The many errors and contradictions found in Amillennialism.

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
4,330
1,839
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It's always noticeable the way you ignore and side-step issues that present you with a problem to your established position. But side-stepping the issue with a question doesn't qualify you for an answer to your question.
I will answer your question in this post. I hope you will then answer mine as well.

What does the word stoicheîon mean in every other New Testament verse where it is used?
It's used in only 5 other verses and it refers to worldly principles or rules in those verses. However, that is NOT the only definition of that word. So, just because it's used a certain way in a grand total of 5 whole verses doesn't mean it has to always be used that way. And the context of 2 Peter 3:10-12 is clearly much different than the context of the other verses where that word is used, also.

I guess I shouldn't even ask you the question. If you can claim that Revelation 20:4 is the only exception in the entire New Testament to the word zao
Is that any worse than you, at least seemingly, claiming that the word can't be used to refer to someone who is physically dead but spiritually (their soul and spirit) alive?

and Revelation 20:5-6 the only exception in the entire New Testament to the word anastasis,
I've never said that. This is typical of Premils. Almost without exception, they resort to false accusations of others when debating. It's a shameful and desperate tactic.

then you will claim that 2 Peter 3:10 & 12's use of the word stoicheîon is an exception.
You're acting as if there is only one definition of that word. There isn't. The word can refer to the physical elements of the universe and that's how it's used in 2 Peter 3:10 & 12.

Forget the question, and I'll forget yours also.
I know you would love to not have to answer my question about what "the earth" in 2 Peter 3:10-12 refers to. And this is the way you came up with to avoid doing that. But, now I have answered your question and you should be willing to answer mine as well.
 

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
4,330
1,839
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Except that it's the resurrection of the martyred witnesses who were beheaded that's being referred to. You're just always side-stepping the facts.
It's referring to them having part in the first resurrection, yes. But, scripture says that Christ's resurrection was the first resurrection (Acts 26:23, 1 Cor 15:20;22, Col 1:18, Rev 1:5). That's not something that should be ignored. So, I'm not side-stepping anything. You need to stop equating your opinions with facts.

So, when are you going to provide evidence to back up your claim that most textual scholars and Bible translators say that the part in Revelation 20:5 that says "But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished" shouldn't be there? You can't just make a claim like that without providence evidence to back it up.
 

Zao is life

Well-Known Member
Oct 3, 2020
3,053
1,206
113
Africa
zaoislife.blogspot.com
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
You're acting as if there is only one definition of that word. There isn't. The word can refer to the physical elements of the universe and that's how it's used in 2 Peter 3:10 & 12.
It depends then on whether or not we need to interpret everything in scripture in the light of Amilennial doctrine.

(Like with so many other interpretations and conclusions we come to, such as whether or not the word anastasis, which you admit refers to the bodily resurrection, is being used in reference to the zao of those who had been beheaded in Revelation 20:4-6, and whether or not the fact that Revelation makes sure we understand that this is the first resurrection shows us that it's definitely talking about the bodily resurrection of those who had been beheaded, because Christ IS the resurrection and the life, and any subsequent resurrection is still the first resurrection).

I will answer your question now about the earth and all it's works being burned up: Aside from the fact that Biblical prophetic literature and Apocalyptic is saturated with metaphor and hyperbole (both in the Old and New Testament books), what Peter says, he is saying in the context of a number of things:

Noah's day: Was the earth and universe destroyed and replaced by another? Yet the time that followed the ark resting on Mt Ararat is a type of the new heavens and earth.

New heavens and earth: a completely different creation after everything has been destroyed?

Or this?:

So that if any one is in Christ, that one is a new creature; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.

For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision has any strength, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation.

