The many errors and contradictions found in Amillennialism.

[ewq1938]

31. Is the beast of Revelation 13 from the distant past and has already been defeated?

Amillennialism sometimes teaches that the events of Revelation 13 are from the past yet how is that possibly true when we see the same beast and false prophet from Revelation 13 in Revelation 19 which most Amillennialists believe to be the future second coming? Has the beast and false prophet been ruling the world since Ad 70? If so, how can they have so much power in a time when satan is supposedly bound and imprisoned since Ad 33?

The truth is that the events of Revelation 13 with the beast and false prophet are roughly 42 months prior to the events of the last half of Revelation 19, the second coming. Revelation 13 is not the past.

Amillennialism has no answer as to why the Revelation 13 beast is destroyed at the second coming. It proves the events of Revelation 13 occur just prior to the second coming.

 

[PinSeeker]

31. Is the beast of Revelation 13 from the distant past and has already been defeated? Amillennialism sometimes teaches that the events of Revelation 13 are from the past...

So we would agree that the answer to this question is no, but not on the complete understanding. Amillennialists would say that the events of Revelation 13 are not merely past, but presently inclusive of the past, the present, and the future... all times leading up to Christ's triumphant return:

The Beast combines features from the four beasts of Daniel 7:1-8, 17-27. The beasts of Daniel represent idolatrous kingdoms. This Beast in Revelation is a worldly kingdom summing all of them up. The state-controlled persecutions against Daniel and his friends thus suggest the nature of the persecution that the previously described seven churches must face from the Roman state ~ and persecutions of later ages. Because it expresses a general principle of Satanic opposition, we may expect multiple manifestations. These manifestations include the first century, the final crisis, and all times in between.

...how is that possibly true when we see the same beast and false prophet from Revelation 13 in Revelation 19 which most Amillennialists believe to be the future second coming?

See above.

Has the beast and false prophet been ruling the world since Ad 70?

Yes, and before, but no longer with regard to the nations (more on this in a moment). As Paul exhorts us in Ephesians 6, we are to put on the whole armor of God, that we may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil (Satan), because we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.

If so, how can they have so much power in a time when Satan is supposedly bound and imprisoned since Ad 33?

Satan is ~ and has been, since Jesus's coming ~ bound with regard to being able to deceive the nations (which is exactly what Revelation 20 says). He is still able to influence individuals, but Jesus is able to "plunder the goods of the strong man, because He has bound him" ~ it is by the Spirit of God that He casts out demons, as the kingdom of God has come upon us. He is able to enter a strong man’s (Satan's) house and plunder his goods, because He (Jesus) has previously (on His coming) bound the strong man (Satan). This is what Jesus Himself is saying in Matthew 12:28-29.

The truth is that the events of Revelation 13 with the beast and false prophet are roughly 42 months prior to the events of the last half of Revelation 19, the second coming.

Ah, the 42 months. I don't completely disagree with you here, and actually agree more than you might think... :) To explain:

This "42 months" is a limited time of distress and intense conflict between God’s people and their opponents (Revelation 13:5). It is also described as 1260 days (Revelation 11:3; Revelation 12:6) or a time, times, and half a time (three and a half years; Revelation 12:14). In a symbolic context like this one, months are reckoned as consisting of 30 days each. It is half of seven years, which from a symbolic point of view suggests a complete period of suffering, cut short by half. The main background is found in Daniel 7:25, which in turn is related to other passages in Daniel (Daniel 9:27; Daniel 12:7, Daniel 11-12). Some futurist (not amillennial) interpreters look for a period of time of this length shortly before the Second Coming, but like other numbers in Revelation, this one is symbolic in character, and related to the three and a half days in Revelation 11:9-11. It thus designates a period of persecution of limited length.

The most significant clue comes from Daniel 9:27. In Daniel 9 God sets out a period of 70 weeks or 490 years or 10 jubilee cycles during which He will accomplish His purposes for worldwide redemption (Daniel 9:24). This period of 70 weeks builds on the earlier period of 70 years of exile prophesied by Jeremiah (Daniel 9:2; Jeremiah 25:12; Jeremiah 9:10). Each of Jeremiah’s 70 years is a sabbatical year in which the land rests (2 Chronicles 36:21; Leviticus 26:43; Leviticus 25:1-7). Hence, symbolically speaking, it represents a total of 490 years. At the end of this period God favors Israel again and restores them to the land and to Jerusalem (Ezra 1:1-4; 2 Chronicles 36:22-23). But this restoration is only preliminary. The final restoration takes place at the conclusion of a second cycle of 490 years. And since the whole sabbath pattern symbolizes final rest, it is fitting that this second cycle consists of symbolical years, symbolizing the way to the consummation. The consummation occurs at the end of 490 symbolical years. The last week of years, 7 symbolical years, stands for the time of inaugurated eschatology, after the Messiah has come and accomplished redemption (Daniel 9:26a). In the middle of the last week the sanctuary is destroyed (Daniel 9:27), which took place in 70 A.D. The period from 70 A.D. to the Second Coming is the last half week of Daniel’s prophecy, a period of trouble and persecution as in Daniel 7:25. The 1260 days is thus the entire inter-advent period, viewed as a time of persecution and distress (cf. 2 Timothy 3:1-13; 2 Thessalonians 1:4-8).

