).

There is some confusion going on here regarding when this single millennium period took place. Actually, it is not as difficult as it is made out to be. The literal 1,000-year millennium had already expired as John was writing Revelation. It was "finished" with the "First resurrection" (Christ and the Matthew 27:52-53 resurrected saints) when Satan was loosed for a "little season" from his chain. And that "little season" John said had already begun. In Revelation 12:12 listed above, Satan had come down to the earth and sea in great wrath, knowing that he only had a "short time" (the "little season") to operate in the world. This "short time" / "little season" of Satan's release had already started before John began writing Revelation. Therefore, the millennium which finished before Satan was loosed was past history by then.

 

[Derf]

The KJV translators didn't help when they translated almost everything as simply "Hell", when the Greek and Hebrew use varied terms.

Agreed!

If you are still convinced that the verse about the "sea" giving up the dead refers to the ocean, here are some texts in Revelation where that can't be a possibility. Try Revelations 12:12, where John was warning the first-century believers, "Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and the sea! For the devil has come down to you, having great wrath, because he knows that he has a short time." Does this mean that Satan was incensed against the whale, octopus, and shark populations of the ocean? Or was his anger directed against mankind who was dwelling in both the earth (land of Israel) and the sea (pagan Gentile nations)? People do not "inhabit" the literal ocean, but they did inhabit Gentile lands.

I'm not so sure that his anger was directed against mankind, either, but because he knows he is about to be judged. Therefore, if he is angry because he has just a little time to work to destroy God's plan and creation, he might easily be after both humans and animals, including the seafaring kinds. Plus, "the sea" could be the places across the sea, like the Americas.

So I'd say it isn't convincing. Plus, there are other usages of "sea" where it includes a third thing, like the trees:
[Rev 7:1 KJV] And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.
[Rev 7:2 KJV] And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God: and he cried with a loud voice to the four angels, to whom it was given to hurt the earth and the sea,
[Rev 7:3 KJV] Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.

I suppose "the trees" might be the servants of God, or the church, or some such, but it isn't that clear.

When a third thing is added, the dichotomy between Jew and Gentile can't apply in the same way. That doesn't mean there's not a symbolic meaning that includes people--there might still be. But add to that the three-fold nature of the second resurrection in Rev 20, and it makes the dichotomy hard to accept.

There is some confusion going on here regarding when this single millennium period took place. Actually, it is not as difficult as it is made out to be. The literal 1,000-year millennium had already expired as John was writing Revelation. It was "finished" with the "First resurrection" (Christ and the Matthew 27:52-53 resurrected saints) when Satan was loosed for a "little season" from his chain. And that "little season" John said had already begun. In Revelation 12:12 listed above, Satan had come down to the earth and sea in great wrath, knowing that he only had a "short time" (the "little season") to operate in the world. This "short time" / "little season" of Satan's release had already started before John began writing Revelation. Therefore, the millennium which finished before Satan was loosed was past history by then.

Again--not convincing. Just because he had a little season of time, doesn't mean it was in the past--you're using your doctrine to prove your doctrine, which is circular.