When Will Christ Return?

1Timothy316 · Mar 24, 2013

Bigbluemarble said:
Thank you! Amen.

I thought I'd entered the twilight zone. It's like people denying that the sky is blue and calling me crazy for thinking it is.

People find it hard to understand the Bible is living. It has many layers for your growth in the Holy Spirit. Faith comes by:

Romans 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Strong in Him · Mar 24, 2013

Bigbluemarble said:
I'm surprised by your responses. It's really very strange.

No it's not.
Jesus spoke in parables to the crowds; he explained everything to his disciples. He doesn't explain Luke 10 at all. There was nothing to explain - Jesus wanted the teacher of the law to understand his point and what he was saying; it means what it says.
He didn't tell his disciples that this parable was about something else; he didn't say it was prophecy or anything of that kind - so what right and reason do we have to read anything into the text? The interpretaion you have given for Luke 10 is reading into the text - there is no reason to do this; Jesus never taught it and I believe it is wrong to do so.

Bigbluemarble said:
Mat 13:13 This is why I speak to them in parables: "Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.

That doesn't mean we can read a meaning into the text which isn't there and was never meant.

Bigbluemarble said:
In the Rich man and Lazarus parable, do you see who the Rich man is, who Lazarus is?

Why do they have to BE anybody?

At the end of the parable, Jesus said, "if they will not believe Moses and the prophets, they will not believe, even if someone should rise from the dead."
This was a referance to the Pharisees, teachers of the law etc. They did not believe what the Scriptures said about Jesus; it was unlikely they would believe even if someone was to rise from the dead. And they didn't. Jesus rose from the dead - some of them might have believed, but many didn't.
Just as Jesus said, elsewhere, "you search the Scriptures but you do not accept that the Scriptures speak of me." And he also said that he had come to fulfil the law and the prophets; the prophecies that had been made about him.

Strong in Him · Mar 24, 2013

Bigbluemarble said:
I thought I'd entered the twilight zone. It's like people denying that the sky is blue and calling me crazy for thinking it is.

No - I'm the one who has entered the twighlight zone.

What reason do you have for giving the interpretation for Luke 10 that you have? Where did Jesus say that this is what the parable means? Where in the text does it say it is about end times or his return, or has a deeper, eschatalogical meaning? It doesn't.
So how do you know; how can you teach that Jesus' words are anything other than what he says?

Strong in Him · Mar 24, 2013

Bigbluemarble said:
uh, you don't see how the good samaritan parable speaks of Jesus' sacrifice?

If you look at the Samaritan who showed love to his enemy, helped him, cared for him, took him to an inn, paid for his stay and his treatment and see Jesus, who went to the cross for his enemies, has saved us, healed us, shown us love and paid the price for us - that's fine. I think I might even agree with you.

But that's not what Jesus was teaching when he told it.

Strong in Him · Mar 24, 2013

Bigbluemarble said:
I have no idea why you are saying these things.

Sorry, forget what I said about eschatology; I hadn't read your post properly. As this is an eschatalogical forum, I guiess I assumed that you were talking about Jesus' return.

Bigbluemarble said:
It's obvious what the parable says and is about.

Adam (mankind) = a certain man
Jerusalem = Eden
Jericho = Wicked world
Thieves = devil
half dead = spirit/body
priest = sacrifices
Levite = law
Samaritan = Jesus
oil = spirit
wine = blood
own beast = carried our sins
innkeeper = church
2 Denarii = two days wages, then returns

No.
Like I said, if you see Jesus' selfless love, self giving and sacrifice on the cross as the ultiumate example of what this parable is about; if that's how it speaks to you, then fine.

But it's not obvious that this is what Jesus was saying. He told this story in response to the question; who is my neighbour? The crowd and the disciples wouldn't have understood anything else by it, Jesus never told his disciples that this is what he meant and nowhere in Scripture are we told, "you know that parable our Lord told us? Well it was really about this". In other words, your interpretation that " thieves = devil, half dead = spirit/body" is your own - it's not taught in Scripture that these things refer to this parable.

eclipsenow · Mar 25, 2013

1Timothy316 said:
Bigbluemarble, you're spot on with your assessment of the parable of the Good Samaritan

Is this a sock puppet?

Bible2 · Mar 25, 2013

eclipsenow said in post 875:

Well, not actually a million, because I'm using that number figuratively, in much the same way Jews used the number 1000.

Regarding "I'm using that number figuratively, in much the same way Jews used the number 1000", are you including the use of the number 1,000 in Revelation 20:4-6? If so, remember that in the Bible, the number 1,000 can indicate 1,000 literally (e.g. Num. 31:4-6, 35:4, Judg. 20:10, 2 Kin. 15:19, 1 Chr. 19:6, Song of Songs 8:11).

Also, remember that amillennialism ends up (inadvertently) logically requiring the error of full preterism (2 Tim. 2:18). For claiming that the church's resurrection in Rev. 20:4-6 is already present requires that Jesus' 2nd coming has already happened, for the church's resurrection in Rev. 20:4-6 won't happen until Jesus' 2nd coming (Rev. 19:7-20:6, 1 Cor. 15:21-23,51-54, 1 Thes. 4:15-16). Also, amillennialism ends up (inadvertently) logically requiring the error of partial preterism. For claiming that the resurrection of those beheaded by the Antichrist during the future tribulation and their subsequent reigning on the earth with the returned Jesus for the full 1,000 years of the millennium (Rev. 20:4-6, 5:10, 2:26-29) is already present, requires that the Antichrist's literal, 3.5-year worldwide reign during the tribulation (Rev. 13:4-18) has already happened. Also, amillennialism is mistaken because it requires that the devil is currently bound in the bottomless pit (Rev. 20:1-6), when in fact he's currently walking around on the earth seeking whom he may devour (1 Pet. 5:8), and won't be bound until Jesus' 2nd coming (Rev. 19:19-20:3).

eclipsenow said in post 875:

Not that you'll accept a single thing I'm saying because "Revelation is almost entirely Literal".

Revelation is almost entirely literal for the reasons given in the "Revelation is almost entirely literal" part of post 865.

eclipsenow said in post 875:

Just repeat that to yourself 3 times and click those ruby slippers together Dorothy, because there are also 7 Holy Spirits and Jesus has 7 horns and 7 eyes and John wrote to the 7 churches but according to you the 7 churchs are LITERAL, and NO, the Seven Holy Spirits are LITERAL!

Regarding "there are also 7 Holy Spirits", just as the one God is at the same time three Persons (Matthew 28:19), so the one Holy Spirit of God could at the same time be seven Spirits of God (Revelation 1:4, Revelation 3:1, Revelation 4:5, Revelation 5:6), which could be the Spirit of the Lord, the Spirit of wisdom, the Spirit of understanding, the Spirit of counsel, the Spirit of might, the Spirit of knowledge, and the Spirit of the fear of the Lord (Isaiah 11:2).

eclipsenow said in post 875:

Just repeat that to yourself 3 times and click those ruby slippers together Dorothy, because there are also 7 Holy Spirits and Jesus has 7 horns and 7 eyes and John wrote to the 7 churches but according to you the 7 churchs are LITERAL, and NO, the Seven Holy Spirits are LITERAL!

Regarding "Jesus has 7 horns and 7 eyes", parts of Revelation 5:6 are literal (God's throne in heaven, the four beasts, the twenty-four elders, Jesus having been slain, the seven Spirits of God, the earth) and parts of Revelation 5:6 are symbolic (Jesus being a lamb, his having seven horns, his having seven eyes).

