If we are in the millenium?????

[divaD]

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.
(Jud 1:6)

You do make an interesting point with this observation. It's been awhile since I've done any serious thought on this verse, but I do seem to remember concluding that that great day is the day of the Lord, almost getting the sense that these beings would be set free in order to do battle with the Lord, which seems to line up with the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit, then makes war against the Lamb. All of this is not fresh in my mind at the moment..this is only vaguely how I recall understanding it.

[Beckrl]

I've never had a problem with this. I just don't see Rev 20:1-3 as being directly related to this. IMO Rev 20:1-3 appears to be an entirely different context, and seems connected to what satan has been doing up unto that point, the beginning of the 1000 yrs..he has been deceiving the nations.

The text seems to make it clear that while satan is bound, he can't deceive the nations anymore...not he can deceive them less, but that he can deceive them no more. I believe RogerW asked my how I interpret nations. I'm not certain if I ever gave an answer, but I interpret it according to how it is used in the events preceding ch 20, IOW according to the overall context of Revelation itself.

Then with the understanding of Revelation is a book of symbolism and not written in order, but has a number of Parenthesis. One must consider that chapter 20 be a Parenthesis. [ Were John gives an explanatory of events that brings about the binding of Satan so that the Gospel may reach the world and how then the end comes at the final battle]

[divaD]

[ Were John gives an explanatory of events that brings about the binding of Satan so that the Gospel may reach the world and how then the end comes at the final battle]

I've considered this as a possibility, as a matter of fact, I still do see it as a possibilty. My problem is not Revelation itself, but it's all those OT prophecies I just can't ignore.. I'm unable to spiritualize them, and I'm unable to write them off as past fullfilled.

[webhead]

Roger:

The Bible does not give a time line for anything. All time lines you have been taught were inserted by man. Revelation does not say the New Jerusalem ever touches the New Earth. That is an assumption inserted by man. What I wrote was given to me by God and is not debatable. If you have a problem with it talk to Him about it.

So, you are the only man that can hear from God?

Your insertions are true, but other men's insertions are false.

God bless.

[Sirus]

Roger:

The Bible does not give a time line for anything. All time lines you have been taught were inserted by man. Revelation does not say the New Jerusalem ever touches the New Earth. That is an assumption inserted by man. What I wrote was given to me by God and is not debatable. If you have a problem with it talk to Him about it.

So....it floats/hovers in the sky (heaven) while the bride is on earth?
It says God dwells with men and in His tabernacle, but you say He is still in heaven in His tabernacle and men are on the earth. This makes 0 sense.

[Desperaux]

So....it floats/hovers in the sky (heaven) while the bride is on earth?
It says God dwells with men in His tabernacle, but you say He is still in heaven in His tabernacle and men are on the earth. This makes 0 sense.

The New Jerusalem is the capital of the Kingdom, which is on the New Earth. We'll be a-travellin'!

[Sirus]

Great! I'll pack my bags! Where we going?
Beam me us Jesus!

[revrobor]

So....it floats/hovers in the sky (heaven) while the bride is on earth?
It says God dwells with men and in His tabernacle, but you say He is still in heaven in His tabernacle and men are on the earth. This makes 0 sense.

The Bible is not clear as to what purpose the New Jerusalem serves in Eternity. But you are correct in that God (in the person of Jesus Christ since the Bible teaches we will never see the face of God) will dwell with His people on the New Earth. It is also possible we (and Jesus) will travel between The New Earth and the New Jerusalem. Heaven will always be Heaven. That doesn't change. It is God's headquarters.

[revrobor]

So, you are the only man that can hear from God?

No. I am not the only one to whom God has revealed the truth concerning end-time events. I'm just the only one on this thread.

Your insertions are true, but other men's insertions are false.

Most Christians have been deceived concerning the end-times and fight to protect their belief in what they have been taught apparently because their faith is in their church and it's doctrines rather than in Jesus Christ.

God bless.

May our Lord open up your heart to His truth.

[Desperaux]

The Bible is not clear as to what purpose the New Jerusalem serves in Eternity. But you are correct in that God (in the person of Jesus Christ since the Bible teaches we will never see the face of God) will dwell with His people on the New Earth. It is also possible we (and Jesus) will travel between The New Earth and the New Jerusalem. Heaven will always be Heaven. That doesn't change. It is God's headquarters.

Please show us in Scripture that God says we will NEVER see His face.

