why would millennial kingdom not be literal?

[Snoozy]

i honestly didnt even know that people existed who didnt think the 1000 year reign of Jesus was not a literal 1000 years on earth. only after i got on the computer i heard about it for the first time. this is the truth.


i think its literal but if someone were to prove to me its not from the bible id believe it of course.

but i wanna ask all of u who dont think its literal, why would it not be? is there a single reason for not taking the millennial kindgom as a literal kingdom on earth? any biblical reason whatsoever?? or is it just that people dont like the idea of it? whats the problem here?

 

[Ugly]

I learned a lot when I got online and started finding things out too. Some of it helped me a lot, much of it is a joke. People will twist the bible, or history, or both, to make their claims sound legit.
So use caution with such questions.
Personally I believe it's literal.

 

[valiant]

i honestly didnt even know that people existed who didnt think the 1000 year reign of Jesus was not a literal 1000 years on earth. only after i got on the computer i heard about it for the first time. this is the truth.


i think its literal but if someone were to prove to me its not from the bible id believe it of course.

but i wanna ask all of u who dont think its literal, why would it not be? is there a single reason for not taking the millennial kindgom as a literal kingdom on earth? any biblical reason whatsoever?? or is it just that people dont like the idea of it? whats the problem here?

Because the Gospel is God's final word to man. IF there was a millennium it would be going backwards.

 

[Snoozy]

Because the Gospel is God's final word to man. IF there was a millennium it would be going backwards.

hows it goign backwards when revelation is the last book in the bible? and its mentioned in one of the last chapters of the nt

 

[Ugly]

hows it goign backwards when revelation is the last book in the bible? and its mentioned in one of the last chapters of the nt

He isn't being literal. He's being sarcastic about going backwards.
An example of faulty logic is all he's provided.

 

[TMS]

Use the Bible alone not presumption and tradition, and show me your way of seeing that;
1. it is 1000 literal years.
2. on earth.

Plain and simple answer please.

 

[valiant]

hows it goign backwards when revelation is the last book in the bible? and its mentioned in one of the last chapters of the nt

But chapter 20 of Revelation summarises the long period of time ('a thousand years') from when Jesus bound Satan and began His reign in glory with His saints ruling OVER the world. Anything beyond that to a different Gospel is a retrograde step.

 

[valiant]

He isn't being literal. He's being sarcastic about going backwards.
An example of faulty logic is all he's provided.

your so called millennium is purposeless. Christ reigns NOW and to introduce another Gospel is an insult to Him.

 

[notuptome]

The main reason is that a literal millennium does not fit into their doctrinal position.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Snoozy]

But chapter 20 of Revelation summarises the long period of time ('a thousand years') from when Jesus bound Satan and began His reign in glory with His saints ruling OVER the world. Anything beyond that to a different Gospel is a retrograde step.

no evidence for any of this.

satan is clearly very active in deceiving the nations today. or else there would be no debates. and saints arent ruling over the world, last time i checked saints are being persecuted? how are the christians ruling the world? this reign doesnt feel like much of a reign. christians are so divided and cant even agree on simple doctrines yet we are reigning the earth somehow.

saints will rule the world once Jesus returns.

and who is talking about a different gospel? what does that have to do with anything

 

[Angela53510]

Well, the word millennium (as a discrete time period) only occurs in one book of the Bible. If it was that important, it would appear in more places.

The other reason is that a lot of Revelation is symbolic. It is apocalyptic literature. It is not literal. (Except perhaps the first 3 chapters - strange how the people want it to be literal everywhere else, want the letters of the churches to be examples and apply them to the church today. When, they were written to specific churches in John's day.) I personally do think the first 3 chapters can also be symbolic, like saying, "That church down the street that folded was neither hot nor cold." You would immediately recognize that I was comparing that church to Laodicea. That church was not the literal first century Laodicea!

