Hi, how do you understand Revelation 20:7-10? If the 1000 years means 'for ever' (which makes sense to me) how can Satan be released at the end of this period to go out and deceive the nations and gather them for battle? Thanks
I don't know what Bible you reading or understanding. You will soon see that things will get worst. What world are you living in? Have you received the Holy Ghost like they did on the day of Pentecost? Do you really have the spirit of God dealing in you?
who gets to decide what is literal and symbolic in the Bible? we must be careful with this because just as easily an unbeliever can point to a passage of scripture, like Luke 16 and claim that Hell is symbolic. The Bible as a whole is literal and I think God was clear when he told John " write the things which shall be hereafter".
1. The context determines what is symbolic and what is to be understood in a natural sense. For instance, when John writes about "the lamb" in Revelation, we understand that he doesn't mean a literal animal. When John sees seven candlesticks, it is not to be understood literally, but as the text says, the candlesticks are the churches. Spiritual symbolism is the norm in prophetic literature, whether Revelation, Ezekiel, or other Old Testament prophets.
2. The value of seeing the happenings described in Revelation as spiritually symbolic is that we can find some spiritual relevance in our own lives today. As to who gets to decide what is literal and what is spiritual, every individual can and should decide for himself.
3. As for Luke 16, I think the story of the rich man and Lazarus can, and probably should be read as a parable, rather than as an account of two literal persons. Notice that just before this parable Jesus says that the law and the prophets have expired with John, and now something new is on the scene: the Kingdom of God into which anyone may enter through faith (not just the observers of the law).
4. In this context, the the rich man portrays Israel, rich in that they had the law and the prophets and assumed themselves to be the children of Abraham. Lazarus represents the believing Gentiles, who characterize the New Covenant people of God. Seemingly "poor" and without God, Jesus places them with Abraham and unbelieving Israel in torment. The parable ends by saying that they (Israel) would not hear Moses and the prophets, and will not hear one risen from the dead (Christ for instance)
The Bible clearly teaches in Jeremiah 4 that during the millennium, there will be "no man", and the earth will be utterly emptied nad made waste. The Saints willl be in heaven during the 1000 years, not on earth. Anyone who says otherwise clearly does not understand the scriptures.
Christ is already reigning as King of Kings and Lord of Lords. He will never be any more a king than he is right now. The 1000 years is a figure of speech, like "the cattle on 1000 hills". There would be no purpose in Christ reigning for a limited period of time (like a literal 1000 years). He reigns today over all who voluntarily submit to him. I'm not looking for anything else.
Then why would anyone want to believe in a Christ reigning over death, destruction, wars famines? If God is perfect, why doesn't His Kingdom make things perfect?
Your chronology is off. The 1000 years is between 2 resurrections. 1 Thess 4:15-17 describes the Second Coming (first resurrection). The saints reign in heaven for 1000 years. Then the saints return to the earth with Christ at the END of the 1000, and the wicked are resurrected and then cast into the lake of fire.
Those verse describe the condition of the Millennium. Since the millennium is between the First and Second Resurrection, there is no need to symbolize the 1000 years as a random period of time. We already know the condition of the earth during the millennium. It is very clear from scripture.
1. Thanks for your comments. In general, I believe the Old Testament prophets look no further than Christ. "The Law and the Prophets were until John..." The passage you cite from Jeremiah, for instance, says "The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full end." The phrase "the land" is a clear reference to the land of Israel, which was in fact, made desolate in the tribulation period culminating in 70 AD.
2. Jeremiah and Isaiah were prophets sent to the nation of Israel. Jesus was the final prophet sent to Israel. (This is how Jesus describes himself in Mt. 21:37) After Christ was rejected by Israel, God concluded the Old Covenant and made a New Covenant. To take elements from the Old Covenant, addressed to the Old Testament people of God and apply them to the future (or to today) is a misapplication (in my view). The Old Testament prophets (and Revelation) use figurative, spiritual language
3. Concerning the first resurrection, if you will consider John 5:24-29 carefully you will see that Jesus describes two resurrections. The first is spiritual: those who hear his word and believe have "passed from death to life" (resurrection language used to describe the born-again, new creation in Christ). The second resurrection is the physical resurrection described in John 5:28 and I Thess. 4 and many other places. The 1000 year reign of Christ is metaphoric language (in my view).
4. I appreciate what you emphasize about there being "no man" during the reign of Christ. I would say that the "man" referred to here is Adam. In our New Covenant relationship with Christ (the present-tense reign of Christ), the "old man" (Adam and his nature) has been replaced by a "new man" (Christ and his nature). I think this is a more healthy and useful (and scripturally correct) way to view the subject. Don't miss what we have now by looking for something in the future that will never be.
5. One final thought. I appreciate the fact that you are taking the scriptures and this subject seriously. I respect your opinion on the matter, but maintain a different viewpoint.
On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half of the mountain moving north and half moving south. -Zechariah 14:4
This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven. -Acts 1:11
This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels. -2 Thess 1:7
This has been flagged as spam show
Hi, how do you understand Revelation 20:7-10? If the 1000 years means 'for ever' (which makes sense to me) how can Satan be released at the end of this period to go out and deceive the nations and gather them for battle? Thanks
Spudthecat1 7 months ago
Comment removed
Spudthecat1 7 months ago
I don't know what Bible you reading or understanding. You will soon see that things will get worst. What world are you living in? Have you received the Holy Ghost like they did on the day of Pentecost? Do you really have the spirit of God dealing in you?
rossdaboss1959 2 years ago
Comment removed
JakandDaxterwiki 2 years ago
who gets to decide what is literal and symbolic in the Bible? we must be careful with this because just as easily an unbeliever can point to a passage of scripture, like Luke 16 and claim that Hell is symbolic. The Bible as a whole is literal and I think God was clear when he told John " write the things which shall be hereafter".
