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.

[Checkpoint]

Confusing it can so easily be or become.

If one is predisposed to making it that way, sure.

Judgment is the decision being made by the Judge. It is a one time experience for the individual...

Right.

... It is a one time experience for the individual, and thus it is temporal.

The term 'temporal,' Checkpoint, means of or related to worldly, linear time. We are temporal beings... while we are on this earth, anyway... and God is eternal, or ouside of worldly, linear time. But we will all eventually be eternal beings; the only question is how we will spend that eternity -- either in God's eternal blessing and rest or under His judgment and eternally devoid of that blessing and grace. This is what will be finally determined in the Judgment.

Punishment is the specific decision made regarding the individual so judged. As such, it is one-time and temporal.

Well, once and for all, with eternal implications.

The specific Judgment decision, whether it be life or punishment, is eternal and lasts forever.

Yes sir.

Kind of funny how myth-one "liked" your post. You pretty much refuted everything he's said this entire thread. Either he's confused or he's coming around, I guess...

Grace and peace to you, Pinseeker and myth-one.

And to both of you also.

Confused or not, we see things as we see things.

We are not yet "face-to-face".

My post got a basic thumbs up from both of you even though you are poles apart.

That is what's kind of funny.

I wonder who has a "reading comprehension" problem, as some poster put it.

Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 161 by myth-one.com]

Jesus was given the opportunity to sacrifice his life for mankind exactly because he was perfect and sinless and as a mighty spirit creature was NOT in line for death as all humans are because they are imperfect and sinful.

Now, I don't really follow you as you're talking about Christ living a sinless life so that he could prove that it's possible. Possible for Adam's progeny? God and Jesus knew that mankind could NOT refrain from sinning. It seems to have gone along with imperfection from the beginning. That is exactly why Jesus had to die for humans.

"So, then, as through one trespass [Adam's rebellion] the result to men of all sorts was condemnation, so too through one act of justification [Jesus' sacrifice] the result to men of all sorts is their being declared righteous for life.

"For just as through the disobedience of the one man many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one person many will be made righteous." (Romans 5:18,19)

So it was not possible for humans to save themselves. We sin every day and most of the time aren't aware of it. It IS possible to not commit serious, gross sins, the sins that God has plainly set forth as unacceptable and worthy of death, such as murder, fornication, stealing, and the like, which most people are aware of. We CAN refrain from doing those things. So, indeed, that is possible. But Jesus died for the sins that we can't help, since we were born with the tendency to sin.

He also showed that it is possible for a PERFECT person to not sin. Adam could have refused to follow Eve and partake of the fruit and essentially give Jehovah the finger. But Adam's offspring could not be sinless, imperfect as we all are. We can refrain from gross sins, but not all sins. Jesus' sacrifice covers INHERITED sin, but not INTENTIONAL sin.
(See I John 5:16-18.)

[myth-one.com]

[Replying to post 161 by myth-one.com]

Jesus was given the opportunity to sacrifice his life for mankind exactly because he was perfect and sinless and as a mighty spirit creature was NOT in line for death as all humans are because they are imperfect and sinful.

No. Jesus had nothing to do with the decision as He did not yet exist.

It was The Word who was given the opportunity to be made flesh as the man Jesus Christ, and fix the "fault" in the Old Testament Covenant.

This makes sense as the Word created everything in the beginning. He created it, so He should fix it.

So the Word agreed to the plan. This is the point at which the commitment of any sacrifice was accepted or rejected. The Word did not have to commit to the plan at this point. But by doing so, He understood the bad things that faced Him by being made human. He accepted those terrible things at this point:

And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.

But once The Word was temporally made the man Jesus, Jesus had no choice but to die the first death as that is appointed to all mankind.

So Jesus' death is not actually what directly saves us -- it sealed the deal by ending His sinless life and making the man Jesus an heir to everlasting life under the Old Testament:

The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ ... (Romans 8:16-17)

Jesus will reject His reward and spread it over all those who believe in Him.

Living a sinless life gained Jesus a future everlasting spiritual life as His reward under the first covenant between God and man.

Under that covenant, the wages of sin is death, but He never sinned thus He does not have to die the second and everlasting death.

However, He refuses to accept His reward of being born again of the Spirit, and gifts His reward to all who believe in Him as their Savior from the wages of their sins.

