Isaiah 65:17-19 relates to the eternal state not some supposed future millennium

[sovereigngrace]

Isaiah 65:17-19 says, “For, behold, I create [Heb. bârâ'] new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind. But be ye glad and rejoice for ever in that which I create: for, behold, I create Jerusalem a rejoicing, and her people a joy. And I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in my people: and the voice of weeping shall be no more heard in her, nor the voice of crying."

The Hebrew word bârâ' means to create, shape, form or fashion. In Scripture it refers to what God does to the heaven and earth, and to man, when He comes. The word describes new conditions and circumstances and transformations.

According to the book of Revelation when does the new heavens and new earth appears – before or after the millennial period? Does this match up with anywhere in Revelation or anywhere in the New Testament?

Of course!

Revelation 21:1-5: “And I saw a new [Gr. kainos] heaven and a new [Gr. kainos] earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away [Gr. parerchomai]; and there was no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven … God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new [Gr. kainos].”

It is not hard to see the likeness and correlation between Isaiah 65:17-19 and Revelation 21:1-5. They depict to the exact same arrangement that arrives at the exact same time. This is the same eternal age. In the biblical new heaven and new earth everything is made new and perfect and the past corruption and sin, death are gone forever.

Please note: it does not say He makes ‘all new things’. To create a new arrangement does not require the complete destruction / replacement of what we now have. It requires the creation of a new perfect glorified environment that is purged of all the bondage of corruption (the result of the Fall). So, this does not negate the renewal/regeneration of this current decaying earth.

This is also pictured in God's redemptive work with us. Interestingly, the same Greek words are used to describe both acts of regeneration. 2 Corinthians 5:17 confirms: “if any man be in Christ, he is a new [Gr. kainos] creature: old things are passed away [Gr. parerchomai]; behold, all things are become new [Gr. kainos].”

Paul uses the same terms “new” and “passed away,” talking about the condition of renewed believers after salvation, as John does in Revelation 21 describing the new heavens and earth. The exact same Greek construction is found in both of these writings.

No one would argue this means that we are not the very same entity after salvation. We are! But we are irrefutably changed through the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit. We are new spiritual creatures. We are a new person. We think different. We feel different. We function different.

Just as we have become a new creation in Christ, yet we remain the exact same entity, so it is with this current earth when He appears. Also, when Jesus comes and glorifies the redeemed are we annihilated? Are we destroyed? Do we become a completely new person? No! We are changed. We take on a new perfected eternal form. This is what happens to this current earth.

It would have been great if this had meant that my old nature was completely eliminated and that I had become completely brand new, although, in a spiritual sense I did – even though my physical appearance remained exactly the same. This did not mean that the core “us” did not continue. It did! But our spiritual outward covering was forever changed. We are now clothed with His perfect righteousness. That will be realized in all it literal and physical fullness at the second coming. This is a strong reason to think the earth is going to undergo similar.

The Premil “millennial new heaven and new earth” are more of the same.

 

[keras]

According to the book of Revelation when does the new heavens and new earth appears

After the Millennium, Revelation 21:1, Isaiah 65:17
But I disagree that the rest of Isaiah 65:18-25 is in Eternity. That Prophecy matches with Isaiah 2:2-4 and Zechariah 14:16-21, all during the Millennium period. Isaiah 28:13 says the Prophesies are mixed up.
Proved by what is described there, simply does not fit with the Spiritual state of Eternity, as described in Revelation 21 to 22.

when Jesus comes and glorifies the redeemed are we annihilated? Are we destroyed? Do we become a completely new person? No! We are changed. We take on a new perfected eternal form.

The only people Jesus will change when He Returns, will be the martyrs killed during the Great Trib and they are just brought back to physical life'
No one can possibly receive immortality until the GWT Judgment and the Book of Life is opened. Rev 20:11-15

 

[sovereigngrace]

After the Millennium, Revelation 21:1, Isaiah 65:17
But I disagree that the rest of Isaiah 65:18-25 is in Eternity. That Prophecy matches with Isaiah 2:2-4 and Zechariah 14:16-21, all during the Millennium period. Isaiah 28:13 says the Prophesies are mixed up.
Proved by what is described there, simply does not fit with the Spiritual state of Eternity, as described in Revelation 21 to 22.