In Revelation 5:6, while the horns and eyes are symbolic, they can represent literal things, so that the number seven can refer literally to seven things. The seven horns of the Jesus lamb in Revelation 5:6 could represent Jesus holding literally seven positions of power at the same time (compare Jesus wearing many crowns at the same time in Revelation 19:12). These seven positions of power could be, for example, Jesus' power as the Son of God (Revelation 2:18), his power as the Word of God (Revelation 19:13), his power as the King of kings (Revelation 19:16), his power as the Lord of lords (Revelation 19:16), his power as High Priest (Hebrews 3:1), his power as the King of Israel (John 12:13), and his power as the Lamb of God (John 1:29).

And Revelation 5:6 tells us what the seven eyes of the Jesus lamb represent: "the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth". These can literally be seven Spirits of God, which, again, could be: the Spirit of the Lord, the Spirit of wisdom, the Spirit of understanding, the Spirit of counsel, the Spirit of might, the Spirit of knowledge, and the Spirit of the fear of the Lord (Isaiah 11:2).

eclipsenow said in post 875:

Just repeat that to yourself 3 times and click those ruby slippers together Dorothy, because there are also 7 Holy Spirits and Jesus has 7 horns and 7 eyes and John wrote to the 7 churches but according to you the 7 churchs are LITERAL, and NO, the Seven Holy Spirits are LITERAL!

Regarding "according to you the 7 churchs are LITERAL", the seven churches can be literally seven because they can be the only churches in literal Roman "Asia" (what is today Western Turkey) who sent messengers to John on the island of Patmos, which was just off the coast of Roman "Asia".

For the "angels" of the seven literal, first century AD local church congregations in seven cities in the Roman province of "Asia" (Revelation 1:20, Revelation 1:11) could have been seven human messengers sent by those churches to John on Patmos (Revelation 1:9). For in Revelation 1:20, the original Greek word (aggelos, G0032) translated as "angels" can refer to human "messengers" (Luke 7:24).

eclipsenow said in post 875:

Oh, but John uses the 7 horns symbolically and the 7 eyes symbolically. But everything else is LITERAL!

It hasn't been said that everything else is literal.

eclipsenow said in post 875:

One minute the 7 in Revelation is literal, the next it's symbolic.

Can you give an example of what you're referring to, with regard to the number seven itself?

eclipsenow said in post 875:

Choc full of verses about the bible but that don't ACTUALLY justify reading symbolic literature poorly, and don't ACTUALLY have much bearing on Revelation at all!

How has it been shown that Revelation is symbolic literature, or that the referenced verses don't have much bearing on Revelation?

eclipsenow said in post 875:

These verses don't prove a literal reading of Revelation is required.

Why not?

eclipsenow said in post 875:

These verses are mostly off the topic, no matter how many times you repeat them to make yourself feel better.

How have they been shown to be off topic?

eclipsenow said in post 875:

You say it isn't F because of it being A, and even though I already disproved A, you just go back into asserting that mode.

Can you give an example of your disproving A?

eclipsenow said in post 875:

NOT PROVING IT, not once, just asserting it again and again and again.

What has been shown to have not been proved?

eclipsenow said in post 875:

Full of verses to make it appear biblical, but it's not.

How has it been shown to not be Biblical?

eclipsenow said in post 875:

For instance, you can't cope with the HISTORICAL FACT that there were more churches in Asia Minor than John actually addressed to.

How many more? And in what cities were they located?

eclipsenow said in post 875:

You just ask a bunch of sulky questions to attempt to cast doubt on the facts of the case and the integrity of this man.

How have the questions been shown to be sulky, or to cast doubt on any facts, or to question the integrity of anyone?

eclipsenow said in post 875:

In other words, you act like you're the authority and have the right to question someone of his calibre.

Why would someone who purported to be the authority ask any questions at all, instead of simply making statements which contradict what he disagrees with, and not replying at all to anything about which he doesn't know the facts?

eclipsenow said in post 875:

You think a few petty little questions just makes John's figurative use of the number 7 just go away?

How have the questions been shown to be petty, and how has it been shown that John's use of the number seven must be figurative?

eclipsenow said in post 875:

Just repeating your theories 3 times does NOT make them true.

How have they been proven to be false?

eclipsenow said in post 875:

I'm sick of the way you avoid the pertinent points and just keep shuffling through your stale doctrines and heresies about 7 Holy Spirits.

What points have been avoided, and what has been shown to be a stale doctrine or a heresy?

eclipsenow said in post 875:

Whatever other whacky stuff you have to say about Android AntiChrists, etc, pales into comparison.

How has it been shown that the idea of an android image of the Antichrist is whacky? For the original Greek word (eikon, G1504) translated as the "image" of the beast (Revelation 13:15) means something made in the likeness of something else, such as the image of a man engraved on a coin (Luke 20:24). So an android made in the likeness of the Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of the beast) could be referred to in the Greek as being an "eikon" of the Antichrist.

eclipsenow · Mar 25, 2013

Bible2 said:
Regarding "according to you the 7 churchs are LITERAL", the seven churches can be literally seven because they can be the only churches in literal Roman "Asia" (what is today Western Turkey) who sent messengers to John on the island of Patmos, which was just off the coast of Roman "Asia".

Prove they were the ONLY churches who sent messengers?
Prove John didn't know ANYTHING about the other churches in Asia Minor? Sorry pal, but that's a terribly long bow to stretch and a rather childish leap of faith just to justify your totally illogical claim that this book is LITERAL when it's NOT!

Why should I take YOUR word for it when you're a heretic that believes there are Seven Holy Spirits, especially when I have the work of a Bishop who is a leading expert in Ancient History?

Also...

Re: 1000 years.
The verses you quote actually have little bearing on how to read JOHN using that number, as within the context of John's book almost every single number ever quoted is symbolic. So go ahead and quote Numbers and Kings…but they are all irrelevant. And if you go through and actually count the sheer number of times 1000 is used, you will find 1000 is MOSTLY symbolic in the bible, not literal!

AMILLENNIALISM
..does nothing of the sort. It's not a literal resurrection in this chapter. You need to STOP reading whatever other biblical categories you have in your head OVER the top of John's writing, and start using the terms JOHN uses the way JOHN uses them elsewhere. That applies to ripping a 'Numbers' use of 1000 out of context and jumping up and down like a 2 year old and saying "I want it to be LITERAL like in NUMBERS!" when Numbers has nothing to do with it! "I want it to be a REAL resurrection like in one of the OTHER gospels!" when in fact we are talking about how JOHN uses the terms 'came to life'.

So what to make of the 'Millennium?'

Revelation has no timeline. There's no linear sequence of particular events all lined up in order. Rather it waltzes around and around some general theological themes, like the repeated theme of Satan's challenge to God and final defeat. We see this in Chapters 17, 19, and 20. It's like watching a sporting event with cameras from every angle. Once the final try is scored, we can see it up close and personal, then from the sidelines, and finally from a 'God's eye' view from heaven. Check it out!

In each repetitive sequence the beast does something, and then gathers for battle, and then is *completely* defeated by Christ. It's the same event from different angles, all of which describe Satan's attempts to wipe out God's kingdom on earth, and then God's victory on Judgement Day. Repeated again and again.

In 17:7-14 the beast was, and is not, and then is again: with 10 horns (symbolic of great power) to persecute God's people, but is wiped out by the Lamb. (Emphasising that our Lord's death saved us).

In 19:11-21 we see the emphasis from the point of view of the Kings of the Earth who are sometimes tricked by Satan into persecuting the church, especially through a 'false prophet'. This is symbolic of all the times false teaching corrupts government. The beast is defeated once again, but this time it is the Lord on a conquering horse! (Even though the blood is probably yet another reference to his sacrifice for us).

Finally, in Chapter 20 we see that Satan is bound in a very specific way, and then rises to fight God's people and is defeated almost as an anti-climax. When God acts... it just happens. Game over. God has won!