1 John 3:2
Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.

[RogerW]

I've never had a problem with this. I just don't see Rev 20:1-3 as being directly related to this. IMO Rev 20:1-3 appears to be an entirely different context, and seems connected to what satan has been doing up unto that point, the beginning of the 1000 yrs..he has been deceiving the nations.

The text seems to make it clear that while satan is bound, he can't deceive the nations anymore...not he can deceive them less, but that he can deceive them no more. I believe RogerW asked my how I interpret nations. I'm not certain if I ever gave an answer, but I interpret it according to how it is used in the events preceding ch 20, IOW according to the overall context of Revelation itself.

David,

When Satan is loose so the nations are no longer deceived, it does not mean that none among the nations will not be deceived. It means that His elect, who are among every nation of the world will no longer be deceived by the works of Satan. Nations are peoples, and His elect are a holy nation saved by grace from among every nation of the world. Paul likens the elect to a "foolish" nation, redeemed as a way to make some of his own kinsmen jealous.

Ac 10:35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

Ro 10:19 But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you.

1Pe 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

Re 5:9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;

Satan is bound so the holy nation; i.e. the elect of God will be redeemed. Satan cannot keep these alone from every nation of the world from entering into the eternal kingdom. When we are born again we have become part of the first resurrection in Christ so that we can never die. Since we can never die, Satan of course does not have any power over us to hold us in death or the grave. We have been set free in Christ and for this reason we have no need to fear death. This is true because Satan was bound when Christ defeated him at the cross and resurrection from the grave. The grave and death could not hold Christ, and because of Christ they cannot hold those [holy nation] who are born again. So when Satan is set free, he will continue to deceive most people throughout the nations of the world, but never again will he be able to deceive God's people, His holy nation, and royal priesthood.

Many Blessings,
RW

[divaD]

I've been giving this subject of the 1000 years a bit more thought. Should I really be taking it literally, or should I allegorize it?
For my own peace of mind, I finally found the answer I've been looking for. In order to understand how to interpret the 1000 years, we simply need to do a little resaearch on how 'years' is treated in the NT, and what the definition is in every case. As some examples, look at the following.


Matthew 2:16 Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men.

Should we take this from two years old and under literally or not? Literally of course.


Matthew 9:20 And, behold, a woman, which was diseased with an issue of blood twelve years, came behind him, and touched the hem of his garment:

What about this verse? Should we interpret this twelve years as literal or not? As literal of course.


John 2:20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?


What about this verse? How do we interpret the Forty and six years? Literally of course.



Acts 4:22 For the man was above forty years old, on whom this miracle of healing was shewed.


Was the man above forty years old or not? Of course he was.


Acts 7:30 And when forty years were expired, there appeared to him in the wilderness of mount Sina an angel of the Lord in a flame of fire in a bush.


Did a literal forty years really expire first, then there appeared to him in the wilderness of mount Sina an angel of the Lord in a flame of fire in a bush? Of course.



Acts 19:10 And this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks



Did this literally continue by the space of two years? Of course it did.


Galatians 1:18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days

Did he really go up to Jerusalem to see Peter after a literal three years from that point in time? Once again, of course he did.


Some are probably wondering...what is my point, what am I trying to show? Pretty simple...I'm showing that anytime a cardinal number is used in front of years, that numerical value is treated as literal.


This leads me back to Rev 20. In that ch, a cardinal number, in this case 1000, is used at least 6 times in front of years.



Revelation 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,


I have easily shown by my prev examples(or at least in my mind I have,, lol), that when a cardinal number is used in front of years, the main idea is to interpret that number literally. Perhaps someone would not mind explaining, that when we get to Rev 20, why this fact should then be ignored, and that we should now allegorize a cardinal number in front of years, instead of correctly interpreting it literally?


Since I'm certain someone might bring this up, I'll bring it up myself.


Psalms 50:10 For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills.


Does this verse state 'the cattle upon a thousand years? No it does not. That then makes your point moot, because we are talking about cardinal numbers in front of years, and how this is interpreted elsewhere throughout Scripture, not how cardinal numbers in front of hills are.

Also, after doing a bit of research, it indeed appears that many of the very early early church fathers interpreted this 1000 yrs literally, even tho some seem to be claiming that this is not so.

[Raybob]

...This leads me back to Rev 20. In that ch, a cardinal number, in this case 1000, is used at least 6 times in front of years.



