IOW, let's just contradict everything John told us in Revelation 20 and what the logical conclusion would be based on what he told us.
First he told us this.
Revelation 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.
Let's start with this---that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled. What does that logically equal? It logically equals exactly what it says.
It might be like someone that has been driving around drunk and getting in all kinds of accidents. Therefore, this person is eventually detained, judged and sentenced to 10 years in prison in order to prevent this person from doing what he was doing that landed him in prison, that being, driving around drunk causing accidents. Obviously, he can't still do that while he is in prison for this 10 years.
But eventually he gets released, which then could mean that he once again goes back to his old ways, his time in prison taught him nothing, he is once again driving drunk causing accidents, except this time around he gets in an accident that ends his life. This analogy is not perfect of course, yet some of it can be applied to satan.
Initially satan is deceiving the nations. Then he is imprisoned for a spell. And in the same way the analogy I used, where his 10 year imprisioment prevented the drunk driver driving around causing accidents, satan's imprisonment prevents him from deceiving the nations while imprisoned. But how can it also prevent him from deceiving the nations when he is loosed from his prison? Where is the logic in that? It was his imprisonment preventing him from doing that. But once he is loosed that means he is free to once again do what he was doing before being imprisoned, deceiving the nations, the fact now there is nothing preventing him from doing that again. The same way there was nothing preventing him from doing that prior to him being imprisoned.
When thinking of it like this, maybe Amil does make better sense than Premil, for all I know? When he is not bound, that period of time would be involving this age. So why wouldn't when he is bound equally be involving this age? And when he is loosed, it equally involving this age? Rather than this entire age, that he is unbound the entire time? I see the logic in Amil in that regard, except Amil can't explain passages post the 2nd coming that require more days post the 2nd coming in order to fulfill. Except Amil has no more days post the 2nd coming to fulfill any of these things, such as Matthew 19:28, for instance.
Revelation 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
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.
Then on top of that you want to contradict verse 8 as well by insisting he never manages to deceive the nations. He simply attempts to but never succeeds. Why then are these in verse 8 being devoured by fire from God in heaven in verse 9 unless satan managed to deceive the nations again?
What makes sense per Amil though I realize Amils do not agree, is this. The ones meant in verse 8 are the ones saved during the millennium, then after the millennium satan is loosed and deceives them again, thus they fall away, think 2 Thessalonians 2 here, that that should be coming to mind. And because they betrayed Christ by falling away after the millennium, God then destroys them at the end of satan's little season. Sometimes I think I would make a better Amil than I do a Premil. But I can't see it working out if I ever switched positions. As if any Amil is going to agree that I might be on to something here, thus worthy of investigating further.
It's very easy to understand what Revelation 20:1-3 is saying.
Firstly because it's logical that if a king has an adversary in his kingdom who is causing disruption, killing or harming the king's subjects, deceiving as many as he can, continuously encouraging dissent against the king and continuously calling the king's authority and integrity into question,
then if the king wants to put a stop to it, he would need to either bind the adversary and lock him in a dungeon, rendering the adversary completely unable to cause more harm, or simply destroy the adversary,
but if the king in his wisdom and sovereign will continues to permit the adversary for a season and a time to continue, whether it be in order to separate the king's loyal and faithful subjects from his adversaries or for any other reason, then this choice and decision is within the king's sovereign right.
Secondly it's very easy to understand because Satan
only has power to deceive any person, culture or nation to the extent that his words of deception are believed, and
its human beings believing his words of deception that give his words (and hence, Satan) that power.
Thirdly it's easy to understand because
long before the Revelation was even given, Satan was called
"the prince of the power of the air who works in the sons of disobedience" (Ephesians 2:2).
Fourthly it's easy to understand because
Revelation 12:9 calls him
"the great dragon (that) was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world", and then tells us how he was cast down to earth, and then a warning of woe is issued to the inhabitants of the earth and the sea, telling us all how
ever since then, he has doubled-down on his efforts
because he knows that his time is now limited - and that has put him into a rage.
Fifthly it's easy to understand that there's no "binding Satan" in terms of his ability to deceive the nations even
mentioned in Revelation chapter 12; and besides this, the saints were
already warned even
before the Revelation was given, to be weary of his wiles and to resist him, and to "put on the full armor of God" because "we do not wrestle against flesh and blood" (John 12:31 & Revelation 12:9); 1 Peter 5:8-9; Ephesians 6:11-12; Revelation 2:9-10 & Revelation 2:13; 1 Thessalonians 2:18; James 4:7 ).
It's very, very easy to understand, but the fact that those who
do not want to understand equate the destruction of Satan's power over death (through Christ's death and resurrection) with Satan's ability to deceive the nations, and assert that
the gospel has bound him,
shows that they do not even realize that when they assert that the power of the light of the gospel has "bound (or "restricted") Satan from deceiving the nations", the flip side of that coin is that if Satan was
not "restricted: or "bound" in terms of his ability to deceive the nations, then
darkness would somehow have hindered the power of
the light of the gospel (which is a blasphemous assertion to make).
There seems to be a desperate need on the part of Amillennialists to protect a theology concocted in the minds of men, which proves over and over again that they belong either in the second or third group of people below (or in both the second and third groups):
By their own admission and theologies, the billions of Christians in the world are divided into two groups regarding the biblical scriptures:-
(a) Those who believe in (and place) the authority of biblical scripture above all the doctrines and theologies of men ("God's Word above all things"); and
(b) Those who do not.
However, there is a third group:
(c) Those who claim to believe in the authority of biblical scripture above all doctrines and theologies of men, and yet fail the test when confronted with a choice between their own doctrines and theologies and what biblical scripture actually teaches.
Lol... Whatever... <smile>
