Once again, for the newcomers, 1000 is more often symbolic than literal

[ewq1938]

But the Hebrew culture uses the NUMBER 1000 figuratively when the context dictates it.

If John wrote this in Revelation you would have a stronger case but the Holy Spirit wanted it in Greek.

This is apocalyptic literature - sort of the "Superhero Comic Book" of the ancient world - full of archetypal images and heroes we are meant to cheer on and villains to boo. It's loaded with symbolic images, animals, numbers, colours, and metaphors.

Yes and all of it's cardinal numbers are exact numbers. They are not metaphors.

It uses the Greek number for 7 to describe Jesus having 7 horns and eyes. The number is 7, agreed. But what does this mean?

You have avoided this point.

The point is moot. How many eyes did John see? How many horns did he see? That's the only NUMBER we need to discuss. He saw 7 of each, not 70, not 7000. We cannot argue that he saw any less or more than 7. It's the same with the thousand years.

There is an easy fix for Amillennialism here. Admit the thousand years is literal and exact but say the thousand years started exactly a thousand years to the day Christ returns. Amillennialism has no real and firm start date of the thousand years anyways. Some say at the cross, some at the ascension, some after he was in heaven...

Up to you guys. I am just showing the reasons why the thousand years is literally that amount of years exactly.

 

[eclipsenow]

The answer would be no, not from someone who knows biblical Greek properly.

The main evidences are:

1. There are no NT examples of chilioi meaning more or less than exactly a thousand.

Except 2 Peter where it's a gazillion.

2. It still means exactly a thousand when paired with other numbers.

Except when the context is apocalyptic symbolism and the passage is visionary and the timeframes are a gazillion years and the main message is matured saints will be kept safe in this period.

3. It's uses in the bible are of exactly a thousand every single time it appears.

You're just asserting this - all the instances I can see of it are - by context - the common Hebrew use of it. A gazillion.

4. When an unknown amount is used, the word used is G5505 chilias, and it is used twice in a row.

Is this evidence of it being unknown or evidence of it being a thousand thousands? Can you please show me where you are getting this from?

5. G5507 chilioi is never used in this double fashion.

So? The context shows it to be a Greek rendering of a Hebrew concept - a Hebrew number symbol - of a gazillion. Like Sampson's conquests, God's faithfulness, and how many times God will multiply out his nation from Deuteronomy and Isaiah. A gazillion. It's NOT hard!

6. The double appearance of G5505 chilias is not found in Revelation 20.

You've asserted the double means unknown, but I am not claiming 1000 means unknown.
I'm claiming it means a bajillion, a gazillion, "heaps", "millions upon millions" or whatever sounds like a big number to you.

I think this is a strong case that Revelation 20's "thousand years" is exactly a thousand years. There is no evidence in the NT that this is a longer period of time.

I think it's special pleading from silence! You've just asserted the same thing in a few different ways, and thrown chilias in there to try and sound authoritative.

There are many places one can learn more about these numbers, but Dr Paul Barnett is a great start and here is his blog page on numbers. http://paulbarnett.info/tag/understanding-revelation/

Try (retired) Bishop Paul Barnett's book. He is not only a theologian, but has a doctorate in Ancient History and taught ancient history for many years, as well as leading tours of the bible lands.
https://www.amazon.com/Apocalypse-Now-Then-Revelation-Commentaries/dp/1875861416

There's also Dr John Dickson's "666 and all that".

Also the Bible Project is written by a guy with a Phd in Jewish number symbolism.

Revelation 1 to 11

Revelation 12 to 22.

 

[ewq1938]

Except 2 Peter where it's a gazillion.

No, it's a thousand years years being compared to a day there.

You're just asserting this - all the instances I can see of it are - by context - the common Hebrew use of it. A gazillion.

Too bad Revelation wasn't part of the OT.

You've asserted the double means unknown

No, it's a fact.

 

[Hammster]

The answer would be no, not from someone who knows biblical Greek properly.

