Surely Premils must invent 2 future glorifications days separated by 1000 years+?

Status
Not open for further replies.

DavidPT

Well-Known Member
Sep 26, 2016
8,601
2,106
Texas
✟196,410.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Based on what you are saying, some people have been good enough to save themselves at the judgment of the dead. This idea cannot be found in the New Testament.


Apparently, some Amils must think saints are granted salvation according to their works, since some Amils have saints who have already put on immortality at the last trump, before this judgment has even taken place yet, later standing there in line with the rest of the dead at the great white throne judgment. Anyone reading Revelation 20:11-15 can clearly see that the text says every single person at that judgment, they are all judgded according to their works.

Why would saints put on immortality first, then after having already put on immortality, be later judged according to their works at the great white throne judgment?
 
Upvote 0

BABerean2

Newbie
Supporter
May 21, 2014
20,614
7,484
North Carolina
✟893,665.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Apparently, some Amils must think saints are granted salvation according to their works, since some Amils have saints who have already put on immortality at the last trump, before this judgment has even taken place yet, later standing there in line with the rest of the dead at the great white throne judgment. Anyone reading Revelation 20:11-15 can clearly see that the text says every single person at that judgment, they are all judgded according to their works.

Why would saints put on immortality first, then after having already put on immortality, be later judged according to their works at the great white throne judgment?


Once again, you are ignoring the time of the judgment of the dead, with reward for some, and destruction for others found in Revelation 11:18, which occurs in the same passage as the sounding of the 7th trumpet.


Apparently, some Premills are able to ignore this verse to make their doctrine work.


.
 
Upvote 0

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Jun 29, 2020
9,282
568
56
Mount Morris
✟123,523.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
That's great! Something we can agree on. Nothing makes me more sad than when I see people who think He is just waiting around in heaven to become our King.
It has not even been 2 days in Heaven. That is the point amil are missing. The physical aspect of time in heaven has been less than 48 hours. It has not been 1990 years.

Time has been that way for all in Christ, who have entered prior to those living. Peter claims 1000 years is spending a day with the Lord. "As a day" with the Lord is time spent with the Lord. The NHNE in Revelation 21-22 cannot be the new heavens and earth in the OT prophecies, for the very reason of time itself. Even people in heaven do not worry about 100 year time spans. So placing the millennium now cannot work. An infant is the product of procreation. We are not even sure if procreation is a thing in the NHNE, because claiming the OT fills in the details John leaves out is contradicory to the point they do not even give a time frame, like they are not sure themselves when, but just what. At the Second Coming in the 6th seal there will be a new heaven and earth. Satan's deception of a planet in a universe will be obliterated. Talk about a new heaven and earth, well some crazy people have been talking about this new earth in a half joking way for hundreds of years. Of course humanity believes Satan over a handful of crazy people.

People are born in the Millennium, thus infants are a reality. That infants are in the NHNE after the GWT is not a given, and time is not even defined. Definitely not time according to a sun and moon relationship, because neither exist in the NHNE after the GWT.
 
Upvote 0

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Jun 29, 2020
9,282
568
56
Mount Morris
✟123,523.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
You cannot have a judgment of the dead without a bodily resurrection of the dead.
This passage is one of several which proves the book is not in chronological order.
So the Holy Spirit was wrong on His chronology, that humans have to correct Him?
 
Upvote 0

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Jun 29, 2020
9,282
568
56
Mount Morris
✟123,523.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
We are saved by His good works.

Based on what you are saying, some people have been good enough to save themselves at the judgment of the dead. This idea cannot be found in the New Testament.

Those Saints in the Old Testament were saved by faith in the Messiah who was to come.

Mat 12:41 The men of Nineveh will rise up in the judgment with this generation and condemn it, because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and indeed a greater than Jonah is here.
Mat 12:42 The queen of the South will rise up in the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and indeed a greater than Solomon is here.
No, you are putting words in my mouth. If an Amil claims that those people are Christians, because of their works, they have the wrong judgment for the church period. This separation based on works is not about the church. Amil use those verses to include the church, because they reject the church taken out prior to this raising of the dead you keep wanting to force at the Second Coming.

Accusing me for your own interpretation seems pretty telling that one cannot even see their own contradictions. The church is not in this "calling out of the grave judgement". The church was judged, condemned, and resurrected at the Cross. That you all refuse to see that because you deny the Revelation 20, 1000 years, is your interpretation of Scripture based on your denial of Revelation 20. There is not a split second time called the Day of the Lord. The Day of the Lord is 1000 years. If you want to lump the events in Revelation prior to or inside of the Day of the Lord is not a life and death matter. The only signicant second in all of history was on the Cross when Jesus Christ said, "It is finished". Overlapping time of how God works is just how God works. Life is not human interpretation to form some man made theology. Life is human experience.
 
Upvote 0

DavidPT

Well-Known Member
Sep 26, 2016
8,601
2,106
Texas
✟196,410.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Once again, you are ignoring the time of the judgment of the dead, with reward for some, and destruction for others found in Revelation 11:18, which occurs in the same passage as the sounding of the 7th trumpet.


Apparently, some Premills are able to ignore this verse to make their doctrine work.


.


Apparently, you seem to be ignoring logic for some reason. Common sense alone tells most of us, that if the dead in Christ rise first, that the wicked dead don't rise prior to them nor even at the exact same time as them. After the dead in Christ rise first, there are still ppl back on earth who are not even physically dead. And this would include those that are alive and get raptured, and would include those Jesus slays in Revelation 19:21. How could the great white throne judgment possibly precede all of those events, especially Revelation 19:21?