Like other visions, this vision has multiple applications throughout the church age. For the seven churches in their first century context it indicates that persecution will come, but it will be limited in length and end in vindication (vv. 11-12). It likewise holds out the same promise for Christians throughout the ages. Just before the Second Coming we are to expect a violent crisis that will bring intense conflict and persecution (2 Thess. 2:1-12).

Revelation 13 is not the past.

Not only past... not past only. What we actually should understand, EWQ, is that Revelation 13, in its entirety, is analogous to the millennium of Revelation 20:4-6, the thousand years over which Christians are individually coming to life and reigning with Christ ~ the time period over which God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which He loves us, even when we were/are dead in our trespasses, makes us alive together with Christ and raises us up with Him and seats us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 2:4-6). This is the first resurrection. And then Revelation 14 should be seen as the same events described in Revelation 19:11-20 and Revelation 20:7-15.

Amillennialism has no answer as to why the Revelation 13 beast is destroyed at the second coming.

Ohhhh... yes, they do... :)

It proves the events of Revelation 13 occur just prior to the second coming.

Well, amillennialists agree with your statement here, but not "just prior" in the sense you mean. See above.

 

[ewq1938]

So we would agree that the answer to this question is no, but not on the complete understanding. Amillennialists would say that the events of Revelation 13 are not merely past, but presently inclusive of the past, the present, and the future... all times leading up to Christ's triumphant return:

None are the past or present. All of Revelation 13 is future.

Satan is ~ and has been, since Jesus's coming ~ bound with regard to being able to deceive the nations (which is exactly what Revelation 20 says).

He can current deceive the nations and has and is. Burt, in Revelation 20 that will stop completely. The fact that he current is doing that proves he is not currently bound and imprisoned.

He is still able to influence individuals

Not while imprisoned.

Not only past... not past only. What we actually should understand, EWQ, is that Revelation 13, in its entirety, is analogous to the millennium of Revelation 20:4-6, the thousand years over which Christians are individually coming to life and reigning with Christ

Revelation 13 is not parallel to Revelation 20 and the Millennium. People now can be born again, but Revelation 20 speaks of people who gave their lives for the testimony of Christ, after being killed they become alive again which therefore has to be a physical resurrection not being born again a second time after being physically killed.

~ the time period over which God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which He loves us, even when we were/are dead in our trespasses, makes us alive together with Christ and raises us up with Him and seats us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 2:4-6). This is the first resurrection.

No, that is not what the first resurrection is found in Revelation 20. There a group of dead Christians are resurrected, the first of two resurrections.

Ohhhh... yes, they do... :)

Nope. The two beasts have only 42 months to be in power and are destroyed at the second coming so they began ruling 42 months before Christ returns.

 

[PinSeeker]

None are the past or present. All of Revelation 13 is future.

Nope. We are in the midst of it. Some (many) manifestations of it are past, some (many) are present, and still at this point, some (many) are future. All this is leading up to Jesus's glorious return.

He can current deceive the nations and has and is.

Nope. Satan is currently bound from doing this, as Jesus Himself said in Matthew 12:28-29 ~ "...if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. Or how can someone enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house." Jesus, EWQ, is plundering Satan's house even as we speak.

Burt, in Revelation 20 that will stop completely.

My name is not Burt. :) That was a joke, of course; I know you meant 'but.' :) Well, I'm not a butt, either... :) At least I hope I'm not... :) Okay, um... sorry... :)

I agree with what you say here, but not in the way you are saying it. Regarding Revelation 20 specifically, at the beginning of the millennium, Satan has been bound from deceiving the nations ~ which you agree with, but yet believe, incorrectly, that this millennium is future only. But in fact, it is the same time period that Ezekiel refers to...

"And I will give them one heart, and a new spirit I will put within them. I will remove the heart of stone from their flesh and give them a heart of flesh, that they may walk in my statutes and keep my rules and obey them. And they shall be my people, and I will be their God." (Ezekiel 11:19-20)

"I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules." (Ezekiel 11, Ezekiel 36:26-27)

...and also Jeremiah...

"Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah... I will put My law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people" ~ Jeremiah 31:31-33).

And the writer of Hebrews refers to Jeremiah's words directly in Hebrews 10:14-16, saying, "...when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified. And the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us; for after saying, 'This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws on their hearts, and write them on their minds...'"

This time is now here; these are the "last days" that he refers to in Hebrews 1:2 ~ "in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son," and again in Hebrews 8:9-10 ~ "...not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt... (f)or they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord... (f)or this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

And this is precisely the time very present time period Peter is referring to in 2 Peter 3:7-13:

"But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly. But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed. Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of people ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness, waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be set on fire and dissolved, and the heavenly bodies will melt as they burn! But according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells."​

The fact that he current is doing that proves he is not currently bound and imprisoned.