The only people Jesus will change when He Returns, will be the martyrs killed during the Great Trib and they are just brought back to physical life'
No one can possibly receive immortality until the GWT Judgment and the Book of Life is opened. Rev 20:11-15

Because Premillennialism lacks any corroboration in Scripture for a future 1,000 years’ age after the second coming, it invents 2 “last days” periods to allow Premillennialism to fit. Mark 1 now, and Mark 2 after the second coming. Premillennialists also invent 2 new heavens and new earths. Mark 1 they relate to their alleged future millennium and is sin-cursed and corrupt. Mark 2 is perfect and incorrupt and they equate it to 1,000 years+ after this.

 

[Diamond7]

and there was no more sea On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half of the mountain moving north and half moving south.

This is very interesting and clearly a reference to the Mediterranean Sea. By damning the nine miles of the Strait of Gibraltar, the Mediterranean could be lowered by 200 metres. This would expose millions of acres of seabed for cultivation. Most likely the Sea will be drained out from an earth quake. We are told there will be an earthquake when Jesus returns.

Zechariah 14:4 On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half of the mountain moving north and half moving south.

I wondered how the valley could be split from the east and west, north and south at the same time. If we study the plate technotes of the Arab continental plate that is exactly what will happen. Even the size is 1500 by 1500 miles. So the New Jerusalam will take up all of the plate or all of the land given to Abraham.

Genesis 13:14-17 NLT​

After Lot had gone, the LORD said to Abram, “Look as far as you can see in every direction—north and south, east and west. I am giving all this land, as far as you can see, to you and your descendants as a permanent possession. And I will give you so many descendants that, like the dust of the earth, they cannot be counted! Go and walk through the land in every direction, for I am giving it to you.”

 

[keras]

Because Premillennialism lacks any corroboration in Scripture for a future 1,000 years’ age after the second coming, it invents 2 “last days” periods to allow Premillennialism to fit. Mark 1 now, and Mark 2 after the second coming. Premillennialists also invent 2 new heavens and new earths. Mark 1 they relate to their alleged future millennium and is sin-cursed and corrupt. Mark 2 is perfect and incorrupt and they equate it to 1,000 years+ after this.

A total failure to address my points and the Prophesies I cite.
I am not a PreMill believer.
If anyone wishes to deny the plainly stated thousand year period after Jesus Returns, then why bother with any of the Bible?

 

[sovereigngrace]

This is very interesting and clearly a reference to the Mediterranean Sea. By damning the nine miles of the Strait of Gibraltar, the Mediterranean could be lowered by 200 metres. This would expose millions of acres of seabed for cultivation. Most likely the Sea will be drained out from an earth quake. We are told there will be an earthquake when Jesus returns.

Zechariah 14:4 On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half of the mountain moving north and half moving south.

I wondered how the valley could be split from the east and west, north and south at the same time. If we study the plate technotes of the Arab continental plate that is exactly what will happen. Even the size is 1500 by 1500 miles. So the New Jerusalam will take up all of the plate or all of the land given to Abraham.

Genesis 13:14-17 NLT​

After Lot had gone, the LORD said to Abram, “Look as far as you can see in every direction—north and south, east and west. I am giving all this land, as far as you can see, to you and your descendants as a permanent possession. And I will give you so many descendants that, like the dust of the earth, they cannot be counted! Go and walk through the land in every direction, for I am giving it to you.”

I don't agree.

 

[sovereigngrace]

A total failure to address my points and the Prophesies I cite.
I am not a PreMill believer.
If anyone wishes to deny the plainly stated thousand year period after Jesus Returns, then why bother with any of the Bible?

I addressed what you presented. You refused to acknowledge the contradictions.

You obviously do not see how you are twisting the texts to support your supposed future millennium. Isa 2 relates to "the last days." That is now since Christ's earthly ministry. Isa 65 relates to "the NHNE" - that comes at the second coming. There is no space for your future millennium. That is because it is ongoing now. You use Rev 20 as a dumping ground for every age. That is why Premil should be rejected. It is horrible hermeneutics.

 

[keras]

I addressed what you presented. You refused to acknowledge the contradictions.

I see no contradictions in the Prophesies.
Gods 7000 year Plan is simple and logical. Revelation 20 is clear and concise; there will be a thousand year period when Jesus will reign on earth.

 

[sovereigngrace]

I see no contradictions in the Prophesies.
Gods 7000 year Plan is simple and logical. Revelation 20 is clear and concise; there will be a thousand year period when Jesus will reign on earth.

