Revelation 20 the 1000 years

[BeRational]

BA

Why does it have to persuade you though?

Your beliefs are not based on evidence

My beliefs are based on the evidence of NT witness. I would be interested to test your beliefs, but as an atheist, you have none, which is a pretty sterile state to be in, isn't it.

But you have claimed that you choose your beliefs!

Why do you need evidence?

Can you choose to believe something when you feel the evidence points a different way?

[Sassy]

One day and a thousand years are the same to God...

King James 2000 Bible
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

Would that be heavenly or earthly years?

God created a mature earth in 7 days... Which would have normally taken many millions according to man.

Why are you asking questions you are not qualified to ask or even answer?

[Sassy]

King James Bible
But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
There is nothing that TW knows that no other Christian will know unless it isn't really in line with the teachings of God through the Prophets and Christ...

Revelation 8:7King James Version (KJV)

7 The first angel sounded, and there followed hail and fire mingled with blood, and they were cast upon the earth: and the third part of trees was burnt up, and all green grass was burnt up.

Revelation 9:18King James Version (KJV)

18 By these three was the third part of men killed, by the fire, and by the smoke, and by the brimstone, which issued out of their mouths.

Revelation 16:3King James Version (KJV)

3 And the second angel poured out his vial upon the sea; and it became as the blood of a dead man: and every living soul died in the sea.


These have not yet happened... What could create such a situation by todays standards?

Unless you are willing to explain everything in the book of Revelations then perhaps you should heed it's warnings...

18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Keep from discussing the book of Revelations unless you are going to explain it all,explain that is- because that is what God wants.

It is clear the book of Revelations is for the believer.
It announces that which are to happen... However, for the believer we know we can trust God to give us what we need to know when we need to know it.

John 16:13King James Version (KJV)

13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Knowledge about the Book of Revelation from it's early days as a letter from John was clearly understood only by believers in that time.

In Christ, every man is forgiven and receives the truth by the Holy Spirit to help them in their daily lives.

Let me remind you what Christ said: "No one comes to the Father but by me." He is the way the truth and life.
There is no other way but Spirit and Truth.  So no natter what you and your friends believer about Revelation 20 the only true way to God is Jesus Christ and the only true sign of belonging to Christ and knowing God is the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Hence Christs own words...Matthew 7:22-23King James Version (KJV)

22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

What you or anyone else thinks they know about the book of Revelations does not and never will replace the truth that Christ taught about believers belonging to him because they believe in who he is and are baptised with the Spirit.

You can speak about Revelations but don't make out that it somehow makes you the only true believers. Because true believers know some may make errors about the bible but the truth of Christ is the only way to be saved and that not all believers have to same gift.

All believers do not need to worry about Revelations because they trust in God,Christ and the Spirit from God to give them what they need when they need it....

[~TW~]

Sass we are discussing this

Christians should know and have some idea of Revelation Chap 20. So can we presume Christ has returned and we are all happy and contented living on a paradise earth in the kingdom as some believe.All is well judgement has taken place.

 17 Then I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the birds that fly in the midst of heaven, “Come and gather together for the supper of the great God,[h] 18 that you may eat the flesh of kings, the flesh of captains, the flesh of mighty men, the flesh of horses and of those who sit on them, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, both small and great.”

19 And I saw the beast, the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against Him who sat on the horse and against His army. 20 Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone. 21 And the rest were killed with the sword which proceeded from the mouth of Him who sat on the horse. And all the birds were filled with their flesh.

 So no more problems BUT we read

   7 Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea.

 Dear me here we were in a paradise earth all comfy and now this. Who are these nations and why has God let satan loose on us in his kingdom ?

 Now I know Alien and others know the clear biblical answers to this,but to those Christians who see us living on Earth in a literal 1000 years can you tell us the answer as to why this happens.

So Sass the subject is above please keep to it.

  ~TW~

[DaveM]

While the destruction of Jerusalem was undoubtedly a consequence of Jesus being rejected by His people, I would refer to my earlier post #108 that the plain statements of Rev 4:1 demand that all events in Revelation from that point onwards need to be interpreted in terms of events future from ~AD95-96 when the book was written.