Before the great white throne judgment can even happen, and whether it happens that same day or not, that is not relevant, all of the following must occur first.

1) Christ bodily leaves heaven--the 2nd coming.

2) The dead in Christ rise first.

3) Those who are alive and remain are raptured.

4) Christ and His armies confront the beast and it's armies.

5) The beast and false prophet are captured, then cast alive into the LOF.

6) The remnant are slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

7) satan is cast into the LOF.

8) The rest of the dead live again, meaning they are resurrected in order to stand in front of God to be judged and sentenced at the great white throne judgment.

Notice that I didn't even insert the thousand years here. That is because it is debatable as to whether it fits before any of these events, or if it fits between some of these events. What shouldn't be debatable is the chronology of events shown above.


So, how is it that those in 2) and 3) end up among those in 8) after those in 2) and 3) have already put on immortality, thus no longer dead or considered dead? If we just simply accept that there are two types of resurrections, one for the just, the other for the unjust, and that there is a gap between these, it should be pretty obvious which resurrection is meaning for the just, and which one is meaning for the unjust. 2) above certainly doesn't involve the resurrection of the unjust. What should that tell us about 8) above, then?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Jun 29, 2020
9,282
568
56
Mount Morris
✟123,523.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Once again, you are ignoring the time of the judgment of the dead, with reward for some, and destruction for others found in Revelation 11:18, which occurs in the same passage as the sounding of the 7th trumpet.


Apparently, some Premills are able to ignore this verse to make their doctrine work.


.
Nope. It says some will be rewarded and some judged. The verse says the OT will be rewarded and the living dead judged.

"the time for rewarding your servants the prophets and your holy people,
those who stand in awe of your name,
both small and great.

It is also the time for destroying
those who destroy the earth.”

So the church is rewarded and those alive are destroyed. No resurrection even mentioned. The church was already in Paradise complete, both OT and NT. Those who are destroying the earth, will be killed.
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
8,982
3,447
USA
Visit site
✟200,066.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Apparently, you seem to be ignoring logic for some reason. Common sense alone tells most of us, that if the dead in Christ rise first, that the wicked dead don't rise prior to them nor even at the exact same time as them. After the dead in Christ rise first, there are still ppl back on earth who are not even physically dead. And this would include those that are alive and get raptured, and would include those Jesus slays in Revelation 19:21. How could the great white throne judgment possibly precede all of those events, especially Revelation 19:21?


Before the great white throne judgment can even happen, and whether it happens that same day or not, that is not relevant, all of the following must occur first.

1) Christ bodily leaves heaven--the 2nd coming.

2) The dead in Christ rise first.

3) Those who are alive and remain are raptured.

4) Christ and His armies confront the beast and it's armies.

5) The beast and false prophet are captured, then cast alive into the LOF.

6) The remnant are slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

7) satan is cast into the LOF.

8) The rest of the dead live again, meaning they are resurrected in order to stand in front of God to be judged and sentenced at the great white throne judgment.

Notice that I didn't even insert the thousand years here. That is because it is debatable as to whether it fits before any of these events, or if it fits between some of these events. What shouldn't be debatable is the chronology of events shown above.


So, how is it that those in 2) and 3) end up among those in 8) after those in 2) and 3) have already put on immortality, thus no longer dead or considered dead? If we just simply accept that there are two types of resurrections, one for the just, the other for the unjust, and that there is a gap between these, it should be pretty obvious which resurrection is meaning for the just, and which one is meaning for the unjust. 2) above certainly doesn't involve the resurrection of the unjust. What should that tell us about 8) above, then?

This is a unitary event. The rescue of the elect sees the simultaneous destruction of the wicked. The resurrection of the wicked immediately follows the resurrection of the righteous.
 
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
7,394
2,496
MI
✟308,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You stress the has now come, I stress the coming.
Actually, I stress both. I made the text bigger for that part to show the part that I believe you are disregarding. The text suggests an ongoing event that occurs every day and had already begun back then rather than just a one time future event. I believe you are not being honest with the text and are allowing doctrinal bias to dictate how you interpret the passage.

Please tell me what you think Jesus meant when he said the time is coming, and has now come...". What does the "and has now come" (KJV: "and now is") part mean to you?

Admittedly, I interpret John 5 that way BECAUSE of Revelation 20.
That is the problem I have with premil's approach to interpreting scripture. Its foundation is on highly debatable, difficult to interpret passages, much of which are written in symbolic language. The amillennial doctrine's foundation, in contrast, is on much more clear, straightforward passages like John 5:28-29 (the previous verses do not talk about the bodily resurrection). Jesus's message in John 5:28-29 is very clear and can only be misunderstood because of doctrinal bias, in my opinion.

In other words, if Rev 20 didn't exist, I strongly believe there is no way you would interpret it the way you do. But, why not interpret Rev 20 according to what the more clear passage of John 5:24-29 says instead of the other way around?