It is the gift that saves us, not His death. His death created His reward of the inheritance by closing out His physical life as sinless. His future reward then became the gift for those who believe in Him as their Savior under a new covenant.

Here is the justification for that:

15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.

16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.

17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:

21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

God and Jesus knew that mankind could NOT refrain from sinning.

If God knew that no mankind could refrain from sinning, then the entire farce would be a fraud.

Jesus proved it was not a fraud, by becoming an heir unto everlasting life under the first covenant. Thus it was possible for a human to do so.

If The Word knew that no man could refrain from sinning, why would He accept an impossible mission?

So it was not possible for humans to save themselves.

How can you say that after Jesus did so?

He also showed that it is possible for a PERFECT person to not sin.

He made it possible for "whosoever" to gain everlasting spiritual bodied like the Word -- not just the PERFECT (whatever that is).

This includes all those we hate, lock up, belittle, look down on, discriminate against, legislate against, impose tariffs on, etc.

None of us are really any better than the worst of us. A mass murderer did not exit the womb and set his goal that day to becoming a mass murderer. He exited the womb into an environment which produced what he became.

Jesus' sacrifice covers INHERITED sin, but not INTENTIONAL sin.

The wages of sin is death.

There is one unforgivable sin -- blasphemy of the Holy Ghost:

Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. (Matthew 12:31-32)

And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven. (Luke 12:10)

Other that that, any word can be used before the word sin, and it is still a sin.

However, sins are not imputed or counted against one, if they do not understand that the act constitutes a sin:

For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. (Romans 5:13)

[PinSeeker]

Jesus executes the Judgement at His return, which is final -- a once and for all event. Subsequently, though, those whom Jesus "never knew" enter into their eternal state under God's judgment. Which means, myth-one, not that God judges them again (and again and again and again), but rather the absolute removal of His grace and blessing. Being judged, which is a one-time event, and being in a state of judgment (under God's judgment), which is ongoing from the point a final judgment is made, are two different things. This is what Scripture very clearly teaches. It does not teach annihilationism.

That's clear as mud.

Then wash your face.

PinSeeker's interpretation:

Jesus executes a once and for all final judgement at His return. Judgement's over.

The Judgment event, that's right...

PinSeeker's interpretation:

Oops. wait a minute. Those that Jesus never knew enter into a state of eternal judgment under God's judgment. Were these overlooked or unable to attend Jesus' judgement?

LOL! You're trying to muddy the waters again. Those that Jesus judges -- shall we say, negatively -- either into a state of eternal judgment under God, which is eternal condemnation. They don't get "judged again" (or again and again and again) -- I was crystal clear about that.

I notice that one is a judgement, while the other is a judgment. Is that significant?

You "notice"... wrongly. One is a judgment, one is a state of being under judgment, or condemnation. Think of it in a temporal way, since this is easier for all of us temporal folks, and then it is easy to extrapolate to the eternal:

The criminal gets his day in court, and he is judged to be guilty. Subsequently, he goes to jail for his life sentence -- as a result of the judgment against him. He is incarcerated for life, under judgment and condemnation because of THE judgment that was rendered against him.

Are they similar events?

One (condemnation) is precipitated by the other (judgment).

... God's judgement is not a judgment at all, but simply the absolute removal of His grace and blessing.

I wouldn't be so flippant as to say "simply," but that's right.

Is that a big deal?

If you get the "deal" wrong, it is. Which you most certainly did, and continue to do. But that's really okay, you know? It's not a salvific matter. By getting it wrong, you don't bring condemnation on yourself and, well, losing your salvation. You're just... mistaken.

Then you need to quote those scriptures as your explanation is confusing. Start with it's a final one time judgement, but then judgment begins for those Jesus never knew.

Well, I don't "need" to do anything. I mean, from time to time, I need to go to the bathroom, but that's beside the point...

But sure. I will. I have before, but I will again here:

I cited Matthew 25:31-46 (Jesus's description of the Judgment), so no need to do so again. This is a once-and-for-all, one-time event... the separation of the wheat from the tares, the sheep from the goats.

I also cited Luke 16:19-31, where, in His parable regarding the rich man and Lazarus, Jesus is describing the state of condemned man (the rich man) after the Judgment -- after he has been judged and consigned to hell.

