Is there really a 1000 years?

[Diggindeeper]

Here is another place that tells something happening in heaven. This is the 24 elders doing the talking. THEY KNOW THE TIME HAS COME for several things to occur. Two very important ones are:

1- "the time of the dead, that they should be judged!"

2- and that Jesus "shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great"

NOTICE: This is also THE time rewards are given to his servants, the prophets, to the saints, and to all that fear his name -- small and great!


Revelation 11:15-18
15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.

16 And the four and twenty elders, which sat before God on their seats, fell upon their faces, and worshipped God,

17 Saying, We give thee thanks, O LORD God Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to come; because thou hast taken to thee thy great power, and hast reigned.

18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

I find it interesting that the only DEAD mentioned are the ones to be judged! Don't you find that interesting?

[RogerW]

Here is another place that tells something happening in heaven. This is the 24 elders doing the talking. THEY KNOW THE TIME HAS COME for several things to occur. Two very important ones are:

1- "the time of the dead, that they should be judged!"

2- and that Jesus "shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great"

NOTICE: This is also THE time rewards are given to his servants, the prophets, to the saints, and to all that fear his name -- small and great!


Revelation 11:15-18
15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.

16 And the four and twenty elders, which sat before God on their seats, fell upon their faces, and worshipped God,

17 Saying, We give thee thanks, O LORD God Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to come; because thou hast taken to thee thy great power, and hast reigned.

18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

I find it interesting that the only DEAD mentioned are the ones to be judged! Don't you find that interesting?

Interesting indeed DD! The reason is that only "the dead" are being judged on Judgment Day...not the living. IOW none who have been made alive in Christ (have part in the first resurrection), they are not "the dead" and therefore they will not be judged out of the things written in the books, and their names will be found in the book of life.

[divaD]

Interesting indeed DD! The reason is that only "the dead" are being judged on Judgment Day...not the living. IOW none who have been made alive in Christ (have part in the first resurrection), they are not "the dead" and therefore they will not be judged out of the things written in the books, and their names will be found in the book of life.

RW, DD makes a good point in that post. But it's nothing that I wasn't aware of. But here's the problem, there's still the OT to deal with. How do we understand what she posted, in light of the OT?

For example. I did some research last night, since I recently brought up Isaiah 24. According to what I read, many scholars and theologians agree that Isaiah chapters 24-27 are like a condensed book of the book of Revelation. These conclude the 4 chapters deal primarily with Rev chapters 6-20 I believe. If this is so, then it looks like I'm on the right track, when I said a cpl of those verses paralleled the 1000 yrs. With that in mind, and if this is so, then how does one understand what DD posted when we also throw Isaiah 24:21-22 into the mix? Why would we ignore Isaiah 24:21-22 if it perhaps explains the 1000 yrs?

[ross3421]

[COLOR=navy]I find it interesting that the only DEAD mentioned are the ones to be judged! Don't you find that interesting?

No. This is why when we see the martyred "alive" in Rev 20 they are already been given judgment. They are resurected before the first resurrection and the return of Christ.

[John146]

RW, DD makes a good point in that post. But it's nothing that I wasn't aware of. But here's the problem, there's still the OT to deal with. How do we understand what she posted, in light of the OT?

For example. I did some research last night, since I recently brought up Isaiah 24. According to what I read, many scholars and theologians agree that Isaiah chapters 24-27 are like a condensed book of the book of Revelation. These conclude the 4 chapters deal primarily with Rev chapters 6-20 I believe. If this is so, then it looks like I'm on the right track, when I said a cpl of those verses paralleled the 1000 yrs. With that in mind, and if this is so, then how does one understand what DD posted when we also throw Isaiah 24:21-22 into the mix? Why would we ignore Isaiah 24:21-22 if it perhaps explains the 1000 yrs?

The NT illuminates the OT, not the other way around. Until you understand that you're just not going to get it, I'm afraid. You might notice that other than a premil interpretation of Rev 20 there is absolutely no reference to that supposed time period after Christ's return found anywhere in the NT. Now, why would that be if there really was going to be such a time period after the return of Christ? Surely, Jesus would have had something to say about that, wouldn't He? I would think Matt 25:31-46 would have been an ideal time for Him to mention it since it mentions both His return and the judgment. But He didn't. Neither did Paul. How could they not have even mentioned such a significant time period?

[John146]

No. This is why when we see the martyred "alive" in Rev 20 they are already been given judgment. They are resurected before the first resurrection and the return of Christ.

When it says judgment is given to them that doesn't mean they are being judged, it means they are being given authority.