Revelation gives 2 resurrections where most the bible has seemed to refer to only a single resurrection outside of isolated single people getting resurrections or Jesus. But Revelation 7 has a great multitude in heaven, not described as souls as in Revelation 6:9-11, so I take that to mean they are in bodies, combined with my interpretation of Revelation 6:12-17 matching up with Matthew 24:29-31 where the elect are gathered. I see that as the resurrection of believers, before the trumpets. With Revelation 20 giving the concept of 2 resurrections, I read John 5 and while on first reading John you read that passage and think Jesus is just being redundant, but.. one resurrection is for those who hear His voice, that is believers... and then a second resurrection where ALL who are in the grave are resurrected.

In the first resurrection Jesus says they're given life, and no threat of condemnation is given with that first grouping. Similarly in Revelation 20, those who take part in the first resurrection, are not under threat of the 2nd death. They're redeemed.
Here is something you have probably not considered before. In my view, the text implies that the only way one can avoid the second death is by having part in the first resurrection. I believe Christ's resurrection is the first resurrection unto a glorified, immortal body (1 Cor 15:20-23, Acts 26:23) and that all believers from all-time spiritually have part in His resurrection.

So, again going back to the idea that having part in the first resurrection is the only way to avoid the second death, how would that work in your view when only some believers are part of the first resurrection and not all of them? What about the rest of the dead believers who you think would be resurrected at other times? How do they avoid the second death, which occurs upon being cast into the lake of fire (Rev 20:14-15)?

The second resurrection, there is a judgement that Jesus warns about, some to life, some to damnation.

So.. where I fall on this, is the rapture, happens, nobody who's raptured is judged with those who stand before the white throne of Judgement, they've already been declared not guilty, forgiven by the Lord Jesus Christ. The second death has no power over them, it's not an threat hanging over their head.
Of course they are not judged in the same way as unbelievers since they will be cast into the lake of fire after giving account of themselves. But, that doesn't mean doesn't believers can't be there as well. Look at what it says here:

Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books.

Why would the book of life be opened there if believers were not there since only believer's names are written in the book of life? It talks about the dead being judged according to what they had done. Is that not the same as what Paul indicates regarding believers as well?

2 Cor 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each of us may receive what is due us for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.

The judgment described in Rev 20:11-15 is according to what people have done. That is exactly what Paul said regarding believers as well. What is the difference? Both believers and unbelievers will be judged according to what they had done, so what basis is there for thinking believers would not be present there? None.

Don't you know that we all will stand before the judgment seat to give account of ourselves for what we've done? When do you believe the following will take place:

Romans 14:10 You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister? Or why do you treat them with contempt? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat. 11 It is written:“‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord, ‘every knee will bow before me; every tongue will acknowledge God.’". 12 So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God.

All people from all-time will stand before the throne that day to give an account of themselves. Is that not exactly what Rev 20:11-15 portrays? And Matthew 25:31-46 as well? I believe so.

The idea of there being more than one judgment day is simply not taught in scripture.

Matthew 12:36 But I tell you that everyone will have to give account on the day of judgment for every empty word they have spoken. 37 For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned.

Jesus referred to "the day of judgment" many times. He never indicates that there would be more than one. That day is mentioned in many passages including John 5:28-29, 2 Cor 5:10, Romans 14:10-12, Acts 17:30-31, Matthew 25:31-46 and Revelation 20:11-15.

After the Millennium, second resurrection, some of those who are resurrected then will have believed, so they go to the resurrection of life.
The rest, to the resurrection of damnation.

You seem to recognize that Jesus IS describing 2 different resurrections, you just consider the first one having taken place when Jesus resurrected, so we were resurrected even before we were born or died. Which is.. sketchy to me.
That is not AT ALL what I'm saying. I don't believe anyone besides Christ has been resurrected unto bodily immortality yet. Are you with me so far? I believe the first resurrection (unto bodily immortality) itself was Christ's resurrection unto bodily immortality because scripture says so (1 Cor 15:20-23, Acts 26:23). Are you still with me?

As I've already told you multiple times at this point, I believe having part in Christ's resurrection in a spiritual sense when we become saved/born again (as indicated in John 5:24-25 and Eph 2:1-6) is the way in which people have part in the first resurrection (Christ's resurrection). Because of having part spiritually in His resurrection, believers go to be with Him in heaven when they physically die and that is where John is seeing them. Are you still with me?

I believe that all believers from all-time will be bodily resurrected when Christ returns. You probably already figured that out since I have said I believe John 5:28-29 says that all people are resurrected at the same time/hour (on the same 24 hour day). Since Christ's resurrection is the first resurrection then the resurrection that occurs at His coming can't be the first, but is the second.

I am seeing 2 BODILY resurrections.
I am, too, but just not in the way you are. Christ's was first long ago and then those who are His at His coming, which is what Paul taught in 1 Cor 15:20-23. But the difference is how you and I understand what it means to have part in the first bodily resurrection (which I believe was Christ's resurrection).

Paul and John both talk about more rewards than just eternal life, they term them as crowns, and what they actually are whether physical jewelry or not is not important, but the Lord has gifts He wants to give us aside from just living.

When Paul talked about those rewards he was talking about a bema seat which is a platform where you hand out laurels for athletic competitions, it's all reward, all positive, not judgement. The great white throne after the 2nd resurrection, is judgement, and some people will go to life others to the 2nd death.
Of course believers will not be condemned and will instead be rewarded, but as I said earlier, the book of life implies that believers are present there and other scripture indicates that as well (Rom 14:10-12, Matt 25:31-46, etc.).

