Which Millennium is better? Amil's or Premil's proposed millennium?

[Davidpt]

You misunderstood Zechariah 14 again. You are working too hard to try to twist Zechariah 14 into Second Coming because you like to believe there will be some mountains being literally divided when Christ returns with his Saints. But it is not what the Word for God talked about! Please read carefully in context:

Zec 14:3-8
(3) Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
(4) And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.
(5) And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.
(6) And it shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear, nor dark:
(7) But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass, that at evening time it shall be light.
(8) And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.

This is STILL talking about the FIRST COMING. So you need to understand that the Bible is a SPIRITUAL BOOK, not a seismologist's ledger. God is not interested in splitting literal mountains, except to make the point about the cleaving of the KINGDOM that a way be made for the remnant of the fallen Old Testament congregation into the New Testament congregation to start the great commission. Selah! Read again:

Zechariah 14:4
(4) And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.

Mat 17:20
(20) And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.

Casting out devils is associated with Matthew 17 because it is a kingdom He Christ spoiled, bound Satan so that He might free the captivity of Israel. The faith of Christ moves this mountain, and the mountain in view is not physical, but a spiritual one! Have you forgotten that the mountains in God's Word represent Kingdoms? And the kingdom that was removed by the faith of Christ was the one that suffered violence, and that the violence took by force. This kingdom was split in two, making a valley that a way could be made for the remnant of the fallen Old Testament congregation to escape into the New Testament congregation to start their great commission! The destruction of the kingdom (mountain) cast into the sea creates a valley that God's people therein might escape. This was fulfilled in Christ Jesus by His Faithfulness and His cross. This is how the Saints is being added to the Lord, but it is not the Second Coming yet. And you need to read in verse 8 where the Holy Spirit went forth from the Cross to the Old Testament (former sea) and New Testament (hinder sea). Obviously not talking about the Second Coming, dude!

The least you could do, rather than avoid, is answer the question I asked about Jude 1:14-15. Do you agree or disagree that the 2nd coming in the end of this age is in view? This is important the fact Zechariah 14:5 records this same exact event. IOW, you can't have one passage involving a coming the other passage isn't involving. They are both involving the same coming. Based on how you are interpreting the coming meant in Zechariah 14:5, that it is involving the 1st coming, would mean for you to remain consistent you need to apply the coming meant in Jude 1:14-15 in the same manner, that it is a first coming prophecy not a 2nd coming prophecy. Do you then take Jude 1:14-15 to be involving the 1st coming rather than the 2nd coming?

 

[TribulationSigns]

The least you could do, rather than avoid, is answer the question I asked about Jude 1:14-15. Do you agree or disagree that the 2nd coming in the end of this age is in view? This is important the fact Zechariah 14:5 records this same exact event. IOW, you can't have one passage involving a coming the other passage isn't involving. They are both involving the same coming. Based on how you are interpreting the coming meant in Zechariah 14:5, that it is involving the 1st coming, would mean for you to remain consistent you need to apply the coming meant in Jude 1:14-15 in the same manner, that it is a first coming prophecy not a 2nd coming prophecy. Do you then take Jude 1:14-15 to be involving the 1st coming rather than the 2nd coming?

Let's do a context test - something you should have done first.

Jud 1:5
(5) I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.

Do you understand what this verse talk about?

Jud 1:6
(6) And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

What angels are they? When did they lose the first estate? What first estate? What habitation did they left? When will the judgment of the great day? Does the verse strictly talk all about the Second Coming only?

Jud 1:9
(9) Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.

When did Michael the archangel (Jesus Christ) had discussion with the devil over the body of Moses? Second Coming?

Jud 1:11
(11) Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.|

Talking about Second Coming here?

Jud 1:13
(13) Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.

When was the ragiv waves of the sea? Before the stars (messengers) were reserved for the blackness of darkness for ever

Do you see the theme in Jude? Jude is mentioned throughout the timeline, but yes Jude 1:14-15 specifically discusses the Second Coming and Judgment Day. What connection does this have to Zechariah 14? Just because the verses sound similar, it doesn’t mean they are referring to the Second Coming. Additionally, the mention of the divided mountain and the pouring of the Holy Spirit on both sides of the Cross doesn’t prove that the passage is about the Second Coming.

 

[Timtofly]

Pulpit Commentary



Verse 16. - And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon; or, as in the Revised Version, they gathered; that is, the "spirits" of ver. 14, of which this is a continuation, the same verb συνάγω being repeated.

Most translations are then wrong in your assessment? You and I are commentaries commenting.