The main evidences are:

1. There are no NT examples of chilioi meaning more or less than exactly a thousand.
2. It still means exactly a thousand when paired with other numbers.
3. It's uses in the bible are of exactly a thousand every single time it appears.
4. When an unknown amount is used, the word used is G5505 chilias, and it is used twice in a row.
5. G5507 chilioi is never used in this double fashion.
6. The double appearance of G5505 chilias is not found in Revelation 20.

I think this is a strong case that Revelation 20's "thousand years" is exactly a thousand years. There is no evidence in the NT that this is a longer period of time.

So John being Jewish (not Greek), being really familiar with the OT, even to the point that a very large portion of Revelation references the OT either directly or implicitly, would never use 1000 in a figurative way simply because it’s not the normal way it’s used?

I think proper hermeneutics and letting scripture interpret scripture is a better option than taking this once instance in a wooden literal way.

 

[ewq1938]

So John being Jewish (not Greek), being really familiar with the OT, even to the point that a very large portion of Revelation references the OT either directly or implicitly, would never use 1000 in a figurative way simply because it’s not the normal way it’s used?

Yes. First, John wrote Revelation but all the info comes from God so how it's written would be unaffected by who John was. Second, John lived in a Greek/Hellenized world so his mindset would be far different than those of Moses' time.

 

[eclipsenow]

No, it's a thousand years years being compared to a day there.

Psalms 84:10 - "Better is one day in your courts than a thousand elsewhere; I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God than dwell in the tents of the wicked."
= Is one day at church better than 1000 days aka 2.7 years, or is this a qualitative assessment of where it is better to DWELL for a long time?

Too bad Revelation wasn't part of the OT.

To bad John was Jew - a descendent of Hebrews - and read his OT and they all knew how 1000 was used there.

No, it's a fact.

Show me again please? Where is this used?

Yes. First, John wrote Revelation but all the info comes from God so how it's written would be unaffected by who John was. Second, John lived in a Greek/Hellenized world so his mindset would be far different than those of Moses' time.

You've got the "John as secretary" model there.
John was writing in apocalyptic literature - a common style at the time - much like there are rules for writing certain types of poetry. It was about 200BC to 200AD so nothing to do with Moses - even though John was thoroughly conversant in his OT! He was given a vision of how the world would be and certain theological truths, but remains free to express it how he wants. It's a common type of literature to the time.

 

[Hammster]

Yes. First, John wrote Revelation but all the info comes from God so how it's written would be unaffected by who John was. Second, John lived in a Greek/Hellenized world so his mindset would be far different than those of Moses' time.

Let’s go with God wrote it. He also wrote the OT, where 1000 was used in a non-literal sense. His mindset never changes.

 

[eclipsenow]

Wow - the scholars I am most convinced by disagree with the location of the "Millennium" but are pretty much in agreement with everything else Prof Bauckham says in the 4 minutes below. (Undeceptions is an AWESOME apologetics podcast.)

As part of Season 3 of the Undeceptions Podcast, John Dickson spoke with Professor Richard Bauckham on the Book of Revelation. Here, they discuss the concept of ‘the millennium’ in the book.
Millennium chats with Professor Richard Bauckham - Undeceptions​

 

[sovereigngrace]

No, it's a thousand years years being compared to a day there.





Too bad Revelation wasn't part of the OT.



No, it's a fact.

Revelation 1:1 says, “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John.”

The order of the transmission of this prophecy was expressly:

God – Christ – Angel – (signified or symbolised) – John

The Greek word interpreted ‘signified’, in this key introductory verse of Revelation, is semaino (Strong’s 4591), which actually means to signify or sign-i-fy. This word is found seven times in the New Testament and is interpreted as follows in the King James Version:

Signs (John 4:48)
Signify (Acts 25:27)
Signifying (John 12:33, 18:32, 21:19)
Signified (Acts 11:28; Revelation 1:1)

The Greek Word for sign in the New Testament is semeion (Strong’s 4592), which is significantly derived from the above word semaino (Strong’s 4591) that is found in Revelation 1:1. In fact, the word semaino itself originates from the shorter Greek word sema (meaning sign, token or mark). The whole weight of this interlinked family of words is definitely signs and sign language.