Romans 8
19 For the earnest expectation of the creation waits for the manifestation of the sons of God.
20 For the creation was not willingly subjected to vanity, but because of Him who subjected it on hope
21 that the creation itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
22 And we know that the whole creation groans and travails in pain together until now.
23 And not only so, but ourselves also, who have the firstfruit of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, awaiting adoption, the redemption of our body.
24 For we are saved by hope. But hope that is seen is not hope; for what anyone sees, why does he also hope for it?
25 But if we hope for that which we do not see, then we wait for it with patience.

See how this relates to the elements [stoicheîon] of the world [kósmos] in Galatians 4:3 and to the new creation in Christ:

Galatians 4
3 Even so we, when we were infants, were in bondage under the elements of the world.

4 But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, coming into being out of a woman, having come under Law,
5 that He might redeem those under Law, so that we might receive the adoption of sons.
6 And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.
7 So that you are no longer a slave, but a son; and if a son, also an heir of God through Christ.

A THOUSAND YEARS is mentioned in the context of this passage, JUST as it's mentioned in Revelation 20, which you do not believe refers to a literal thousand years.

2 Peter 3

10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a rushing noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat. And the earth and the works in it will be burned up.
11 Then, all these things being about to be dissolved, what sort ought you to be in holy behavior and godliness,
12 looking for and rushing the coming of the Day of God, on account of which the heavens, being on fire, will melt away, and the elements will melt, burning with heat?
13 But according to His promise, we look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.

Question: What are the works of the earth that will be burned up? God's works when He created the earth? Or Satan's works, the works of corruption carried out by man since Adam and Eve?

Are you 100% sure 2 Peter 3:5-13 is very, very literal, and there is no meaning in it which would be consistent with the Bible's repeated use of metaphor, symbolism and hyperbole (to the extent that all prophetic books of the Bible are saturated with it)?

I have not come to any hard-and-fast conclusion on 2 Peter 3:5-13, but one thing I know: The hyper-literal way of interpreting it, is extremely short-sighted, to say the least, and is born out of a need to ensure that all prophetic utterances in the Old and New Testaments comply with an Amillennial platform.

If Amillennialism is wrong, then the platform upon which you base all this is the foundation of sand and the whole frame and everything else you've built on your foundation, is the sandcastle built on the sea's side of the high-tide mark.

I believe the thousand years mentioned by Peter is literal, and in Revelation 20 is literal, and the rest metaphor and a great deal of symbolism based on types, mixed with hyperbole, which is so typical of this type of prophetic statement regarding the judgment of nations such as Babylon, Nineveh, Judah, Babylon the Great, etc etc.

You obviously have it the other way around: The thousand years is symbolic and the rest is literal (to you).

And that's why we will never agree on it.
 
Last edited:

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
4,330
1,839
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It depends then on whether or not we need to interpret everything in scripture in the light of Amilennial doctrine.
What depends on that exactly? I'm not sure what you're saying here. Are you denying that the Greek word stoicheion can refer to the physical elements of the universe?

This is what I see on blueletterbible.org for that word:

upload_2022-5-12_18-19-55.png

So, one of the definitions of the word is fits my interpretation of how it's used in 2 Peter 3:10-12. There's no basis for acting as if only one if its definitions can possibly be used in scripture.

Like with so many other interpretations and conclusions we come to, such as whether or not the word anastasis, which you admit refers to the bodily resurrection,
That's nothing to "admit" to. It's obvious that it refers to a bodily resurrection everywhere else that it's used.

is being used in reference to the zao of those who had been beheaded in Revelation 20:4-6, and whether or not the fact that Revelation makes sure we understand that this is the first resurrection shows us that it's definitely talking about the bodily resurrection of those who had been beheaded, because Christ IS the resurrection and the life, and any subsequent resurrection is still the first resurrection).
I can't make sense of what you said here. If we understand that the first resurrection itself is Christ's resurrection, then what we should consider is what scripture teaches about how someone has part in His resurrection. And that is spiritually. Where in scripture (besides a Premil interpretation of Rev 20) does it ever talk about the bodily resurrection of the dead as being a case of having part in Christ's bodily resurrection?