That 7000 years invented scheme you promote has been repeatedly proved to be a fallacy. No such thing as "Gods 7000 year Plan." It is Keras's 7000 year Plan. It is extra-biblical and anti-biblical.

 

[keras]

That 7000 years invented scheme you promote has been repeatedly proved to be a fallacy. No such thing as "Gods 7000 year Plan." It is Keras's 7000 year Plan. It is extra-biblical and anti-biblical.

No one has disproved the timeline I have presented, which shows the exact 2000 years; Adam to Abram, 2000 years Abraham to Jesus and now nearly 2000 years to when Jesus will Return and rule for the final 1000 years.
The AMill theory is wrong. You deny Bible truths.

 

[sovereigngrace]

No one has disproved the timeline I have presented, which shows the exact 2000 years; Adam to Abram, 2000 years Abraham to Jesus and now nearly 2000 years to when Jesus will Return and rule for the final 1000 years.
The AMill theory is wrong. You deny Bible truths.

We are over 2000 years since the birth of Christ. We must niw be in the millennium.

Also, Rev 20 goes on a lot further than 1000 years, thus demolishing your whole thesis.

 

[Jamdoc]

Isaiah 65:17-19 says, “For, behold, I create [Heb. bârâ'] new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind. But be ye glad and rejoice for ever in that which I create: for, behold, I create Jerusalem a rejoicing, and her people a joy. And I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in my people: and the voice of weeping shall be no more heard in her, nor the voice of crying."

The Hebrew word bârâ' means to create, shape, form or fashion. In Scripture it refers to what God does to the heaven and earth, and to man, when He comes. The word describes new conditions and circumstances and transformations.

According to the book of Revelation when does the new heavens and new earth appears – before or after the millennial period? Does this match up with anywhere in Revelation or anywhere in the New Testament?

Of course!

Revelation 21:1-5: “And I saw a new [Gr. kainos] heaven and a new [Gr. kainos] earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away [Gr. parerchomai]; and there was no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven … God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new [Gr. kainos].”

It is not hard to see the likeness and correlation between Isaiah 65:17-19 and Revelation 21:1-5. They depict to the exact same arrangement that arrives at the exact same time. This is the same eternal age. In the biblical new heaven and new earth everything is made new and perfect and the past corruption and sin, death are gone forever.

Please note: it does not say He makes ‘all new things’. To create a new arrangement does not require the complete destruction / replacement of what we now have. It requires the creation of a new perfect glorified environment that is purged of all the bondage of corruption (the result of the Fall). So, this does not negate the renewal/regeneration of this current decaying earth.

This is also pictured in God's redemptive work with us. Interestingly, the same Greek words are used to describe both acts of regeneration. 2 Corinthians 5:17 confirms: “if any man be in Christ, he is a new [Gr. kainos] creature: old things are passed away [Gr. parerchomai]; behold, all things are become new [Gr. kainos].”

Paul uses the same terms “new” and “passed away,” talking about the condition of renewed believers after salvation, as John does in Revelation 21 describing the new heavens and earth. The exact same Greek construction is found in both of these writings.

No one would argue this means that we are not the very same entity after salvation. We are! But we are irrefutably changed through the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit. We are new spiritual creatures. We are a new person. We think different. We feel different. We function different.

Just as we have become a new creation in Christ, yet we remain the exact same entity, so it is with this current earth when He appears. Also, when Jesus comes and glorifies the redeemed are we annihilated? Are we destroyed? Do we become a completely new person? No! We are changed. We take on a new perfected eternal form. This is what happens to this current earth.

It would have been great if this had meant that my old nature was completely eliminated and that I had become completely brand new, although, in a spiritual sense I did – even though my physical appearance remained exactly the same. This did not mean that the core “us” did not continue. It did! But our spiritual outward covering was forever changed. We are now clothed with His perfect righteousness. That will be realized in all it literal and physical fullness at the second coming. This is a strong reason to think the earth is going to undergo similar.

The Premil “millennial new heaven and new earth” are more of the same.

It does refer to the New Earth, as there are statements there that directly address certain aspects of the curse that God put on the world when sin entered it, such as Isaiah 65:23 directly addresses the curse in Genesis 3:16.
But there is a millennial period, and John gets it from the "Day for the Lord = 1000 years for us" idea that Peter talks about, the Psalms talk about and is what makes Adam dying in 930 years work for God saying "in the day" that he ate from the fruit he would "return to dust"
so the 1000 years is 'the Day of the Lord", and it is not a 24 hour day as we experience it.
It is how all the "the last day" statements make sense, that it is a day from God's experience of reckoning not ours, for us it's a much longer period of time.