What is your evidence for this date, please?

Hi Spud,

The AD 95-96 date is widely held,  Amongst the prominent early church figures both Eusebius and Clement of Alexandria give that as a date of writing.  In terms of more recent scholars we have William Barclay (going back some decades now) on the one end of the theological spectrum and the Dallas Theological Seminary on the other end, both agreeing on this date.  In the more central conservative evangelical ground F.F. Bruce, the late Scottish scholar, for whom I have great respect, also has a late first century date.  My copy of the Lion Handbook to the Bible also confirms this.

In terms of Study Bibles which I possess, the introductions to Revelation in both the ESV and NASB give a 95-96 date as does the Amplified Bible.

So I believe I am correct in saying that AD 95-96 is a widely held date and probably represents a majority opinion. 

[~TW~]

The key word Spud is All, as in all people.
  ~TW~

This is what I thought, but apparently Dave hasn't noticed it yet.

In Genesis 14:20 Abraham gave Melchizedek a tenth of all he had.  How do you interpret "all' here?

Exactly that a 10th which is not all.

  ~TW~

[Spud]

While the destruction of Jerusalem was undoubtedly a consequence of Jesus being rejected by His people, I would refer to my earlier post #108 that the plain statements of Rev 4:1 demand that all events in Revelation from that point onwards need to be interpreted in terms of events future from ~AD95-96 when the book was written.

What is your evidence for this date, please?

Hi Spud,

The AD 95-96 date is widely held,  Amongst the prominent early church figures both Eusebius and Clement of Alexandria give that as a date of writing.  In terms of more recent scholars we have William Barclay (going back some decades now) on the one end of the theological spectrum and the Dallas Theological Seminary on the other end, both agreeing on this date.  In the more central conservative evangelical ground F.F. Bruce, the late Scottish scholar, for whom I have great respect, also has a late first century date.  My copy of the Lion Handbook to the Bible also confirms this.

In terms of Study Bibles which I possess, the introductions to Revelation in both the ESV and NASB give a 95-96 date as does the Amplified Bible.

So I believe I am correct in saying that AD 95-96 is a widely held date and probably represents a majority opinion.

Hi Dave,

I've found one statement by Irenaeus which seems to be the one most widely believed to indicate an AD 95 date for Revelation:

We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103530.htm

There is reason to suggest that Irenaeus meant that John (not the Apocalypse) was seen towards the end of Domitian's reign. Apparently the word 'that' can also be translated as 'he'. I'll have to check this. See also the opening paragraph which says, 'and those men who saw John face to face bearing their testimony [to it]'

[~TW~]

Hi Spud I aimed this thread to those who go for a literal millennium and my question was.

 Why does God according to their teaching set Satan on them{those in this paradise earth}near  the end of this literal 1000 years for what purpose ?

 We could add is this before the final day /last trumpet or after,know one seems to know.

  ~TW~

[Spud]

One day and a thousand years are the same to God...

King James 2000 Bible
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

Would that be heavenly or earthly years?

God created a mature earth in 7 days... Which would have normally taken many millions according to man.

Why are you asking questions you are not qualified to ask or even answer?

Revelation is written in symbols, so the thousand years are most likely to be symbolic too.

Do you think God would give us a book that could not be interpreted? Most people, including me, do not have enough knowledge of the Old Testament to understand Revelation. But I think its recipients, in the seven churches, would have been able to.

[Spud]

Hi Spud I aimed this thread to those who go for a literal millennium and my question was.

 Why does God according to their teaching set Satan on them{those in this paradise earth}near  the end of this literal 1000 years for what purpose ?

 We could add is this before the final day /last trumpet or after,know one seems to know.

  ~TW~

How would you answer this from an amillennial point of view?

Btw, I've just been reading from that link you posted on Zechariah 14. It is very informative.... 

[~TW~]

Hi Spud I aimed this thread to those who go for a literal millennium and my question was.

 Why does God according to their teaching set Satan on them{those in this paradise earth}near  the end of this literal 1000 years for what purpose ?