The problem is, some people think every word of the Bible is meant to be read literally, and it isn't! That is why Jesus talked in parables, because he wanted to obscure meanings. Some things are not meant to be known. Yet, people come into this forum all the time with detailed interpretations of the symbols in Revelation, and they say they take the Bible literally. In some circles, the word "metaphor" is seen as an evil, Bible twisting word. And yet, there are literal metaphors from start to finish in the Bible. Even the sacrifices of the OT were about a foreshadowing of Jesus Christ's sacrifice on the cross. And think of things like "the Lion of Judah" or "The Lamb of God." Those are metaphors! And we know and use them!

Anyway, millennium cannot possibly be literal, or it would not be isolated in one chapter. And taken in context with the rest of Apocalyptic and prophetic literature, it simply isn't not something that we should pull out and make a huge doctrine about.

 

[garee]

Amen Angela

To begin with the whole book of Revelation is signified using signs as that seen, the temporal, to give us the spiritual understanding, the eternal as that not seen .

It becomes a matter how do we hear God, as the things of God's perfect loving law seeking His approval and not as the things of men after the philosophies as oral traditions of men of this world? Which master or way of interpreting.Do we need men to teach us or can God perform that which he promises?

Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:


2Co 4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

It certainly applies to the the parable in Chapter 20 and the word thousand, the word in question which represents a unknown, unseen number throughout the scriptures used in many examples in order to establish the use of parables.

It is no less used as a metaphor than any of the other metaphors in that parable.Like in the beginning I saw an angel, angels have no form it was a revelation as a interpretation of God and the things that have form speak of the eternal not seen . They can get turned upside down and easily take way Gods understanding of the parables..

The apostate unconverted Jew turned things upside down in that way... taking away his understanding as His interpretation as a vision, revelation to us. that chased after the things seen requiring a sign before they would believe. This made them stumble over the cross an obstacle in their way.

And I saw an angel (not literal)come down from heaven, having the key (not literal) of the bottomless pit (not literal)and a great chain(not literal)in his hand(not literal). And he laid hold on the dragon(not literal), that old serpent(not literal), which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand(not literal)years,
And cast him into the bottomless pit(not literal) and shut him up, and set a seal (not literal)upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand (not literal)years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season. And I saw thrones,(not literal)and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls (not literal)of them that were beheaded(not literal)for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast(not literal), neither his image(not literal), neither had received his mark(not literal)upon their foreheads(not literal), or in their hands(not literal); and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand (not literal)years.But the rest of the "dead"(not literal)lived not again until the thousand(not literal)years were finished. "This is the first resurrection."Rev 20:5

"This is the first resurrection.the resurrection we are presently in. It began over two thousand literal years ago when Christ said it was the finished, the time of reformation had come and is still here reforming souls and hearts.we are over the literal thousand mark and no one has received the promise of their new incorruptible body .

That's the second and final resurrection on the last day in the twinkling of the eye the former things will not be remembered or ever come to mind. then the wedding will be consummated and the glorious veil of his bride lifted and we will see Him face to face.

 

[valiant]

no evidence for any of this.

where does it say He will rule ON EARTH? Bang goes your evidence.

satan is clearly very active in deceiving the nations today. or else there would be no debates.

Nevertheless he is restricted. Jesus bound him (Matth 12.28-29)

and saints arent ruling over the world,

well I am lol eph 2.5-6

last time i checked saints are being persecuted? how are the christians ruling the world?

in their triumph over persecution among other ways

this reign doesnt feel like much of a reign. christians are so divided and cant even agree on simple doctrines yet we are reigning the earth somehow.

well get reigning then!

saints will rule the world once Jesus returns.

where does it say so?

and who is talking about a different gospel? what does that have to do with anything

the so called Gospel of the Kingdom (as opposed to the real Gospel of the Kingly Rule of God).

 

[TMS]

Rev 20:1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
Rev 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
Rev 20:3 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.
Rev 20:4 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.
Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

Do you agree that After the first resurrection Satan is bound for 1000 years and the saved reigned with Christ 1000 years. ??

i agree with this but the place where the saved reign with Christ is not told here.

 

[Ahwatukee]

Hello Angela,

Well, the word millennium (as a discrete time period) only occurs in one book of the Bible. If it was that important, it would appear in more places.