[ross3421]

Interesting indeed DD! The reason is that only "the dead" are being judged on Judgment Day...not the living. IOW none who have been made alive in Christ (have part in the first resurrection), they are not "the dead" and .

Your statement is a bit confusing.......

Those made alive ARE those whom were dead and judged at the first resurrection.

1co 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
1co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
1co 15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming (first resurrection).

therefore they will not be judged out of the things written in the books, and their names will be found in the book of life

True believers are judged for eternity by the book of life but other books will contain our works to be judged.

2co 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

Re 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

[ross3421]

When it says judgment is given to them that doesn't mean they are being judged, it means they are being given authority.

The greek implies judgment "given". Also would not the reference of being alive a sign of resurrection and judgment, hence why the others are not yet?

[divaD]

The NT illuminates the OT, not the other way around. Until you understand that you're just not going to get it, I'm afraid.

The truth is, I see many non premils doing the same thing as Fenris is doing. He's trying to understand all of the Scriptures with only part of them, and so would anyone else, if they don't also consider the OT in all cases, and not just some. The OT prophets, should we now discard what they had to say about the future? None of it matters anymore, since we now have the NT? Speaking for myself, if I'm going to try and fit a puzzle together for instance, the first thing I would hope for is that all the pieces are there. One can't fit the puzzle together with only the NT. The OT is just as much a piece of that puzzle as is the NT. For example, why would Jesus tell us we need to go back to the book of Daniel if we are expected to understand what He was illuminating? Why didn't He illuminate it right there in the NT? It looks like to me that both the OT and NT were used to explain what He meant. I actually understand more than you give me credit for. I'm just not real great at explaining things on paper.

[RogerW]

RW, DD makes a good point in that post. But it's nothing that I wasn't aware of. But here's the problem, there's still the OT to deal with. How do we understand what she posted, in light of the OT?

For example. I did some research last night, since I recently brought up Isaiah 24. According to what I read, many scholars and theologians agree that Isaiah chapters 24-27 are like a condensed book of the book of Revelation. These conclude the 4 chapters deal primarily with Rev chapters 6-20 I believe. If this is so, then it looks like I'm on the right track, when I said a cpl of those verses paralleled the 1000 yrs. With that in mind, and if this is so, then how does one understand what DD posted when we also throw Isaiah 24:21-22 into the mix? Why would we ignore Isaiah 24:21-22 if it perhaps explains the 1000 yrs?

David Isa 24:21 speaks of a time referenced as "that day"...what is the time frame here? I believe it is the time all of the OT prophets anticipated. IOW "that day" is not a single day, but a certain time that begins on a certain day, and ends on a certain day. What is that time? The whole New Covenant era! "That day" is reference to Messiah the OT prophets looked for...not the second coming of Christ, but the first advent that had not yet come during the time of these OT prophets. None of the OT prophets anticipated a second coming! Why would they? Since they had not yet seen fulfillment of His coming at any time. So when Isaiah speaks of "that day" it is reference of all that will come to pass from the coming of Christ's first advent to the fulfillment of "that day" on the last day. All that was written would be fulfilled when Messiah came...not when He comes again, for the OT prophets were simply looking for His coming. So Isaiah 24 is prophecy that began to be fulfillled when Messiah came, some aspects are being fulfilled during the New Covenant era, and all prophecy will finally be fully fulfilled at His second coming. All because Messiah has come, just as all the OT prophets tell us He would.

With this in mind, try reading prophecy from the OT as though Messiah has come to fulfill all that was written. And stop reading a second coming into what the OT prophets wrote.

[RogerW]

Your statement is a bit confusing.......

Those made alive ARE those whom were dead and judged at the first resurrection.

1co 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
1co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
1co 15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming (first resurrection).

Since Christ has risen, it is apparent the dead have already risen. If the dead are not risen, then Christ is not risen and our faith is vain for we are yet in our sins. But since Christ is risen, Paul tells us that all those who have died in Christ are also risen. They died in faith before Christ came, and when Christ was raised they were also raised with Him. Christ being the firstfruits of them who had already died in faith. They were in Adam, but they died in faith looking for Christ at His coming. So when He came for them (Eph 4:8-10), they ascended into heaven with Him. This is the first resurrection, them being spiritually resurrected because flesh and blood or our natural bodies cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven. So the first resurrection is spiritual in Christ. Since Christ ascended into heaven, every believer becomes a partaker with Christ in this spiritual resurrection when he/she is born again of the Spirit. And since we partake of the first resurrection, we are assured that when He comes again we will receive our new resurrected bodies that have been changed from corruptible to incorruptible and mortal to immortality. This bodily resurrection will keep us from the second death or from being cast into the lake of fire.

