Paul claimed 3 times that Rev 20:4 was a current reality.

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

rwb

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2022
4,233
1,904
113
73
Branson
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

This proves a resurrection takes place BEFORE the thousand years starts, because the rest of the dead did not live again/come back to life when the others did. Clearly all of Rev 20 is still future because the resurrection has not occurred nor has anyone been killed for refusing the mark or worship of the image because those only can happen during the 42 month trib.

All false doctrines try to make people believe the AC isn't coming, or had already come, and same with the tribulation. This makes the coming of the false christ so easy, and makes the Apostasy able to happen and be so successful. The church is not prepared, ready or educated correctly in prophecy.

How can that be true? The martyred saints alive have already LIVED and REIGNED with Christ during this time, symbolized a thousand years. So how can a thousand years take place before the thousand years starts since these martyred souls have lived and reigned during this period?

Why must those who died in faith, already having everlasting life through Christ come to life AGAIN? The spirit in them through the Spirit from Christ gives us blessed assurance that though our flesh will die, we shall live forever!
 

Davidpt

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2023
1,448
451
83
67
East Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The dead are allowed to live again, that they may die again in the LOF that is the second death. This is the only reason the dead shall be raised to life again in an hour coming when the last trumpet sounds.

That is my position as well, Yet I tend to think we are missing something here, that the rest of the dead have an involvement in satan's little season. The question is, how so? I don't know yet. I'm guessing the OT might hold some clues, though. Such as Isaiah 24:21-22, Ezekiel 38-39. Speaking of these accounts, both Isaiah 24 and Ezekiel 38 record--and after many days shall they be visited.

Isaiah 24:21 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the LORD shall punish the host of the high ones that are on high, and the kings of the earth upon the earth.
22 And they shall be gathered together, as prisoners are gathered in the pit, and shall be shut up in the prison, and after many days shall they be visited

Ezekiel 38:8 After many days thou shalt be visited: in the latter years thou shalt come into the land that is brought back from the sword, and is gathered out of many people, against the mountains of Israel, which have been always waste: but it is brought forth out of the nations, and they shall dwell safely all of them.

Seems to me that Isaiah 24:21-22 undeniably fits Revelation 19:19-21 and Revelation 20:1-3, 7-10. And if Revelation 19:19-21 involves the 2nd coming, that obviously places what is recorded in Isaiah 24:22, post the 2nd coming. Which then means one needs to explain this post the 2nd coming---and after many days shall they be visited. Obviously, the many days meant here are meaning the thousand years, therefore, making when they are visited to be meaning at the end of satan's little season.

One can't argue that Isaiah 24:21 matches Revelation 19:19, then argue that what is recorded in Isaiah 24:22 does not follow those events. Of course what is recorded in verse 22 follows what is recorded in verse 21. How can it not? Amil then has zero explanation for the following post the 2nd coming---and after many days shall they be visited.

BTW, I don't know what it is about Amils that make them think everything can be determined from one testament alone, meaning the NT in this case, rather than both testaments together? I still tend to think, the fact a lot of things in the NT are highly compressed, thus some of the details are missing, that the missing details are recorded in the prophets in the OT. And that we just can't assume the NT alone explains everything.
 
Last edited:

PinSeeker

Well-Known Member
Oct 4, 2021
3,376
847
113
Nashville
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Why do you say the other nations besides Israel?
Because the Gospel was only revealed to the nation of Israel then; with the coming of Jesus, the Gospel was opened to all (Jew and Gentile). God allowed Satan the ability to "deceive the nations" ~ prevent the spread of the Gospel ~ in Old Testament times. Think of it terms of a "lesser Israel" ~ just Jews, with a few foreigners sprinkled in (which foreshadowed the "greater Israel" to come ~ and later, at the advent of Jesus a "greater Israel" ~ now including Jew and Gentile believers... all those who God places in Christ, ultimately an innumerable multitude of people from every tongue, tribe and nation.

Don’t you think Israel was deceived during the first advent?
Not as a nation, no; God kept that from being the case. Think of it as an "object lesson" of sorts. God showed on a lesser scale how, in His perfect faithfulness, He sustains His people to the end. So again, then, Lesser Israel, and with the coming of Jesus, Greater Israel, as per above. The same is true of God's land promise: in the Old Testament, the Promised Land was a tiny sliver of the earth on the eastern end of the Mediterranean Sea... the Lesser Promised Land. But with the coming of Jesus, the Promised Land ~ which was really always greater ~ was revealed to be the whole earth; Jesus Himself, in Matthew 5:5, said, "The meek shall inherit the earth"... the Greater Promised Land. This idea of lesser and greater is a great theme that runs in many ways ~ another example... with regard to kingship over Israel, David was the Lesser David, and Jesus is the Greater David ~ all the way through Scripture. You see?