The above is false thinking on your part and pure conjecture. The fact is that "a thousand years" is mentioned six times from Rev.1:1-7. The context should always be considered first. That said, there is nothing whatsoever in the context that would lead the reader to seek after another meaning other than the plain meaning of a literal thousand years. Anything else is inferred without any basis.

The other reason is that a lot of Revelation is symbolic. It is apocalyptic literature. It is not literal.

The book of Revelation should be read in the literal sense until a symbolic interpretation is obvious and not vise versa. It is these standards that men have created and that people adhere to such as Revelation being "apocalyptic literature" that keeps people from understanding it. Most of the symbolism is revealed right in Revelation itself.

The problem is, some people think every word of the Bible is meant to be read literally, and it isn't! That is why Jesus talked in parables, because he wanted to obscure meanings. Some things are not meant to be known.

Well, the purpose of the book of Revelation which God gave us would disagree with you. Jesus spoke in parables to that generation of Israel, but he said to his disciples and the rest of the church "but to you has been given the knowledge of the kingdom of God.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The disciples came to him and asked, “Why do you speak to the people in parables?” He replied, “Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them.


"In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: “ ‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. For this people’s heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.’


But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


The "they" in the scripture above, was that generation of Israel. So please stop applying to the church what was meant for that generation of Israel. As far as the book of Revelation, it's purpose is stated right in the first verse:

"The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things that must soon take place."

You need to forget about your hermeneutics and your apocalyptic literature guidelines and just read the book of Revelation, because you're missing the meaning.

 

[PennEd]

where does it say He will rule ON EARTH? Bang goes your evidence.



Nevertheless he is restricted. Jesus bound him (Matth 12.28-29)



well I am lol eph 2.5-6



in their triumph over persecution among other ways



well get reigning then!



where does it say so?



the so called Gospel of the Kingdom (as opposed to the real Gospel of the Kingly Rule of God).

Can you please tell me when Jesus sat on DAVID'S throne?
Luke1: 32 [FONT=&quot]He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. [/FONT]

 

[valiant]

The fact is that "a thousand years" is mentioned six times from Rev.1:1-7. The context should always be considered first. That said, there is nothing whatsoever in the context that would lead the reader to seek after another meaning other than the plain meaning of a literal thousand years. Anything else is inferred without any basis.

The use of 'a thousand' in the Old Testament? E.g. 'a thousand generations' meaning a large number of generations. 'The cattle on a thousand hills' meaning a large number of hills. Need I go on?

The book of Revelation should be read in the literal sense until a symbolic interpretation is obvious and not vise versa

Why when John himself said it was a book of signs?


.

It is these standards that men have created

John? but John also created the book.

 

[valiant]

Can you please tell me when Jesus sat on DAVID'S throne?
Luke1: 32 He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David.

Acts 2.30-36

 

[PennEd]

Acts 2.30-36

You understand this passage completely vindicates a literal Political Throne on Earth don't you? Thank you for refreshing my memory on that.

30 Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne,[e] 31 he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption. 32 This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses. 33 Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear.
34 “For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he says himself:
‘The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at My right hand,
35 Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.”

Jesus is currently sitting at the right Hand of His FATHER'S Throne. UNTIL HE MAKES HIS ENEMIES HIS FOOTSTOOL. You are not trying to suggest that David sat on his throne in heaven are you?

So I ask again. The angel Gabriel told Mary Jesus would sit on David's throne. Please tell me when He did that?

 

[TMS]

The new Jerusalem...
Rev 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
Rev 20:8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
Rev 20:9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.

This tells me that the Saints are in the City of God protected from Satan and all the evil outside. Than Fire destroyed the wicked including Satan. John explains it again with more insight.


Rev 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
Rev 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
Rev 20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
Rev 21:2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.



Rev 21:3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
Rev 21:4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; .....I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.
Rev 21:7 He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.
Rev 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
Rev 21:9 And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife.
Rev 21:10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,

Than the city is described...
Rev 21:27 And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

Rev 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
Rev 22:15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

When Jesus said i go to prepare a place for you, i'm sure it was the new Jerusalem that is in Heaven now.
And the evil or the unsaved are not raised until the 1000 years are finished.

Rev 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.

The question is when does the New Jerusalem come down out of Heaven from God?