He is able to possibly influence and possibly deceive individuals within those nations. Again, these are the times Peter is speaking of in 1 Peter 5:6-10, in saying:

"Humble yourselves, therefore, under the mighty hand of God so that at the proper time he may exalt you, casting all your anxieties on Him, because He cares for you. Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. Resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same kinds of suffering are being experienced by your brotherhood throughout the world. And after you have suffered a little while, the God of all grace, who has called you to his eternal glory in Christ, will himself restore, confirm, strengthen, and establish you."​

Revelation 13 is not parallel to Revelation 20 and the Millennium.

Yes it is. I respect your opinion, but the parallel between Revelation 13 ~ and Revelation 17 ~ and Revelation 20:4-6 is what it is.

People now can be born again...

Right, and this is the first resurrection. It is happening to individuals over the course of the millennium.

...but Revelation 20 speaks of people who gave their lives for the testimony of Christ, after being killed they become alive again which therefore has to be a physical resurrection not being born again a second time after being physically killed.

I agree, but this is the second resurrection, which is general, and is referred to specifically in Revelation 20:12-13.

PinSeeker: the time period over which God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which He loves us, even when we were/are dead in our trespasses, makes us alive together with Christ and raises us up with Him and seats us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 2:4-6). This is the first resurrection.​

No, that is not what the first resurrection is found in Revelation 20.

Yes, it is. The first resurrection is spiritual, after which we are no longer dead in our trespasses, having been raised with Christ ~ resurrected ~ spiritually in His physical resurrection and seated with Him, again, spiritually, in the heavenly places in Him. This corresponds intensely with us, as Christians, coming to life ~ being born again of the Spirit ~ and reigning with Christ for these thousand years... over the course of God's millennium.

ewq1938: Amillennialism has no answer as to why the Revelation 13 beast is destroyed at the second coming.
PinSeeker: Ohhhh... yes, they do...​

Nope.

Well yes, Amillennialists do have an answer, and an intensely coherent one ~ you kind of have to acknowledge that ~ and I just gave it to you. You don't accept it, which I respect, but it is what it is. I mean, I will readily acknowledge the coherence of Premillennialists' and Postmillennialists and even Preterists' answer, but of course will not accept those. This is called disagreement. :)

The two beasts have only 42 months to be in power and are destroyed at the second coming so they began ruling 42 months before Christ returns.

Again, quoting from above, this "42 months" is a limited time of distress and intense conflict between God’s people and their opponents (Revelation 13:5). Like other visions, this vision has multiple applications throughout the church age. It likewise holds out the same promise for Christians throughout the ages... this age, God's millennium.

Grace and peace to you, EWQ.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Ah, but not just in Revelation 19. Yes, Revelation 19:11-21 is a vision of the final battle. There are six other places in Revelation where it is described and/or alluded to. Revelation 20:7-10 is the seventh. :)

I didn't say it was just in Revelation 19. I agree that there are other places where it is described.

Hmmm... You're taking both 'destruction' and 'fire' out of context, it seems.

How so?

The destruction is in the sense of ruination (not obliteration or a wiping from existence), and, well, as you probably know, our God is a consuming fire, and fire, throughout the Bible, is symbolic of God's righteous judgment.

Grace and peace to you.

There is nothing in 2 Peter 3:7 or 2 Peter 3:10-12 to indicate that it's anything but literal, physical fire that will come down upon the earth when Christ returns. But, I'm not saying it will completely obliterate the earth as you seem to think that I'm saying. I believe it will burn up the surface of the earth. This future event is compared directly to the global flood of Noah's day in 2 Peter 3:5-7. The past event affected the entire surface of the earth and so will the future event.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Your arguments become so ridiculous when you need to defend the defenseless. At least @ewq1938 has a better reason for arguing for a resurrection of the dead mentioned in Revelation 20:12-13.

The word for "stand" =
Strongs 2476 hístēmi
to stand (transitively or intransitively), used in various applications (literally or figuratively):--abide, appoint, bring, continue, covenant, establish, hold up, lay, present, set (up), stanch, stand (by, forth, still, up).

It's literal or figurative:

"And lo, the star which they saw in the east went before them until it came and stood [hístēmi] over where the child was." Matthew 2:9

So was the star standing up? Or lying down?

"Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation. And every city or house divided against itself shall not stand [hístēmi]." (Matthew 12:25).

What's it supposed to say? "A house divided against itself shall not lie down"?

John saw the dead before the great white judgment throne of God. How was he supposed to put it? The dead were lying down before the judgment throne of God?

It's so obvious the dead are figuratively "standing" before the throne of God. The word can be used figuratively.

I don't know why I even bother to respond to your arguments whenever you make ridiculous arguments like this, based on nothing. At least ewq1938 has a better basis for his argument about it (but you don't want to use his argument, so you resort to this type of ridiculousness again).

And you throw in so many ridiculous and false arguments that we always have to waste our time responding to things like this. It's often just a waste of time arguing with you because of things like this.

LOL. You again are being a hypocrite by accusing someone else of ridiculous arguments after you've made so many ridiculous arguments yourself. Anyway, I don't recall saying that the word translated as "stand" can't ever be used figuratively. But, the bottom line here is that scripture is very clear that the unsaved dead will be resurrected and judged. Just look at Daniel 12:2 and John 5:28-29 for two clear examples. Why would you deny that except for doctrinal bias?