Dunno how you can't see those as being different circumstances, one is a medal ceremony and the olympics, the other is a trial with the death penalty sentence on the line.
Dunno how you can see believers getting their rewards 1000+ years before unbelievers do. The rewards are different for believers and unbelievers at the time, but all are present there. And, yes, the punishment that unbelievers receive at that time will be their "reward". The word "reward" isn't always necessarily positive.

Matthew 6: Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

The only negative at the bema seat that Paul talked about, was that you might have been saved, but as by fire, basically getting nothing but your life, you get eternal life, but God doesn't have any rewards for you because you wasted your life. 1 Corinthians 3:9-15 goes into this. Even Jesus talked about rewards and treasures in heaven, and He doesn't just mean eternal life.
Again, there is no basis for thinking that 2 Cor 5:10 is speaking of some other judgment besides the GWT judgment.

2 Cor 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each of us may receive what is due us for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.

This speaks of being judged based on the things we have done. Which is no different than this:

Romans 14:10 You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister? Or why do you treat them with contempt? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat. 11 It is written: As surely as I live,’ says the Lord,‘every knee will bow before me; every tongue will acknowledge God.’” 12 So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God.

When do you believe what is described here will happen and who exact do you believe will be part of the judgment described here? Paul indicates that it is a judgment at which he himself would be present ("each of us" includes Paul himself), so it would have to be the same judgment as 2 Cor 5:10, right? I say that because Paul indicated in 2 Cor 5:10 that he would be included ("each of us") in what is described in 2 Cor 5:10 as well.

So, with the understanding that 2 Cor 5:10 and Romans 14:10-12 are speaking of the same judgment, what can we deduce from that (besides that Paul himself will be there)? Does this judgment, which you call the bema seat judgment, only include unbelievers as you believe is the case?

Isaiah 45:22 “Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is no other. 23 By myself I have sworn, my mouth has uttered in all integrity a word that will not be revoked:
Before me every knee will bow; by me every tongue will swear. 24 They will say of me, ‘In the Lord alone are deliverance and strength.’” All who have raged against him will come to him and be put to shame.

Notice that when it says every knee will bow and every tongue swear (confess) that He is God, it includes unbelievers. It says "all who have raged against him will come to him and be put to shame". Even though they did not believe in Him in this lifetime, they will bow before Him on His throne on judgment day right along with us. That contradicts your idea that the judgment described in 2 Cor 5:10 and Romans 14:10-12 will be one with only believers in attendance.

All of this lines up perfectly with how amils understanding passages like Matthew 25:31-46 and Rev 20:11-15. The idea of separate judgment days is not taught in scripture.

Again, interpreting something that will probably take time, as happening instantly. There will be billions of people and a Just God is going to go through ALL the charges against you. A person doesn't go to hell just because they didn't believe on Christ. They go to Hell for their sins. So.. Judgement of people who ARE in the book of life is simple of course. They believed on Christ, their sins are not brought up. If they didn't believe on Christ, well, now they're judged by their sins, and every single one will be laid on them, over the course of a lifetime, it may take a lifetime to go through all of them. It takes time. Human judges have to tell you what you're being charged of before they just declare a sentence on you, God's more just than that, do you really think a person will not even be told exactly what they did wrong on every count before they're sentenced? God may be able to make a judgement instantly, but we're still finite, and can't process the charges and verdicts and judgements instantly.
We're talking about God here. Why are you talking about what He will do as if He was merely human? Time does not affect Him like it does us (2 Peter 3:8). To think that it would take Him the same amount of time to judge everyone as it would a human is just silly nonsense (sorry if that comes across as too harsh, but that's just how I see it).

and the bema seat Paul talked about, was not a trial for condemnation. Does 1 Corinthians 3:15 sound like they go to hell to you? Not to me, sounds like they go into eternal life with nothing but the white robe.
I showed above how everyone will be appearing before the bema seat (not just believers) and how it is no different than the Great White Throne. Just 2 different ways of referring to the same throne/seat of judgment.

How are the 7 last plagues figurative? How are they not the wrath of God when John says they are?
I don't recall saying that they're not the wrath of God. Probably because I didn't. They are the wrath of God, but I don't believe they should be taken literally. There's a lot of symbolic/figurative language in Rev 16. For example,

12 The sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up to prepare the way for the kings from the East. 13 Then I saw three impure spirits that looked like frogs; they came out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet. 14 They are demonic spirits that perform signs, and they go out to the kings of the whole world, to gather them for the battle on the great day of God Almighty.
15 “Look, I come like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake and remains clothed, so as not to go naked and be shamefully exposed.”
16 Then they gathered the kings together to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon.

For one thing the bowl (KJV: vial) itself is figurative. I'm not sure how the wrath of God could be held in a literal bowl. With that in mind I wonder how a figurative bowl can pour something out on a literal river? I don't think so. It does mention the river Euphrates, but that does not mean we should assume it's speaking of the literal Euphrates river. I'll give you a few examples of literal places being used in a figurative sense to back up my point.

Rev 11:8 Their bodies will lie in the public square of the great city—which is figuratively called Sodom and Egypt—where also their Lord was crucified.

Here, the great city where the Lord was crucified was "figuratively called Sodom and Egypt".

Rev 16:19 The great city split into three parts, and the cities of the nations collapsed. God remembered Babylon the Great and gave her the cup filled with the wine of the fury of his wrath.

Here, "the great city" is called "Babylon the Great". Another clear figurative reference since Babylon no longer exists.