Most translations give a full break, as if there is no continuation of thought from verse 14 to verse 16.

Even in Ezekiel 29 and 38, we see 2 seperate times God puts "hooks" in the jaws of nations.

That these spirits are "hooks", even coming out of these 3 individuals, is still God working in the hearts and minds, including Satan's will.

In fact, I would not even say these are literal spirits, but symbolize God's will working from the top down.

"out of the mouth of the dragon"

You would not say there is a literal dragon, but this represents Satan fully involved in human government, and was calling the shots during the previous 42 months before Armageddon.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Why would I be doing that, though? Maybe because you have done something similar to that to me in the past, insisted I was misrepresenting your view even though I wasn't. IOW, if you can dish it out you should be able to take it as well.

LOL. How would you even know for sure if you were misrepresenting my view or not? Do you think you know my view even better than I do? You absolutely do not. And you absolutely HAVE misrepresented my view a number of times. I'm not saying you've done it on purpose, but you certainly have done it.

I fully understand, that in your mind, if any of these things are post the 2nd coming, this would indicate we have to take these things pertaining to animal sacrificing in the literal sense in that case. But even so, I don't interpret it to mean that since it is nonsensical that animal sacrificing would resume post the 2nd coming even if there is a millennium after the 2nd coming.

That's fine. Some premils do believe that and some don't. My point is that if you interpret it literally, it implies animal sacrifices because keeping the feast of tabernacles literally would entail performing animal sacrifices. So, can you tell me what you think it means in a figurative sense then? I've never seen you even attempt to explain how it can be interpreted in a figurative or spiritual sense. This is like how you interpret Matthew 24:15-21. You tell me it can't be taken literally, but then you can't explain how it should be interpreted any other way. I can't take that seriously.

Therefore, assuming there is a millennium that follows the 2nd coming it won't be involving literal animal sacrificing, period. What some of that might look like if not meaning in a literal sense, that I can't tell you. Too bad none of this can fit the current age somehow instead.

How would you know it can't fit? If it can fit in a figurative or spiritual futurist sense then why can't it fit in a figurative or spiritual ongoing (New Testament era) sense. You can't say something like that if you can't even explain how it can fit in a future millennial age. So, please do that.

That would solve the problem if it could. It simply can't because until Zechariah 14:12 is fulfilled, verses 16-19 can't be fulfilled in the meantime.

Why would you use an undeniabley difficult passage like Zechariah 14 as part of the primary foundation of your doctrine instead of more clear, straightforward passages? I truly don't understand that at all. If Zechariah 14:16-19 is yet to be fulfilled, then tell me how it will be fulfilled.

It is ludricrous that Zechariah 14:12 has already been fulfilled, in any sense.

Why is that? I could only see that as being the case if it was meant to be interpreted literally. Why would that be the case if it was meant to be interpreted figuratively or spiritually instead?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

If things were initiually hidden in the OT and revealed in the NT, and that this basically is your position, you are being just as unreasonable as @WPM is if you are insisting that unless the OT said these things outright, then it can't be so. IOW, it contradicts that you expect things to be hidden in the OT then revealed in the NT, lol.

I'm not saying it has to say those things outright. It just has to say those things in some way. Can you prove that it does? Or are you just interested in making claims that you can't back up? You are the one claiming that Zechariah 14 supports premil, so you should be able to back that up.

If verses 16-19 are meaning post the 2nd coming, and the fact they can be punished for not complying, this implies a possible rebellion eventually unless those verses are meaning forever, that it will be like that forever, these punishments hanging over their heads for failing to comply.

A possible rebellion? Revelation 20:7-9 refers to a certain rebellion that will happen. How does a possible rebellion equate to a certain rebellion? Your doctrine is based only on speculation. Where are the clear, straightforward passages that support premil? They don't exist.

But if there is a period of time after the 2nd coming, thus Revelation 20 and the millennium, that means Zechariah 14:16-19 has this future rebellion hidden in the text but then revealed in the NT.

What was hidden in the OT is revealed now, so we can see the truth in the OT now that was hidden previously. That's why I use NT scriptures to show what Daniel 9:24 is all about, for example. So, you expect me to buy the argument that premil is supported in Zechariah 14, but is just hidden in there somewhere? Why would it still be hidden now? What was hidden in the OT is revealed in the NT, so how does Zechariah 14:16-19 agree with what is taught in the NT? How exactly should Zechariah 14:16-19 be interpreted if it's meant to be interpreted in a futurist sense?

It's called Scripture interpreting Scripture.