 

[ewq1938]

Nope. Satan is currently bound from doing this

He isn't currently bound and even years after the cross he was described as unbound:

1Pe_5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

, as Jesus Himself said in Matthew 12:28-29 ~ "...if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. Or how can someone enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house." Jesus, EWQ, is plundering Satan's house even as we speak.

No, that happens in the future in Revelation 20. Satan is free and deceiving most of the world, which in turn is persecuting and killing much of the Church.

I agree with what you say here, but not in the way you are saying it. Regarding Revelation 20 specifically, at the beginning of the millennium, Satan has been bound from deceiving the nations ~ which you agree with, but yet believe, incorrectly, that this millennium is future only.

I'm not wrong on this. Look around at this evil world. Christ and his saints aren't ruling at all, let alone with a rod of iron. The Millennium is future, after Christ returns and rules for real.

But in fact, it is the same time period that Ezekiel refers to...

"And I will give them one heart, and a new spirit I will put within them. I will remove the heart of stone from their flesh and give them a heart of flesh, that they may walk in my statutes and keep my rules and obey them. And they shall be my people, and I will be their God." (Ezekiel 11:19-20)

"I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules." (Ezekiel 11, Ezekiel 36:26-27)

...and also Jeremiah...

"Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah... I will put My law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people" ~ Jeremiah 31:31-33).

That isn't happening now. The church is shrinking, and the world more and more lawless. We might be close to the Great Tribulation.

And the writer of Hebrews refers to Jeremiah's words directly in Hebrews 10:14-16, saying, "...when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified. And the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us; for after saying, 'This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws on their hearts, and write them on their minds...'"

This time is now here

Nope. He is still waiting for that time.


Heb_2:8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him.

Years after the cross and still Paul knew not yet all things were under him.

He is able to possibly influence and possibly deceive individuals within those nations.

Which proves he is not bound and imprisoned because he will be unable to do such things.

Yes it is. I respect your opinion, but the parallel between Revelation 13 ~ and Revelation 17 ~ and Revelation 20:4-6 is what it is.

Go ahead and try to p[rove a parallel between Revelation 13 and Revelation 20. I will point out the many errors that will be there.

Right, and this is the first resurrection. It is happening to individuals over the course of the millennium.

No. The first resurrection starts and ends before the Millennium even begins according to Revelation 20. The first resurrection is the dead resurrecting physically, not people being born again.

I agree, but this is the second resurrection, which is general, and is referred to specifically in Revelation 20:12-13.

That is the second resurrection which is for the unsaved dead.

Yes, it is. The first resurrection is spiritual

The first resurrection in Revelation 20 is not spiritual. It is a physical resurrection. The souls of the beheaded lived again. That proves it is a physical resurrection.

, after which we are no longer dead in our trespasses, having been raised with Christ ~ resurrected ~ spiritually in His physical resurrection and seated with Him, again, spiritually, in the heavenly places in Him. This corresponds intensely with us, as Christians, coming to life ~ being born again of the Spirit ~ and reigning with Christ for these thousand years... over the course of God's millennium.

You have it all wrong. Being born again happened before being killed or dying. After that, a resurrection is a bodily resurrection. The text is not on your side.

Again, quoting from above, this "42 months" is a limited time of distress and intense conflict between God’s people and their opponents (Revelation 13:5). Like other visions, this vision has multiple applications throughout the church age. It likewise holds out the same promise for Christians throughout the ages... this age, God's millennium.

This age is not the Millennium. It will be the next age, a thousand years without satan interference.

Grace and peace to you, EWQ.

Same to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

I didn't say it was just in Revelation 19. I agree that there are other places where it is described.

Okay, good. I was really just elaborating a bit and making a more complete picture. Cool.

How so?

Well I did elaborate on the out-of-context thing. As I said, the destruction is in the sense of ruination (not obliteration or a wiping from existence), and, well, as you probably know, our God is a consuming fire, and fire, throughout the Bible, is symbolic of God's righteous judgment. This latter part was really more what I was talking about. Jehovah's Witnesses and some others subscribe to annihilationism, which is not Biblical at all, and I think you agree with that.

There is nothing in 2 Peter 3:7 or 2 Peter 3:10-12 to indicate that it's anything but literal, physical fire that will come down upon the earth when Christ returns.

Okay, well, I disagree. I don't think it would be a long explanation, but again I would say, just to make it very short, our God is a consuming fire.

I believe it will burn up the surface of the earth.

Okay, yes, I understand. I don't. :) Again, making it short, I'll go to Revelation 21. There, in verse 5, God does not say, "Behold I am making all new things," but rather, "Behold, I am making all things new."

This future event is compared directly to the global flood of Noah's day in 2 Peter 3:5-7.

Right, and the direct comparison is that it will be sudden.

The past event affected the entire surface of the earth and so will the future event.

I agree, but not in the way that you mean that. Even if you reject it, hopefully you can understand what I'm saying... what I believe Scripture to be saying. It's no less literal, just quite different in nature.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Well I did elaborate on the out-of-context thing. As I said, the destruction is in the sense of ruination (not obliteration or a wiping from existence), and, well, as you probably know, our God is a consuming fire, and fire, throughout the Bible, is symbolic of God's righteous judgment. This latter part was really more what I was talking about. Jehovah's Witnesses and some others subscribe to annihilationism, which is not Biblical at all, and I think you agree with that.

