What are your thoughts on the "Millennial Day Theory?" Christ to come back in the 7,000th year

Many believe Christ's death marked the start of the church age, the last 2,000 years...so the start of the 7,000 could be within the decade.

Did He? I thought the Bible said to comfort one another with these words of a promised rapture, and that we will know when it is at the door.
No major math going on here, sir. An 8-year old can add 1,000's.

Care to explain why?

First time i heard that theory was about 66 years ago.

That's awesome! Knowledge is to increase in the final days.

The trick is misinterpreting scripture to empose those numbers on dates and times to add them up.
The Bible does indeed say comfort each other with these words in 1 thessalonians chapter 4 and then you go on and read chapter 5 which starts out saying that the Day of The Lord comes as a thief in the night, which is to say unexpectedly. But that it wont catch us off guard because we are watching amd in watch we comfort each other and dont get caughr up in worldly stuff and put on faith and love.
Not one word about calculating dates.

Pretty much, as the "after TWO days" and "IN the THIRD day" of Hosea 5:13-6:3 says, "I, even I, will tear ['tear' who? v.6:1!] and go away" and "I will go and return to My place, TILL...," which words "go away" and "go and return to My place" speaks of when He ascended (Acts 1), so... from the time of 32ad (rather than at some point prior to that).





In the same context where Peter said "be not ignorant OF THIS ONE THING," he also spoke of Paul's epistles, "in which some things are dysnoēta [hard-to-be-understood]..." Why is that, do ya think? Why would Peter be saying that in Paul's epistles are some things "hard-to-be-understood"? (if that wasn't indeed the case)

Everyone in this community, those lurking and reading too, will due waiting for the very same thing Christians waited for these past 2000 years.

It's actually from ancient times, it stems from Genesis 2:4 and comes from the word toledoth the entire verse is here https://biblehub.com/interlinear/genesis/2-4.htm ... In Jewish thinking their calendar reflects the year to be 5783(currently) and is counting off the 6000 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_6000 ...

If you consider the book of Jubilees it is divided into 50 chapters and 50x120 is 6000(why 120?), https://biblehub.com/genesis/6-3.htm and why 50 instead of 49?(year of rest follows the 49).... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Jubilees ... In short though there are multiple examples of the millennial day theory prior to Christianity... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Jubilees

If you follow the links at the bottom of this page (same as above) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_6000 you will find a link to the millennial day theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennial_Day_Theory and it is interesting to note that it seems that early Church premillennialism is deeply rooted in prior Jewish thought. In reading the different things they spoke of in their writings I find Irenaeus of Lyons most interesting(not found in wiki article?) and so I will give you this from "Against Heresies" ,book 5, chapter 28 https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103528.htm in which he states that the six days are not only an account of things formerly created but also an prophecy of what is to come. In conclusion it is no new manner of thought but rather ancient...

The forefathers in charge of ascertaining the year on the Hebrew calendar were obliged to do so obeying the Law. Because of this they could not make an exact computation of the first year of what is called time for they were only permitted to use the year's afforded by the Word, that is the years from Adam according to Genesis.

Because some of the ages of those figuring in genealogies are missing, they were obliged to use only the years known in order to obey the law, not to add nor take away from God's Word. Ergo, some of the years are missing therefore we are much closer to the year of the beginning of the seventh thousand than any man knows. It could be just a few years and it could be more.
Of that day and of that hour no man knows except the Father.

Absolutely...
People expected a great military and Regal leader when Jesus came...

People expected the Heavenly Kingdom to set everything right upon the Earth any second after Jesus's ascension....

The list of expectations by people of God doing something is long and disastrous...and ridiculous if it weren't for the piles of bodies.

God is not going to have a "coming out" party that demonstrates his power to a world full of self important Karen's. He doesn't want to know or have anything to do with them...and He is usually kind and generous. But He has a duty to those who are humble to not let the Karen's in.

And God and I have had this ongoing conversation about His Book....and the Hermeneutics concerning it.
(Guess who wins those debates?)
Which is why God has a very unique sense of twisted but benevolent humor. And if you don't get it...you aren't going to. It's a one of a kind Characteristic.

Here's the rub.
ALL the manuscripts hand copied over the past 5,000+ years have an idiom of speech.
The number 1,000 and the word for forever are only separated by a dot from the pen...one that is often forgotten or accidentally placed in. A vowel accent dot. As such, in Hebrew, the words are synonymous.,,

Meaning that it's an intentionally vague expression. IE "NOT TELLING "
Which is precisely the inference that should come from these passages.

in your own words?

I was kind of disappointed that this video (in Post #27) didn't all all cover what I was EXPECTING it to cover--the matter of the wording and idea expressed in 2Peter3:8--which he didn't even come to 2Pet3 till about the 49-min-mark (toward the end of the video), lol.



I'm too tired to go into each of the [many] flaws (I hate to say) that I heard throughout this video (which points I've covered in many past posts), but I'll mention a couple here:

--he seems to think that others not holding his "Amill" viewpoint (like, say, us PRE-mills) do not follow the rule he mentions, of "Clear passages govern unclear passages" and that we (instead) START with "interpreting Revelation" (instead of the "clear passages" in "literal" parts of the Bible) to come up with [what he considers is our] incorrect notions (i.e. PRE-mill, etc)... which I would have to say to that... DISAGREE! I think it's a wrong assumption that we go about interpreting Revelation FIRST;

--he asks, "Were the 70 Weeks in Daniel 9 literal?" and says, "Of Course Not!"... Well, I have to disagree again, and say that he doesn't seem to understand what the Hebrew word for "WEEKS [/ sevens]" means... so that when it says "seventy SEVENS" it can mean "70 [sets of] seven DAYS" or "70 [sets of] seven YEARS" or... you get the picture. It doesn't mean exactly like our English word "week" (always meaning "7 24-hr DAYS"). He says, "if it were literal" it would have added up to something like a year and a half, or a year and a quarter, so OBVIOUSLY it is "symbolical"... But that is not the case. It LITERALLY MEANS (along the lines of) "[set of] SEVENS" (set of seven DAYS or set of seven YEARS, depending on the context where written... but those are LITERAL measures of ACTUAL "TIME"... it is not "symbolical" as he is suggesting.)





Okay... much more could be said about the video (I thought he was going to prove via Scripture why the interpretation of 2Pet3:8 cannot mean that, using other Scripture and explaining this verse as well... but he didn't at all)... so, well, I'm off to get some sleep. Night all! =D

I dont have enough time to write that much here.