LOL. Is that what you imagine that you're doing? As far as I can tell, you're doing nothing to show how you can use Revelation 20 or any other NT scripture to interpret Zechariah 14. Can you please do that?

For some strange reason you are demanding that the OT interprets itself without the aid of the NT,

I am doing no such thing. Your false claims add nothing to the discussion. Please show me how you can use the NT to interpret Zechariah 14:16-19. So far, you have not done that. Maybe in your own mind you have, but not in this thread.

then complaining when the OT doesn't outright do that, such as in Zechariah 14:16-19, even though your position is that things were hidden in the OT then revealed in the NT..

I'm not complaining about anything. I'm waiting for you to show me how exactly Zechariah 14:16-19. All this other nonsense is a waste of time. If you want to claim that it should be understood in a futurist sense, then show me how that can be the case.

 

[Timtofly]

That's what I tend to think might be the case as well. And if so, so much for the thinking that the lost wake up in hell upon death and are burning in literal flames of fire. They can't be burning in hell if they are going about taking possession of humans still alive on the earth. Hmmm...maybe per Amil they could? After all, Amil, for instance, has satan bound in the pit and at the same time freely roaming about on the earth.

That is not exactly how it works. The soul is in sheol in torment.

All spirits are in the presence of God, until a soul is reprobate, and then that spirit becomes a demon and has to flee God's presence. You have no connection to your spirit that is currently with all the other spirits in heaven.

In the OT when the kings of the two halves of Israel joined in battle, and the prophets were asked to give some sign of victory, they received that from spirits in the presence of God. All are spiritually dead and separated from their spirit, which seems to be a separate entity like the Father, Sin, and Holy Spirit. We are created in God's image as a trinity.

The soul has to work in agreement with both the body, and the spirit. Many claim to have control over the old man, which is this physical body of death, after one is redeemed. But then you all get hung up on OSAS and NOSAS. Why can the soul always remain saved, while the body or flesh can sometimes get the better of us? Is not the soul that is redeemed, while the body returns to dust?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

That's what I tend to think might be the case as well.

You think that "Demons are the spirits of reprobate humans both dead from the time of the Flood until today"? Seriously? You don't believe in hell then? The spirits of reprobate humans (unbelievers) go to hell when they die. They can't possess other humans.

And if so, so much for the thinking that the lost wake up in hell upon death and are burning in literal flames of fire. They can't be burning in hell if they are going about taking possession of humans still alive on the earth. Hmmm...maybe per Amil they could? After all, Amil, for instance, has satan bound in the pit and at the same time freely roaming about on the earth.

LOL. Have you ever seen an Amil claim that the spirits of unbelievers can possess living humans? I'm sure you have not. Yet, you asked that ridiculous question, anyway.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Where are billions of satanist found in Revelation 20?

Was Eve a satanist deceived by Satan?

People are deceived every day, but not all of them are satanist.

How do you know there are billions? Is that your symbolic assessment of your millennium, that it only has satanist on earth with a few believers scattered here and there?

They don't all actively and knowingly worship Satan, of course. But, there is a sense in which every unbeliever could be considered a Satanist in the sense that they all are his children (see Matthew 13:38-39).

Anyway, how many people do you think a number of people "as the sand of the sea" would be, if not billions?

Revelation 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, 8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.

 

[Timtofly]

They can't possess other humans.

They are not angels. So according to you there are no demons period in creation, or a third being other than sons of God (humanity) and the angels (stars).

All of Satan's angels have been locked up and they don't have spirits that roam about. You really don't understand what locked up means, since you have a carnel understanding of how mobsters work while incarcerated. Angels are not mob bosses on a long chain. There are Prince and powers of the air (spirit world), and they are the spirits of physically dead humans. Only the soul is in sheol. The body returns to dust, but the spirit is free whether or not that spirit can enter and leave sheol as it pleases. A person's soul cannot, and no one can control their spirit any more than unconscious bodily functions. If you had to decide everything in your body, you would go mad.

Your spirit does not reside in you, or you would be possessed with your own spirit, and that would only be if your spirit was a demon. You say orher people's spirits cannot possess a person, so neither can your spirit possess you. That is true, unless a spirit has been demonized. But God can send any spirit to you to influence your decisions.

 

[Timtofly]

They don't all actively and knowingly worship Satan, of course. But, there is a sense in which every unbeliever could be considered a Satanist in the sense that they all are his children (see Matthew 13:38-39).

Anyway, how many people do you think a number of people "as the sand of the sea" would be, if not billions?