I will answer your question now about the earth and all it's works being burned up: Aside from the fact that Biblical prophetic literature and Apocalyptic is saturated with metaphor and hyperbole (both in the Old and New Testament books),
Let me just stop you here and say that this is obvious to everyone, but 2nd Peter is not an apocalyptic book like Revelation is. You have to keep that in mind.

what Peter says, he is saying in the context of a number of things:

Noah's day: Was the earth and universe destroyed and replaced by another? Yet the time that followed the ark resting on Mt Ararat is a type of the new heavens and earth.
No. And that is not what I'm saying will happen to the heavens and earth when Christ returns, either. I have pointed out a number of times in the past on other forums (one of which you know about) that I believe the entire earth surface will be burned up and renewed when Christ returns. I do NOT believe that the earth will be annihilated and replaced by a completely separate earth (Earth 2?). So, I believe this earth will be made new rather than being replaced by a different earth. It appears that you didn't realize that I believe that, but now you know.

New heavens and earth: a completely different creation after everything has been destroyed?
No.

Or this?:

So that if any one is in Christ, that one is a new creature; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.
Do you not believe there will be a literal new heavens and new earth one day? Us being made new spiritually has nothing to do with that.

A THOUSAND YEARS is mentioned in the context of this passage, JUST as it's mentioned in Revelation 20, which you do not believe refers to a literal thousand years.

2 Peter 3

10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a rushing noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat. And the earth and the works in it will be burned up.
11 Then, all these things being about to be dissolved, what sort ought you to be in holy behavior and godliness,
12 looking for and rushing the coming of the Day of God, on account of which the heavens, being on fire, will melt away, and the elements will melt, burning with heat?
13 But according to His promise, we look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.
It says in verse 10 that the earth will be burned up. Where exactly have you explained what that means? I don't see it. Do you think that's talking about planet earth? If so, what does it mean for it to be burned up if not literally burned up (not in terms of being annihilated, but in terms of the earth's surface)? If not, then what does "the earth" symbolically represent?

Question: What are the works of the earth that will be burned up? God's works when He created the earth? Or Satan's works, the works of corruption carried out by man since Adam and Eve?
Both. It first says that the earth itself will be burned up. I take that to mean the entire earth surface. So, that would obviously include God's works and Satan's works. It will result in the new heavens and new earth (2 Peter 3:13) and Revelation 21:5 indicates that God is making all things new in relation to ushering in the new heavens and new earth.

Are you 100% sure 2 Peter 3:5-13 is very, very literal, and there is no meaning in it which would be consistent with the Bible's repeated use of metaphor, symbolism and hyperbole (to the extent that all prophetic books of the Bible are saturated with it)?
I feel 100% sure about it, yes. I don't have any doubt whatsoever that it's meant to be interpreted as the literal burning up and renewing of the heavens and the earth. One major reason I feel so certain about it is because that event is compared DIRECTLY to a past literal event in 2 Peter 3:5-7. And that event, of course, was the flood in Noah's day. Why would Peter compare a future figurative event to a past literal one? I don't believe that makes any sense. He was clearly comparing like events (global, literal and physical).

Another reason is that I believe this interpretation lines up with other scriptures which I believe indicate that all unbelievers will be killed when Christ returns (Matt 24:37-39, 2 Thess 1:7-10, Rev 19:17-18, Rev 20:9).

I have not come to any hard-and-fast conclusion on 2 Peter 3:5-13, but one thing I know: The hyper-literal way of interpreting it, is extremely short-sighted, to say the least, and is born out of a need to ensure that all prophetic utterances in the Old and New Testaments comply with an Amillennial platform.
And, yet, you have done NOTHING to show why it shouldn't be interpreted literally. I mean NOTHING. What you said above is entirely unconvincing. You said nothing about what it means for the earth to be burned up, for example. How should that be understood in a non-literal way? Until you give me some reasonable explanation for that, I have no reason to take what you're saying about 2 Peter 3 seriously.