Vines Dictionary highlights Revelation 1:1, whilst explaining the meaning of the Greek, saying, “Rev. 1:1, where perhaps the suggestion is that of expressing by signs.”

This is exactly what the book of Revelation is; it a number of similar figurative visions indicating and impressing important spiritual truths by way of signs and/or symbols

Premillennial-literalists try to water down the symbolic meaning of the word semaino as its proper reading destroys the whole way of how they approach Revelation. They attempt to alter the true sense of the Greek by assigning all forms of alternative meanings simply to support their literalist concept of Revelation. Some Premils even try to resort to the New American Standard or other modern versions in order to find a translation that fits their understanding of the word. Interestingly, whilst the New American Standard interprets the word semaino in Revelation 1:1 as communicate, it elsewhere renders in this version as:

Signs (John 4:48)
Indicate (John 12:33, Acts 11:28, Acts 25:27)
Signifying (John 18:32, 21:19)

Interpreting the Greek word semaino as “signified” in Revelation 1:1 is plainly a correct translation and in perfect agreement with its consistent rendering elsewhere in Scripture. The word “signified” therefore simply means what it says – sign-i-fied.

The book of Revelation is manifestly a book written in sign language. Its number and images are visionary and are advanced to describe spiritual truths that are found elsewhere in Scripture. Revelation is a symbolic record of the overall battle between the kingdom of God and the kingdom of darkness. It relates, like every other New Testament book, to the period running between the first and Second Advents.

John 4:48 uses the Greek Word semanio (Strong’s 4591), NOT semeion (Strong’s 4592).

There are actually 61 matches for semeion (Strong’s 4592) in the New Testament, and John 4:48 is not one of them.

Matthew 12:38, 39 (x3), 16:1, 3, 4 (x3), 24:3, 24, 30, 26:48, Mark 8:11, 12 (x2), 13:4, 22, 16:17, 20, Luke 2:12, 34, 9:42, 11:16, 29 (x3), 30, 21:7, 23:8, John 2:11, 18, 23, 3:2, 4:54, 6:2, 14, 26, 30, 7:31, 9:16, 10:41, 11:47, 12:18, 37, Acts 4:16, 22, 6:8, 8:6, 15:12, Romans 4:11, 1 Corinthians 1:22, 14:22, 2 Thessalonians 3:17, Revelation 12:1, 3, 13:13, 14, 15:1, 16:14, 19:20.

 

[sovereigngrace]

The point is moot. How many eyes did John see? How many horns did he see? That's the only NUMBER we need to discuss. He saw 7 of each, not 70, not 7000. We cannot argue that he saw any less or more than 7. It's the same with the thousand years.

There is an easy fix for Amillennialism here. Admit the thousand years is literal and exact but say the thousand years started exactly a thousand years to the day Christ returns. Amillennialism has no real and firm start date of the thousand years anyways. Some say at the cross, some at the ascension, some after he was in heaven...

Up to you guys. I am just showing the reasons why the thousand years is literally that amount of years exactly.

It is not the symbol that is important, it is what it represents. If one catches this, Revelation will open up to him.

I believe 7 represents completeness and perfection.

The term "a thousand" is used in most languages in a figurative sense to represent a large number or a large indefinite period. Certain common numbers are frequently used in Scripture as valuable symbols to represent particular divine truths or ideas; a thousand and ten thousand are two such numbers. They are employed as familiar figures to impress deep spiritual principles in a distinctly comprehendible and identifiable way. It is not necessarily the exact numerical size of the figure outlined that is important but the spiritual idea that it represents. In fact, English dictionaries recognise the indefinite nature of a thousand defining it variously as a very large number or a great number or amount. This use is very common in our daily language.