Third: what is Chapter 20 all about?
If Revelation keeps repeating the theme of Satan's war against God during this period and God's final victory over him, then what is different in Chapter 20? What angle is this 'action replay' from? It's from heaven! Verse 20:4 takes us back to the throne room (which we've already seen in Revelation Chapters 4 and 5). There we see martyred Christians who are safe with Christ in heaven.

We learn that even though Satan is very active against God's people (previous chapters), there is one specific way he is bound. He cannot deceive the nations. He cannot stop the forward march of the gospel. Satan is not bound totally, as some Dispensationalist seem to imagine. Rather this imagery is to be fitted into other sections describing this age. Satan is bound in a very particular way. He cannot stop Acts 1:8, the forward march of the gospel! This is not a promise that every nation will respond to the gospel, but that every nation will hear the gospel. Rev 20 is to be held in balance with the other chapters that show Satan to be very active indeed! But in *this* chapter is a very powerful fulfilment of the promise to Abraham, that his children (us) would bless the whole world!

Dispensationalists reduce this rich theological passage to one of seeminlgy arbitrary events. This then that then that. But why? Amillennialists see the biblical symbols in John's writings, and know that John was yet again crafting a rich theological lesson full of symbol and metaphor and meaning and purpose. Satan being bound from deceiving the nations is the great mystery fulfilled, that God's kingdom would go out to all the world, not just confined to Palestine.

Finally we have the martyrs. Satan could not stop their 'first resurrection'. They are safe. The second death or hell has no power over them. Did you get that bit? These Saints are dead Saints. The second death has no power over them, even though the first one did have power over them when they died! In John's gospel he describes Christians as moving from death to life. Literally the phrase in Revelation 20 is "they lived and reigned with Christ". They *lived*, not they were resurrected! Even though it says "This is the first resurrection" that's John talking symbolically about how these were *Christians*, people forgiven by Christ who had moved from death to life! After all the horror of the last chapters in Revelation, we are told that should we be killed for Christ we will be safe. The view of this chapter is from heaven.

That the 'first resurrection' is John's way of referring back to his gospel should not surprise us.

John 3:36 "Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on them."

John 5:24 “Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life.

John 6:40 "For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”

We *have* eternal life now, but are only raised up on the Last Day, not 1000 years before the Last Day! If this were a 'bodily' resurrection it would be 1000 years before the Last Day, and not fit with the rest of the New Testament let alone John's own gospel.

In John 11:24 John says:
"Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die.""
Compare this to John's writing in Revelation 20. "They LIVED with Christ" and they did not need to fear the second death.

Reading 20:4-6 as the actual resurrection doesn't fit 20:11-15 which really *is* describing actual bodily resurrection!
///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. ///

It's Judgement Day, the dramatic language of the bodily resurrection of *everyone*, both good and bad, which is why the book of life is necessary. This is the final sorting between good and evil, between believers and unbelievers.

If THIS is when believers were bodily resurrected, then verse 4 cannot be. The Christians 'lived' in the *heavenly* throne room we know from earlier chapters. In other words, verses 11 to 15 are Judgement Day, the sorting of the Sheep from the Goats. Which makes sense of the rest of the New Testament instead of doing violence to it. The great Judgement, the resurrection, the end of sin and Satan and death itself, indeed the end of this very universe and installation of the next all happen on the Last Day.

Footnote 1: 1000 hardly ever used literally in the bible.

There ARE times when multiples of a thousand indicate an actual, 'close enough', literal number, such as when describing how many men went into battle or how many people they captured. But this is clear from the specific context. For example: 1 Chronicles 5:21
"They seized the livestock of the Hagrites—fifty thousand camels, two hundred fifty thousand sheep and two thousand donkeys. They also took one hundred thousand people captive,"

However these are usually in *multiples* of 1000. The USUAL usage of the actual symbol 1000 is anything but an actual number. It's like us saying 'about a gazillion' to modern ears. It's about exaggeration, not accuracy; it's about making a point, not counting; it's about completeness, not numbers.

The number 1000 is 10 times 10 times 10, the number of 'full completeness'. Just as the Hebrews repeated words 3 times for emphasis, for example, saying "Holy, Holy, Holy" instead of saying "God is extremely Holy", they also would throw some numbers together for emphasis. For example: 12 Tribes of Israel + 12 Apostles * 1000 (the complete number) gives you 144 thousand, the most complete number and picture of ALL God's people.

The two most conclusive verses that can ONLY be read as figurative for 'a gazillion' are;

Psalm 50:10
"for every animal of the forest is mine, and the cattle on a thousand hills."
(Are literalists really going to conclude that God does not own the cattle on the gazillion other hills on planet earth?)

1 Chronicles 16:15
"15 He remembers[a] his covenant forever,
the promise he made, for a thousand generations,"
(1000 generations is being compared to 'forever'. Or are literalists going to say God backs out of His promises on generation 1001?)

But then many other verses also illustrate the number 1000 as 'a gazillion'.

Deuteronomy 32:30
"How could one man chase a thousand, or two put ten thousand to flight, unless their Rock had sold them, unless the LORD had given them up?"

Joshua 23:10
"One of you routs a thousand, because the LORD your God fights for you, just as he promised."

Job 9:3
"Though they wished to dispute with him, they could not answer him one time out of a thousand."

Job 33:23
"Yet if there is an angel at their side, a messenger, one out of a thousand, sent to tell them how to be upright,"

Psalm 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."

Ecclesiastes 7:28
"while I was still searching but not finding— I found one upright man among a thousand, but not one upright woman among them all."

Isaiah 30:17
"A thousand will flee at the threat of one; at the threat of five you will all flee away, till you are left like a flagstaff on a mountaintop, like a banner on a hill.”

Ezekiel 47:5
"He measured off another thousand, but now it was a river that I could not cross, because the water had risen and was deep enough to swim in—a river that no one could cross."

2 Peter 3:8
"But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day."

Bible2 · Mar 26, 2013

eclipsenow said in post 888:

Prove they were the ONLY churches who sent messengers?

Prove they weren't.

eclipsenow said in post 888:

Prove John didn't know ANYTHING about the other churches in Asia Minor?

Who said he didn't, if they existed?

eclipsenow said in post 888:

Sorry pal, but that's a terribly long bow to stretch and a rather childish leap of faith just to justify your totally illogical claim that this book is LITERAL when it's NOT!

Revelation is almost entirely literal, for it is unsealed (Revelation 22:10), meaning that it should not be difficult for saved people of any time to understand it if they simply read it as it is written: chronologically and almost-entirely literally. The few parts of it that are symbolic are almost always explained afterward (for example, Revelation 1:20, Revelation 17:9-12). And Revelation's few symbols not explained afterward (for example, Revelation 13:2) are usually explained elsewhere in the Bible (for example, Daniel 7:4-7,17). Just as Jesus' second coming in Revelation 19:7 to 20:3 will be fulfilled almost entirely literally, so the events of the preceding tribulation in Revelation chapters 6 to 18 will be fulfilled almost entirely literally. Also, the millennium in Revelation 20 will be literal, and will begin after Jesus' second coming (Revelation 19:7 to 20:6, Zechariah 14:3-21), when he will reign on the earth with the bodily resurrected church for a thousand years (Revelation 20:4-6, Revelation 5:10, Revelation 2:26-29, Psalms 66:3-4, Psalms 72:8-11). After that, the events of Revelation 20:7 to 22:5 will occur literally.

eclipsenow said in post 888:

Why should I take YOUR word for it when you're a heretic that believes there are Seven Holy Spirits, especially when I have the work of a Bishop who is a leading expert in Ancient History?