Things to consider:
the 7th trumpet takes multiple days
Revelation 10

7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.

there is years of cleanup, human activity, after Gog/Magog (and yes, that is describing Armageddon in Ezekiel 39)

9 And they that dwell in the cities of Israel shall go forth, and shall set on fire and burn the weapons, both the shields and the bucklers, the bows and the arrows, and the handstaves, and the spears, and they shall burn them with fire seven years:
10 So that they shall take no wood out of the field, neither cut down any out of the forests; for they shall burn the weapons with fire: and they shall spoil those that spoiled them, and rob those that robbed them, saith the Lord God.
11 And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will give unto Gog a place there of graves in Israel, the valley of the passengers on the east of the sea: and it shall stop the noses of the passengers: and there shall they bury Gog and all his multitude: and they shall call it The valley of Hamongog.
12 And seven months shall the house of Israel be burying of them, that they may cleanse the land.

So Jesus comes back at the beginning of the Day of the Lord, and Final Judgement is at the end of the Day of the Lord, but it is not 24 hours for us, but more or less a period of time of about 1000 years.

For you to fit this into the Ammillennialist system, you would need to say that we are currently in the Day of the Lord, currently in the last day, and that the Last Day began at Jesus' birth and is ongoing and would need to end before 2000 years have passed since Jesus' birth because that would then become 2 days of the Lord, rather than 1.

The terminology would allow for over 1000 years since it is "after the 1000 years" that we are given in scripture. So over 1000, but before 2000 is possible.

But are you willing to say right now is "the Day of the Lord"

and I dare say we're over 2000 years since the Lord first came down from heaven, if His birth is what you consider to be the start of the Day of the Lord.
if the Cross is when you consider the Lord coming down from Heaven and the start of the Day of the Lord.. we have a few years left.

and keep in mind that Paul was explicit that they were not currently in the Day of the Lord in 2 Thessalonians 2

So I guess you kinda lose that wiggle room.

 

[keras]

We are over 2000 years since the birth of Christ. We must niw be in the millennium.

Also, Rev 20 goes on a lot further than 1000 years, thus demolishing your whole thesis.

But not yet since the Cross and the Resurrection.

Rev 20 covers the Millennium, then comes the GWT Judgment, then; Eternity.

 

[sovereigngrace]

But not yet since the Cross and the Resurrection.

Rev 20 covers the Millennium, then comes the GWT Judgment, then; Eternity.

Your theology is not in Scripture. It belongs to you. I also reject your date setting.

 

[Jamdoc]

Your theology is not in Scripture. It belongs to you. I also reject your date setting.

so when are you saying the Day of the Lord began if we are currently in it? Remember, Paul said in 2 Thessalonians 2 that the Day of the Lord would not come until Antichrist was revealed, so that's either Partial Preterism (AD70) or Futurism, in which case the Day of the Lord will begin with Jesus' return and end with final Judgement and is a period described by John to be 1000 years.

 

[sovereigngrace]

so when are you saying the Day of the Lord began if we are currently in it? Remember, Paul said in 2 Thessalonians 2 that the Day of the Lord would not come until Antichrist was revealed, so that's either Partial Preterism (AD70) or Futurism, in which case the Day of the Lord will begin with Jesus' return and end with final Judgement and is a period described by John to be 1000 years.

The day of the Lord is the climactic return of Christ. It is nowhere described as 1000 years long.

 

[sovereigngrace]

It does refer to the New Earth, as there are statements there that directly address certain aspects of the curse that God put on the world when sin entered it, such as Isaiah 65:23 directly addresses the curse in Genesis 3:16.
But there is a millennial period, and John gets it from the "Day for the Lord = 1000 years for us" idea that Peter talks about, the Psalms talk about and is what makes Adam dying in 930 years work for God saying "in the day" that he ate from the fruit he would "return to dust"
so the 1000 years is 'the Day of the Lord", and it is not a 24 hour day as we experience it.
It is how all the "the last day" statements make sense, that it is a day from God's experience of reckoning not ours, for us it's a much longer period of time.