The phrase “a thousand” comes up a lot in every day conversation. For example: “a picture is worth a thousand words” is a familiar saying. This simply tells us that much can be gleaned from a still print. An image can be more revealling and more influential than a substantial amount of text.

Another well-known phrase that some use is: “A journey of a thousand miles starts with one step.” This suggests that the greatest of endeavours starts with the first move – a great undertaking must start somewhere.

We may in passing say: “I have a thousand things to do today.” However, the expression is no way intended to delineate an exact number, but rather a notion. It is simply a figure of speech.

Tourists are welcomed to Dublin airport, Ireland, by the popular Irish expression: “Welcome to the City of a Thousand Welcomes.” This is simply a figurative communication epitomizing the friendliness and hospitality of the place.

People also use ‘a thousand’ as a round figure or as a phrase to describe a general amount. If they had $1053 (literally pronounced one thousand and fifty three dollars) it wouldn't be uncommon or unusual to say I had a thousand dollars. They would simply round it off to a familiar even number. This is where 10, 100, 1,000, and 10,000 are often used. These are not wooden numbers.

This figure is also used to describe a long indeterminate period of power and government. Hitler boasted that the Third Reich would last a thousand years. The Nazi Party used the terms Drittes Reich and Tausendjähriges Reich (Thousand-Year Reich) to describe the rule, power and vision of the Fascist kingdom. It wasn’t that Hitler limited his wicked dream to that period, but that it symbolically represented a long period of unparalleled supremacy.

Churchill also infamously said of the victory of the war, “if we fail, the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age, made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science. Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that if the British Empire and its Commonwealth last for a thousand years, men will say, ‘This was their finest hour’” (Churchill in his speech on June 18, 1940).

 

[sovereigngrace]

The point is moot. How many eyes did John see? How many horns did he see? That's the only NUMBER we need to discuss. He saw 7 of each, not 70, not 7000. We cannot argue that he saw any less or more than 7. It's the same with the thousand years.

There is an easy fix for Amillennialism here. Admit the thousand years is literal and exact but say the thousand years started exactly a thousand years to the day Christ returns. Amillennialism has no real and firm start date of the thousand years anyways. Some say at the cross, some at the ascension, some after he was in heaven...

Up to you guys. I am just showing the reasons why the thousand years is literally that amount of years exactly.

People often mistakenly concentrate upon the actual figure revealed rather than what that figure represents. One hundred and forty and four thousand on the other hand, whilst rarely used (being found only in the deeply symbolic book of Revelation), is similarly used, only in an increased manner to impress a number that is completely unfathomable by human capability. The figure of one hundred and forty and four thousand should be viewed in relation to the biblical use of a thousand representing vastness and 12 representing authority.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Yes. First, John wrote Revelation but all the info comes from God so how it's written would be unaffected by who John was. Second, John lived in a Greek/Hellenized world so his mindset would be far different than those of Moses' time.

John was a Hebrew descendent who was very familiar with the Old Testament Scriptures. In fact, Revelation is saturated with references from the Hebrew text. He was well aware of the Old Testament teaching and meaning of “a thousand” or “a thousand years.”

God has not changed from the Old to the New Testament. His truths are immutable. These two testaments are an harmonious whole, and cannot be divorced from each other. The Holy Spirit repeatedly uses “a thousand” in a non-literal sense in the Hebrew text. It is used as a suitable, common and familiar symbol to express deep spiritual truths. A thousand basically describe a large amount or a long period of time. This was, and is, a very common symbol in most cultures to describe a large amount or a long indefinite period of time.

Most wise Bible students employ solid hermeneutics that allow Scripture to interpret Scripture. They do not divorce the Old Testament truths from the New Testament truths.

 

[eclipsenow]

John was a Hebrew descendent who was very familiar with the Old Testament Scriptures. In fact, Revelation is saturated with references from the Hebrew text. He was well aware of the Old Testament teaching and meaning of “a thousand” or “a thousand years.”