CrackerJayherber 2 years ago
1. The context determines what is symbolic and what is to be understood in a natural sense. For instance, when John writes about "the lamb" in Revelation, we understand that he doesn't mean a literal animal. When John sees seven candlesticks, it is not to be understood literally, but as the text says, the candlesticks are the churches. Spiritual symbolism is the norm in prophetic literature, whether Revelation, Ezekiel, or other Old Testament prophets.
LastDaysRevelation 2 years ago
@LastDaysRevelation God sniffs butts, god is so scared of me that he just went pee pee in his pants
freeofjesus 2 weeks ago
2. The value of seeing the happenings described in Revelation as spiritually symbolic is that we can find some spiritual relevance in our own lives today. As to who gets to decide what is literal and what is spiritual, every individual can and should decide for himself.
LastDaysRevelation 2 years ago
3. As for Luke 16, I think the story of the rich man and Lazarus can, and probably should be read as a parable, rather than as an account of two literal persons. Notice that just before this parable Jesus says that the law and the prophets have expired with John, and now something new is on the scene: the Kingdom of God into which anyone may enter through faith (not just the observers of the law).
LastDaysRevelation 2 years ago
4. In this context, the the rich man portrays Israel, rich in that they had the law and the prophets and assumed themselves to be the children of Abraham. Lazarus represents the believing Gentiles, who characterize the New Covenant people of God. Seemingly "poor" and without God, Jesus places them with Abraham and unbelieving Israel in torment. The parable ends by saying that they (Israel) would not hear Moses and the prophets, and will not hear one risen from the dead (Christ for instance)
LastDaysRevelation 2 years ago
The Bible clearly teaches in Jeremiah 4 that during the millennium, there will be "no man", and the earth will be utterly emptied nad made waste. The Saints willl be in heaven during the 1000 years, not on earth. Anyone who says otherwise clearly does not understand the scriptures.
Lysimachus78 2 years ago
Christ is already reigning as King of Kings and Lord of Lords. He will never be any more a king than he is right now. The 1000 years is a figure of speech, like "the cattle on 1000 hills". There would be no purpose in Christ reigning for a limited period of time (like a literal 1000 years). He reigns today over all who voluntarily submit to him. I'm not looking for anything else.
LastDaysRevelation 2 years ago
Then why would anyone want to believe in a Christ reigning over death, destruction, wars famines? If God is perfect, why doesn't His Kingdom make things perfect?
Your chronology is off. The 1000 years is between 2 resurrections. 1 Thess 4:15-17 describes the Second Coming (first resurrection). The saints reign in heaven for 1000 years. Then the saints return to the earth with Christ at the END of the 1000, and the wicked are resurrected and then cast into the lake of fire.
Lysimachus78 2 years ago
You are also ignoring that during the Millennium, there is "no man" on the earth.
Read Jeremiah 4:23-27, Isaiah 24:1-4, Isaiah 24:19-22.
Those verse describe the condition of the Millennium. Since the millennium is between the First and Second Resurrection, there is no need to symbolize the 1000 years as a random period of time. We already know the condition of the earth during the millennium. It is very clear from scripture.
Lysimachus78 2 years ago
1. Thanks for your comments. In general, I believe the Old Testament prophets look no further than Christ. "The Law and the Prophets were until John..." The passage you cite from Jeremiah, for instance, says "The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full end." The phrase "the land" is a clear reference to the land of Israel, which was in fact, made desolate in the tribulation period culminating in 70 AD.
LastDaysRevelation 2 years ago
2. Jeremiah and Isaiah were prophets sent to the nation of Israel. Jesus was the final prophet sent to Israel. (This is how Jesus describes himself in Mt. 21:37) After Christ was rejected by Israel, God concluded the Old Covenant and made a New Covenant. To take elements from the Old Covenant, addressed to the Old Testament people of God and apply them to the future (or to today) is a misapplication (in my view). The Old Testament prophets (and Revelation) use figurative, spiritual language
LastDaysRevelation 2 years ago
3. Concerning the first resurrection, if you will consider John 5:24-29 carefully you will see that Jesus describes two resurrections. The first is spiritual: those who hear his word and believe have "passed from death to life" (resurrection language used to describe the born-again, new creation in Christ). The second resurrection is the physical resurrection described in John 5:28 and I Thess. 4 and many other places. The 1000 year reign of Christ is metaphoric language (in my view).
LastDaysRevelation 2 years ago
4. I appreciate what you emphasize about there being "no man" during the reign of Christ. I would say that the "man" referred to here is Adam. In our New Covenant relationship with Christ (the present-tense reign of Christ), the "old man" (Adam and his nature) has been replaced by a "new man" (Christ and his nature). I think this is a more healthy and useful (and scripturally correct) way to view the subject. Don't miss what we have now by looking for something in the future that will never be.
LastDaysRevelation 2 years ago
5. One final thought. I appreciate the fact that you are taking the scriptures and this subject seriously. I respect your opinion on the matter, but maintain a different viewpoint.
LastDaysRevelation 2 years ago
On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half of the mountain moving north and half moving south. -Zechariah 14:4
This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven. -Acts 1:11
This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels. -2 Thess 1:7
BOX5500 3 years ago