Of course I agree with that.

Okay, well, I disagree. I don't think it would be a long explanation, but again I would say, just to make it very short, our God is a consuming fire.

Yes, He is, but 2 Peter 3:10-12 is not about that. It's about God burning up the current heavens and earth and renewing them which will result in the new heavens and new earth.

Okay, yes, I understand. I don't. :) Again, making it short, I'll go to Revelation 21. There, in verse 5, God does not say, "Behold I am making all new things," but rather, "Behold, I am making all things new."

Right. He is going to make the current heavens and earth new. How else will He do that if not by literal fire? How else will He get rid of the all the wicked things on earth besides burning them up?

I agree, but not in the way that you mean that. Even if you reject it, hopefully you can understand what I'm saying... what I believe Scripture to be saying. It's no less literal, just quite different in nature.

Can you explain to me exactly what you think will happen in the future that will result in the new heavens and new earth? At this point, I'm not sure what it is that you believe exactly. Are you a postmillennialist?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I proved you were wrong, "Nominative Plural Feminine"

There is no interpretation from me just the fact that the word is plural. It's KINGDOMS not kingdom.

Do you think it helps your case when you completely ignore arguments that refute your beliefs? Let me try again.

That same word is used in the following verses which I'm quoting from the KJV:

Matthew 3:2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom G932 of heaven is at hand.

Should this say "the kingdoms of heaven"?

Matthew 6:10 Thy kingdom G932 come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.

Should this say "thy kingdoms come"?

Mark 10:23 And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom G932 of God!

Should this say "the kingdoms of God"?

Luke 17:20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom G932 of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom G932 of God cometh not with observation:

Should this say "the kingdoms of God"?

John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom G932 is not of this world: if my kingdom G932 were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom G932 not from hence.

Did Jesus actually say "My kingdoms are not of this world"?

Colossians 1:13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom G932 of his dear Son:

Should this say "the kingdoms of his dear Son"?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

No, because fire is also symbolic. You just pick and choose what is or is not literal, to make a point. Birds eating the carcasses of dead humans is as literal as fire is. You can't just yell "figurative" to prove your point.

You are the one claiming Revelation is all symbolic, until you need something to be literal. At least some posters are consistently literal, even if it seems literally impossible.

LOL! Your nonsense is truly hilarious. None of us interpret everything in the book symbolically and none of us take it all literally. But, you're acting as if everyone either interprets it all literally or all figuratively.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Except the verse I quoted that has kingdoms in the plural.

Rev 5:10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

There will be many kings reigning over various kingdoms on the Earth during the Millennium. Interpreting scripture with scripture does not appear to be something you have any interest in.

You need to work on figuring out which translation is best in cases like this. I've noticed you are not good at that at all.

This is a better translation of that verse:

Revelation 5:10 You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God, and they will reign on the earth.”

We are part of one kingdom, not multiple kingdoms, with Jesus as our King. And it will always be the case that we are all together part of one kingdom. So, this verse is accurate and doesn't potentially lead to conclusions that contradict other scripture. This translation lines up with other scripture like this:

1 Peter 2:9 But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.

Notice that we are a royal priesthood. Singular. The way you interpret Revelation 5:10 would suggest that there are or will be multiple royal priesthoods, but there is just one that we (Christians) are all part of.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Except you claim fire will literally burn them to death which makes you a hypocrite.

How so? Don't make a claim like this without explaining what you mean.

A sword is not symbolic of fire. You just want to insert fire into the text due to doctrinal bias. That is known as eisegesis.

The sword in this case symbolizes destruction. But, it doesn't symbolize what causes the destruction exactly. Why can't you understand that symbols don't have to resemble what they symbolize in reality? Do you think Satan looks like a dragon with seven heads and ten horns in reality? I'm sure you don't. So, why does what literally causes the destruction at Christ's return have to resemble the destruction that would be caused by a literal sword?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

30. Did the reign with Christ and the saints becoming kings and priests occur at the cross?

Revelation 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

"and shall reign" is in the future tense and this was written decades after the cross. Amillennialism often teaches this reign as priests happened at the cross but that violates the future tense John uses proving the reign with Christ could not have started at the cross. It is a future event which validates the Premillennial understanding of this reign.

As usual, you draw conclusions from one isolated verse without taking other scripture into account. Compare Revelation 20:6 to this passage:

Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, 6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

This passage describes Jesus Christ in present tense as "the prince of the kings of the earth". That means He had been reigning already when John wrote that long ago. Why would you not take this into account when interpreting Revelation 20:6?

And then notice how it says that Jesus "hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father". That means He had already made His people priests of God and of Christ before John wrote the book. Why do you not take that into account when interpreting Revelation 20:6?

When Revelation 20:6 says they "shall reign" it's not saying that they will reign at some point in the future. It's saying they reign and will continue to reign during the thousand years. It should be understood in the same way that the word is used in Revelation 5:10.

Revelation 5:10 You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God, and they will reign on the earth.”