Rev 20:7 When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—and to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore.

Here, "the nations in the four corners of the earth" are figuratively called "Gog and Magog".

With all this in mind, it should not be hard to believe that the reference to the Euphrates river and the reference to Armageddon are figurative as well.

It also talks about spirits that look like frogs coming out of the dragon, beast and false prophet. That's obviously figurative.

Since, the wrath of God is described figuratively we should interpret it accordingly. I'm not saying that it's not actually talking about the wrath of God. It is. The wrath of God is most definitely a real thing (don't confuse the words figurative and fictional like some do). But, it's described figuratively rather than literally. It's not going to come down out of a bowl as frog-like spirits coming out of a dragon, beast and false prophet's mouth and so on.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
7,394
2,496
MI
✟308,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
But the Day of the Lord? That's figurative. I've given you multiple ways that that same time is phrased. Hour of His judgement, year of recompences, year of redemption, times of restitution
That phrase can be figurative, but it can also be used to describe the day Christ returns as Paul did in 1 Thess 5 and Peter did in 2 Peter 3. The phrase does not always refer to the same thing, which is what you miss. The phrase even can refer to what began on the day of Pentecost (compare Acts 2:16-21 to Joel 2:28-32).

I mean, Isaiah 34:8 Isaiah 63:4, I don't know how it can possibly be more clear that it's a figure of speech than those 2 verses where God refers to it as a day and a year interchangeably in the same verse???
That's correct. You are making a straw man argument here which is a complete waste of time. The only thing I have contended is that the way Paul and Peter used the phrase "the day of the Lord" in 1 Thess 5 and 2 Peter 3 had to do with the day (24 hour day) that Christ will return. It is you that is trying to say that the phrase "the day of the Lord" has to always refer to the same thing. If that's the case then explain why Peter indicates that Joel 2:28-32 was being fulfilled (or least starting to be) on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:16-21)?

144,000 are protected, and a great multitude are in Heaven, Revelation 7. Explain that if we're left on earth subject to the trumpets and vials? Not to mention just prior after the 6th seal, events happened that parallel Matthew 24.
Is there not already a great multitude of believer's souls in heaven? It seems like you are only able to think of people with bodies for some reason. The timing of what John saw in Revelation 7 is not indicated.

To assume that it is a scene before any of the trumpets and vials is nothing more than speculation. Revelation 7 is just a parenthetical section of the book like Revelation 12. Also, there are a number of parallel sections within the book, so it should not be read in such a way as if it was one, long chronological book. For example, what is described in Rev 12 clearly does not follow what is described in Rev 11 chronologically.

It's not really a problem other than you may be pleasantly surprised to be taken out of harm's way earlier than you expected. But it is kind of sad that you see yourself having to live through what sounds like asteroid impacts 60 pound hailstones, scorching heat, and demons everywhere. It's going to be bad enough having to endure tribulation at the hands of men than to have God pouring His wrath all around you.
That's the problem. It only sounds like that. It's all figurative language, unlike 2 Peter 3:3-13. Trust me, if i believed it was all literal I would believe like you do. But, the problem with interpreting it like you do is that it contradicts other scripture.

It makes it more significant when something in the bible is stressed or rerpeated. To me that says "important detail" Like time, times and half a time/1290 days/42 months
Sure, it says that to me, too. But, that doesn't have anything to do with whether it's literal or figurative. Again, I give "the beast" as an example. The beast is mentioned 35 times. Seems like "the beast" must be something important to understand. But, it's not a literal beast with seven literal heads and seven literal horns.

He rules but He is also waiting, that is what it means being longsuffering.
Yeah, he's waiting to deliver His kingdom to the Father when He comes at the end of the age as 1 Cor 15:20-24 and Matt 13:40-43 indicate.

He's allowing for the mystery of iniquity to continue, because it means more people will be saved.
I don't believe that people can't be saved during Satan's little season (which I equate to the time when iniquity will no longer be restrained), so in my view that time period could potentially have already started.

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

This verse is in regards to the Lord's desire for more people to repent and be saved. But, to me, it indicates that people can be saved right up until the day His keeps the promise of Christ's coming. But, during Satan's little season it seems that it will be more difficult to reach people with the truth because of the increase in deception and wickedness.

It is when He returns, but as I keep pointing out, I don't believe in an instantaneous event but rather a series of events all connected to Jesus returning. The second coming begins with Jesus in the clouds. But, the all events afterward are still the second coming.

Was His first coming just His birth?
But, you have Jesus descending from heaven and then going back to heaven for a period of time and then descending from heaven again. The problem with that is scripture never teaches that He would be descending form heaven twice in the future.

As far as there being a series of events connected to Jesus returning, have I not said that several things happen on the day He comes back? You make so many straw man arguments and I can only assume that is because this is the first time in your life that you've debated an amillennialist. The difference between us isn't that you see several events happening in relation to His second coming and I don't. No. Instead, the difference is that you see those things happening over a prolonged period of time, but I don't. And, as I pointed out above, you see Him descending from heaven twice while I believe scripture clearly teaches that He will descend from heaven only once.

That sounds like a preterist view that you believe the 70th week, antichrist, and all that have already happened. But Jesus gave those signs of the great tribulation and abomination of desolation as happening right before His return, not 2000 years before His return.
Yet another straw man argument. Where did I say that some event involving an individual antichrist during the 70th week already happened? I didn't. Don't put words in my mouth. I don't interpret the 70th week the way you do, so I have no obligation to see the fulfillment of it the way you do in terms of it having anything to do with an individual antichrist confirming some future covenant for a week and all that.