Regarding "Seven Holy Spirits", it hasn't been said that there are seven Holy Spirits, just as it hasn't been said that the Trinity is three Gods. Instead, just as the three Persons of God are one God, so the seven Spirits of God could be one Holy Spirit. Just as the Father is the one God (Ephesians 4:6), and the Son is the one God (Hebrews 1:8), and the Holy Spirit is the one God (Acts 5:3-4), so the Spirit of the Lord (Isaiah 11:2) would be the one Holy Spirit (2 Corinthians 3:17), and the Spirit of wisdom (Isaiah 11:2) would be the one Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:8), and the Spirit of understanding (Isaiah 11:2) would be the one Holy Spirit (Exodus 31:3), and the Spirit of counsel (Isaiah 11:2) would be the one Holy Spirit (Isaiah 30:1), and the Spirit of might (Isaiah 11:2) would be the one Holy Spirit (Ephesians 3:16), and the Spirit of knowledge (Isaiah 11:2) would be the one Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:8), and the Spirit of the fear of the Lord (Isaiah 11:2) would be the one Holy Spirit (Acts 9:31).

eclipsenow said in post 888:

Why should I take YOUR word for it when you're a heretic that believes there are Seven Holy Spirits, especially when I have the work of a Bishop who is a leading expert in Ancient History?

Regarding "Why should I take YOUR word for it . . . when I have the work of a Bishop who is a leading expert in Ancient History?", note that what he says regarding the number of churches in Roman "Asia" has not been denied.

Instead, honest and simple questions have been asked: How many more than seven churches were there in Roman "Asia"? And in what cities were they located?

Why can't there be any answer to these questions?

eclipsenow said in post 888:

The verses you quote actually have little bearing on how to read JOHN using that number, as within the context of John's book almost every single number ever quoted is symbolic.

How has that been shown?

Why can't they all be literal?

eclipsenow said in post 888:

And if you go through and actually count the sheer number of times 1000 is used, you will find 1000 is MOSTLY symbolic in the bible, not literal!

Really?

How has that been shown? (That is, you might consider most to be symbolic when in fact most could be literal.)

Also, how would any majority of usage elsewhere in the Bible determine the usage in Revelation, when you just finished saying that other verses elsewhere in the Bible "have little bearing" on how to read John's usage of that number in Revelation?

eclipsenow said in post 888:

It's not a literal resurrection in this chapter.

The first resurrection in Revelation 20:4-6 is literal, in the sense of bodily, for Revelation 20:5 says "But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished", meaning that the first resurrection is the same, bodily type of resurrection as will occur sometime after the thousand years (Revelation 20:7-15). For not every dead person is going to be spiritually resurrected in the sense of becoming saved (Revelation 20:15), and Revelation 20:5 means that the rest of the dead (that is, including all the non-church dead of all times) won't be resurrected in the same manner that the church is resurrected in Revelation 20:4-6, until after the thousand years.

Also, the first resurrection in Revelation 20:4-6 is literal because it will not occur until Jesus' second coming (Revelation 19:7 to 20:6), and the resurrection that will occur at Jesus' second coming will be a literal resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:21-23,52-58; 1 Thessalonians 4:15-18).

eclipsenow said in post 888:

So what to make of the 'Millennium?'

The millennium will begin after Jesus' 2nd coming (Rev. 19:7-20:6, Zech. 14:3-21), when he will reign on the earth with the bodily resurrected church for a thousand years (Rev. 20:4-6, 5:10, 2:26-29, Ps. 2, 66:3-4). During the millennium, Jesus will place obedient Christians over cities (Lk. 19:17-19) and nations (Rev. 2:26-29) and political divisions within nations (Mt. 19:28, Lk. 22:30), while Jesus will be King of Kings (Rev. 19:16) over the entire earth (Zech. 14:9, Ps. 72:8-11), reigning in the earthly Jerusalem (Mic. 4:1-4, Zech. 14:8-21).

eclipsenow said in post 888:

Revelation has no timeline.

It does, and that's one of at least seven different reasons for reading Rev. 20:4-6 as occurring after Jesus' second coming in Rev. 19:7-21.

-

First, it would be in accord with how the rest of Rev. chs. 6-22 are in chronological order, insofar as the future tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 will begin with the events of the second through sixth seals, occurring in the order shown in Revelation 6:3-14. After the events of the sixth seal, Revelation 7 will occur. Then the seventh seal will be unsealed and out of it will come the tribulation's seven trumpets (Revelation 8:1-6). Then the events of the first six trumpets in Revelation 8:7 to Revelation 9:21 will occur in the order shown there. Then Revelation 10 will occur. Then the literal 3.5 years of the Antichrist's worldwide reign will occur, which time period is shown from four different angles in Revelation chapters 11 to 14 (Revelation 11:2b-3, Revelation 12:6,14, Revelation 13:5,7, Revelation 14:9-13).

Then the seventh trumpet will sound, announcing the legal end of the Antichrist's reign (Revelation 11:15). Out of the seventh trumpet's heavenly temple opening will come the seven plagues of the seven vials (Revelation 11:19, Revelation 15:5 to 16:1), the tribulation's final stage. Then the events of the seven vials will occur in the order shown in Revelation 16. Jesus will return right after the seventh vial (Revelation 16:17,19, Revelation 19:2-21), and he will marry the church at that time (Revelation 19:7). Then he will defeat the unsaved world (Revelation 19:11 to 20:3), and he will reign on the earth with the bodily resurrected church for a thousand years (Revelation 20:4-6, Revelation 5:10, Revelation 2:26-29). Then the events of Revelation 20:7 to Revelation 22:5 will occur in the order shown there.

-

Second, the thousand years in Rev. 20:4-6 is the same as in Rev. 20:1-3, when Satan will be bound and cast into and locked within the bottomless pit for a thousand years, whereas currently he's walking about freely on the earth seeking whom he may devour (1 Pet. 5:8). So the thousand years can't have started yet. But their beginning after Jesus' second coming makes perfect sense (Rev. 19:7-20:6).

Third, the defeat of Satan in Rev. 20:1-3 is in chronological accord with the immediately preceding defeat of the Antichrist (the individual man aspect of the beast) and the False Prophet and all the unsaved armies of the world at Jesus' second coming (Rev. 19:19-21). Indeed, there's no chapter break between Rev. 19 and Rev. 20 in the original Greek, so that Rev. 19:19-20:3 can be taken together as a unit, showing how every power of evil will be defeated at Jesus' second coming.

Fourth, reading Rev. 20:4-6 as Jesus and the bodily resurrected church reigning first on the present (not the new) earth after his second coming (Rev. 19:7-20:6) matches Jesus reigning first on the present (not the new) earth after his second coming in Zech. 14:3-21. For Zech. 14:8-21 can't be referring to the new earth, because it refers to a temple building in Jerusalem (Zech. 14:20-21), whereas there will be no temple building in New Jerusalem on the new earth (Rev. 21:22). Also, Zech. 14:8-21 can't be referring to the new earth because it refers to surviving unsaved people from the present earth being forced to come up to worship the returned Jesus in Jerusalem during the millennium (Zech. 14:16-19), whereas by the time of the new earth, all the unsaved people from the present earth will have already been cast into the lake of fire and brimstone (Rev. 20:15-21:8).

Fifth, reading the first resurrection in Rev. 20:4-6 as the bodily resurrection of the church at Jesus' second coming (Rev. 19:7-20:6) matches other verses which show that the bodily resurrection of the church will occur at Jesus' second coming (1 Cor. 15:21-23,51-54, 1 Thes. 4:15-16).

Sixth, reading the first resurrection in Rev. 20:4-6 as the bodily resurrection of the church at Jesus' second coming (Rev. 19:7-20:6, 1 Cor. 15:21-23,51-54, 1 Thes. 4:15-16) is in line with Rev. 20:5, which must refer in its entirety to only bodily resurrection. For not every dead person is going to be spiritually resurrected in the sense of becoming saved (Rev. 20:15), and Rev. 20:5 means that the rest of the dead (i.e. including all the non-church dead of all times) won't be resurrected in the same manner that the church is resurrected in Rev. 20:4-6, until after the thousand years.