Notice that it indicates that believers had already been "made" into "a kingdom and priests to serve our God". With that being the case, why would their reign not begin until a future time? That makes no sense. So, when it says they "shall reign" or "will reign", it means they are reigning and will continue to reign.

 

[PinSeeker]

He isn't currently bound and even years after the cross he was described as unbound:

1Pe_5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour...

No offense intended, EWQ, but this is a conflation of two very different things. I understand and respect your position on it, though. You're certainly not alone in thinking that, but, well, neither am I in my position. Satan is able to influence and deceive individuals with nations, but not the nations themselves; he is bound from doing that. We can keep going back and forth on this, but I suggest we not. :)

PinSeeker: Right, and this is the first resurrection. It is happening to individuals over the course of the millennium.
No, that happens in the future in Revelation 20.

Okay, again, I understand your position. I agree that it happens in Revelation 20, in verses 4 through 6. But that is happening now, as the saints ~ all believers ~ are coming to Christ, being placed in Him, and thus reigning with Him. This first resurrection ~ spiritual in nature ~ is also described vividly by Paul in Ephesians 2:5-6, where we, individually, at our appointed time, "even when we were dead in our trespasses, were made alive together with Christ and raised up with Him and seated with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus." As Paul says elsewhere, "...sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned..." (Romans 5:12) "...Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life... So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus... present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life" (Romans 6).

Satan is free and deceiving most of the world, which in turn is persecuting and killing much of the Church.

Right, but, individuals, not the nations. In the days of the ancient Israelites, he was able to deceive the nations, but Jesus came and bound Him from doing that, just as He said in Matthew 12:28-29. Jesus is plundering Satan's house, now. God's building of Israel is in progress and will one day be complete, when the fullness of the Gentiles has been brought in and the partial hardening of Israel has been removed. In this way, Paul says, all Israel will be saved.

Look around at this evil world. Christ and his saints aren't ruling at all, let alone with a rod of iron. The Millennium is future, after Christ returns and rules for real.

Christ is ruling from heaven now; this is His millennial reign. For real. :) Is Christ not your King, EWQ? Even right now? He is, and mine. In sitting at the right hand of God, Jesus sits on the “throne of his father David” (Luke 1:26–33). He is the Messiah of Israel, “the highest of the kings of the earth” and the fulfillment of the Lord’s promise to keep the offspring of David on the throne forever (Ps. 89:19–37). We are not waiting for Jesus to enter into His messianic reign, He enjoys it now. All of His enemies are being put under His feet as His gospel is preached and His kingdom expands (1 Cor. 15:20–28). Even now, Jesus is seated on the throne of His father David at the right hand of God. This means that He is ruler over all and that the kings of the earth rule only according to His sovereign permission. As such, Christ alone is worthy of our highest allegiance, and it is to Him that we must render obedience, even if it means, at times, defying the rulers of this world. Jesus’ kingdom alone is eternal, and His rule is above all others.

That isn't happening now. The church is shrinking, and the world more and more lawless. We might be close to the Great Tribulation.

Hm, well, we are all enduring tribulation (trials of all kinds, as James puts it) in this present age. I do agree that there will be a great "ramping up" near the end of the age, and yes, we may be very close to it. But "shrinking"... that depends on what you mean by the church. :)

• The visible church, which is made up of those who profess to be Christians, is shrinking in the sense that, as John puts it, those who are going out from us (born-again Christians) are proving that they were not of us: "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us" (1 John 2:19).

• But God is still building His Church, which is invisible, made up of true, heart-regenerate Christians (only God sees and knows the heart) and one day His Israel will be complete. What Paul said at the end of Ephesians 2 has been and will continue to be true all the way up to Christ's triumphant return: "In (Christ we) also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.

Nope. He is still waiting for that time.

The wise men were not mistaken in thinking Jesus was "born king of the Jews," as they had "(seen) His star when it rose and (came) to worship him” (Matthew 2:2). Nathanael was not mistaken when he encountered Jesus in person and acknowledged Him as "the King of Israel" (John 1:49). And ~ perish the thought ~ Christ Jesus was not somehow mistaken when replied in the affirmative to Pontius Pilate's question ("Are you a king?" ~ Matthew 27, Mark 13, Luke 23, John 18). We, EWQ, along with Jesus, are waiting for the consummation of the kingdom, which will happen on Christ's return, after the Judgment.

Years after the cross and still Paul knew not yet all things were under him.

Sure. It's a work in progress.

Go ahead and try to prove a parallel between Revelation 13 and Revelation 20. I will point out the many errors that will be there.

Sure, you've already decided what your conclusion will be. No, thanks. But they're there... :)

No. The first resurrection starts and ends before the Millennium even begins according to Revelation 20.

Nope. See above.

The first resurrection is the dead resurrecting physically, not people being born again.

Again: respect your opinion, but the physical resurrection is the second resurrection, which is, depending on the person, a

That is the second resurrection which is for the unsaved dead.

