The Millennium, the 1000 years of Revelation 20...

[Checkpoint]

This thread stems from the following exchange between myself and Pinseeker:

PinSeeker wrote:

The millennium of Revelation 20 is not a future event. It was when Jeremiah prophesied, obviously, but is not anymore. Or, to be more exacting, it's no longer merely a future event.

Checkpoint asked:

Then why do so many believers think of it as yet future only?

Pinseeker explained:

For at least two reasons, I think:

1. A basic misunderstanding of Revelation as a whole, and the Millennium of chapter 20 included.

2. Many believers (primarily western believers) have bought into the heresy of the "rapture," which came about in the early 19th century. It's not that they are heretics, it's just that that's all they've ever been exposed to.

That's one take from one school of thought.

Your take may be similar or be completely different.

Please share it here, and tell us why you hold that position.

[PinSeeker]

[Replying to post 18 by myth-one.com]

The second resurrection is equally important![/ quote]

There is no such thing as a "second resurrection", in terminology or in future actuality.

It is not anywhere in scripture, which always speaks of one resurrection, of both believers and unbelievers, in connection with the Judgment that takes place when Jesus returns.

No interpretation of Revelation 20 can override what the whole of scripture plainly teaches time and again.

Ah, well, I would say, Checkpoint, that since Scripture speaks of the first resurrection, there is, inferentially and necessarily, a second -- or more correctly a final -- resurrection. You may disagree, and I understand that. Grace and peace to you.

[PinSeeker]

Is there one thing gained by a "soul" merging back with its resurrected physical body? Shouldn't the soul be dreading the resurrection??

By no means, if the soul is a believer. Because at the resurrection, the physical body will be redeemed (as it never was when the believer was still alive); this is what Paul is saying in Romans 7 when he says:

• "So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not... if I am doing the very thing I do not want, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me... I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death?"

So, in answer to your question, no, but rather eagerly awaiting it (the resurrection).

[PinSeeker]

The thousand years of Revelation 20 extend from the first coming of Christ to just before his Second Coming, when Satan will be loosed for a short time. This position on the thousand years of Revelation 20 implies that Christians who are now living are enjoying the benefits of this millennium since Satan has been bound for the duration of this period. That Satan is now bound does not mean that he is not active in the world today but that during this period he cannot deceive the nations — that is, cannot prevent the spread of the gospel. The binding of Satan during this era, in other words, makes missions and evangelism possible. This should certainly be a source of encouragement to the church on earth.

Satan is bound?

That's funny.

One sign of the end times is that the gospel must first be preached in the entire world before the end of this age, the age of man, can occur:

And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come. (Matthew 24:14)

In fact, the "Great Commission" in Matthew 28:19-20 commands Christians to accomplish this very prophecy:

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen. (Matthew 28:19-20)

However, even with our wonderful worldwide communication systems of today, will we ever achieve this great accomplishment? No! God has to send an angel shortly before the Second Coming to fulfill this prophecy so that the age of man can end:

And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people. (Revelation 14:6)

If God has to send an angel to fulfill this prophesy, then the Church failed to do so!

Why?

Because Satan successfully sealed the scriptures from mankind's understanding in the first three or four pages of the Bible. When they read in Genesis that man was created a living "soul," and then Satan states, "Ye shall not surely die," they believed a part of them would live forever.

Therefore, the second death cannot mean death at all. It means eternal punishment. When John 3:16 states that nonbelievers will perish, they know that it cannot mean perish because their "soul" lives forever!

Perish must be re-interpreted to mean something other than death. So it means spiritual death. But spirits can't die either. So it means eternal separation from God. But God is omnipresent. So it means . . . . etc, etc.

Therefore, Satan's lie and man's ignorance combine to keep the Bible sealed. When will it be unsealed? In the end times:

And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. (Daniel 12:9)

Christians typically proclaim they spend eternity in heaven while all others endure some type of severe everlasting conscious condemnation in hell.

If that message was successfully preached to every person in every nation, the end could still not occur -- because that is not the Good News!

The good news is that those who believe in Jesus will have everlasting life and all others will quickly perish.

LOL! Yes, Satan is bound, in that He can no longer "deceive the nations," which means to stop the spread of the Gospel. He cannot stop folks from becoming Christians. In this way he is bound.

The rest... I mean, you can argue with me until your face turns blue; it will do you absolutely no good. But it's not really me you're arguing with...

[myth-one.com]

LOL! Yes, Satan is bound, . . .

In the book of Luke, when Satan tempted Jesus for forty days in the desert, Satan offered Jesus power over all the kingdoms of the earth:

And the devil, taking him up into a high mountain, showed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. And the devil said unto him, All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whosoever I will I give it. If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be thine. (Luke 4:5-7)

Notice that Jesus did not question the devil's authority to give him power over the earth. He knew that Satan did indeed have control over the earth and could give or share this power with whomever he pleased.

Once God makes a covenant, or testament, or promise, He always keeps it. Satan was given rule over the earth. Although he rebelled against his creator, God did not and will not violate the agreement. Satan was given rule over the world and a ruler must be defeated and overthrown!