God has not changed from the Old to the New Testament. His truths are immutable. These two testaments as an harmonious whole, and cannot be divorced fro each other. The Holy Spirit repeatedly uses “a thousand” in a non-literal sense in the Hebrew text. It is used as a suitable, common and familiar symbol to express deep spiritual truths. A thousand basically describe a large amount or a long period of time. This was, and is, a very common symbol in most cultures to describe a large amount or a long indefinite period of time.

Most wise Bible students employ solid hermeneutics that allow Scripture to interpret Scripture. They do not divorce the Old Testament truths from the New Testament truths.

What he said... in this post and his previous thousand.

 

[ewq1938]

Let’s go with God wrote it. He also wrote the OT, where 1000 was used in a non-literal sense. His mindset never changes.

That doesn't mean the language he wants something in is going to change and mimic another language. There is a reason God inspired John to use Greek and not any other language for Revelation. The thousand years is exactly that long according to Greek cardinal numbers. There is zero evidence for a symbolic meaning.

 

[Hammster]

That doesn't mean the language he wants something in is going to change and mimic another language. There is a reason God inspired John to use Greek and not any other language for Revelation. The thousand years is exactly that long according to Greek cardinal numbers. There is zero evidence for a symbolic meaning.

He inspired John to use Greek because that is what he knew. But that still doesn’t change the fact that by your own argument, God wrote it, like He did the OT. There is no reason to think that He wouldn’t use 1000 in a different way just because it was to be written in Greek.

 

[ewq1938]

He inspired John to use Greek because that is what he knew. But that still doesn’t change the fact that by your own argument, God wrote it, like He did the OT. There is no reason to think that He wouldn’t use 1000 in a different way just because it was to be written in Greek.

Unless the thousand years is an exact number of years. Either it is an exact number or it isn't. I have made a case that is is exact using the language God inspired it to be written in. I don't find the "Hebrew occasionally uses thousand in a non-literal way" a very good argument. Also the fact that there is not one single NT example of a Greek number not being that precise number is very compelling.

 

[ewq1938]

All numbers in Revelation are literal and exact.

42 months is 42 months.
144,000 is 144,000.
3 and a half days is 3 and a half days.
7 seals are 7 seals.
7 trumpets are 7 trumpets.
7 vials are 7 vials.
24 elders are 24 elders.
1260 days is 1260 days.
And yes, a thousand years is a thousand years.

Amounts that are non-literal or non-exact:

Rev 5:11 And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands;

Rev 7:9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;

Rev 20:8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.

 

[Hammster]

Unless the thousand years is an exact number of years. Either it is an exact number or it isn't. I have made a case that is is exact using the language God inspired it to be written in. I don't find the "Hebrew occasionally uses thousand in a non-literal way" a very good argument. Also the fact that there is not one single NT example of a Greek number not being that precise number is very compelling.

It’s not “occasionally”. It’s quite a bit. And like all of the other OT references in Revelation, there’s no reason to think the audience wouldn’t automatically go there. And again, I can use the same argument for “beast” or “dragon” as you use for 1000.

 

[Hammster]

All numbers in Revelation are literal and exact.

42 months is 42 months.
144,000 is 144,000.
3 and a half days is 3 and a half days.
7 seals are 7 seals.
7 trumpets are 7 trumpets.
7 vials are 7 vials.
24 elders are 24 elders.
1260 days is 1260 days.
And yes, a thousand years is a thousand years.

Amounts that are non-literal or non-exact:

Rev 5:11 And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands;

Rev 7:9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;

Rev 20:8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.

Not all are literal, especially the 144,000. Neither are the 24 elders. Remember, Revelation is just John’s longer Olivet Discourse.

 

[ewq1938]

It’s not “occasionally”. It’s quite a bit.

How many times is it used figuratively VS. how many times it is exact?