....The Isaiah verses I quoted were about the end times where God dealing out His wrath to the world, at the end of the world... similar imagery of Jesus having His clothes soaked in blood after having tread the winepress of the wrath of God... same imagery given in Revelation 14 and 19. It's the same "day of the Lord" your referring to, the second coming, the heavens rolling up like a scroll, etc etc...
and in those verses it's given as both a day and a year...
... and you still insist on literal 24 hour day.
Exhausting. Read Isaiah rather than assume it's referring to something different.
I have read Isaiah plenty of times. It's insulting for you to imply otherwise.
It's time to agree to disagree on the meaning of "the day of the Lord". You just admitted that it's "exhausting" and I have to agree.
I see 2 cycles of tribulation, rapture, wrath, and final judgement. Chapters 6-11 with 10 being definitely parenthetical, and chapters 12-20, with chapter 17 definitely being parenthetical. I'd almost be willing to listen to an argument that chapter 20 was not part of the second vision and could be a 3rd vision but...
Revelation 20:10 shows the beast and false prophet. People who were introduced in this second vision that Paul saw of end times events, and so it connect it to chapter 13, and logic would dictate, places it after chapter 19, when Jesus throws the beast and false prophet into the lake of fire.
Note the false prophet wasn't mentioned in the first vision, and the beast was only mentioned once. The beast is only formally introduced in the second vision.
I've seen this argument before, but I don't find it to be a strong one. If Rev 19 and 20 are not chronological, as I believe, then that simply means that the beast and false prophet are cast into the lake of fire shortly before Satan is. Similar to how death and Hades (or hell) are cast in just before those whose names are not written in the book of life. This is not a problem for amil at all.
So I do see recapitulation, but more continuity than you do.
I respect that you at least do see some recapitulation. I think that's very unusual for any premil to see any recapitulation in the book whether they're pre-trib, pre-wrath or post-trib.
Only when you interpret "day of the Lord" literally.
I'm not used to getting criticized by a premil for being too literal. It's a strange feeling.
When I believe there are 2 end time's resurrections, because I believe that the wrath of God happens after the rapture, I have no reason whatsoever, to see the 1000 years as anything other than literal, Because I know that there's a resurrection before the wrath, and another resurrection after the wrath before the final judgement, that gives time between resurrections, not to mention those resurrections have different characteristics. one is blessed and not under judgement where the second death is a possible outcome, the other is judgement and death is on the line.
Because there has to be some time between, why not go with what the bible says is the time between and believe it is 1000 years?
Because it doesn't line up with many passages of scripture as I've told you before. I've shown you several of those already.
A number of passages show all believers and unbelievers being resurrected and judged when Christ returns at the end of the age which doesn't allow for a 1000 year gap in between. Also, several passages show all living unbelievers being destroyed when Christ comes which would not allow for any mortals to survive into an earthly millennial kingdom (all believers would have mortal bodies at that point).
It doesn't have to be exactly 1000 years, but that's the only scripture to go off of that gives any length of time between the two resurrections, so sure, 1000 years. I'll believe the word of God on that until God says otherwise.
How does that line up with the fact that the unbelieving dead are judged immediately after being resurrected and are then cast into the lake of fire as indicated in Rev 20:11-15 while Matt 25:31-46 indicates the timing of that is when Christ comes in His glory?
Revelation 20
10 And
the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
11 Then
I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. The earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. 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. 13
The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15
Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.
Matthew 25
31 “
When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32
All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33
He will put the sheep on his right and
the goats on his left.
34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world.
40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you,
whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’
41 “
Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you,
whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’
46 “
Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
In regards to unbelievers, notice the similarities between the two passages, which I color coded to highlight that.
Both passages speak of someone sitting on the throne to judge them with Matt 25 indicating that it is the Son of Man, which obviously is Jesus.
Both passages speak of all of them being judged for what they have done.
Both passages speak of unbelievers being cast into the same everlasting fire as the devil.
And, obviously, believers are rewarded at that time as well. These passages are clearly speaking of the same judgment. Only doctrinal bias would keep someone from seeing that. So, with that in mind, this places the judgment depicted in Rev 20:11-15 as occurring when Christ comes with His angels, not 1000+ years after that. That means all of Rev 20 has to occur before and up to the day that Christ comes which contradicts your understanding of the events of Rev 20 following the events of Rev 19 chronologically.
Jesus will return, it doesn't mean He is forbidden from going back to Heaven after to get married and come back down with His bride on whatever sweet ride the horse is supposed to be if that's figurative. Isaiah 34 describes unicorns so.. who knows.