...they didn’t have the gospel and things changed at the cross
Colossians 2:15

And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.
Hmmm, on their not having the Gospel, I disagree. Rather, the Gospel was revealed in different ways before Jesus and the cross, but always was what it was, with regard to the Bible, from Genesis 3:15 on. The only real difference between the Israelites of old and all of us since Jesus is that they were looking forward to His first (and second) advent, while we look back on His first advent (and forward to the second). As the writer of Hebrews says to Gentile believers as well as Jewish believers, "Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son, Whom He appointed the heir of all things, through Whom also He created the world" (Hebrews 1:1-2).

Grace and peace to you.
 

PinSeeker

Well-Known Member
Oct 4, 2021
3,376
847
113
Nashville
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
...I don't know what it is about Amils that make them think everything can be determined from one testament alone, meaning the NT in this case, rather than both testaments together?
No "Amill" worth his/her salt would even hint at such a thing. The Bible is one Story, not two. I've heard it said ~ and said myself ~ that the one page you can rip out of your Bible is the blank one between the Old Testament and the New. :)

I still tend to think, the fact a lot of things in the NT are highly compressed, thus some of the details are missing, that the missing details are recorded in the prophets in the OT. And that we just can't assume the NT alone explains everything.
I'm not sure I would state it exactly that way, but yes, generally speaking, I agree. There is a statement, first made a long time ago (by whom I'm not sure), that the Old Testament is the New Testament concealed, and the New Testament is the Old Testament revealed. I guess that can have at least a slightly different meaning to folks, but generally, it's true. Like the writer of Hebrews says ~ and you may be able to see that this is part of my signature below ~ "Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son, Whom He appointed the heir of all things, through Whom also He created the world" (Hebrews 1:1-2). There are, in my opinion at least, a lot of takeaways from that.

Grace and peace to you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rwb

grafted branch

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2023
1,377
235
63
48
Washington
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No, what it means is that the DEAD remain the rest of the DEAD because they did not in TIME (a thousand symbolic years) live and reign with Christ before they died. Since they have physically died it is too late for them to ever live and reign with Him, so they shall not live again until after TIME symbolized a thousand years has ended. After Satan has his little season they will be raised to life again to die the second death.
RWB, you are using circular logic to say the rest of the dead remain dead until after the little season is finished, that is, A is true because B is true and B is true because A is true.

I don’t know if you think Satan has already been loosed or not but let’s suppose we are in the little season. Obviously the final resurrection hasn’t happened and obviously the rest of the physically dead are still dead, yet the thousand years would be finished.

Let’s use circular logic on this supposition, A is true (the rest of the dead live) because B is true (the millennium is finished). Since we now know A is true, we can prove it is true because B is true. Using this logic I just proved the rest of the dead are now living based only on the millennium being finished.

If the reality was that the millennium was over and the rest of the dead weren’t actually living I’d have a problem because nobody is going to accept my conclusion unless they already believed the rest of the dead were living.

I simply can’t accept your conclusion based on Revelation 20:5 where it says the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished, not until the little season is finished.

I think we are at an impasse on this.
 

Davidpt

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2023
1,448
451
83
67
East Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
RWB, you are using circular logic to say the rest of the dead remain dead until after the little season is finished, that is, A is true because B is true and B is true because A is true.

I don’t know if you think Satan has already been loosed or not but let’s suppose we are in the little season. Obviously the final resurrection hasn’t happened and obviously the rest of the physically dead are still dead, yet the thousand years would be finished.

Let’s use circular logic on this supposition, A is true (the rest of the dead live) because B is true (the millennium is finished). Since we now know A is true, we can prove it is true because B is true. Using this logic I just proved the rest of the dead are now living based only on the millennium being finished.

If the reality was that the millennium was over and the rest of the dead weren’t actually living I’d have a problem because nobody is going to accept my conclusion unless they already believed the rest of the dead were living.

I simply can’t accept your conclusion based on Revelation 20:5 where it says the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished, not until the little season is finished.

I think we are at an impasse on this.

Something else that has to be factored in here. This thousand years. Obviously, it can't mean less than a thousand years. It has to at least mean a thousand years. With that in mind, obviously, if someone died at the beginning of this thousand years, or even 500 years into this thousand years, they couldn't possibly reappear after the thousand years unless they bodily rise from the dead first. Surely you are not suggesting that the thousand years are not involving a literal era of time consisting of at least a thousand literal years, are you? Clearly, the thousand years are involving a literal era of time that consists of at least 1000 literal years, though some take it be involving more than just 1000 literal years. Either way it is involving an era of time consisting of literal years no less than 1000 years.
 