 We could add is this before the final day /last trumpet or after,know one seems to know.

  ~TW~

How would you answer this from an amillennial point of view?

Btw, I've just been reading from that link you posted on Zechariah 14. It is very informative.... 

  How would I answer it Spud very easy first listen to what I sent you.Right we are in the millennium now when will the end be,I have no idea.We see the apostasy in the church.We see the visible church being slowly screwed by governments and anti Christian ideas coming into focus the third person of the unholy Trinity is very busy {the false prophet}.Economics ,well just look around,the black,red and pale horse very busy,and sometime before the end Satan is allowed to do his worse and then comes the final day /last trumpet and all is wrapped up.

Hope that helps Spud

    ~TW~

[Spud]

Hi Spud I aimed this thread to those who go for a literal millennium and my question was.

 Why does God according to their teaching set Satan on them{those in this paradise earth}near  the end of this literal 1000 years for what purpose ?

 We could add is this before the final day /last trumpet or after,know one seems to know.

  ~TW~

How would you answer this from an amillennial point of view?

Btw, I've just been reading from that link you posted on Zechariah 14. It is very informative.... 

  How would I answer it Spud very easy first listen to what I sent you.

Hm, that guy likes the sound of his own voice. That rings alarm bells.

Right we are in the millennium now when will the end be,I have no idea.We see the apostasy in the church.We see the visible church being slowly screwed by governments and anti Christian ideas coming into focus the third person of the unholy Trinity is very busy {the false prophet}.Economics ,well just look around,the black,red
and pale horse very busy,and sometime before the end Satan is allowed to do his worse and then comes the final day /last trumpet and all is wrapped up.

Hope that helps Spud

    ~TW~

Am listening to the first of the talks about the Millennium. I still have a problem with the view that in ch. 19 all non-Christians are literally killed. The sword coming out of the mouth of the rider on the white horse is not a literal sword. It's symbolic of the tongue, which implies a kind of 'death' that comes from hearing God's word and not accepting it.

[~TW~]

 Spud ----Am listening to the first of the talks about the Millennium. I still have a problem with the view that in ch. 19 all non-Christians are literally killed. The sword coming out of the mouth of the rider on the white horse is not a literal sword. It's symbolic of the tongue, which implies a kind of 'death' that comes from hearing God's word and not accepting it.

-------------------------------------------
Spud  that is the final judgement the End of the world.

                  ~TW~

[Spud]

Can I ask, what do you understand the beast to represent?

[~TW~]

Can I ask, what do you understand the beast to represent?

Which one in the unholy trinity we have Satan the first beast and the second beast.

  ~TW~

[DaveM]

Hi Spud,

The AD 95-96 date is widely held,  Amongst the prominent early church figures both Eusebius and Clement of Alexandria give that as a date of writing.  In terms of more recent scholars we have William Barclay (going back some decades now) on the one end of the theological spectrum and the Dallas Theological Seminary on the other end, both agreeing on this date.  In the more central conservative evangelical ground F.F. Bruce, the late Scottish scholar, for whom I have great respect, also has a late first century date.  My copy of the Lion Handbook to the Bible also confirms this.

In terms of Study Bibles which I possess, the introductions to Revelation in both the ESV and NASB give a 95-96 date as does the Amplified Bible.

So I believe I am correct in saying that AD 95-96 is a widely held date and probably represents a majority opinion.

Hi Dave,

I've found one statement by Irenaeus which seems to be the one most widely believed to indicate an AD 95 date for Revelation:

We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103530.htm

There is reason to suggest that Irenaeus meant that John (not the Apocalypse) was seen towards the end of Domitian's reign. Apparently the word 'that' can also be translated as 'he'. I'll have to check this. See also the opening paragraph which says, 'and those men who saw John face to face bearing their testimony [to it]'

Hi Spud,

Thanks for the quote from Irenaeus and the link.  Interesting stuff. Somehow I seem to have missed that reference for an ~AD95 Dave

[DaveM]

One day and a thousand years are the same to God...

King James 2000 Bible
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

Would that be heavenly or earthly years?