If Amillennialism is wrong, then the platform upon which you base all this is the foundation of sand and the whole frame and everything else you've built on your foundation, is the sandcastle built on the sea's side of the high-tide mark.
Is that not true for any doctrine? Why are you acting like you're saying something profound here? If you're referring to 2 Peter 3 alone being the foundation of my Amil doctrine then that is not the case. That just happens to be one of the scriptures that most clearly supports Amil, but there are plenty more.

I believe the thousand years mentioned by Peter is literal
What does that mean for the thousand years of 2 Peter 3:8 to be literal, though? It has nothing to do with Revelation 20, that's for sure. 2 Peter 3:8-9 has to do with the fact that the Lord exists outside of time and is not effected by time AT ALL and therefore no one can say He's being slow in keeping His promise of coming again.

and in Revelation 20 is literal, and the rest metaphor and a great deal of symbolism based on types, mixed with hyperbole, which is so typical of this type of prophetic statement regarding the judgment of nations such as Babylon, Nineveh, Judah, Babylon the Great, etc etc.

You obviously have it the other way around: The thousand years is symbolic and the rest is literal (to you).

And that's why we will never agree on it.
Yes, we will obviously never agree on it as long as you insist on taking the thousand years literally. It's amazing to me that you would not take 2 Peter 3:10-12 literally, but you do take Revelation 20 literally. Which book contains a great deal of symbolism, 2nd Peter or Revelation?

And I have one more question regarding 2 Peter 3:10-12. If God is not going to rid the world of wickedness and wicked things by way of fire as I believe 2 Peter 3:10-12 indicates, then how else do you think He's going to do it?
 

ewq1938

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2015
5,840
1,211
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If you want to look at it as two resurrections (one of believers and one of unbelievers), I don't care. That's really besides the point that Amils make about John 5:28-29. If it's meant to be seen as two resurrections then it's two resurrections that occur at around the same time.

Yet Revelation 20 says there is a thousand years before the rest of the dead live again so its not "around the same time". All passages on the two resurrections do present two resurrections but only the passage in Revelation 20 tells us how much time is inbetween.
 

ewq1938

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2015
5,840
1,211
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
What does this even mean? What are you attempting to say here? How exactly does this question relate to a supposed error or contradiction in Amil? You're clearly just making up a bunch of nonsensical points, including #23 here, and then claiming they are supposed contradictions in Amil.


Wrong again. This is a valid contradiction related to the one before it. Just read the one before it and you will understand how this is also a problem for Amillennialism.
 

ewq1938

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2015
5,840
1,211
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
he word "anazao" is used in other scripture in relation to people being bodily resurrected, but the word "zao" is never used in that way in other scripture.


That's wrong. When a dead person becomes ZAO, a resurrection/anazao took place.

Mat 9:18 While he spake these things unto them, behold, there came a certain ruler, and worshipped him, saying, My daughter is even now dead: but come and lay thy hand upon her, and she shall live (zao) .

Here is the same word. Anytime someone who is dead is said to "live" (zao) it's a reference to physical resurrection.

You are clearly not experienced enough to speak on this issue. You need to read more and post less so you can learn what is correct and stop speaking in error after error.
 

Truth7t7

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2014
10,760
3,214
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You've been brainwashed by men's leaven doctrines so long, you don't even realize when you directly contradict yourself in your own sentence.

The 1 Corinthians 15:49-50 Scripture by Apostle Paul has NOTHING to do with a flesh and bone body. Nor does the fact that Paul also showed Jesus' flesh was made "a quickening spirit", further showing that a flesh and bone body CANNOT enter into Heaven.

