You need to read what it says more carefully. It says "Premils must invent 2 future glorifications days and 2 future raptures separated by 1000 years+?. It does NOT say Premils must invent two resurrections separated by 1000 years".
Premills believe that those who belong to Christ are glorified (changed, made bodily immortal) on the day He comes which they obviously believe is before the thousand years. So, where does it say anything about believers being glorified 1,000+ years later as well? Nowhere. So, they have to invent that idea.
Likewise, Premills believe the rapture occurs before the thousand years. Where does Revelation 20 indicate that another rapture occurs 1,000+ years later when the fire is coming down from heaven? Nowhere. So, they have to invent that, too.
what form of premil is the OP addressing because I’m unaware of any premil belief in 2 raptures?
As to “glorification”, you appear to agree this involves the resurrection - you stated “glorified (changed, made bodily immortal)”. So if the OP is using the 2 glorification events to mean 2 resurrection events, I’m not following your counter argument of “read more carefully”
Revelation 20 literally has 2 resurrections or as you put it “glorifications (changed, made bodily immortal) separated by 1000 years.
Revelation 20:4-5 They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
5The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.
I certainly would agree if you are meaning to say that we should not primarily base our doctrine on the book.
Correct. But premils often take revelation literally and as a brand new revelation, previously unknown by the other apostles.
For example, Paul died before the Revelation. Paul’s letters don’t have the complete revelation of how the eschaton will unfold, only bits and pieces. Since revelation is the revealing of how the eschaton will actually unfold, premils will fit Paul’s bits and pieces into the fuller chronology provided by revelation.
Why would a premil interpret revelation through the lens of Paul’s incomplete eschatology? They most often dont, and therefore any argument that an amil will make by using the “bits and pieces” of Paul’s incomplete eschatology to prove amil and discount premil is often ineffective.
It’s why time after time after time, those that hold a literal view of revelation, as a revealing of how the eschaton will unfold, don’t really care if other NT passages don’t teach anything about a millennium nor 2 resurrection separated by 1,000 years —> it hadnt been revealed yet.
Sure. But, you clearly missed the point of this thread which is that Premills are not able to support their implied belief in two glorification days (two different days when the bodies of believers are changed and made immortal) and two raptures separated by 1,000+ years with scripture.
the 2 separate rapture events kind of sounds like a strawman, but maybe I’m just unaware of a form of premil that believes in 2 separate rapture events?
And if glorification is just another term for the resurrection of the body, revelation 20 does have 2 resurrections separated by 1,000 years. That would not be an “invention”.