True believers are judged for eternity by the book of life but other books will contain our works to be judged.

2co 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

Re 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

We receive our immortal and incorruptible bodies when Christ comes again, at the sound of the last trumpet (1Co 15:51-58). So when we appear with Christ at the Judgment Throne we will be standing with Christ at His right hand (Mt 25:33) where He is seated next to the Father, simply to hear "well done"..."enter into the joy of the Lord." We won't be judged for our works done on earth, Christ has already been judged for believers.

[John146]

The greek implies judgment "given". Also would not the reference of being alive a sign of resurrection and judgment, hence why the others are not yet?

Again, they are given authority, not being judged. Notice that they sit on thrones. That should be all the evidence you need to show that they are being given authority to judge, not being judged.

[John146]

The truth is, I see many non premils doing the same thing as Fenris is doing. He's trying to understand all of the Scriptures with only part of them, and so would anyone else, if they don't also consider the OT in all cases, and not just some. The OT prophets, should we now discard what they had to say about the future?

No one is discarding what they had to say. You have completely missed the point. I'm saying we should understand what they are saying based on the explanations given in the NT.

[RogerW]

The truth is, I see many non premils doing the same thing as Fenris is doing. He's trying to understand all of the Scriptures with only part of them, and so would anyone else, if they don't also consider the OT in all cases, and not just some. The OT prophets, should we now discard what they had to say about the future? None of it matters anymore, since we now have the NT? Speaking for myself, if I'm going to try and fit a puzzle together for instance, the first thing I would hope for is that all the pieces are there. One can't fit the puzzle together with only the NT. The OT is just as much a piece of that puzzle as is the NT. For example, why would Jesus tell us we need to go back to the book of Daniel if we are expected to understand what He was illuminating? Why didn't He illuminate it right there in the NT? It looks like to me that both the OT and NT were used to explain what He meant. I actually understand more than you give me credit for. I'm just not real great at explaining things on paper.

David, you are absolutely right when you say we must consider both the OT as well as the NT writings. But we have to remember that the OT is somewhat hidden through signs and symbols. It is impossible to come to the right understanding when we try to use the OT prophesy to explain the NT. It works the other way around, because what was hidden in the Old is made clear or at least most clear in the New. This is the mistake preterists, dispensationalists, and the Jews make. We have to use the NT to understand the Old signs and symbols. We cannot use signs ans symbols to prove the New.

For instance the preterists use symbology from the old to try to prove Christ came again in 70 AD. But when we consider the words of Christ from the New and then find similar language in the Old we don't hear OT prophets telling us Christ is coming in 70 AD, we hear them telling us what will come to pass at the end of time when Christ comes again on the clouds of glory.

We get it right because we've used the plain words of Christ to show us that even the prophets of old foretold the same thing. This is how we must read all the Old Testament prophecy. What was veiled in the Old is made manifest in the New, but the New is not made manifest if we try to force the plain language of Christ into the symbols from the old.

[divaD]

The NT illuminates the OT, not the other way around. Until you understand that you're just not going to get it, I'm afraid. You might notice that other than a premil interpretation of Rev 20 there is absolutely no reference to that supposed time period after Christ's return found anywhere in the NT. Now, why would that be if there really was going to be such a time period after the return of Christ? Surely, Jesus would have had something to say about that, wouldn't He? I would think Matt 25:31-46 would have been an ideal time for Him to mention it since it mentions both His return and the judgment. But He didn't. Neither did Paul. How could they not have even mentioned such a significant time period?

Eric, I know you feel you're being reasonable, logical in my case, even helpful, but the thing is, you're not making much sense to me. You're telling me until I understand what I already understand, that I won't undertand at all. Let me prove it to you. You said the NT is used to illuminate the OT, and that I don't undrstand that. So let's see if that's a correct assumption.

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


Hmmm...I wonder what all this means? It's too bad that there's not another testament that might shed some more light on this. But wait..there is another testament, perhaps I should look there. Let's see, I'm pretty certain the book of Revelation is in the NT. Perhaps I can look in there. Well, what do you know, Rev 19 and Rev 20 seem to shed a little more light on that passage.

I challenge you to do the same as I just did, even tho you claimed I didn't. Isaiah 24:21-22
is the passage in question. Now illuminate it with the NT just like I did, but really didn't.
I noticed Raybob attempted it in a prior post, but I'm not convinced it was related, since it doesn't explain verse 22.