Things to consider:
the 7th trumpet takes multiple days
Revelation 10


there is years of cleanup, human activity, after Gog/Magog (and yes, that is describing Armageddon in Ezekiel 39)


So Jesus comes back at the beginning of the Day of the Lord, and Final Judgement is at the end of the Day of the Lord, but it is not 24 hours for us, but more or less a period of time of about 1000 years.

For you to fit this into the Ammillennialist system, you would need to say that we are currently in the Day of the Lord, currently in the last day, and that the Last Day began at Jesus' birth and is ongoing and would need to end before 2000 years have passed since Jesus' birth because that would then become 2 days of the Lord, rather than 1.

The terminology would allow for over 1000 years since it is "after the 1000 years" that we are given in scripture. So over 1000, but before 2000 is possible.

But are you willing to say right now is "the Day of the Lord"

and I dare say we're over 2000 years since the Lord first came down from heaven, if His birth is what you consider to be the start of the Day of the Lord.
if the Cross is when you consider the Lord coming down from Heaven and the start of the Day of the Lord.. we have a few years left.

and keep in mind that Paul was explicit that they were not currently in the Day of the Lord in 2 Thessalonians 2

So I guess you kinda lose that wiggle room.

Where is a "millennial kingdom" mentioned here? You have to add into unto the biblical texts.

Let us have a literal word-by-word look at the Hebrew pertaining to Isaiah 65:20.

לֹא־יִֽהְיֶ֨ה מִשָּׁ֜ם עֹ֗וד ע֤וּל יָמִים֙ וְזָקֵ֔ן אֲשֶׁ֥ר
Lo'- yihªyeh mishaam `owd `uwl yaamiym wªzaaqeen 'ªsher
Not be hence more an infant [of] days, an old man after

לֹֽא־יְמַלֵּ֖א אֶת־יָמָ֑יו כִּ֣י הַנַּ֗עַר בֶּן־מֵאָ֤ה שָׁנָה֙ יָמ֔וּת
Lo'- yªmalee''et- yaamaayw Kiy hana`ar ben- mee'aah shaanaah yaamuwt
Not fulfill your days inasmuch a child old an hundred years die

What is this telling us?

The exact same thing, only in different terms.

This is called synonymous parallelism. It is telling us that a child will never become old on the new earth. This line reinforces what has just been said. It confirms the thought of the impending reality of no more death in the eternal state for the righteous. In eternity there will be no more aging or dying. It is not going to be like our corrupt age where infants eventually get old. It will not be like the here-and-now where a man could live to be an old person of a hundred years of age and then die.

This passage is actually saying the opposite to what many think. What this is saying is: there will be no more aging, curse or death on the new earth. Every glorified saints will have come to full maturity in Christ with their new perfect eternal bodies. It is the next line of Isaiah 65:20 that has confused many, because the translators have not interpreted it in a literal word-for-word sense. It is not saying there will be more babies, death and old men. It is saying the opposite to what they are alleging. It is saying that there will be no more aging: children getting old, old people and people dying! It is describing eternity to an Old Testament audience in terms they can grasp.

The new heavens and new earth will indeed be a glorious victorious perfect state where death is unknown. God is saying that the eternal state will actually be free of death for young and old alike. This passage is telling us that there will be no more death on the new earth! The Hebrew word Lo' (Strong’s 3808) means “no” or “not.” The word is a simple negation. The word is found twice in this much-debated new heavens and new earth verse.

Debate in Isaiah 65:20 centers in on the use of the original word yaamuw meaning “die” or “death.” What should we relate it to? Is there indeed “death” on the new earth? Also, should the death be related to the “child” in the second phrase or the “sinner” in the third phrase? What is more, in what way should it read? I must admit, if we are to read it in its most natural way it fits perfectly with the context. So why change it? I believe it should be applied to the “child” as it should agree with the first phrase that is simply a reinforcement of the same truth. It then fits perfectly with the whole overall teaching of the prophet on the perfection and bliss of the eternal state.

No (Lo') longer will an infant become like an old man,
No (Lo') longer will a child reach one hundred and die.

This is Old Testament verbiage that describes eternity to the Old Testament listener. It is telling us: no one is going to age! This relates to the new heaven and new earth not some supposed future millennium – that will never happen.