Last edited:

rwb

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2022
4,233
1,904
113
73
Branson
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Are you joking? Have you never heard of a bodily resurrection?

Who are you arguing will come back to life AGAIN? Do you NOT believe those who have LIVED and REIGNED with Christ during their lifetimes, symbolized a thousand years, BEFORE they died, MUST have come to life AGAIN and that's why John sees them alive after physical death?

If that's your understanding, it makes no sense, because when we have been born again of the Spirit of Christ, our spirit returns ALIVE to God in heaven. John is proving the faithful have life after physical death through the Spirit of Christ in them. And they will NOT be bodily resurrected until an hour coming when the last trumpet sounds. You continue to push a false narrative that the only way faithful saints can possibly be alive after physical death is through bodily resurrection. That is NOT true, and saying it is makes Christ to be a liar! We have His promise that whosoever lives and believes in Him shall NEVER die! Since we NEVER die, why would you believe the martyred saints must have been bodily resurrected and physically alive or they would not be alive at all?
 

Davidpt

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2023
1,448
451
83
67
East Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No "Amill" worth his/her salt would even hint at such a thing. The Bible is one Story, not two. I've heard it said ~ and said myself ~ that the one page you can rip out of your Bible is the blank one between the Old Testament and the New. :)

Why is it then that Amils generally rarely use both testaments to prove Amil, and that unless Premils bring up OT passages first, Amils don't have much to say about any of those OT passages except to insist Premils are misinterpreting them?
 

rwb

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2022
4,233
1,904
113
73
Branson
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
That is my position as well, Yet I tend to think we are missing something here, that the rest of the dead have an involvement in satan's little season. The question is, how so? I don't know yet. I'm guessing the OT might hold some clues, though. Such as Isaiah 24:21-22, Ezekiel 38-39. Speaking of these accounts, both Isaiah 24 and Ezekiel 38 record--and after many days shall they be visited.

Isaiah 24:21 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the LORD shall punish the host of the high ones that are on high, and the kings of the earth upon the earth.
22 And they shall be gathered together, as prisoners are gathered in the pit, and shall be shut up in the prison, and after many days shall they be visited

Ezekiel 38:8 After many days thou shalt be visited: in the latter years thou shalt come into the land that is brought back from the sword, and is gathered out of many people, against the mountains of Israel, which have been always waste: but it is brought forth out of the nations, and they shall dwell safely all of them.

Seems to me that Isaiah 24:21-22 undeniably fits Revelation 19:19-21 and Revelation 20:1-3, 7-10. And if Revelation 19:19-21 involves the 2nd coming, that obviously places what is recorded in Isaiah 24:22, post the 2nd coming. Which then means one needs to explain this post the 2nd coming---and after many days shall they be visited. Obviously, the many days meant here are meaning the thousand years, therefore, making when they are visited to be meaning at the end of satan's little season.

One can't argue that Isaiah 24:21 matches Revelation 19:19, then argue that what is recorded in Isaiah 24:22 does not follow those events. Of course what is recorded in verse 22 follows what is recorded in verse 21. How can it not? Amil then has zero explanation for the following post the 2nd coming---and after many days shall they be visited.

BTW, I don't know what it is about Amils that make them think everything can be determined from one testament alone, meaning the NT in this case, rather than both testaments together? I still tend to think, the fact a lot of things in the NT are highly compressed, thus some of the details are missing, that the missing details are recorded in the prophets in the OT. And that we just can't assume the NT alone explains everything.

David, there are only two ways to understand prophecy of Old. That is through understanding the prophecy specifically given to Israel of Old that has already been fulfilled, or the prophecy points to all that comes to pass after the promised Messiah/Redeemer would come. But it requires spiritual discernment of things written through types and shadow of things that shall come to pass. You will never be able to understand the prophecies of Old until you learn how to spiritually discern what is written by comparing it to what is written with more clarity found in the New Testament. As long as you continue to try to prove Premillennialism, using that which is vague, with types and shadow, you will forever believe there has to be another ONE thousand literal years given this earth after the second coming of Christ.
 

grafted branch

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2023
1,377
235
63
48
Washington
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Surely you are not suggesting that the thousand years are not involving a literal era of time consisting of at least a thousand literal years, are you?
Well I do think the thousand years represents an unknown period of time (at least unknown until it occurred). That period of time was as yesterday or as a watch in the night, with both of these being much less than a thousand years.
 