This is one of the reasons Jesus is coming to the earth, to defeat Satan.

Until the Second Coming and defeat of Satan, Satan (AKA the devil) still rules the world.

It's like a rebellious colony within the Kingdom of God.

Was Jesus wrong or confused?

Do you have some source which Jesus did not have access to?

[PinSeeker]

You're quite a fellow, myth-one.

Satan can do nothing that God doesn't allow him to do. Yes, Satan is the "ruler" of the world, but Jesus's Kingdom is here now, too; He even said so. And Jesus has already won the victory -- on the cross. Again, Jesus's Kingdom, which is not of this world but contains the world, is here now, just not in its fullness yet. This is the battle, and we are in the middle of it, and the Holy Spirit is our helper. When Jesus comes back, He will win the final battle, defeating sin and death forever, and usher in His Kingdom in its fullness. As for us now, we can live as if this has already happened, because it is certain. Yes, God keeps His promises; they all have their 'yes' and 'amen' in Christ. The Millennium, the tribulation, the battle... is now.

Grace and peace to you.

[tam]

duplicate

[tam]

Peace to you!

[Replying to post 22 by Checkpoint]

Hi Tam,

Ok, let's look at it that way, as being first in sequence, for, on reflection, I now favor that usage, that interpretation!

To be first in sequence there must be a second to follow at a later time.

Yes. There is no reason to call something the first resurrection if it is the ONLY resurrection.

The term "second resurrection" is not found anywhere in scripture, for a very good reason, there is none.

Is this not a contradiction of your logic just above?

The term "second resurrection" is not found in scripture that I know of, but a resurrection which follows after the first resurrection is described.

The first resurrection occurs at the start of the "thousand years". But the rest of the dead do not come to life until after the thousand years are ended. That is the second resurrection, the resurrection of the dead.

The first resurrection is for Christians.

The second resurrection - the resurrection of the dead - is for all those who have died (who are not Christian), from the beginning. Some are resurrected to life and some are resurrected to judgment and the second (eternal) death, ie, the lake of fire. This is done before the judgment seat of God, and is according to what they have done as recorded in their scrolls.

Yes, I know it is widely believed today that there is one, but it is not what the Bible tells us.

That belief comes from how Revelation 20 is being interpreted rather than from the consistent teaching of the rest of scripture.

There are plenty of examples I could cite, but this one will suffice for now:

Acts 24:

14 I do confess to you, however, that I worship the God of our fathers according to the Way, which they call a sect. I believe everything that is laid down by the Law and written in the Prophets,

15 and I have the same hope in God that they themselves cherish, that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked.

Not two resurrections but one, " a resurrection of both".

The resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked is the second resurrection, the resurrection of the dead. (Just because Paul refers here to the resurrection of the righteous and the wicked does not mean this is the only resurrection Paul knows about, though he could have personally meant also the first resurrection when he spoke of this. Remember his audience though; he is bringing to mind the resurrection belief that he has in common with his accusers.)



But Christ offered another resurrection - the first resurrection - for those who belong to Him, wherein they will reign as kings and priests in His Kingdom with Him, for a thousand years.

Paul speaks of the first resurrection as well at 1Corinthians 15:23 and 1 Thess 4:15-17.


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[myth-one.com]

... Satan successfully sealed the scriptures from mankind's understanding in the first three or four pages of the Bible. .

If Satan has sealed the scriptures from being understood, how do you know you have correctly understood Revelation?

Here's a wild & crazy idea.

The scriptures state in several separate verses that anything we pray for, believing that it will be received, then it will be received:

Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them. (Mark 11:24)

So pray asking God to let you understand the scriptures, believing He will do so.

Then read the scriptures.

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to post 18 by myth-one.com]

The second resurrection is equally important![/ quote]

There is no such thing as a "second resurrection", in terminology or in future actuality.

It is not anywhere in scripture, which always speaks of one resurrection, of both believers and unbelievers, in connection with the Judgment that takes place when Jesus returns.

No interpretation of Revelation 20 can override what the whole of scripture plainly teaches time and again.

Ah, well, I would say, Checkpoint, that since Scripture speaks of the first resurrection, there is, inferentially and necessarily, a second -- or more correctly a final -- resurrection. You may disagree, and I understand that. Grace and peace to you.

I do see your point, Pinseeker, but I also do disagree with it.

Why?

Because that Revelation 20 passage itself spells out what is "second" in time sequence.

It is "the second death".

Only in Revelation are the terms "first resurrection" and "second death" used.

The challenge for us is to determine what exactly they are used for, just what they intend to convey, in that context.

Outside of Revelation there is only one resurrection, not two or more.

It consists of both the saved and the lost; of both believers and unbelievers.

Anyway, think about what I am saying.

Grace and peace.

[myth-one.com]

Outside of Revelation there is only one resurrection, not two or more.

It consists of both the saved and the lost; of both believers and unbelievers.

A resurrection is discussed outside of Revelation which involves only the resurrection of believers -- those that are Christ's:

For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the first fruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. (I Corinthians 15:22-23)

The resurrection in Revelation involves only nonbelievers.