Amil, Premil, poster list

[Marty fox]

No, of course not. New Jerusalem is BOTH in heaven and on earth. The souls of the dead in Christ are in heaven now and we obviously are here on earth now. Those of us in the church on earth are the "camp of the saints" that experiences opposition everywhere we are in the world because the world hates us, as Jesus said it would. But, both Jesus and Paul spoke of a time when the amount of deception and wickedness and opposition to the church would increase significantly before Jesus returns.

Yes amen this is exactually how I see it too.

 

[grafted branch]

Yes, it WAS beloved LONG ago, but it was no longer beloved when the book of Revelation was written. So, Revelation 20:9 can only be referring to the new heavenly Jerusalem.

Well maybe the literal city of Jerusalem was beloved in heaven but not beloved on earth, just like new Jerusalem can be in both heaven and earth at the same time.

 

[Marty fox]

Ok, so how do you explain new Jerusalem being in heaven while the unsaved surround it? Are you going to go down the same road SI took and claim it is in both heaven and earth at the same time?

Yes because saints are both in heaven and on earth now.

Rev 21 is after the end of our world when we come together in one place

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Well maybe the literal city of Jerusalem was beloved in heaven but not beloved on earth, just like new Jerusalem can be in both heaven and earth at the same time.

Are you now going to insist on making a fool of yourself instead of allowing Marty and I to explain this to you first before you say nonsense like this?

 

[Marty fox]

Well maybe the literal city of Jerusalem was beloved in heaven but not beloved on earth, just like new Jerusalem can be in both heaven and earth at the same time.

It wasn't beloved in 70AD

Think about this God doesn't love or hate literal Jerusalem because literal Jerusalem is buildings its the people of Jerusalem God is talking about

Matthew 23
37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing. 38 Look, your house is left to you desolate.

So is the New Jerusalem a literal city of the saints?

 

[Marty fox]

The new heavenly Jerusalem is not just in heaven. It is "the bride, the Lamb's wife" (Revelation 21:9). It's a symbolic representation of the church. Do you have something against symbolism? I can't understand your trouble with this.

Have you never read this:

Hebrews 12:18 You have not come to a mountain that can be touched and that is burning with fire; to darkness, gloom and storm; 19 to a trumpet blast or to such a voice speaking words that those who heard it begged that no further word be spoken to them, 20 because they could not bear what was commanded: “If even an animal touches the mountain, it must be stoned to death.” 21 The sight was so terrifying that Moses said, “I am trembling with fear.” 22 But you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, 23 to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the Judge of all, to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, 24 to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.

Can you see here how this says we HAVE COME "to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem...to the church of the firstborn"? That's present tense. We haven't literally gone to the new heavenly Jerusalem in heaven, but we are spiritually part of it even now. Make sense? So, the symbolic depiction of it being surrounded in Revelation 20 is simply a reference to opposition and persecution of the church happening worldwide before Jesus returns. Which lines up with other scripture as well.

Well said great post

 

[grafted branch]

So is the New Jerusalem a literal city of the saints?

No, I don’t believe it’s a literal city. That’s why I don’t think it’s possible for the unbelievers to surround it by going up on the breadth of the earth.

 

[Marty fox]

No, I don’t believe it’s a literal city. That’s why I don’t think it’s possible for the unbelievers to surround it by going up on the breadth of the earth.

It means that the ungodly world of people are all around us. Were not secluded together separated from other people

 

[grafted branch]

It means that the ungodly world of people are all around us. Were not secluded together separated from other people

In order for your view of the unsaved surrounding the camp of the saints to work, you would have to show a time when the unsaved were not surrounding the camp and make the distinction of what the difference is between when they do surround and when they don’t surround it. And also it would be helpful if you could identify what going up on the breadth of the earth is, and what the difference is before and after this event.

These are easily explained by the 70AD surrounding of literal Jerusalem.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Amillennialism: A Word Direct From The Scriptures!

 

[Marty fox]

In order for your view of the unsaved surrounding the camp of the saints to work, you would have to show a time when the unsaved were not surrounding the camp and make the distinction of what the difference is between when they do surround and when they don’t surround it. And also it would be helpful if you could identify what going up on the breadth of the earth is, and what the difference is before and after this event.

These are easily explained by the 70AD surrounding of literal Jerusalem.

Think of Noah.

The book of Genesis shows how the linage of Seth was many and faithful to God generation after generation and over time it all dwindled down to just one man Noah. Thus Noah was the camp of God people (the person He loved) who was surround by the people of the world.

This is how it will be as we also see now happening today as many of the church are conforming to the ways of the world. As time goes by the camp of Gods people the faithful will become less and less surrounded by the increasing people of world.

The reason for the flood that destroyed the world will be the same reason for the fire that will destroy the world the conforming church

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

In order for your view of the unsaved surrounding the camp of the saints to work, you would have to show a time when the unsaved were not surrounding the camp and make the distinction of what the difference is between when they do surround and when they don’t surround it. And also it would be helpful if you could identify what going up on the breadth of the earth is, and what the difference is before and after this event.

These are easily explained by the 70AD surrounding of literal Jerusalem.

That was not a surrounding of saints. The saints fled Jerusalem as Jesus instructed them to do. That was a surrounding of the camp of the antichrists who were killed by God's wrath that the Roman armies carried out. Your thinking on this is all out of whack. Completely. You have been deceived by false preterist doctrine.