Revelation 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,


I have easily shown by my prev examples(or at least in my mind I have,, lol), that when a cardinal number is used in front of years, the main idea is to interpret that number literally. Perhaps someone would not mind explaining, that when we get to Rev 20, why this fact should then be ignored, and that we should now allegorize a cardinal number in front of years, instead of correctly interpreting it literally?


Since I'm certain someone might bring this up, I'll bring it up myself.


Psalms 50:10 For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills.


Does this verse state 'the cattle upon a thousand years? No it does not. That then makes your point moot, because we are talking about cardinal numbers in front of years, and how this is interpreted elsewhere throughout Scripture, not how cardinal numbers in front of hills are.

Also, after doing a bit of research, it indeed appears that many of the very early early church fathers interpreted this 1000 yrs literally, even tho some seem to be claiming that this is not so.

What about other verses? Do these verses mean specifically 1000 years only or can they simply mean a very long period of time?

For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.
(Psa 90:4)

Yea, though he live a thousand years twice told, yet hath he seen no good: do not all go to one place?
(Ecc 6:6)

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.
(2Pe 3:8)

[Desperaux]

David,

When Satan is loose so the nations are no longer deceived, it does not mean that none among the nations will not be deceived. It means that His elect, who are among every nation of the world will no longer be deceived by the works of Satan. Nations are peoples, and His elect are a holy nation saved by grace from among every nation of the world. Paul likens the elect to a "foolish" nation, redeemed as a way to make some of his own kinsmen jealous.

Ac 10:35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

Ro 10:19 But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you.

1Pe 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

Re 5:9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;

Satan is bound so the holy nation; i.e. the elect of God will be redeemed. Satan cannot keep these alone from every nation of the world from entering into the eternal kingdom. When we are born again we have become part of the first resurrection in Christ so that we can never die. Since we can never die, Satan of course does not have any power over us to hold us in death or the grave. We have been set free in Christ and for this reason we have no need to fear death. This is true because Satan was bound when Christ defeated him at the cross and resurrection from the grave. The grave and death could not hold Christ, and because of Christ they cannot hold those [holy nation] who are born again. So when Satan is set free, he will continue to deceive most people throughout the nations of the world, but never again will he be able to deceive God's people, His holy nation, and royal priesthood.

Many Blessings,
RW

If you are speaking of the future binding of Satan, he is not being bound for the sake of the elect. He is going to be bound because Jesus will be literal Lord and King in all the Earth. He will deceive the nations of those who are mortal on the Earth, for the elect will have already received their glorified bodies and their reward, and will already be reigning. There is no danger of us being deceived.

[divaD]

What about other verses? Do these verses mean specifically 1000 years only or can they simply mean a very long period of time?

For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.
(Psa 90:4)

Yea, though he live a thousand years twice told, yet hath he seen no good: do not all go to one place?
(Ecc 6:6)

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.
(2Pe 3:8)

For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.
(Psa 90:4)

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.
(2Pe 3:8)


Let's start with the one in 2 Peter 3:8. What does it imply? It simply implies that from the Lord's POV, 1 day equals 1000 yrs, and 1000 yrs equals 1 day. This is for a reason, not because that's the way the Lord would understand time. But anyway, that's for another discussion.

With the above in mind, what does Psalms 90:4 imply, coming from the perspective of 2 Peter 3:8? If we know from 2 Peter 3:8 that 1 day equals 1000 yrs, and 1000 yrs equals 1 day, then what would a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past represent? the yesterday would represent a 1000 yr day that has gone by, just like when a yesterday goes by, as we would understand it, in this case, 24 hours, a 24 hour period of time has gone by, or yesterday has past. It's a pretty easy concept to grasp, once one really gives it some thought.



Ecclesiastes 6:3 If a man beget an hundred children, and live many years, so that the days of his years be many, and his soul be not filled with good, and also that he have no burial; I say, that an untimely birth is better than he.
4 For he cometh in with vanity, and departeth in darkness, and his name shall be covered with darkness.
5 Moreover he hath not seen the sun, nor known any thing: this hath more rest than the other.
6 Yea, though he live a thousand years twice told, yet hath he seen no good: do not all go to one place?



Notice the 'if' that begins verse 3. With that in mind, more than likely the passage isn't to be interpreted literally, but perhaps hypothetically. With that said, there would be no reason to interpret
'though he live a thousand years twice told' as literal either. I would see no reaon to treat Rev 20 in the same manner, as hypothetical, or as hyperbole.