Seventh, reading the first resurrection in Rev. 20:4-6 as the bodily resurrection of the church at Jesus' second coming (Rev. 19:7-20:6, 1 Cor. 15:21-23,51-54, 1 Thes. 4:15-16) is in line with Rev. 20:4b, which shows that the people in the first resurrection will include those in the church who will have been beheaded by the Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of the beast) for not worshipping him or his image, or receiving his mark on their foreheads or hands. This refers back to Rev. 13's details, which have never been fulfilled. So the first resurrection can't have happened yet. But its occurring at Jesus' second coming, when he will defeat the Antichrist, makes perfect sense (Rev. 19:20-20:6).

eclipsenow said in post 888:

Rather it waltzes around and around some general theological themes, like the repeated theme of Satan's challenge to God and final defeat. We see this in Chapters 17, 19, and 20.

Only Revelation 20:7-10 refers to Satan's final defeat.

Rev. 19:19-21 and 20:7-9 are different events, separated by over a thousand years (Rev. 19:19-20:9). After the first event, Satan will be bound in the bottomless pit for a thousand years (Rev. 20:1-3), whereas after the 2nd event, he will be cast into the lake of fire to suffer forever (Rev. 20:10).

Rev. 19:19-21 is the battle at Jesus' 2nd coming, which Zech. 14:2-5 shows will occur at Jerusalem. After that battle will occur Jesus' physical reign on the earth (Zech. 14:9-21) with the bodily resurrected church for 1,000 years (Rev. 20:4-6, 5:10, 2:26-29). It won't be until after the 1,000 years are over that the Gog/Magog event will occur (Rev. 20:7-9, Ezek. chs. 38-39).

Bible2 · Mar 26, 2013

eclipsenow said in post 888:

Rather it waltzes around and around some general theological themes, like the repeated theme of Satan's challenge to God and final defeat. We see this in Chapters 17, 19, and 20.

Revelation chapters 17, 19, and 20 refer to three different, sequential times, insofar as the destruction of the symbolic Babylon in Revelation 17:16 by the ten kings of the Antichrist's empire will occur at the seventh vial, immediately before Jesus' second coming (Revelation 16:17,19, Revelation 19:2-21). Then Revelation 19:7 to 20:3 will happen at his second coming. Then Revelation 20:7-10 will happen some thousand years after his second coming (Revelation 19:7 to 20:10).

eclipsenow said in post 888:

In 17:7-14 the beast was, and is not, and then is again: with 10 horns (symbolic of great power) to persecute God's people, but is wiped out by the Lamb.

Regarding Revelation 17:14, it is just a part of the description of the career of the ten kings of the Antichrist's empire (Revelation 17:12-17). In Revelation 17:14a, the extremely-short summary of what will happen to them at Jesus' second coming is not meant to be taken, like the highly detailed Revelation 19:7 to 20:3 is meant to be taken, as when the second coming will occur in relation to the chronological sequence of Revelation chapters 6 to 22.

eclipsenow said in post 888:

In 17:7-14 the beast was, and is not, and then is again: with 10 horns (symbolic of great power) to persecute God's people, but is wiped out by the Lamb.

Regarding "the beast was, and is not, and then is again", that relates to the seven heads of the beast in its empire aspect (Revelation 13:1, Revelation 17:3), which represent seven empires (Revelation 17:9-10): Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome, and (possibly) Islam. The first five had fallen by the time of John the apostle in the first century AD: "five are fallen" (Revelation 17:10, Revelation 1:1b-2). The sixth (Rome) existed at the time of John: "one is" (Revelation 17:10). The seventh (possibly Islam) had not come by the time of John: "the other is not yet come" (Revelation 17:10). The empire of the Antichrist (the individual-man aspect of the beast) will be a different, still-future, eighth head (Revelation 17:11), which will be a revival of one of the five empires that had fallen by the time of John (Revelation 17:8,10-11). It will be a revival of the empire of Babylon. The Antichrist will transform the present-day, rebuilt city of Babylon (in Iraq) into the capital of his empire, only to see it ultimately destroyed at Jesus' second coming (Isaiah 13).

Before the second coming, when the world is brought into the worship of Lucifer (the dragon, Satan) and the Antichrist, during the Antichrist's future, literal 3.5-year worldwide reign (Revelation 13:4-18, Revelation 12:9), the Antichrist will build their main temple in the city of Babylon. For a temple to "wickedness" will be built in Shinar (Babylonia) (Zechariah 5:8,11), and the Antichrist is called "that Wicked" (2 Thessalonians 2:8). Also, the dragon has been the god worshipped in the city of Babylon since ancient times.

The Antichrist may claim to be Nebuchadnezzar returned, and so reinstitute the system that Nebuchadnezzar set up whereby everyone had to worship an image or be killed (Daniel 3, Revelation 13:15). The Antichrist may also claim to be, at the same time, the return of Nimrod (the founder of Babylon: Genesis 10:8-10), and Hammurabi, and Asoka, and other famous rulers of the past. For he may claim that he has had many different "past lives" as various "enlightened" rulers.

Besides building a main temple in Babylon, the Antichrist will also sit (at least one time) in a future, third Jewish temple in Jerusalem, and declare himself God there (2 Thessalonians 2:4, Daniel 11:36,31, Matthew 24:15, Revelation 11:1-2). The Antichrist could also sit (at least one time) in other religions' holiest shrines, and declare himself to be God there as well. For example, he could also sit in Islam's Kaaba in Mecca, in the Sikhs' Golden Temple in Amritsar, in Catholicism's St. Peter's Basilica in the Vatican, etc.

eclipsenow said in post 888:

In 17:7-14 the beast was, and is not, and then is again: with 10 horns (symbolic of great power) to persecute God's people, but is wiped out by the Lamb.

Regarding the "10 horns", or kings, of the beast in its Antichrist's-empire aspect (Revelation 13:1, Revelation 17:3,12), they could be ten men whom the Antichrist will appoint as kings over ten major nations, which could be the ten horns in Daniel 7:24.

For Dan. 7's first three beasts (Dan. 7:3-6) represent the ancient empires of Babylon (lion), Medo-Persia (bear), and Greece (leopard). And Dan. 7's fourth beast, or fourth "king"/"kingdom" (Dan. 7:17,23), represents the ancient Roman Empire. And the ten horns/kings which come out of it (Dan. 7:7,24) could represent ten major kingdoms/nations today which came out the former territory of the Roman Empire, which consisted not only of Western Europe, but also the Middle East and North Africa. These ten nations could be Germany, the U.K., France, Italy, Spain, Turkey, Egypt, Iraq, Algeria, and Syria. The ten part-iron/part-clay toes of Dan. 2:42 could represent the same thing as the ten horns of Dan. 7:7. The Europeans could be the iron, and the Arabs and Turks could be the clay. In Dan. 2:43, the inability of the iron to mix with the clay could represent how, for example, there are many Turks living in Germany, but they remain separated in ghettoes within German cities. Similarly, there are many Algerians living in France, but they remain separated in ghettoes within French cities.