Revelation 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, 8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.

Do you view this as concrete, without budging on the numbers?

Or is this a worse case scenario?

What if only a couple thousand actually listen to Satan, instead of a larger number?

In the Garden, 50% were deceived if you only count Adam and Eve. I count Cain and Abel, so only 25% were deceived.

The point is that before Satan is loosed no one were rebels. After Satan is loosed half of the earth could be deceived, or only 25%. Or no one at all.

Do you think Eve was forced to be deceived, or would one of Adam's offspring hundreds of years finally give into Satan's deceptions?

No one knows what could have happened in the Garden. Neither should one say they know the future. The only sure prophecy ever given was the birth of the Messiah. Most are conditional, and there is free will, despite humans declaring no one has a choice.

Why would your theology just outright condemn millions or billions to the second death just because they were born?

 

[Timtofly]

But, there is a sense in which every unbeliever could be considered a Satanist in the sense that they all are his children (see Matthew 13:38-39).

How does Satan actively proselytize humans while out of sight in a pit locked up?

Sowing seeds is the definition of proselytizing. That is why many public places declare: "No proselytizing".

You cannot say that these verses describe believers and unbelievers who are doing the proselytizing. These verses specifically state Jesus and Satan are both front and center on earth proselytizing for followers.

They cannot be children until both Jesus and Satan are on the earth together. Judas was one while both Jesus and Satan were active on the earth, when Jesus actually spoke these words while physically on the earth. Except Matthew 13 is about the Second Coming.

"The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world."

Both Jesus and Satan are physically going to be present at the end of this age. Even though you deny that very fact. They cannot be proselytizing (sowing seed) if all humanity are killed at the Second Coming.

If you have Satan bound, sowing seed is not by osmosis. Neither are the followers of Jesus by osmosis. Proselytizing is literally done in person. Satan was never bound, and has not stopped proselytizing since the very beginning in the Garden. He is just not openly active, because then people would understand that Jesus was also a literal human on earth, and not just some theological symbolism.

I know you do not question God's reality, and even Jesus as a man. The point is, that you claim something different from Matthew 13, than what Jesus actually said, as some blanket salvation experience in the NT period. Jesus did not say that He would be proselytizing from heaven and Satan from sheol during the next "x" thousand years. Jesus was not talking about a millennium reign, nor Satan's little season.

Now when Satan is loosed after the thousand years, he will be back in person proselytizing again. Proselytizing is a true point. Your interpretation of the end of the age is missing the point that Satan would be bound, after the Second Coming, not prior to the Second Coming.

You are forcing the millennium into the text of Matthew 13, while accusing pre-mill of forcing ideas into Revelation 20, which is hypocritical.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

They are not angels. So according to you there are no demons period in creation,

How could I forget that all you do is make false accusations and completely misrepresent what I believe? Not sure how I could forget what an utter waste of time it is to try to have a discussion with you. I'll try to not make that mistake again.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Do you view this as concrete, without budging on the numbers?

Or is this a worse case scenario?

What if only a couple thousand actually listen to Satan, instead of a larger number?

In the Garden, 50% were deceived if you only count Adam and Eve. I count Cain and Abel, so only 25% were deceived.

The point is that before Satan is loosed no one were rebels. After Satan is loosed half of the earth could be deceived, or only 25%. Or no one at all.

Do you think Eve was forced to be deceived, or would one of Adam's offspring hundreds of years finally give into Satan's deceptions?

No one knows what could have happened in the Garden. Neither should one say they know the future. The only sure prophecy ever given was the birth of the Messiah. Most are conditional, and there is free will, despite humans declaring no one has a choice.

Why would your theology just outright condemn millions or billions to the second death just because they were born?

Such utter nonsense. It says they number "as the sand of the sea" (Revelation 20:8). How many people do you think would number "as the sand of the sea"? Only a couple thousand? LOL.

 

[Timtofly]

Such utter nonsense. It says they number "as the sand of the sea" (Revelation 20:8). How many people do you think would number "as the sand of the sea"? Only a couple thousand? LOL.

It is the percentage. You cannot even accept that in a thousand years from now there could be a trillion humans on earth, and a couple of billion of deceived people is still a huge number to those in the first century. But only a small percentage when it happens.

The D Day invasion of Europe probably seemed like there were as many people as those sandy beaches they unloaded onto. But only a small percentage of the entire world's population.

Your interpretation seems to think all of humanity is sinful. That is not the point of people deceived after the Millennial Reign of Christ on the earth for a thousand years.