No, it's physical and general, for all the ones who have died physically ~ "And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne..." This is the gathering for the Judgment, which immediately follows, where all are "judged, each one of them, according to what they (have) done." This is the event that Jesus describes in Matthew 25, where:

• the ones on His right are told, "Come, you who are blessed by My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world" (Matthew 25:34), just as the thief on the cross to the right of His is told, "Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise" (Luke 23:43)

• the ones on His left are told, "Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels" (Matthew 25:43), just as the thief on the cross to the left of Jesus's is... not told what the thief on His right was ~ the silence is deafening. :)

But backtracking just a bit to just before the Judgment, as Jesus Himself says, "Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment" (John 5:28-29)

You have it all wrong.

And I would say the same right back to you. Not all, as in not completely, but, well, in the same sense as you mean it.

Being born again happened before being killed or dying.

Now see, this I agree with. In being born again, we are raised from death in sin to life in Jesus. It is a resurrection. Let me ask you this: Do you believe the Gospel to be both now and not yet?

After that, a resurrection is a bodily resurrection.

And this I agree with, too, and will happen when Jesus returns.

The text is not on your side.

What a strange thing to say, when I just agreed with you...

This age is not the Millennium. It will be the next age, a thousand years without satan interference.

Ah. Yes, this age is God's millennium. The next age is eternity, the age to come. God's millennium, in which He is building His church, precedes eternity... the present age.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

He isn't currently bound and even years after the cross he was described as unbound:

1Pe_5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

Why did you stop quoting Peter there?

1 Peter 5:8 Be alert and of sober mind. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour. 9 Resist him, standing firm in the faith, because you know that the family of believers throughout the world is undergoing the same kind of sufferings.

What happens when we resist him?

James 4:7 Submit yourselves, then, to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.

If we resist him and stand firm in the faith then he will flee from us. Was this true in Old Testament times? No, it was not. It's true in NT times because we have the Holy Spirit dwelling in us. He knows that he can't do anything against those who are trusting in the Holy Spirit to lead and guide them and help them withstand his attacks. This relates to his binding. He is not able to do anything against those who walk in the Spirit and resist him while "standing firm in the faith".

This age is not the Millennium. It will be the next age, a thousand years without satan interference.

Does your understanding of this age and the age to come line up with what Jesus taught?

Luke 20:34 Jesus replied, “The people of this age marry and are given in marriage. 35 But those who are considered worthy of taking part in the age to come and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, 36 and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God’s children, since they are children of the resurrection.

Jesus taught that in this age people get married and they die. He indicated that the resurrection from the dead will occur at the end of this age. And He indicated that in the age to come people will no get married or die anymore. Yet, you have people dying in the age to come. Why do you not establish your doctrine about this age and the age to come on what Jesus taught about that?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

31. Is the beast of Revelation 13 from the distant past and has already been defeated?

Amillennialism sometimes teaches that the events of Revelation 13 are from the past yet how is that possibly true when we see the same beast and false prophet from Revelation 13 in Revelation 19 which most Amillennialists believe to be the future second coming? Has the beast and false prophet been ruling the world since Ad 70? If so, how can they have so much power in a time when satan is supposedly bound and imprisoned since Ad 33?

The truth is that the events of Revelation 13 with the beast and false prophet are roughly 42 months prior to the events of the last half of Revelation 19, the second coming. Revelation 13 is not the past.

Amillennialism has no answer as to why the Revelation 13 beast is destroyed at the second coming. It proves the events of Revelation 13 occur just prior to the second coming.

First, you talk about something that only some Amillennialists believe, but then later you make the blanket statement that "Amillennialism has no answer as to why the Revelation 13 beast is destroyed at the second coming.". In fairness to the rest of us, you should make it clear throughout your post that you're only referring to something that some Amils (partial preterists in particular) believe.

 

[ewq1938]

Do you think it helps your case when you completely ignore arguments that refute your beliefs? Let me try again.

Bah. You responded to 6 things today that I posted. Do you think I have time to respond to each? Pick one topic and I will reply. There is nothing that I cannot refute in regard to any Amillennialism proof texts.

 

[PinSeeker]

PinSeeker: Well I did elaborate on the out-of-context thing. As I said, the destruction is in the sense of ruination (not obliteration or a wiping from existence), and, well, as you probably know, our God is a consuming fire, and fire, throughout the Bible, is symbolic of God's righteous judgment. This latter part was really more what I was talking about. Jehovah's Witnesses and some others subscribe to annihilationism, which is not Biblical at all, and I think you agree with that.

Of course I agree with that.

Good. Cool.

Yes, He is, but 2 Peter 3:10-12 is not about that. It's about God burning up the current heavens and earth and renewing them which will result in the new heavens and new earth.

Well, except for the way you apparently mean "burning up," I agree. :) Verse 7 says "...by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly." The heavens and the earth being "stored up" is the same as their "being kept," and they are being stored up "for fire," which is the same as " judgment and destruction (ruin)" of the ungodly. It absolutely is about that; our God is a consuming fire. Now, "the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved," as verse 10 says, but, continuing with verse 10, "the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed," meaning there will be nowhere for the evil to hide themselves or their evil works; everyone will know them for who they are.

Right. He is going to make the current heavens and earth new. How else will He do that if not by literal fire?

Literal fire does not make new, it destroys. Again, our God is a consuming fire. God will make new by removing sin, the same as He makes us a new creation ~ "if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come" (2 Corinthians 5:17) ~ when we are born again, even having been previously dead in our sin.