But despite this social separation, which could endure indefinitely, the people of Western Europe on the one hand, and the people of the Middle East and North Africa on the other, could still one day put aside their political separation and become united into one confederation (Dan. 2:42 refers to the ten as a singular "kingdom"). The person who brings this about could be the Antichrist. The arising of the "little" horn (Dan. 7:8, 8:9), which is "diverse" from the ten major nations (Dan. 7:24), could mean that the Antichrist will arise from a little country. And the little horn arising from "among" the ten major nations (Dan. 7:8) could mean the Antichrist's country's territory used to be part of the Roman Empire. And before that, it was part of one of the four Diadochian Greek kingdoms which succeeded the Greek Empire of Alexander the Great (Dan. 8:8-9,21-25). The territory of these four kingdoms stretched from Greece over to Iran, and down into Egypt. So the Antichrist could come from the Middle East. He could be an Arab who will come from the little country of Lebanon, from the modern city of Tyre (Ezek. 28:2, 2 Thes. 2:4).

The Antichrist could start out by claiming to be a Baathist. After becoming the leader of Lebanon, he could peacefully gain control of a Baathist confederation of three of the ten major nations (Dan. 7:24): Egypt ("toward the south" of Lebanon: Dan. 8:9), Iraq and Syria ("toward the east" of Lebanon: Dan. 8:9). This confederation could also include the minor nation of a United Palestine (i.e. a defeated Israel, "the pleasant land": Dan. 8:9). This Baathist confederation could be put together in the future by an Iraqi Baathist General who could completely defeat and occupy Israel and Egypt (Dan. 11:15-17; in verse 17 the original Hebrew word translated as "daughter" is "bath"), but who could then mysteriously disappear (Dan. 11:19) shortly before the Antichrist arises on the world stage (Dan. 11:21-45). Years later, when the Antichrist gains control over all ten of the major nations, he could appoint kings over them (Rev. 17:12) who will defer to him (Rev. 17:13), like, for example, when Napoleon gained control over different nations, he appointed kings over them who would defer to him.

eclipsenow said in post 888:

In 19:11-21 we see the emphasis from the point of view of the Kings of the Earth who are sometimes tricked by Satan into persecuting the church, especially through a 'false prophet'. This is symbolic of all the times false teaching corrupts government.

Regarding "a 'false prophet'", Revelation 19:20 refers back to the individual beast which comes up out of the earth (Rev. 13:11-16), representing the individual man who will become the Antichrist's False Prophet (Rev. 16:13). He could be a (secretly apostate) pope who will begin his tenure by making a great push for peace and unity between Christianity and Islam. He could say something like: "Why do we fight each other? Are we not all the spiritual children of Abraham and of his God, the one God? Can't we lay aside our foolish, man-made differences of theology, which have done us no good at all, but only brought us hatred and violence, and unite into one religion of Abraham, one religion of peace, based on love for the one God and love for our fellow man? What's more important than this?"

He could be so skillful in elucidating what the moderate Muslims could call "the true, peaceful, loving nature of Islam", that he could be hailed by them worldwide as (in their words) "a Great Imam, come to rescue our beloved Islam from the bad reputation falsely given to it by the terrorists". In this way, a pope could come to hold high positions of power in two religions at the same time, which could be symbolized by the two horns of the False Prophet lamb (Rev. 13:11). This would be similar to how the seven horns of the true-Jesus lamb in Rev. 5:6 could represent the true Jesus holding seven positions of power at the same time (cf. Jesus wearing many crowns at the same time in Rev. 19:12). The False Prophet could even say that he is Jesus. (But he won't say that he's Christ, for the False Prophet and the Antichrist will deny that Jesus is the Christ and will deny that Christ is in the flesh: 1 Jn. 2:22, 2 Jn. 1:7.)

eclipsenow said in post 888:

Verse 20:4 takes us back to the throne room (which we've already seen in Revelation Chapters 4 and 5).

It doesn't. Rev. 20:4's "I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them" refers to during the future millennium on the earth (Rev. 5:10b), when, for example, the twelve apostles will sit on twelve thrones "judging" the twelve tribes of Israel (Mt. 19:28, Lk. 22:30) in the sense of ongoing rule, like the "judges" ruled Israel in the book of Judges. Also, Rev. 20:4-6 doesn't mean (as is sometimes claimed) that only those in the church beheaded in the future by the Antichrist will be resurrected in the first resurrection and reign with Jesus during the millennium, for the first resurrection is the bodily resurrection of the entire church (of all times) at Jesus' 2nd coming (Rev. 19:7-20:6, 1 Cor. 15:21-23,52, 1 Thes. 4:15-16), and every obedient person in the church (of all times) will reign on the earth with Jesus during the millennium (Rev. 2:26-29, 5:10).

Jesus will reign on the earth during the thousand years because the thousand years will begin after his 2nd coming (Rev. 19:7-20:6), when he will land on the earth and rule it from Jerusalem (Zech. 14:4-21). And because Jesus will reign on the earth during the thousand years, so will the resurrected church, for the resurrected church will reign with Jesus during the thousand years (Rev. 20:4-6). And so Rev. 5:10's reference to the church reigning "on the earth" in the future includes the thousand years. Also, Rev. 2:26-29's reigning of the church over the nations can refer to the thousand years. There's absolutely no reason to exclude the thousand years from Rev. 5:10 or Rev. 2:26-29, just as there's absolutely no reason to exclude the earth from Rev. 20:4-6.

eclipsenow said in post 888:

Satan is bound in a very particular way.

He will be literally bound in the bottomless pit (Revelation 20:3), which is a literal place. Job 33:22's original Hebrew word (shachath, H7845) translated as "the grave" can be translated as "the pit" (Job 33:28,30), meaning the extremely deep pit that's in hell/sheol (Isa. 14:15, Ps. 30:3, Job 11:8), in the sides of which pit are the graves of the conscious souls of the unsaved dead (Isa. 14:15,9,10, Ezek. 32:21-23), who experience pain there (Ps. 116:3). This pit is in the "nether" (the lowermost, Hebrew: tachtiy, H8482) parts of the earth (Ezek. 32:18-32, Ps. 63:9), and so it could reach down to the center of the earth (in the spiritual dimension). And it could continue past the center of the earth and continue on in a straight line up the other side of the earth almost to the surface, so that the pit is "bottomless" in that its lowest point is empty space at the center of the earth (in the spiritual dimension). Satan/Lucifer will be cast into this literal "bottomless pit" by an angel at Jesus' second coming (Rev. 19:7 to 20:3, Isa. 14:15,12).

Bible2 · Mar 26, 2013

eclipsenow said in post 888:

Amillennialists see the biblical symbols in John's writings, and know that John was yet again crafting a rich theological lesson full of symbol and metaphor and meaning and purpose.

What Biblical symbols are you referring to?

eclipsenow said in post 888:

Finally we have the martyrs. Satan could not stop their 'first resurrection'. They are safe. The second death or hell has no power over them. Did you get that bit? These Saints are dead Saints. The second death has no power over them, even though the first one did have power over them when they died!

Sorry, not getting the logic of the argument. What requires that the martyrs are still dead at the time of the first resurrection?

Why can't the second death have no power over bodily resurrected, living people?

eclipsenow said in post 888:

They *lived*, not they were resurrected!

They lived as part of the first resurrection (Revelation 20:4-6).

eclipsenow said in post 888:

John 6:40 "For my Fathers will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.

We *have* eternal life now, but are only raised up on the Last Day, not 1000 years before the Last Day!

In John 6:40, the original Greek word translated as the last "day" (hemera, G2250) doesn't have to mean the last 24-hour day, but can be used figuratively to refer to a much longer period of time (for example, see the Greek of 2 Cor. 6:2, 2 Pet. 3:8, and Jn. 8:56).

The last days began in the first century AD with Jesus' first coming (Hebrews 1:2) and the Holy Spirit's pouring out at the Pentecost in Acts 2 (Acts 2:16-17). The last days are the last three roughly thousand-year "days" (2 Peter 3:8) of the seven roughly thousand-year "days" from the creation of Adam in roughly 4,000 BC to the future end of the present earth and the creation of the new earth (Revelation 21:1) in roughly 3,000 AD. So the last days are the roughly 3,000 years from Jesus' first coming to sometime after the future millennium (Revelation 20:4-6), which will be part of the last roughly thousand-year "day".

eclipsenow said in post 888:

Reading 20:4-6 as the actual resurrection doesn't fit 20:11-15 which really *is* describing actual bodily resurrection!