But there you are, TRYING to say a flesh and bone type body is an eternal heavenly body. That's just more SICKNESS revealed by those who don't actually know their New Testament Bible. Have you like Timothy been staying in Torah most of your life instead?
Jesus presented himself to his disciples and over 500 after his resurrection, his body was tangible flesh and bone that ate physical food, entered a room with doors closed, and vanished out of sight

No place in scripture does it teach that this physical tangible body changed before, during, or after the ascension

All believers will receive this very same "spiritual body" of flesh and bone at their resurrection, it's that simple
 

ewq1938

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2015
5,840
1,211
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No place in scripture does it teach that this physical tangible body changed before, during, or after the ascension


Of course his body was changed before the ascension.

Php 3:20 For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:
Php 3:21 Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.


It was glorified which means it was changed into an immortal body which happened at the resurrection. The same thing will happen to the living saints at the rapture, they just don't die first but the mortal body will be changed and glorified to be like His glorious body.
 

ewq1938

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2015
5,840
1,211
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
25. How much time inbetween the resurrection of the saved vs. unsaved?

Amillennialism sometimes teaches the saved will resurrect and immediately or seconds later the unsaved will also resurrect. Not only is this two resurrections rather than one general resurrection, it also contradicts Revelation 20:

Revelation 20:5 states "the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished" which negates the possibility of only a second or seconds separating the two resurrections. There is a thousand years inbetween the resurrection of the saved and the unsaved.
 

ewq1938

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2015
5,840
1,211
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
(Each of these issues have been presented in threads in various forums by people who believe in Amillennialism. These may or may not be held by every individual of that doctrine.)

Each person who believes in Amillennialism is a good person with good intent regarding scriptural interpretation but Premillennialism very much disagrees with their doctrine, their way of interpretation, and their exegesis of various scriptures. In this list you will see the many problems contained within Amillennialism.
 
Last edited:

Truth7t7

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2014
10,760
3,214
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Of course his body was changed before the ascension.

Php 3:20 For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:
Php 3:21 Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.


It was glorified which means it was changed into an immortal body which happened at the resurrection. The same thing will happen to the living saints at the rapture, they just don't die first but the mortal body will be changed and glorified to be like His glorious body.
Your presentation of Phillipians 3:20-21 states absolutely nothing about the Lord's body being transformed before or at the ascension, because no transformation took place, none!
 

ewq1938

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2015
5,840
1,211
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Your presentation of Phillipians 3:20-21 states absolutely nothing about the Lord's body being transformed before or at the ascension, because no transformation took place, none!


It does because he went from a regular body to a glorious one and it promises the same will happen to Christians who also shall be changed.
 

Truth7t7

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2014
10,760
3,214
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It does because he went from a regular body to a glorious one and it promises the same will happen to Christians who also shall be changed.
I fully agree that Christians will receive a body just as Jesus maintained at the ascension

It was my mis-understanding that you were denying this, my apology

Davy and a few other posters claim Jesus changed into a ghostly spirit at the ascension "Wrong"
 
  • Like
Reactions: ewq1938

ewq1938

Well-Known Member
Jul 11, 2015
5,840
1,211
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I fully agree that Christians will receive a body just as Jesus maintained at the ascension

It was my mis-understanding that you were denying this, my apology

No problem.

Davy and a few other posters claim Jesus changed into a ghostly spirit at the ascension "Wrong"

I don't agree with that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Truth7t7

Zao is life

Well-Known Member
Oct 3, 2020
3,053
1,206
113
Africa
zaoislife.blogspot.com
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
I have pointed out a number of times in the past on other forums (one of which you know about) that I believe the entire earth surface will be burned up and renewed when Christ returns. I do NOT believe that the earth will be annihilated and replaced by a completely separate earth (Earth 2?). So, I believe this earth will be made new rather than being replaced by a different earth. It appears that you didn't realize that I believe that, but now you know.