The original Hebrew does not give us any reason to attribute death to the “child” in this second line. In fact, it does not fit the whole context which is evidently speaking of the removal of aging and death on the new earth. Interpreting it as we have, seems to (1) match the original, (2) make sense to its context, and (3) taps into the thrust of what the prophet was trying to relay. We need to remind ourselves that the whole idea here is describing the incredible eternal deliverance from the curse of corruption and the joy that “the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind” on the “new earth.”

 

[Jamdoc]

The day of the Lord is the climactic return of Christ. It is nowhere described as 1000 years long.

it's described as 1000 years in Revelation 20, that's my point.

Where did John get this idea of a 1000 year period? As Amillennialists love pointing out, Revelation 20 is the only place in scripture that talks about a 1000 year period. So where did John get the idea.. just randomly out of the ether the Holy Spirit gives him this 1000 year thing that he keeps repeating?

Or....
Was John referring to the Day of the Lord, and referencing the concept of a Day to the Lord being like 1000 years to men?
and that's where I'm going with this.
Events of the Day of the Lord are laid out in such a way that they take longer than a single 24 hour period.
IE the 7 years of cleanup after Ezekiel 38 and 39, the 7th trumpet taking multiple days, etc.
but it's all "the Day of the Lord". The concept going all the way back to Genesis where God told Adam he would die the same day he ate the fruit. Adam lived 930 years. God didn't lie that Adam died in the same day. But God reckons a day for Him is like 1000 years to men. That concept was applied in Psalms, and Peter quoted it, and John took the concept to its conclusion, that the Day of the Lord is 1000 years long.
That's how Revelation 20 is not totally novel information but progressive revelation, expanding on what was already revealed throughout scripture. The Day of the Lord has a LOT of things all happening on it, John explains that they all happen, over 1000 years.

I've tried pointing this out to you before, that in Isaiah 34, and Isaiah 63, the Day of the Lord is used interchangably with "the Year" to stress that no it doesn't mean 24 hours, but a longer period of time.
It was just even longer than I even thought it was.
That 1 day/1000 year equivalency was an epiphany for me, and now I see John's 1000 years all over the bible.... as the Day of the Lord.

 

[sovereigngrace]

it's described as 1000 years in Revelation 20, that's my point.

Where did John get this idea of a 1000 year period? As Amillennialists love pointing out, Revelation 20 is the only place in scripture that talks about a 1000 year period. So where did John get the idea.. just randomly out of the ether the Holy Spirit gives him this 1000 year thing that he keeps repeating?

Or....
Was John referring to the Day of the Lord, and referencing the concept of a Day to the Lord being like 1000 years to men?
and that's where I'm going with this.
Events of the Day of the Lord are laid out in such a way that they take longer than a single 24 hour period.
IE the 7 years of cleanup after Ezekiel 38 and 39, the 7th trumpet taking multiple days, etc.
but it's all "the Day of the Lord". The concept going all the way back to Genesis where God told Adam he would die the same day he ate the fruit. Adam lived 930 years. God didn't lie that Adam died in the same day. But God reckons a day for Him is like 1000 years to men. That concept was applied in Psalms, and Peter quoted it, and John took the concept to its conclusion, that the Day of the Lord is 1000 years long.
That's how Revelation 20 is not totally novel information but progressive revelation, expanding on what was already revealed throughout scripture. The Day of the Lord has a LOT of things all happening on it, John explains that they all happen, over 1000 years.

I've tried pointing this out to you before, that in Isaiah 34, and Isaiah 63, the Day of the Lord is used interchangably with "the Year" to stress that no it doesn't mean 24 hours, but a longer period of time.
It was just even longer than I even thought it was.
That 1 day/1000 year equivalency was an epiphany for me, and now I see John's 1000 years all over the bible.... as the Day of the Lord.

It doesn't say one thousand years. It says the more figurative "a thousand years." A thousand years is simply a simile for a long period of time.

 

[Jamdoc]

It doesn't say one thousand years. It says the more figurative "a thousand years." A thousand years is simply a simile for a long period of time.

2 Peter 3

7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
8 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.
9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

Peter is even talking about the Day of the Lord regarding the context of this equation of a day being like a thousand years.

What you have to understand is that, the point is the way God sees time and the way we experience it are 2 very different things.
If the Day of the Lord lasts over 24 hours is it no longer the Day of the Lord? No, because to God a day and 1000 years, no difference. it's a finite period of time, it's insignificant to God.
so to God, whether 24 hours, or 1000 years, it's a Day.
We might see it as 1000 years long.