I could write 10 more pages about why I interpret the 70 week prophecy the way I do, but I don't have the desire to do that right now. For now, I will just say that I believe Jesus is the prince/ruler who confirmed the new covenant long ago. It has nothing to do with an antichrist confirming some 7 year peace treaty. To insert a huge time gap into a prophecy that never gives any indication that the 70 weeks would not be consecutive just boggles my mind.

No, it's "deceive the nations no more" not "deceive the nations, but less so that the gospel can be spread"
That is how you interpret it, but I disagree. I see no reason to assume that it's speaking of his ability to deceive in general. You interpret it that way because you are what they call a hyper-literalist.

Too much false religion has Satan's fingerprints all over it. Not to mention amillennialists treat it as if nobody could believe the truth prior to Jesus' ascension but many gentiles feared the Holy One of Israel in the Old Testament. Even Nebuchadnezzar did eventually. The Magi came LOOKING for the Messiah and worshiped Him. The first people outside of His immediate earthly family to know the Son of God were gentiles.
And here is your next straw man argument. I never said that no Gentiles at all believed the truth in OT times. Stop putting words in my mouth. I'm saying that very few did. In Noah's day, only 8 people did and they were not Jews. The people of Nineveh in Jonah's day were Gentiles and they repented and believed. Did you somehow think I wasn't aware of that as well?

But, what I'm saying is that a far lower percentage believed in those times than in NT times and that is a fact.

So being able to evangelize, and have people believe, doesn't tell me that Satan is not running around freely deceiving the nations anymore.

There are 1.6 billion muslims after all and it's near impossible to preach the gospel in nations where there's a majority of muslims, and muslims conquered a gooc chunk of the world within the first 1000 years after Christ ascended, so you can't even claim that Satan was bound for 1000 years but got set loose only recently. Satan has always been prowling around freely, he'll be beaten the tar out of and bound later though.
You just aren't understanding my point. Please tell me how you interpret theses passages:

Heb 2:14 Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil— 15 and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death.

Eph 2:11 Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called “uncircumcised” by those who call themselves “the circumcision” (which is done in the body by human hands)— 12 remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

What do you think passages like these say about the impact Christ had on Satan and on the ability of the Gentiles to be set free from spiritual darkness?

It's referring to the second coming, you are correct, but as the first coming had multiple events over more than 30 years, the second coming has multiple events over time as well.
Where does scripture itself indicate to us that since the first coming involved events over more than 30 years then we should understand the events related to the second coming as happening over a significant period of time as well? If scripture itself does not make that comparison, then I won't, either.

There's all sorts of events that involve fire after Jesus comes in the clouds, but we're given times of at least 5 months, I wouldn't be surprised if like Noah, the destruction lasted over a year.

the day of the Lord's vengeance, and the year of recompences?
Why would it take that long? If Jesus is coming back to take vengeance on "them that don't know God and don't obey the gospel of Christ" (2 Thess 1:7-10) then what would be the point of Him taking His time doing so? And how exactly would it take that much time when this time it will be by fire instead of water?

Please clarify something. You said, in relation to Noah and the flood, that the destruction lasted over a year. It rained for 40 days and 40 nights, so the earth was certainly already destroyed by the floodwaters by the time the 40th day came. So, I have to assume that you're not trying to say it took over a year to destroy the earth and all the wicked living on the earth.

So, I assume you're talking about how long it took the floodwaters to recede and all that? Does this mean you think God will just let the earth burn for over a year when He sends fire down upon it? Why would that be and what difference does that really even make?

As far as the length of time of the fire actually coming down upon the earth and killing all the unbelievers on the earth, I see no basis for thinking that would take very long at all (certainly not longer than it took for the flood to do so).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

BABerean2

Newbie
Supporter
May 21, 2014
20,614
7,484
North Carolina
✟893,665.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Apparently, you seem to be ignoring logic for some reason. Common sense alone tells most of us, that if the dead in Christ rise first, that the wicked dead don't rise prior to them nor even at the exact same time as them. After the dead in Christ rise first, there are still ppl back on earth who are not even physically dead.


How can there be a time of the judgment of the dead in Revelation 11:18, with reward for some, and destruction for others, without a bodily resurrection of the dead?


.
 
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
7,394
2,496
MI
✟308,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Revelation was written decades after Paul's epistles. So no, Paul, nor Jesus, were referring to the trumpet judgements in Revelation.
What kind of logic is this? Is God not the One who inspired all of the New Testament, including Revelation and Paul's epistles? What they wrote was what God inspired them to write. Do you think God was not aware of the Revelation trumpets until John wrote the book? That would be ridiculous, right?

God, already knowing then what He would later inspire John to write down in the book of Revelation, inspired Paul to say that the trumpet that sounds when we are changed unto bodily immortality, is the last trumpet. Paul would not have known exactly what that meant in terms of how it would relate to the book of Revelation since it hadn't been written yet, but God did.

You make the last trumpet not really the last trumpet in any sense. That is a flaw in your doctrine.

Okay so
Jesus was crucified on Passover, He is our eternal passover lamb, He fulfilled passover.
He was buried during feast of unleavened bread, His resurrection fulfills the feast of first fruits, and His ascension fulfilled Pentecost.