They both are describing actual bodily resurrections, for Revelation 20:5 says "But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished", meaning that the first resurrection is the same, bodily type of resurrection as will occur sometime after the thousand years (Revelation 20:7-15). For not every dead person is going to be spiritually resurrected in the sense of becoming saved (Revelation 20:15), and Revelation 20:5 means that the rest of the dead (that is, including all the non-church dead of all times) won't be resurrected in the same manner that the church is resurrected in Revelation 20:4-6, until after the thousand years.

eclipsenow said in post 888:

It's Judgement Day, the dramatic language of the bodily resurrection of *everyone*, both good and bad, which is why the book of life is necessary. This is the final sorting between good and evil, between believers and unbelievers.

When Jesus returns, only the church will be bodily resurrected and finally-judged (1 Cor. 15:21-23, Rev. 20:5, Ps. 50:3-5, cf. Mk. 13:27; Mt. 25:19-30, 2 Cor. 5:10, Lk. 12:45-48). The obedient part of the bodily resurrected church (including those in the church who had been beheaded by the Antichrist) will then reign on the earth with the returned Jesus for a thousand years (Rev. 19:7-20:6, 5:10, 2:26-29, Ps. 66:3-4, 72:8-11, Zech 14:3-21). Only sometime after the thousand years and the subsequent Gog/Magog rebellion (Rev. 20:7-10, Ezek. chs. 38-39) will the rest of the dead be bodily resurrected (Rev. 20:5) and finally-judged at the great white throne judgment (Rev. 20:11-15).

eclipsenow said in post 888:

Footnote 1: 1000 hardly ever used literally in the bible.

Really?

How has that been shown? (That is, you might consider it hardly ever used literally, when in fact it could mostly be used literally.)

eclipsenow said in post 888:

For example: 12 Tribes of Israel + 12 Apostles * 1000 (the complete number) gives you 144 thousand, the most complete number and picture of ALL God's people.

The number 144,000 in Revelation 7:4 and Revelation 14:1,3 is a literal number of people, which will consist of literally twelve groups with literally twelve thousand people in each group (Revelation 7:5-8).

The 144,000 will be Christians (Revelation 14:1,4), and so they will be part of the church (compare Ephesians 4:4-6). They will be the firstfruits of the church (Revelation 14:4) in the sense of its best part (compare Numbers 18:12). They will be male virgins (Revelation 14:4), who could all have been born in the 20th or 21st century, and who could all already be part of the church. For they will all be alive on the earth, and will all already be God's servants (Revelation 7:3; compare Romans 6:22, Philippians 1:1), by the time of Revelation 7:3-8 (during the first stage of the future tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18/Matthew 24). They will have entered the tribulation along with the rest of the church alive at that time, for there will be no pre-tribulation rapture (2 Thessalonians 2:1-8, Matthew 24:29-31, Revelation 19:7 to 20:6).

eclipsenow said in post 888:

Psalm 50:10
"for every animal of the forest is mine, and the cattle on a thousand hills."
(Are literalists really going to conclude that God does not own the cattle on the gazillion other hills on planet earth?)

No, for literalism doesn't say that every use of 1,000 has to be literal.

eclipsenow said in post 888:

2 Peter 3:8
"But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day."

2 Peter 3:8 (like Psalms 90:4) can be literal without having to mean exactly a thousand years, for God can round numbers down. For example, 1 Kings 7:23 in effect rounds 3.14 down to three. For 1 Kings 7:23 is not implying that pi is equal to exactly three. All 1 Kings 7:23 is saying is that a brass basin ten cubits in diameter had a circumference of thirty cubits, which could simply have been rounded down from a circumference of 31.4 cubits. Or the ten-cubit diameter could have been rounded up from 9.55 cubits, which would have resulted in a circumference of thirty cubits. Or neither the ten-cubit-diameter figure nor the thirty-cubit-circumference figure was meant to be taken as an exact figure accurate to the hundredth of a cubit. For 1 Kings 7:23 isn't giving an exact blueprint description of the basin, nor is it giving a geometry lesson. It's simply giving a general account of how big the basin was.

Similarly, 2 Peter 3:8 and Psalms 90:4 do not have to be giving an exact equation, but can be giving a general idea. Just as God can in effect round 3.14 down to three, so he could round something like 1,140 down to a thousand.

eclipsenow · Mar 26, 2013

Bible2 said:
Prove they weren't.

Here's the deal: you made suggestions about this verse and appeared to try to argue that it was literal because the messengers were literal so the number was literal. It's all an exercise in justifying what virtually no Revelation scholar I'm aware of thinks, that Revelation is literal. It's not. So it's up to you to prove those suggestions. For my part, I'm resting on the credentials of Dr Paul Barnett's historical and theological career, and his commentary on Revelations that says there were more than seven churches across Asia Minor at the time. I can't help it that you have to invent lies about this passage to try and render it literal. That's your problem, not mine.

Revelation is almost entirely literal, for it is unsealed ....

I'm not interested in reading this paragraph ever again. You've 'shared' it with me (forced it down my throat) about 30 or 40 times in our conversations over the last year. It just shows what an internet troll you are that you do this! This is your standard copy and paste, and so I'm ignoring it as it contains no new information. It's just nonsense, repeated and repeated and repeated. (See there, I just repeated the word repeated three times which is a Jewish symbol. But you wouldn't recognise thrice repeated words or numbers as symbolic, would you?)

If you repeat it here you're just proving what an internet troll you really are. I've addressed your 'arguments' in that paragraph repeatedly for the last year, showing how just because Revelation contains the gospel promise of Jesus eventual return does NOT make it a literal timetable of the last decades of human history. That's a preposterous claim, and if applied to other parts of the New Testament that discuss the gospel promise of Jesus return in judgement, turning them also into a timetable of the Last Decade, it would render them useless and unreadable mumbo-jumbo.

Regarding "Why should I take YOUR word for it . . . when I have the work of a Bishop who is a leading expert in Ancient History?", note that what he says regarding the number of churches in Roman "Asia" has not been denied.

THANK YOU!

Instead, honest and simple questions have been asked: How many more than seven churches were there in Roman "Asia"? And in what cities were they located?

He doesn't say, but you're welcome to track down Dr Paul Barnett or other church historians and ask them. But as to the symbolism in the number 7, try this wiki. It's just a fact that 7 is symbolic and that John is using most of the numbers in his book symbolically.

7

The gematria of the Hebrew letter ז
The number 7 is the Divine number of completion
The general symbol for all association with God; the favorite religious number of Judaism, typifying the covenant of holiness and sanctification, and also all that was holy and sanctifying in purpose
The Seven Laws of Noah
The menorah in the Temple had seven lamps
Acts of atonement and purification were accompanied by a sevenfold sprinkling
Every seventh year of the Hebrew calendar is a Sabbatical year [4]
A full week of shiva is seven days; the term "shiva" refers to the seven-day period
Number of blessings in the Sheva Brachot [4]
A woman in niddah following menstruation must count seven "clean days" prior to immersion in the mikvah
Number of days of Sukkot [4]
Number of days of Pesach (Israel)[4]
Blessings in the Amidah of Shabbat, Yom Tov, and Musaf (except Rosh Hashanah)
Number of aliyot on Shabbat[4]
Significance of numbers in Judaism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How has that been shown?

Why can't they all be literal?