 

[grafted branch]

Think of Noah.

The book of Genesis shows how the linage of Seth was many and faithful to God generation after generation and over time it all dwindled down to just one man Noah. Thus Noah was the camp of God people (the person He loved) who was surround by the people of the world.

But the big difference between Seth to the time of Noah and the millennium is that Satan wasn’t bound during that time. I would think there should be a very distinct difference between when Satan is bound and when he isn’t.

Are you thinking it’s going to be some kind of gradual transition to the time Satan is loosed, so that it’s not something that can be easily quantified?

This is how it will be as we also see now happening today as many of the church are conforming to the ways of the world. As time goes by the camp of Gods people the faithful will become less and less surrounded by the increasing people of world.

This has been going on since the churches first got started. The warnings in Revelation chapters 2 and 3 testify to this.

When I look back at some of the false predictions, like Harold Camping, about how the church had gone apostate and how Satan was already loosed, I have to be cautious because so many people in the past have fallen victim to the idea that we are currently in some kind of downward spiral that’s vastly different than anything that’s happened in the past.

Personally I have to trust the scripture and compare them to historical events and current events. Satans little season fits historical events in a much more precise manner than current events.

The camp of the saints referring to the church kinda fits but there is no demarcation between when the church wasn’t surrounded and when it was. And with no real definition of what going up on the breadth of the earth means, it seems to me there would be no way to definitively know if Satan was loosed or not. This is how people like Harold Camping could deceive others.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Think of Noah.

The book of Genesis shows how the linage of Seth was many and faithful to God generation after generation and over time it all dwindled down to just one man Noah. Thus Noah was the camp of God people (the person He loved) who was surround by the people of the world.

This is how it will be as we also see now happening today as many of the church are conforming to the ways of the world. As time goes by the camp of Gods people the faithful will become less and less surrounded by the increasing people of world.

The reason for the flood that destroyed the world will be the same reason for the fire that will destroy the world the conforming church

Excellent analogy. I hope he understands it and how it relates to the church today. Right now his view of Revelation 20:7-9 contradicts much scripture and he's not seeing that so far.

 

[grafted branch]

That was not a surrounding of saints. The saints fled Jerusalem as Jesus instructed them to do. That was a surrounding of the camp of the antichrists who were killed by God's wrath that the Roman armies carried out. Your thinking on this is all out of whack. Completely. You have been deceived by false preterist doctrine.

I thought we went over this once before but in Deuteronomy 33:2-3 Moses blessed the children of Israel and collectively called all of them saints. The word saints can be referring to the tribes of Israel as a group.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I thought we went over this once before but in Deuteronomy 33:2-3 Moses blessed the children of Israel and collectively called all of them saints. The word saints can be referring to the tribes of Israel as a group.

I don't recall that, but maybe we did. I've had so many discussion with many people on these forums that I can't possibly remember all of them.

Anyway, are we talking about a verse in the Old Testament or New Testament here? New Testament, right? Do you think all of Israel would be called the camp of the saints at any point after Jesus verbally ripped Israelites like the Pharisees and scribes to shreds in Matthew 23? You really think Israel, in its state after that with Jesus having rendered their temple spiritually desolate, would be referred to as "the camp of the saints"? You think the people who Jesus called hypocrites, blind guides, fools and blind, serpents and vipers would be called "the camp of the saints" in Revelation 20? No chance of that at all.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I thought we went over this once before but in Deuteronomy 33:2-3 Moses blessed the children of Israel and collectively called all of them saints. The word saints can be referring to the tribes of Israel as a group.

You acknowledge that we are part of the new Jerusalem now, right? But, for some inexplicable reason, you seemed incredulous at the idea of the new Jerusalem being on earth and heaven at the same time. Why? Are the souls of the dead in Christ in heaven not also part of the new Jerusalem now? Of course they are. So, with the new Jerusalem being the church (the bride, the Lamb's wife - Rev 21:9), how can you have a problem with saying it is both in heaven and on earth now?

 

[grafted branch]

No chance of that at all.

Yes chance of that. Are you forgetting that in Galatians 2:9 it was agreed that John was to go to the circumcision (Old Testament saints).

 

[grafted branch]

You acknowledge that we are part of the new Jerusalem now, right? But, for some inexplicable reason, you seemed incredulous at the idea of the new Jerusalem being on earth and heaven at the same time. Why? Are the souls of the dead in Christ in heaven not also part of the new Jerusalem now? Of course they are. So, with the new Jerusalem being the church (the bride, the Lamb's wife - Rev 21:9), how can you have a problem with saying it is both in heaven and on earth now?

Well I’m in new Jerusalem right now and I know there’s not two of them.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Yes chance of that. Are you forgetting that in Galatians 2:9 it was agreed that John was to go to the circumcision (Old Testament saints).

I don't understand what you're saying here. Can you explain?

Galatians 2:6 As for those who were held in high esteem—whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not show favoritism—they added nothing to my message. 7 On the contrary, they recognized that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the uncircumcised,[a] just as Peter had been to the circumcised.[b] 8 For God, who was at work in Peter as an apostle to the circumcised, was also at work in me as an apostle to the Gentiles. 9 James, Cephas[c] and John, those esteemed as pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcised.

All Paul was saying in verse 9 here was that he and Barnabas would go preach to the Gentiles while James, Cephas/Peter and John would preach to the Jews. What does this have to do with anything as it relates to Revelation 20:9?