Davidpt

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2023
1,448
451
83
67
East Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Who are you arguing will come back to life AGAIN? Do you NOT believe those who have LIVED and REIGNED with Christ during their lifetimes, symbolized a thousand years, BEFORE they died, MUST have come to life AGAIN and that's why John sees them alive after physical death?

If that's your understanding, it makes no sense, because when we have been born again of the Spirit of Christ, our spirit returns ALIVE to God in heaven. John is proving the faithful have life after physical death through the Spirit of Christ in them. And they will NOT be bodily resurrected until an hour coming when the last trumpet sounds. You continue to push a false narrative that the only way faithful saints can possibly be alive after physical death is through bodily resurrection. That is NOT true, and saying it is makes Christ to be a liar! We have His promise that whosoever lives and believes in Him shall NEVER die! Since we NEVER die, why would you believe the martyred saints must have been bodily resurrected and physically alive or they would not be alive at all?

I am Premil but that you are arguing Amil, and that I am supposed to answer that as if I too am Amil?
 

rwb

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2022
4,233
1,904
113
73
Branson
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
RWB, you are using circular logic to say the rest of the dead remain dead until after the little season is finished, that is, A is true because B is true and B is true because A is true.

NONE can be resurrected to physical life again until an hour coming when the last trumpet sounds. That comes after the thousand years expire. But then we have Satan's little season. Do you think the dead are resurrected to life just to be physically consumed by the fire of God that comes down from heaven? What other reason could there be to raise to life again those who died without faith, and NEVER had part in the resurrection life (the first resurrection) through Christ before they physically died? Who knows they may well be raised for this purpose, first burn them up with fire that comes down from heaven, then call them to the GWTJ and burn them up again in the LOF that is the second death? Not logical IMO.
 

rwb

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2022
4,233
1,904
113
73
Branson
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Something else that has to be factored in here. This thousand years. Obviously, it can't mean less than a thousand years. It has to at least mean a thousand years. With that in mind, obviously, if someone died at the beginning of this thousand years, or even 500 years into this thousand years, they couldn't possibly reappear after the thousand years unless they bodily rise from the dead first. Surely you are not suggesting that the thousand years are not involving a literal era of time consisting of at least a thousand literal years, are you? Clearly, the thousand years are involving a literal era of time that consists of at least 1000 literal years, though some take it be involving more than just 1000 literal years. Either way it is involving an era of time consisting of literal years no less than 1000 years.

David, since a thousand years symbolizes TIME, it could be as little as one second, minute, hour, day, month, year, or multitudes of time UNKNOWN! When someone lives and dies during this symbolic time, they have lived and died during TIME symbolized a thousand years. The only thing known about this symbolic time is that it began with the binding of Satan, which was through the first advent of Christ, and this symbolic time shall not end until the day(s) when the seventh/last trumpet begins to sound.
 

grafted branch

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2023
1,377
235
63
48
Washington
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Do you think the dead are resurrected to life just to be physically consumed by the fire of God that comes down from heaven?
No, that is why I think it’s referring to the rest of the dead figuratively.

Matthew 8:22 But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.

Here is an example of dead being used figuratively.
 

Davidpt

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2023
1,448
451
83
67
East Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
David, there are only two ways to understand prophecy of Old. That is through understanding the prophecy specifically given to Israel of Old that has already been fulfilled, or the prophecy points to all that comes to pass after the promised Messiah/Redeemer would come. But it requires spiritual discernment of things written through types and shadow of things that shall come to pass. You will never be able to understand the prophecies of Old until you learn how to spiritually discern what is written by comparing it to what is written with more clarity found in the New Testament. As long as you continue to try to prove Premillennialism, using that which is vague, with types and shadow, you will forever believe there has to be another ONE thousand literal years given this earth after the second coming of Christ.

Roger, when it comes to prophecies in general, in my mind these prophecies involve events, regardless what they might look like when being fulfilled, thus might not be meaning in a literal sense every time, that fit a literal era of time and are chronological in nature. For example, Christ's first coming. The chronology would be thus. First Christ is in heaven, then He is born on the earth during a particular era of time, meaning in the beginning of the first century in this case. No one would argue that chronology is not relevant here, that a particular era of time is not relevant here.

You would think the same has to be true of any other prophecies as well. It is then a matter of determining which particular era of time these events involving these prophecies fit. One way to determine that is by comparing passages that appear to be involving the same events, then using chronology to further aid in helping determine where something logically fits. Thus my example involving Isaiah 24:21-22, by first comparing verse 21 to Revelation 19, then using verse 22 in Isaiah 24 to show that something after the time involving Revelation 19 has to be able to explain---and after many days they shall be visited.
 

rwb

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2022
4,233
1,904
113
73
Branson
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Why is it then that Amils generally rarely use both testaments to prove Amil, and that unless Premils bring up OT passages first, Amils don't have much to say about any of those OT passages except to insist Premils are misinterpreting them?