In John 5, Jesus clearly states, "(God the Father) gave (Me) authority to execute judgment, because (I am) the Son of Man. Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear (My) voice, and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment" (vv.27-29; emphasis mine).

It's very clear, like I said; it's really is not difficult to understand.

Isn't two judgments double jeopardy?

Um, myth-one, you're not putting God under the Constitution of the United States, are you? LOL! There are not "two judgments." Maybe now you see. But I'm not holding my breath.

[PinSeeker]

yada yada yada...

============================================

Do you disagree with that and why?

You know, myth-one, it's not that I disagree with that ("that" being God's Word), and I don't completely -- not completely, anyway -- disagree with you. But I do disagree with your overall take on these things. And this is not a new disagreement. It's an debate basically between premillennialism and amillennialism, and it's not a new disagreement. You are where you are on it. I am where I am. We're not going to resolve it; so let's quit trying to convince each other, give each other the right hand of fellowship, and part on good terms. Can you just not do that? Is that the problem? If so, it shouldn't be. Grace and peace to you.

[myth-one.com]

The criminal gets his day in court, and he is judged to be guilty. Subsequently, he goes to jail for his life sentence -- as a result of the judgment against him.

But what if the sentence for his crime is death.

He goes to the death chamber and is executed.

And we never see him again.

That is the case we are discussing in the scriptures.

The wages of sin is death, not life in prison.

Do you finally get that?

Nonbelievers get the death penalty in the lake of fire.

Never to be heard from, seen, or remembered again!

You could use the word annihilated if you like.

[PinSeeker]

We who would be teachers of others are not to be crowd pleasers or crowd followers; we are under obligation to our God.

Nobody's suggesting otherwise, Checkpoint.

[PinSeeker]

But what if the sentence for his crime is death.

You're going beyond the point. I knew you would... <eyeroll>

He goes to the death chamber and is executed. And we never see him again.

This is the temporal world, myth-one, and not the eternal. The "parable" I offered was not meant to conflate the two. But like I said, I knew you would; that's your agenda. And I "get" your agenda, but don't accept it, because it's... wrong.

Grace and peace to you.

[tam]

Peace to you all!


Some are speaking of the separation of the sheep and the goats as the same event as the final judgment that takes place in Rev 20:11-15. But these are two completely different events. The criteria of judgment may be the same for both; but they are not the same event.




The separation of the sheep and the goats occurs at the beginning of the thousand years, when Christ returns, and this separation continues during those years. The sheep and the goats are people of the nations (they are not Christian) who are alive at the time Christ returns. The sheep are invited into the kingdom; the goats are cast out of the kingdom, all based upon how they treated even a least one of Christ's brothers (because whatever one does for one of His brothers, one does for Him).


I shared as my Lord has taught me on these matters here:

viewtopic.php?p=965799#965799

and here,

viewtopic.php?p=731804#731804





**


The final judgment in Revelation 20 is the judgment of the dead. These also are not Christian. Christians are not dead at the end of the thousand years - not in ANY sense of the word. If Christians are not dead at the beginning of the thousand years, how in the world could they be dead at the END of the thousand years?

Note that here at the judgment of the dead, the sea gives up the dead in it; and death and hades give up the dead in them. Christians are not the dead to begin with, but they are certainly not the dead in the sea, or in death and hades.

Christians (who died before Christ returns) are only ever described as being the dead in Christ.




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

[JehovahsWitness]

@JehovahsWitness:

• “Are you suggesting there is something in (Genesis 1:26-27) that suggests a conscious part of man that survives the death of the body?â€�

Yes.

• “If so what?â€�

I think I was quite clear.

No, it is not clear to me. Would you like to express in English words what words in the verse supports a conscious part of man that survives the death of the body?

GENESIS 1:26-27

Then God said: “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness, and let them have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and the domestic animals and all the earth and every creeping animal that is moving on the earth.� And God went on to create the man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.

IS it perhaps the part that says "Let us make man in our image"? If so, I'll admit I've never seen this verse used to support the immortality of the soul and would be very interested in seeing how you attempt to build an arguement from this.



JW




JW




RELATED POSTS

What does it mean that man was created in God's image?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 153#957153

Why did God say "Let "us" make man"?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 869#903869