How else will He get rid of the all the wicked things on earth besides burning them up?

What do you mean by "wicked things," SI? Things, in and of themselves, are not wicked. What he "gets rid of" are the wicked, and they... obediently... depart. We see this in what Jesus Himself says Matthew 7:21-23 and Matthew 25:41-46.

Can you explain to me exactly what you think will happen in the future that will result in the new heavens and new earth? At this point, I'm not sure what it is that you believe exactly.

Other than what is in Scripture, no. It will be far greater than we can imagine, I think. But I kind of think everything will look pretty much the same, actually. But it will be much different, of course. I think we have a glimpse of this in what the world looked like before the events of Genesis 3. But I don't think that means there will be no buildings or roads or houses or... clothes... :) I guess none of us can really imagine a world without sin, but that it will be.

Are you a postmillennialist?

No. I'm in the amillennialist camp... although I don't really like that term, because it seems to insinuate (by the 'a' prefix) that we think there is no millennium. I'm not sure how long ago, but at some point, folks started referring to this camp as the nunc-millennial camp (the 'nunc' prefix means now, or current). This is the conversation I've been having with ewq, if you've been following.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[ewq1938]

No offense intended, EWQ, but this is a conflation of two very different things. I understand and respect your position on it, though. You're certainly not alone in thinking that, but, well, neither am I in my position. Satan is able to influence and deceive individuals with nations, but not the nations themselves; he is bound from doing that.

Such a distinction is not found in Revelation 20. The nations cannot be deceived while satan is imprisoned. You say they can be but in a limited fashion which, again, is non-biblical.

Okay, again, I understand your position. I agree that it happens in Revelation 20, in verses 4 through 6. But that is happening now

No, it's not happening now. The dead in Christ remain dead until the second coming when the bodily resurrection happens. What is happening now, is that people are accepting the gospel and are being born again. You are conflating physical resurrection with spiritual re-birth.

Right, but, individuals, not the nations.

Same thing. Nations do not exist if there are no individuals. The word is ethnos anyways which means ethnic people ie: RACE, not nations as in governments.

G1484
ἔθνος
ethnos
eth'-nos
Probably from G1486; a race (as of the same habit), that is, a tribe; specifically a foreign (non-Jewish) one (usually by implication pagan): - Gentile, heathen, nation, people.
Total KJV occurrences: 164

In the days of the ancient Israelites, he was able to deceive the nations, but Jesus came and bound Him from doing that

No, he didn't do that. Even Revelation 20 makes clear an angel does this not Christ.

Christ is ruling from heaven now; this is His millennial reign.

No, Christ said after he left that satan was coming as the ruler of the world. That is the reality now and since the ascension and will only end when Christ returns.

For real. :) Is Christ not your King, EWQ? Even right now?

He is not the King over the world right now.

The wise men were not mistaken in thinking Jesus was "born king of the Jews," as they had "(seen) His star when it rose and (came) to worship him” (Matthew 2:2). Nathanael was not mistaken when he encountered Jesus in person and acknowledged Him as "the King of Israel" (John 1:49). And ~ perish the thought ~ Christ Jesus was not somehow mistaken when replied in the affirmative to Pontius Pilate's question ("Are you a king?" ~ Matthew 27, Mark 13, Luke 23, John 18).

His contextual answer was "No".

Joh 18:33 Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews?
Joh 18:34 Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?
Joh 18:35 Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?
Joh 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Again: respect your opinion, but the physical resurrection is the second resurrection, which is, depending on the person,

Both the first resurrection and the second of Revelation 20 are physical. Before physical death is the possibility of spiritual re-birth but not after physical death as you are claiming.

No, it's physical and general, for all the ones who have died physically ~ "And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne..." This is the gathering for the Judgment

They had already had a physical resurrection but are still called the dead because they are all spiritually dead and going to the lake of fire. The saved were resurrection a thousand years before this.

, which immediately follows, where all are "judged, each one of them, according to what they (have) done." This is the event that Jesus describes in Matthew 25, where:

• the ones on His right are told, "Come, you who are blessed by My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world" (Matthew 25:34), just as the thief on the cross to the right of His is told, "Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise" (Luke 23:43)

And that happens at the second coming.

• the ones on His left are told, "Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels" (Matthew 25:43), just as the thief on the cross to the left of Jesus's is... not told what the thief on His right was ~ the silence is deafening. :)

And that happens at the Great White Throne Judgement (GWTJ).

But backtracking just a bit to just before the Judgment, as Jesus Himself says, "Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment" (John 5:28-29)

All will hear his voice but not at the same time. Revelation 20 is clear about people living and then "the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished" proving two resurrections separated by a thousand years. Amillennialism avoids this like the plague.

Now see, this I agree with. In being born again, we are raised from death in sin to life in Jesus. It is a resurrection. Let me ask you this: Do you believe the Gospel to be both now and not yet?

No, no one believes that. This is a strawman fallacy.

Ah. Yes, this age is God's millennium.

Obviously it is not. The Millennium is a time of peace devoid of satan. What today is is the times preceding the Great Tribulation when the world is in a horrible state, lawless and ruled only by the wicked.