Try reading post 888 again. It obviously went over your head. I showed you exactly why: because in literature the immediate context of the author's own intentions and use of common symbols trumps the way others might use it. Anyway, the few possible literal uses of 1000 you tossed at me ignore the vast majority of times 1000 is most definitely symbolic. (But your verses many not be evidence of literal uses of 1000, as I didn't have time to check all your 'quotes' and have found you to be unreliable when quoting in the past).

The evidence I have is:

1. John is obviously writing in the apocalyptic genre which is not literal (if you bothered to read any scholars you would know this!) and so therefore...
2. I would need proof that he was using it literally, rather than requiring proof that he was being symbolic, because the genre John chose to write in is pretty much exclusively symbolic!

It's self explanatory. The style of symbolism with Jesus having 7 horns and 7 eyes is symbolic, right? Even you have agreed to that. Why would John throw that in? Why would he write like that? And why does the whole book sound like that?

Because it's all apocalyptic literature, as most scholars I read agree.
Dr Paul Barnett
Leon Morris
John Richardson
Dr Greg Clarke and Dr John Dickson (Authors of 666 and all that)
Archbishop of Sydney Dr Peter Jensen
Countless staff and faculty at Moore College
Dean of Sydney Anglican Cathedral Dr Philip Jensen
Some great sermons here Revelation | Scripture Index | Phillip Jensen
Dr Kim Riddlebarger
And many, many more.

That's it. I've about done enough 'feeding the troll' on this topic. I'm no longer going to try and justify to you the nearly self-evident on Revelation being symbolic. It's time for you to find some scholars that explain why it is literal... because it just isn't. Off you go there lad, you've got some work to do.

eclipsenow · Mar 26, 2013

Bible2 said:
They both are describing actual bodily resurrections, for Revelation 20:5 says "But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished", meaning that the first resurrection is the same, bodily type of resurrection as will occur sometime after the thousand years (Revelation 20:7-15). For not every dead person is going to be spiritually resurrected in the sense of becoming saved (Revelation 20:15), and Revelation 20:5 means that the rest of the dead (that is, including all the non-church dead of all times) won't be resurrected in the same manner that the church is resurrected in Revelation 20:4-6, until after the thousand years.

Sorry Bible2 but there's absolutely no point debating what Revelation says and means until we're agreed on the genre. I don't know why you insist on blurting out the obsessively detailed rubbish 'timetables' you indulge in so much when we don't even agree on the genre of Revelation and that it is all entirely symbolic in the first place! So please, try to stop being irrelevant. You were saying something about 1000 being literal and asking about how on earth various parts of Revelation could be symbolic: I gave you an example. That does not mean I'm going to run around justifying an amil position on these verses to someone who cannot agree on the genre!

Achilles6129 · Mar 26, 2013

I think the big question that we all should be considering is: Why hasn't Christ returned yet? It's been (by earth standards, at least) a very, very long time. Nearly 2000 years. And yet Christ hasn't returned and he has not intervened to stop any wars/rebellions against God, etc.

Why not?

ViaCrucis · Mar 26, 2013

Everything's in God's timing. It could be another 2,000 or 20,000 years. It's all in God's timing, not ours.

-CryptoLutheran

dfw69 · Mar 26, 2013

Achilles6129 said:
I think the big question that we all should be considering is: Why hasn't Christ returned yet? It's been (by earth standards, at least) a very, very long time. Nearly 2000 years. And yet Christ hasn't returned and he has not intervened to stop any wars/rebellions against God, etc.

Why not?

Because god is not willing any should perish but all come to repentance...so it's a calling into the fold for all who will hear and believe by faith... And god does not want to punish his enemies...but save them... But there is a time for wrath... It's a day of darkness... And even then...god will plead with his enemies... To repent and believe the good news...

No matter how long The Lord tarries.... People though all these years are being saved by the Holy Spirit from generation to generation and his enemies separate from the flock ...

But as time passes ... the Lords enemies get stronger and grow more bolder...and there will be a showdown...when the time is right...

An even greater question is ... Why has the Jewish messiah not return yet? Jews have been waiting even longer for their final restoration of the kingdom.... When was the 1st prophecy of the seed of the woman given?.... In the garden...from the time of the garden to the first coming of Christ was how many years?.... And the Jews don't believe in Jesus but denied him.... So how long have they been waiting for the promise?

eclipsenow · Mar 26, 2013

dfw69 said:
Because god is not willing any should perish but all come to repentance...so it's a calling into the fold for all who will hear and believe by faith... And god does not want to punish his enemies...but save them... But there is a time for wrath... It's a day of darkness... And even then...god will plead with his enemies... To repent and believe the good news...

No matter how long The Lord tarries.... People though all these years are being saved by the Holy Spirit from generation to generation and his enemies separate from the flock ...

Agreed.

But as time passes ... the Lords enemies get stronger and grow more bolder...and there will be a showdown...when the time is right...

Disagree. There's no biblical reason I can see that this is the case. Things seem to be getting better for the majority of believers on this planet as democracy spreads. Nevertheless, things being 'better' seems to often drag Christians away into seeking pleasure and financial gain more than seeking Christ, so that may very well be a double edged sword.

An even greater question is ... Why has the Jewish messiah not return yet? Jews have been waiting even longer for their final restoration of the kingdom.... When was the 1st prophecy of the seed of the woman given?.... In the garden...from the time of the garden to the first coming of Christ was how many years?.... And the Jews don't believe in Jesus but denied him.... So how long have they been waiting for the promise?

This question might afflict the Jews, some of whom will hopefully become Christians, but I do not see it being of any especial importance to Christians as we know who the Messiah is.

dfw69 · Mar 26, 2013

eclipsenow said:
Disagree. There's no biblical reason I can see that this is the case. Things seem to be getting better for the majority of believers on this planet as democracy spreads. Nevertheless, things being 'better' seems to often drag Christians away into seeking pleasure and financial gain more than seeking Christ, so that may very well be a double edged sword.

Hope you are correct... May it get better for all

This question might afflict the Jews, some of whom will hopefully become Christians, but I do not see it being of any especial importance to Christians as we know who the Messiah is.

Doubt it will offend the Jews ... They are like us... And hold to their faith...and god will deliver his promises to them

But I questioned because the question arose how long Jesus is taking to return... If the Jews can wait and hold to there beliefs for so long.. We can learn from their example and wait for our lord to return whatever length it takes.......

dfw69 · Mar 26, 2013

But as time passes ... the Lords enemies get stronger and grow more bolder...and there will be a showdown...when the time is right...

Disagree. There's no biblical reason I can see that this is the case. Things seem to be getting better for the majority of believers on this planet as democracy spreads. Nevertheless, things being 'better' seems to often drag Christians away into seeking pleasure and financial gain more than seeking Christ, so that may very well be a double edged sword.

Eclipsenow... Jesus is going to end world government ... It's the end of the age... Or can there be world governments and the kingdom of Christ on earth?..... If Jesus came now... will Obama still be in office and Christ reign in Israel ?..

zeke37 · Mar 26, 2013

the worlds a big place, and nations will exist in the Mill
he might be in "power" but things will have changed so much then,
that power will not be the same thing as it is today.

When Will Christ Return?

What year range do you believe Jesus Christ will return in?

2010 - 2020

2020 - 2030

2030 - 2040

Beyond 2040

I don't know

Newbie

Great is thy faithfulness

Great is thy faithfulness

Great is thy faithfulness

Great is thy faithfulness

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

Bible2

Guest

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

Bible2

Guest

Bible2

Guest

Bible2

Guest

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

Veteran

Confessional Lutheran

Pre-Tribulation Pre- False Messianic Age

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

Pre-Tribulation Pre- False Messianic Age

Pre-Tribulation Pre- False Messianic Age

IMO...

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency