Is Revelation 20:1-6 really a recap?

[Spiritual Israelite]

No, I agree we've been rescued *legally.*

What does that mean?

Biblically, we only have a "downpayment" on our inheritance presently. We do not have the property yet--not until the full amount has been recorded with the appropriate "government" authority.

Huh? It's sad when I see Christians downplay the significance of our current spiritual status, as you are doing here. Is Jesus your King right now, Randy? Are you in His kingdom right now?

See above. We're not there yet.

Where are you now? Nowhere? Do you not agree with scripture that you are now a priest in Christ's kingdom (Revelation 1:5-6, 1 Peter 2:9)?

No, physical persecution means we do not reign in the Kingdom yet.

Your understanding of reigning is terribly flawed. It has nothing to do with physical dominance or whatever you think it does. It has to do with belonging to Christ regardless of our circumstances and having spiritual authority over our enemies, which we do right now.

If we reigned presently, our enemies would already be under our feet. As yet, they are not yet crushed under our feet. Legally they've lost. But in reality, they're still active and opposing us, building up God's case against them for eternal judgment.

When they are crushed they will then be in the lake of fire for eternity. Jesus will be crushing them all under His feet when He returns (1 Thess 5:2-3, 2 Thess 1:7-10, 2 Peter 3:10-12). So, if you want to talk in that sense, it makes no sense to think a future thousand years would be required to accomplish that.

I disagree. The Bible records that God promised Abraham literal "nations."

No, it does not. Do you not even care what the New Testament says about the promises God made to Abraham and his seed? Why are you so obsessed with literal nations when literal nations have nothing to do with God's promises to Abraham? What God promised Abraham was that He would have many spiritual offspring, which refers to those who have faith like Abraham.

Why do you not allow the New Testament to interpret the Old Testament for you? Allow Paul to teach you instead of trying to figure it all out on your own. It's much easier that way. Please read this...

Galatians 3:5 Therefore He who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you, does He do it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?— 6 just as Abraham “believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” 7 Therefore know that only those who are of faith are sons of Abraham. 8 And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, saying, “In you all the nations shall be blessed.” 9 So then those who are of faith are blessed with believing Abraham.

See this? This explains what Genesis 17:3 is all about. It's not about Abraham being the father of many literal nations, but rather being the spiritual father of many people from all nations who "are of faith" like Abraham.

And read this...

Galatians 3:26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

The promise to Abraham was not in relation to literal nations, but rather to those who "are Christ's" who make up "Abraham's seed" and are the "heirs according to the promise". You have the promise to Abraham being many literal nations instead of being many individuals of faith who belong to Christ and have faith like Abraham.

Now, please read this where Paul even more clearly explains what Genesis 17:4 means by referencing it directly...

Romans 4:16 Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all 17 (as it is written, “I have made you a father of many nations”) in the presence of Him whom he believed—God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did;

Paul equated the "many nations" that Abraham would be the father of to "us all" who have faith like Abraham. Not to literal nations, as you believe. If you won't listen to me, then listen to Paul. Let him teach you what Genesis 17:4 means.

Gen 17.3 Abram fell facedown, and God said to him, 4 “As for me, this is my covenant with you: You will be the father of many nations.

I think you define "nations" differently than I do, or even than the Dictionaries do?

I define God's promise to Abraham the way Paul does. It does not appear that you accept Paul's explanations for how God's promises to Abraham should be understood.

But don't tell me, "He did not."

I'll tell you again. He did not. You are not understanding the verse properly. You are not using any spiritual discernment to understand scripture. You are relying competely on your own fallible human wisdom instead of relying on the Holy Spirit like Paul said we should do in 1 Corinthians 2:9-16. You see the word "nations" and then make assumptions about it while not allowing the New Testament scriptures to explain the Old Testament scriptures for you.

It is right there in Gen 17.3! If you want to deny what is right there in black and white you're going to have to explain that, or at least explain why you redefine "nations" differently than the rest of us do?

See above. And I've already done this with you multiple times in the past, but you do not pay any attention to what I say to you, obviously. All I'm doing is accepting what Paul wrote about this, but you don't seem to care what Paul wrote. You act as if Paul said nothing about this. Your understanding of Genesis 17:3 does not at all match what Paul said about it.

And your problem is that you use your own favored biblical interpretations to deny language, literature, and reality.

So, you don't deny that you have a problem with not basing your doctrine on scripture and basing it on language and literature instead. Your doctrine comes from sources outside of scripture. Mine does not.

Thank you. Your stock goes up. Many cannot check their pride at the debate forum. We can indeed love and respect one another even with different points of view. It's a measure of maturity.

Yes, Jesus was speaking of the process of the Kingdom coming--not as if it had already come, as in a fiat decree. The Kingdom was in the process of coming, as in the stages leading up to its realization.

Jesus plainly said that the Kingdom is "near," which means that his presence among his people did not mean his Kingdom had yet come.

So, it's now around 2,000 years later and His kingdom still hasn't come despite already being near almost 2,000 years ago? Goodness gracious. I can't take this seriously.

Also, Jesus was not saying that His kingdom was near as if it wasn't already present. He said His kingdom is "at hand". That means it's present. It was already there because the King was there. He is not a King without a kingdom! Do you deny that He is the King now? If so, I believe that is blasphemous. He most certainly is! He IS the King of kings and Lord of lords.

When asked by Pontius Pilate if He was the King of the Jews, He said that He was. But, you say that He is not, thereby contradicting Jesus Himself.

Matthew 27:11 Now Jesus stood before the governor. And the governor asked Him, saying, “Are You the King of the Jews?” Jesus said to him, “It is as you say.”

But his presence among them did mean that the Kingdom was in the process of coming, even though it had plainly not yet arrived.

Nonsense. The kingdom was where Jesus was because He is the King. It was not in the process of coming. That's like saying Jesus was only in the process of becoming King. No, He has been King for a long time now and was King back then. Is He your King right now, Randy?

The necessity of his death made this reality all the more plain, since his disciples recognized that when he died the Kingdom had not yet come. The entire NT teaches that the Kingdom, in order to come, will be an eschatological coming, and not a "realized coming."

Paul, in fact, warned the Thessalonian church in 2 Thes 2 not to be fooled by a premature proclamation of the Kingdom *now.* The Antichrist must precede the coming of Christ with his Kingdom to destroy the Antichrist.

You are not differentiating between Christ's spiritual kingdom that we're in now and the fullness of the kingdom of God that will be in the new heavens and new earth when Jesus returns and delivers the kingdom to God the Father. Scripture does differentiate between those two realities of the kingdom, but you somehow do not even recognize it.

 

[WPM]

No, it isn't fantasy. You're projecting your own sense of what I believe--not at all what I've been saying. So, you apparently just want to agree with your own false characterization of what I believe. How convenient!

I never mentioned an Age of Aquarius. I don't believe that the "same bondage of corruption," or the "Sin Nature," requires that the world be at constant war, either in this age or in the Millennial Age. It hasn't been true in history, so I'm not sure why you're claiming that?

Where is the peace you talk about in Rev 20?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Who/what does Babylon symbolize?

I will answer this question if you answer my question first. You don't get to ignore my question while expecting me to answer yours. That's not acceptable to me. So, again, do you think Babylon was already destroyed after the death and resurrection of Christ?

 

[ewq1938]

Ephesians 2
6And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus,

Revelation 20
4 I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They[a] had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

Just like in Revelation 20:4, Paul shows that even while alive on the earth he is also spiritually raised up and seated with Christ in the heavenly realms.

The two verses speak of two vastly different timeframes but Paul may someday be on a throne judging in Rev 20, but that is many years into the future from the letter he wrote and what he was talking about in that verse.

 

[rwb]

I will answer this question if you answer my question first. You don't get to ignore my question while expecting me to answer yours. That's not acceptable to me. So, again, do you think Babylon was already destroyed after the death and resurrection of Christ?

It wouldn't do any good for me to answer your question until I know if you understand Babylon is symbolic!

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

It wouldn't do any good for me to answer your question until I know if you understand Babylon is symbolic!