One major reason I feel so certain about it is because that event is compared DIRECTLY to a past literal event in 2 Peter 3:5-7. And that event, of course, was the flood in Noah's day. Why would Peter compare a future figurative event to a past literal one?
Those are good points. Like I said, I have no sealed view on 2 Peter 3.
What does that mean for the thousand years of 2 Peter 3:8 to be literal, though? It has nothing to do with Revelation 20, that's for sure. 2 Peter 3:8-9 has to do with the fact that the Lord exists outside of time and is not effected by time AT ALL and therefore no one can say He's being slow in keeping His promise of coming again.
That's not true and I'll explain why once again, further below.
If God is not going to rid the world of wickedness and wicked things by way of fire as I believe 2 Peter 3:10-12 indicates, then how else do you think He's going to do it?
Like this: Revelation 20:7-9.

These, once again, are the reasons why the thousand years can only be literal:

1. Wtihout exception the word anastasis (resurrection) appearing in verses 5 & 6 is only used in reference to the bodily rising again from the dead.

2. Without exception the word zao in verse 4 is only used in reference to living people who are alive in their bodies *

* The Revelation makes sure we understand that it's the first Resurrection, so that we know for sure it's the bodily Resurrection of those who are zao after being beheaded:

I'll continue with my repeat of the final three points after asking you to consider the comparison of scripture in these images.

Note: Both 2 Peter 3 and Revelation 20-21 mention (a) a thousand years; and (b) a new heavens and new earth:

Isaiah 60 and Revelation 21.png

Revelation 7 and 21.png

Revelation 11 and Revelation 20.png

2 Peter 3 and Revelation 20 - 21.png

3. People being killed for refusing to worship the beast or his image or receive his mark or the number of his name is only mentioned twice in the New Testament: Revelation 13 and Revelation 20.

4. Beheading of saints is only mentioned twice in the New Testament, and each time the same saint/s seen living after their beheading is associated with their bodily resurrection (anastasis).

Revelation 20 even calls it the first anastasis (which refers only to a bodily Resurrection wherever the word appears in the New Testament), and we know that because Christ IS the resurrection and the life, it's through His own bodily resurrection that any later bodily resurrection takes place:

The New Testament talks about:-

1. Adam's death, which came to all mankind.

2. Christ's (the last Adam's) Resurrection from the dead. Christ IS the Resurrection and the Life.

3. The second death. * There is no second resurrection following the second death.

5. At the same time and for the same period, Satan is said to be bound, put in the abyss and a seal set on him so that he is unable to deceive the nations:

Satan is now (in this present time) called the god of this aion (Age) and prince of the power of the air who works in the sons of disobedience, who will give the beast and false prophet his seat, power and great authority; and the saints are warned that they should be weary of his wiles and are told to resist him, and to put on the full armour of God because we do not wrestle against flesh and blood
(2 Corinthians 4:3-4; Ephesians 2:2; 1 Peter 5:8-9; Ephesians 6:11-12; Revelation 2:9-10 & Revelation 2:13; 1 Thessalonians 2:18; James 4:7).

6. In the Greek New Testament, one thousand, two thousand, three thousand, four thousand, five thousand, seven thousand .. goes like this:

chílioi, dischílioi, trischílioi, tetrakischílioi, pentakischílioi (or pénte chiliás), heptakischílioi ..

chílioi literally means a thousand (one thousand) in Revelation 12:6 and Revelation 14:20, where Revelation 12:6 adds chílioi to two hundred and sixty to make 1,260, and where Revelation 14:20 adds it to six hundred to make 1,600.

It's not as though the one thousand years commences before the new heavens and new earth. It commences with the new heavens and new earth.

Satan was allowed to beguile mankind in the Garden of Eden when Adam & Eve were living in God's sabbath and living forever (see
Isaiah 55:8-11).

Besides this,

28 For the earth brings out fruit of itself, first the blade, then [1534 eîta] the ear, after that [1534 eîta] the full grain in the ear.
29 But when the fruit has been brought out, immediately he puts in the sickle, because the harvest has come. (Mark 4:28-29)

23 But each in his own order: Christ the first-fruit, and afterward they who are Christ's at His coming;
24 then [1534 eîta] is the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God, even the Father; when He makes to cease all rule and all authority and power.

Amillennialists have it this way:

28 For the earth brings out fruit of itself, first the blade, then [1534 eîta] he puts in the sickle, because the harvest has come. (Mark 4:28-29).

In the Greek, the word "Then" in Matthew 24:21 is not eita, but tote. Tote means "at the time of this .." (whatever is being spoken about, and in Matthew 24's case it's at the time of whatever was being described in the verses that preceded it).

What follows the return of Christ is what this thread is about. It really doesn't matter how God is going to end the current order.
 
Last edited:

Truth7t7

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2014
10,760
3,214
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Those are good points. Like I said, I have no sealed view on 2 Peter 3.

That's not true and I'll explain why once again, further below.

Like this: Revelation 20:7-9.

These are, once again, are the reasons why the thousand years can only be literal:

1. Wihout exception the word anastasis (resurrection) appearing in verses 5 & 6 is only used in reference to the bodily rising again from the dead.

2. Without exception the word zao in verse 4 is only used in reference to living people who are alive in their bodies *

* The Revelation makes sure we understand that it's the first Resurrection, so that we know for sure it's the bodily Resurrection of those who are zao after being beheaded:

I'll continue with my repeat of the final three points after asking you to consider the comparison of scripture in these images.

Note: Bboth 2 Peter 3 and Revelation 20-21 mention (a) a thousand years; and (b) a new heavens and new earth:

View attachment 22534

View attachment 22535

View attachment 22536

View attachment 22537

3. People being killed for refusing to worship the beast or his image or receive his mark or the number of his name is only mentioned twice in the New Testament: Revelation 13 and Revelation 20.

4. Beheading of saints is only mentioned twice in the New Testament, and each time the same saint/s seen living after their beheading is associated with their bodily resurrection (anasstasis).

Revelation 20 even calls it the first anastasis (which refers only to a bodily Resurrection wherever the word appears in the New Testament), and we know that because Christ IS the resurrection and the life, it's through His own bodily resurrection that any later bodily resurrection takes place:

The New Testament talks about:-

1. Adam's death, which came to all mankind.

2. Christ's (the last Adam's) Resurrection from the dead. Christ IS the Resurrection and the Life.

3. The second death. * There is no second resurrection following the second death.

5. At the same time and for the same period, Satan is said to be bound, put in the abyss and a seal set on him so that he is unable to deceive the nations: Satan is called the god of this aion (Age) and prince of the power of the air who works in the sons of disobedience, who will give the beast and false prophet his seat, power and great authority; and the saints are warned that they should be weary of his wiles and are told to resist him, and to put on the full armour of God because we do not wrestle against flesh and blood (2 Corinthians 4:3-4; Ephesians 2:2; 1 Peter 5:8-9; Ephesians 6:11-12; Revelation 2:9-10 & Revelation 2:13; 1 Thessalonians 2:18; James 4:7).

6. In the Greek New Testament, one thousand, two thousand, three thousand, four thousand, five thousand, seven thousand .. goes like this:

chílioi, dischílioi, trischílioi, tetrakischílioi, pentakischílioi (or pénte chiliás), heptakischílioi ..

chílioi literally means a thousand (one thousand) in Revelation 12:6 and Revelation 14:20, where Revelation 12:6 adds chílioi to two hundred and sixty to make 1,260, and where Revelation 14:20 adds it to six hundred to make 1,600.

It's not as though the one thousand years commences before the new heavens and new earth. It commences with the new heavens and new earth.

Satan was allowed to beguile mankind in the Garden of Eden when Adam & Eve were living in God's sabbath and living forever (see
Isaiah 55:8-11).