What's the next feast that has not been fulfilled.
The feast of trumpets.
Now I'm not 100% on this since it is borderline date setting, but a rather convincing interpretation is that the rapture happens on a feast of trumpets, to fulfill that feast. The feast of Trumpets has 99 trumpet blasts and then 1 last long trumpet blast that is known as the call of awakening.
The feast of trumpets is also not declared until the sighting of the new moon, visibly. Nobody knows the date or hour, they have to have multiple witnesses sight the new moon.
Not to mention, around the time that this happens, the sun and moon will be darkened. So you will not be able to call the feast of trumpets if it happens that day. Even if you try to predict the day, you won't know the hour since it'll be impossible to sight the moon.
I'm sorry, but I don't buy this explanation at all. It's pure speculation with no biblical support in terms of the feast of trumpets having anything to do with the return of Christ. Where does scripture itself indicate that the feast of trumpets has anything to do with the second coming of Christ? Nowhere. Please stop making wild speculations and stick to what scripture actually says in relation to the second coming.

The trumpets that we do know relate to the second coming of Christ are the ones mentioned in the book of Revelation. The seventh trumpet in particular must have something to do with the time when He comes because at that point "The time has come for judging the dead, and for rewarding your servants the prophets and your people who revere your name, both great and small—
and for destroying those who destroy the earth.”

The last trumpet is the last prophetic trumpet to sound and we know from the book of Revelation that it will be the last of the seven trumpets.

Either way I highly doubt that it is in reference to the 7th trumpet judgement.
Why is that besides doctrinal bias? It is at the last trumpet that the dead are raised and Christ returns (1 Cor 15:20-23,50-54). Again, the seventh trumpet signals that "the time has come for judging the dead". Matthew 25:31-46 makes it clear that the time when the dead will be judged is when Christ returns.

Again
Isaiah 26:19-21 an invitation to come and enter a place of safety, after a resurrection, to hide from the wrath of God.
The only wrath we need to be hidden from is the final wrath of fire that comes down on the entire earth on the day Christ returns.

as far as your last point. If there were people that would only be saved after seeing Jesus come in the clouds.. you think God would just deny them?
We are saved by faith. What faith would anyone need after seeing Jesus in all His glory?

Because if Jesus coming in the clouds means its too late, nobody else can get saved, what's the meaning of Revelation 14:13?
if you're right, then the rapture has taken place, and everyone left over is unsavable.
If I'm right, they can still be saved and blessed, they missed the rapture, but even if they die having faith from that point on, they will be blessed.
I don't see how Rev 14:13 has anything to do with what you're saying here. Can you explain what you're asking more specifically? Please tell me how you interpret that verse first so that I can understand what you're asking.
 
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
7,394
2,496
MI
✟308,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Christians will enter into the Millennial Reign whether alive or dead.
I asked about mortals. What Christian mortals would enter into a Millennial reign? Keep in mind that all Christians will be changed and have immortal bodies once Christ returns (1 Cor 15:20-23,50-54). So, I don't see any possibility of there being Christian mortals at that point to populate a future Millennial kingdom.
 
Upvote 0

Jesse Dornfeld

Slave to Christ
Supporter
Oct 11, 2020
3,348
1,112
37
Twin Cities
Visit site
✟176,263.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
I asked about mortals. What Christian mortals would enter into a Millennial reign? Keep in mind that all Christians will be changed and have immortal bodies once Christ returns (1 Cor 15:20-23,50-54). So, I don't see any possibility of there being Christian mortals at that point to populate a future Millennial kingdom.

I see my language fails here. I do not mean that the Christians who are living with not be transformed into their glorious bodies, but there will be some Christians who have never died who receive their glorious bodies as it talks about in 2 Thessalonians 1:7-8.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

DavidPT

Well-Known Member
Sep 26, 2016
8,601
2,106
Texas
✟196,410.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
How can there be a time of the judgment of the dead in Revelation 11:18, with reward for some, and destruction for others, without a bodily resurrection of the dead?


.


I'm not saying there is no bodily resurrection of the dead recorded in that passage. Of course there is. But in context it is only involving the saved dead and not also the unsaved dead as well, therefore this doesn't even involve the great white throne judgment recorded in Revelation 20. It involves a judgment though, and is recorded in both Daniel 7:22 and Revelation 20:4, and is meaning when the time has come that the saints have possessed the kingdom. After all, does not Revelation 11:15 indicate--The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever?

Doesn't Daniel 7:22 say this---Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High?

And that Revelation 20:4 says this---And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them?

And does not Daniel 7:22 mean chronologically after Daniel 7:21 has been fulfilled first---I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them

And are not the martyrs recorded in Revelation 20:4, who are martyred for refusing to worship the beast, martyred during the period of time specified in Daniel 7:21? And is not the period of time specified in Daniel 7:21 meaning the 42 month reign of the beast, Revelation 13?

And the fact there has to be a gap between when the just rise and when the unjust rise, well, a gap is a gap, right? If it can be a gap of seconds, or minutes, or even hours, why can't it also be a gap involving years?