You have little understanding of Amillennial doctrine you try so hard to discredit! It is by using ALL of Scripture, and not only one chapter found in the most symbolically written book of the Bible, that Amillennial is built upon. Trying to use what is written through vague type and shadow, you continue to use the Old Covenant prophecies to try to force a literal fulfillment of things that can only be spiritually discerned.
 

rwb

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2022
4,233
1,904
113
73
Branson
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I am Premil but that you are arguing Amil, and that I am supposed to answer that as if I too am Amil?

You have no ability to answer to what Amillennialism doctrine believes. That's where I differ from you, because I argue against Premillennialism after having been taught and believing your doctrine to be true. You argue against what you really lack understanding of!
 

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2020
9,639
629
113
Mount Morris
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
when John writes that he saw martyred souls alive in heaven
There is no verse that leads us to think these souls are in heaven. John was on earth when he saw the angel come down to the pit, that had been opened at the 5th Trumpet. Whether symbolic or not, still symbolically or not, on the earth.

These souls are the camp of the saints attacked later in the chapter. The thousand years is not a split vision, where one half of the thousand years is in heaven, and the second half on the earth. Satan was bound while on the earth, and loosed back to being on the earth. Those souls were on the earth, because they were just beheaded on the earth. You should at least state those souls were symbolically reigning in the camp of the saints off and on, to make any sense. The camp of the saints is not in heaven.

The 7th Trumpet is when Jesus is proclaimed king of every nation. Is that your last trumpet? If the redeemed are currently reigning on earth prior to the 7th Trumpet, why are we called ambassadors since the Cross? An ambassador represents a kingdom that is not presently ruling over the nation that one is an ambassador in. It always made sense to say in life, we are ambassadors, and in death we reign with Christ.

Why were these souls even judged? John mentions thrones set up and judgment given in relationship to these souls on the earth. I don't see how these souls were even made alive until they were judged via thrones set up on the earth. There is no implication they were set up in heaven. Heaven already has thrones since Genesis 1. The GWT exists after heaven and earth no longer exist, why would it not have been there before they existed? Why not have been judging souls since Adam and Eve?

The rest of the dead were not souls in heaven, so again those beheaded souls did not have to be either, the rest of the dead implies those souls were part of those dead, but were seperated and judged and then made alive, on the basis they had been beheaded. The rest of the dead stood in judgment before the GWT. Nothing states they immediately came to life at the split second the thousand years ended. The thousand year reign were for those souls judged and made alive. The point was that those other dead would have no judgment until after the thousand years. And then we see clearly they were judged at the GWT. It would be only after judgment some could be made alive, while the majority would be tossed into the LOF.

Most do not even seem to notice those thrones set up and judgment given. Those beheaded souls had to face the judgment, because they were not redeemed and judged with Christ on the Cross. This was not an awards judgment. This was receiving the first resurrection or being made alive status, which means the restoration of body and soul.

Obviously you do not include a physical body in the being made alive gift of God in Christ. You prefer sinful humans spiritually redeemed reigning over other sinful humans who have not accepted the gift of salvation. Except we see from history turning the church into ruling and reigning while in Adam's dead corruptible flesh does not always turn out that great. We have not been made alive is the point. We are still in Adam's dead state whether physically alive or physically dead. Because you don't even allow a physical body until the GWT judgment, which you call the last trumpet for some reason. A soul is always alive even in torment, and called the dead, until permanently placed in the second death, the LOF.

You still have to have souls continually standing in judgment before thrones during the whole thousand years. The first resurrection is the judgment awarded from these thrones.

"And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them."

This also has to be continuous if you have souls constantly dying and living throughout this time.
 

rwb

Well-Known Member
Nov 11, 2022
4,233
1,904
113
73
Branson
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No, that is why I think it’s referring to the rest of the dead figuratively.

Matthew 8:22 But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.

Here is an example of dead being used figuratively.

You don't think they are physically DEAD? If not physical why does John write they were beheaded?

Your reference above is speaking about the physically dead having died in unbelief. His father will be buried by most likely members of their own household that are also spiritually dead. Christ is anxious for His servants in faith to go preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom of God to give spiritual life to those who are spiritually dead.

Matthew 8:21-22 (KJV) And another of his disciples said unto him, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father. But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.