Besides this,

28 For the earth brings out fruit of itself, first the blade, then [1534 eîta] the ear, after that [1534 eîta] the full grain in the ear.
29 But when the fruit has been brought out, immediately he puts in the sickle, because the harvest has come. (Mark 4:28-29)

23 But each in his own order: Christ the first-fruit, and afterward they who are Christ's at His coming;
24 then [1534 eîta] is the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God, even the Father; when He makes to cease all rule and all authority and power.

Amillennialists have it this way:

28 For the earth brings out fruit of itself, first the blade, then [1534 eîta] he puts in the sickle, because the harvest has come. (Mark 4:28-29).
You openly disregard the fact that several scriptyresclearlyshowsthe Lord returns In fire and final judgment, you stuff these factual truths off as metaphorical symbolizm

You have been clearly shown that when Jesus returns, (then cometh the end)

You have been clearly shown, that no kingdom on this earth, nor living humans on earth, are seen presented in Revelation 20:1-6, Angel, Heaven, Devil, Satan, The Souls, The Dead, God, Christ, 100% Spiritual, yet you claim a literal future Kingdom on this earth is seen, Big Smiles!

Jesus Christ returns in fire and final judgment, dissolving this earth by fire (The End)
 

Zao is life

Well-Known Member
Oct 3, 2020
3,053
1,206
113
Africa
zaoislife.blogspot.com
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
You have been clearly shown that when Jesus returns, (then cometh the end)
You have been clearly shown that the Greek word eita does not mean something that follows at the same time as the previous thing ends.

Yet you deliberately ignore the truth about this to pretend that what you say about it is true.

You have been clearly shown that IF what you claim were true about what "Then" in 1 Corinthians 15:24 means had any truth, the Greek word would be toteh (as in Matthew 24:9).

Your deliberate choice to deny facts and truth is your choice. I won't attempt to help you with that.
 

Truth7t7

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2014
10,760
3,214
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You have been clearly shown that the Greek word eita does not mean something that follows at the same time as the previous thing ends.

Yet you deliberately ignore the truth about this to pretend that what you say about it is true.

You have been clearly shown that IF what you claim were true about what "Then" in 1 Corinthians 15:24 means had any truth, the Greek word would be toteh (as in Matthew 24:9).

Your deliberate choice to deny facts and truth is your choice. I won't attempt to help you with that.
You claim the verses below are not literal, but just (Apocalyptic Metaphor) how can your eschatology be take seriously

Jesus Christ Returns In Fire And Final Judgement, Dissolving This Existing Earth By Fire, Immediately After The Tribulation

This Existing Heaven And Earth Will Be (Replaced) By The New Heaven, Earth, Jerusalem, A New Creation, At The Return Of Jesus Christ

(Behold, I Make All Things New)


2 Peter 3:10-13KJV
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

Revelation 21:1-5KJV
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.
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.
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.
4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

Matthew 24:29-30KJV
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

1 Corinthians 3:13KJV
13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

Luke 17:29-30KJV
29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.
30 Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.


2 Thessalonians 1:7-9KJV
7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance
on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

Malachi 3:2KJV
2 But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap:

Psalm 46:6KJV
6 The heathen raged, the kingdoms were moved: he uttered his voice, the earth melted.

Psalm 50:3KJV
3 Our God shall come, and shall not keep silence: a fire shall devour before him, and it shall be very tempestuous round about him.

Psalm 97:5KJV
5 The hills melted like wax at the presence of the Lord, at the presence of the Lord of the whole earth.

Isaiah 66:15KJV
15 For, behold, the Lord will come with fire, and with his chariots like a whirlwind, to render his anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire.

Zechariah 14:12KJV
12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the Lord will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.

Nahum 1:5-6KJV
5 The mountains quake at him, and the hills melt, and the earth is burned at his presence, yea, the world, and all that dwell therein.
6 Who can stand before his indignation? and who can abide in the fierceness of his anger? his fury is poured out like fire, and the rocks are thrown down by him.

Revelation 20:9KJV
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.