Let me ask Amils this then. Who is it that Amils don't think will rise first, yet are still saved saints, but will instead rise when the rest of the dead do after Revelation 19:21 has at least been fulfilled first? Can Amils think of anyone? Do Amils think the dead in Christ would also include OT saints, such as Adam, Abel, Job, Daniel, so on and so on? If Amils perhaps do, what saints would still need to rise, but not during when the dead in Christ rise first, but when the rest of the rest of the dead rise last? None, right? Based on this alone, assuming Amils agree that Adam and all other OT saints are included with those in Christ that rise first, how could it possibly be incorrect to conclude that there are two types of resurrections, and that there is a gap between these, therefore none of the unjust rise when the just do, nor do any of the just rise when the unjust do?
 
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
7,394
2,496
MI
✟308,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Half the world's population will be dead from the 4th seal and the 6th trumpet, and an untold number of people are killed by the other judgements and armageddon, but, there are billions of people on the planet, and if an army has survived to armageddon and Jesus killed not by immersing the world in fire in Revelation 19 given that carrion birds are feeding on the corpses, well, I see it as localized slaughter of those who worship the beast
Revelation 19 talks about Jesus coming down from heaven while being on a horse with a sword in His mouth. Doesn't that picture establish that what is described there is figurative rather than literal? I mean, you don't really believe that Jesus will have a sword coming out of His mouth that He will use to "smite the nations" (Rev 19:15) when He returns, do you? I doubt it.

So, with that in mind, how could it be that Rev 19:11-21 describes the literal way that the destruction will occur rather than describing it figuratively?

Rev 19:17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun, who cried in a loud voice to all the birds flying in midair, “Come, gather together for the great supper of God, 18 so that you may eat the flesh of kings, generals, and the mighty, of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, great and small.” 19 Then I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies gathered together to wage war against the rider on the horse and his army.

Is this really saying that an angel will literally be standing on the sun crying out in a loud voice to all the birds (He must be REALLY loud)? Just try to picture that. It's not literal anymore than the beast is literal. Look at the description of "the kings of the earth and their armies". You really think that people will be riding horses while trying to attack the King of kings and Lord of lords? This is clearly all figurative. But not fictional. If figuratively describes the real event of Christ's second coming.

It is figuratively describing the very real destruction that will come down when Christ returns. But, notice how John expands the scope of this destruction beyond just the "kings, generals, and the mighty". He indicates that this destruction will affect "all people" whether free or slave, great or small. It's ironic that premil takes all of this so literally but then does not take the reference to "all people" literally.

Believers will be caught up to meet the Lord in the air at that point, so the "all people" refers to all unbelieving people remaining on the earth at that time. The mention of "all people, free and slave, small and great" is inclusive language to indicate that there will be no exceptions among Christ's enemies as far as who will be destroyed at that time. That matches up perfectly with Matt 24:36-39 and 2 Peter 3:3-13 which both indicate that all unbelievers on the earth will be destroyed when Christ returns just as all unbelievers were destroyed by the flood in Noah's day.

To back up what I said regarding how "all people, free and slave, small and great" should be understood as literally all unbelievers, read this:

Rev 13:15 The second beast was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. 16 It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads,

This refers to all living unbelievers receiving the mark of the beast without exception. I say without exception because it says "all people" and indicates that there it includes "great and small, rich and poor, free and slave". How does that allow for any exceptions? John had previously indicated that "all inhabitants of the earth" whose names are "not written in the Lamb's book of life" will worship the beast. Everyone who worships the beast surely would also receive its mark.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
7,394
2,496
MI
✟308,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I see my language fails here. I do not mean that the Christians who are living with not be transformed into their glorious bodies, but there will be some Christians who have never died who receive their glorious bodies as it talks about in 2 Thessalonians 1:7-8.
Right, I agree. So, what mortals without glorified bodies would populate a future millennial earthly kingdom then?

In other words, who are the ones described in Rev 20:7-9 as opposing "the camp of God's people" if what is described there was to occur after a future millennial earthly kingdom? Do you think any unbelievers will survive Christ's second coming in light of what passages like 2 Peter 3:3-13 say?
 
Upvote 0

Jesse Dornfeld

Slave to Christ
Supporter
Oct 11, 2020
3,348
1,112
37
Twin Cities
Visit site
✟176,263.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Right, I agree. So, what mortals without glorified bodies would populate a future millennial earthly kingdom then?

In other words, who are the ones described in Rev 20:7-9 as opposing "the camp of God's people" if what is described there was to occur after a future millennial earthly kingdom? Do you think any unbelievers will survive Christ's second coming in light of what passages like 2 Peter 3:3-13 say?

My personal take on this is just what I have already shared. That even though some people might have glorified bodies, this doesn't necessarily make it impossible for them to sin. So as Satan is released from the bottomless pit, he influences some of those in the millennial kingdom (like Gog and Magog) to rebel against God before Jesus makes his final judgement, but this will be very short lived.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
8,982
3,447
USA
Visit site
✟200,066.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
My personal take on this is just what I have already shared. That even though some people might have glorified bodies, this doesn't necessarily make it impossible for them to sin. So as Satan is released from the bottomless pit, he influences some of those in the millennial kingdom (like Gog and Magog) to rebel against God before Jesus makes his final judgement, but this will be very short lived.

This does not make sense. Incorruptible means incorruptible. It means free from death and decay. Sin, death and decay are married together in Scripture.

You have your millennial inhabitants needing new Mark 2 incorruptible bodies at the end of the Premil millennium.

With your reasoning, then, man has the ability to fall again in the NHNE in his Mark 2 incorruptible body? Why would he not need a Mark 3 or 4 incorruptible body?
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.