Do you believe the wedding with His bride has already occurred before Rev 19? If so, that can't be since it says in Rev 19:7 that the time of the wedding has come and the bride has made herself ready. That means it hasn't happened yet up until that point since the bride had not been ready for the wedding yet until then. Right after that in Rev 19:11-21 it describes Jesus coming and delivering His wrath on the day He returns.
Don't you see Rev 19:11-21 as being the second future time He descends from heaven rather than the first? That can't be because He will have not been married to His bride yet until then, as Rev 19:7 indicates, because she will not have been ready for the wedding until then.
What's your proof texts that He is only allowed to come down once? Again all events after He comes in the cloud are the second coming just like all events after His birth are the first coming.
The 5th trumpet lasts 5 months.
I've shared those with you several times already. How did you miss it? Have I not indicated multiple times that I believe He descends from heaven, we're caught up to Him in the air and He proceeds to destroy the wicked? No back and forth needed. And I've shown the passages to back up my view several times. But, you're still asking me this?
If this is "deceive the nations no more" then color me unimpressed.
Wow. You are not impressed with the effect that Christ's death and resurrection had on Satan and the Gentile nations? Unbelievable. I'm not impressed with your hyper-literal understanding of what "deceive the nations no more" means.
Because if it takes time, then people can come to repentence, I know you're going to quote that people DIDN'T come to repentence, but as we both agree, just like Gentiles could fear God in the OT despite most of the OT treating gentiles like they're totally in darkness and none know the Lord, most people won't repent, but some will repent, if you drag things out for some time, some of those people, those prepper types or people living in isolation types that are self sufficient who didn't take the mark out of necessity might just say as they see fire raining down from the sky "I have a bible here somewhere, maybe it's all real afterall". It is worth it to the Lord to drag things out if even 1 more sheep gets saved.
Why did Jesus say He is coming quickly if He's actually going to take His time when He comes? Sorry, but your explanation makes no sense. God is all knowing, so He will know when the exact right time will be for Christ to come and take His vengeance. Don't worry, He won't send His Son from heaven to dish out His final wrath until everyone has made their choice of whether to follow Him or reject Him. He will ensure that.
Genesis 7:11
Second month of the year, 17th day
40 days means over a month right there
and then
Genesis 7:24
the earth was flooded for 150 days after the 40 days and 40 nights. So this is already about 200 days.
Then it took awhile for it all to drain away, Noah was sending doves and ravens to see if the water was low enough to come down off the mountains, and so on, until finally
Genesis 8:14
2nd month, 27th day, the earth was dry, and Noah left the Ark
1 year, 10 days.
What is the point of this? Obviously, the unbelievers were all destroyed by the time the earth was initially flooded after the 40 days and nights. What difference does it make how long it took the water to recede? This is a waste of time.
also, not everyone is destroyed by fire during the wrath of God, that's why there's other judgements than fire, and, the first doesn't REALLY come down and become all consuming until Revelation 20, and referencing the beast and false prophet being in the lake of fire, I take it to mean after armageddon and they've been being tortured for 1000 years.
Revelation 20 is where you have an instant destruction, with no events happening afterward, just fire comes down from heaven, satan gets thrown into hell, and then the resurrection and final judgement. So there's your 2 Peter 3:10, your Zephaniah, etc.
Good grief, man. That has been my point all along. That fire that comes down from heaven in Rev 20:9 bringing instant mass destruction to a number of people "as the sand of the seashore" is the same mass destruction that Peter talks about in 2 Peter 3:3-13 as occurring when Christ returns. That places Rev 20:9 at the return of Christ rather than 1000+ years afterwards as you believe.
That means your understanding of Rev 20 speaking of 2 mass bodily resurrections separated by 1000+ years is flawed. That is the point I've been trying to make but you continually miss it because it seems you've never given Rev 20 much thought before. Instead, your sole focus is on the things that you think happen during a 7 year period of time before Christ returns.
If it weren't for the book of Revelation I'd maybe believe in instantaneous destruction at the return like you do.
But Revelation exists for a reason. It wraps up most of the old testament day of the lord prophecies and the olivet discourse and shows them in concert. It makes sense out of scramble.
This is the difference between us. You interpret the rest of scripture (or at least those prophecies you mentioned, anyway) in light of the highly symbolic and not very straightforward (but still awesome) book of Revelation. I, on the other hand, interpret the book of Revelation in light of other more clear, straightforward scriptures that don't contain a great deal of difficult (but not impossible) to discern symbolic language.[/quote]