God created a mature earth in 7 days... Which would have normally taken many millions according to man.

Why are you asking questions you are not qualified to ask or even answer?

Revelation is written in symbols, so the thousand years are most likely to be symbolic too.

Do you think God would give us a book that could not be interpreted? Most people, including me, do not have enough knowledge of the Old Testament to understand Revelation. But I think its recipients, in the seven churches, would have been able to.

Of course Daniel was told to seal up his Book until the time of the end.  Certainly as far as I can see that has been the case.  Until recent times all attempts at producing a coherent commentary of Daniel have been pretty conclusive failures.  Whether more recent ones will prove to me more correct remains to be seen,

[DaveM]

Hi Spud going back and looking at Dave M post reply 45 we have this---Today’s world is so far removed from the picture the Scriptures paint of the golden age of the Millennium that I find it amazing that anyone could equate the two.

 Spud it is Dave M who takes the 3 chapters he quoted earlier and it is he who equate's the 3 chapters with the millennium.

 His mistake is we have no mention of a millennium in those chapters.If you want to know for sure what the millennium is about then it is revelation.So the comments of Dave are null and void.Also for Dave this is worth a read.

        http://www.preteristarchive.com/Modern/2001_demar_zechariah-14.html

              ~TW~

Hi TW,

I was under the impression that you subscribed to the Historicist approach to the interpretation of Revelation.  But here you are quoting Preterist articles.  So now I am confused. Going from bad to worse are you an Historicist, a Partial Preterist or a Full Preterist?

[Spud]

Can I ask, what do you understand the beast to represent?

Which one in the unholy trinity we have Satan the first beast and the second beast.

  ~TW~

The first beast from the sea, the seven headed one.

[Spud]

The reason I asked what the beast from the sea represents is more to do with what its heads and horns represent. If the beast symbolizes the Roman empire, then the heads and horns can be explained in terms of its various emperors. If that is wrong, it is still necessary to interpret what they represent if we are going to claim that 19:11ff and 20:7-10 refer to the same event (the second coming and the end of the world).

[~TW~]

The reason I asked what the beast from the sea represents is more to do with what its heads and horns represent. If the beast symbolizes the Roman empire, then the heads and horns can be explained in terms of its various emperors. If that is wrong, it is still necessary to interpret what they represent if we are going to claim that 19:11ff and 20:7-10 refer to the same event (the second coming and the end of the world).

Have sent you a pm will sort it out.

           ~TW~

[2Corrie]

The reason I asked what the beast from the sea represents is more to do with what its heads and horns represent. If the beast symbolizes the Roman empire, then the heads and horns can be explained in terms of its various emperors. If that is wrong, it is still necessary to interpret what they represent if we are going to claim that 19:11ff and 20:7-10 refer to the same event (the second coming and the end of the world).

I very much agree! The unholy trinity of Satan, the beast (The anti-christ) and the false prophet. If they are marching about now who are they TW?

[OH MY WORLD!]

"Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; So that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God."   2Thessalonians 2:3,4

[Spud]

Seven heads are all of the beasts in Daniel 7 combined:
1 Babylonian empire
2 Persian empire
3 Greeks under Alexander
4 Hellenistic Syria
5 Hellenistic Egypt
6 Hellenistic Rome
7 Imperial Rome

NB the Greek beast had 4 heads (3-6).

Ten horns: these are all on the seventh head (Dan 7:7) so they represent the first ten Roman Emperors who reigned before AD 70:
Julius, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero, Galba, Vitellius, Otho, Vespasian.

[~TW~]

The reason I asked what the beast from the sea represents is more to do with what its heads and horns represent. If the beast symbolizes the Roman empire, then the heads and horns can be explained in terms of its various emperors. If that is wrong, it is still necessary to interpret what they represent if we are going to claim that 19:11ff and 20:7-10 refer to the same event (the second coming and the end of the world).

I very much agree! The unholy trinity of Satan, the beast (The anti-christ) and the false prophet. If they are marching about now who are they TW?

Not a problem 2 Corrie answers very soon,but I am still waiting for you to answer my last post to you.

                        ~~TW~