I asked first, so you should answer first. That's how this works. If your answer to my question is "I don't know" or "I'm not sure", that's fine, but instead you have to demand that I answer your question before you answer mine, which is ridiculous. Imagine me demanding that you answer a question that I asked after you asked me a question. Would you be okay with that? I'm sure you would not.

Of course I believe that Babylon is symbolic. That's all I'm going to say for now until you answer my question.

 

[Marty fox]

The two verses speak of two vastly different timeframes but Paul may someday be on a throne judging in Rev 20, but that is many years into the future from the letter he wrote and what he was talking about in that verse.

Paul stated that it was a current reality when he wrote those words I quoted the bible and you just gave your view that's not backed up with scripture.

How would you interpret Ephesians 2:6 then?

 

[ewq1938]

Paul stated that it was a current reality when he wrote those words I quoted the bible

Yes but he is speaking of something completely unrelated to Rev 20. Paul was alive when he said those things but Rev 20 is about dead people coming back to life in the resurrection.

and you just gave your view that's not backed up with scripture.

Mine is backed up by the same scriptures.

How would you interpret Ephesians 2:6 then?

A symbolic thing in the lives of 1st century Christians. Not the rod of iron rule over the nations promised to happen AFTER the events of Armageddon, in Rev 19.

 

[rwb]

I asked first, so you should answer first. That's how this works. If your answer to my question is "I don't know" or "I'm not sure", that's fine, but instead you have to demand that I answer your question before you answer mine, which is ridiculous. Imagine me demanding that you answer a question that I asked after you asked me a question. Would you be okay with that? I'm sure you would not.

Of course I believe that Babylon is symbolic. That's all I'm going to say for now until you answer my question.

Very briefly,

I believe the harlot in Rev 19 symbolizes the church of Old, characterized as the harlot through spiritual apostasy/adultery, being overrun by the powers of evil. Christ judged this harlot church of Old at His coming telling apostate Jews their house is left desolate and that the Kingdom of God has been taken from them.

The church of Old became an abomination unto God which is why Christ came to establish anew the spiritual Kingdom of God that would be within believers, not a physical kingdom but spiritually built, and never be destroyed, but would come under great tribulation as the forces of evil come against Her as the servants/saints of Christ proclaim the gospel of the Kingdom of God unto all the nations of the world.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Very briefly,

I believe the harlot in Rev 19 symbolizes the church of Old, characterized as the harlot through spiritual apostasy/adultery, being overrun by the powers of evil. Christ judged this harlot church of Old at His coming telling apostate Jews their house is left desolate and that the Kingdom of God has been taken from them.

The church of Old became an abomination unto God which is why Christ came to establish anew the spiritual Kingdom of God that would be within believers, not a physical kingdom but spiritually built, and never be destroyed, but would come under great tribulation as the forces of evil come against Her as the servants/saints of Christ proclaim the gospel of the Kingdom of God unto all the nations of the world.

That wasn't so hard to answer my question, right? I really wish I knew why you are so evasive at times. Anyway, I completely disagree with your understanding of the harlot Babylon, but I appreciate that you at least answered my question. It seems that your understanding is similar to how preterists interpret it. I never realized before that you are a partial preterist or at least believe similarly to them when it comes to the book of Revelation, apparently.

To me, it's very clear that Revelation 19:11-21 describes the future second coming of Christ and that Revelation 19 is primarily about that. As in, the day of His second coming. It matches up with other scriptures which speak of Him bringing down His wrath on unbelievers on the day of His return. So, the timing of the destruction of Babylon correlates with the timing of the destruction of Christ's enemies on the day of His return.

I see the harlot, the great city Babylon as the exact spiritual opposite of the holy city, the new heavenly Jerusalem which is "the bride, the Lamb's wife" (Revelation 21:9). So, I see all people on earth as spiritually being citizens either of the holy city heavenly Jerusalem, which is the church, or of the great city Babylon. I believe Babylon symbolically represents all of the false religions, cults, and philosophies of the world that oppose Christ and His church. It says that Babylon is "the hold of EVERY foul spirit, and a cage of EVERY unclean and hateful bird." (Revelation 18:2). And God tells His people to "Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues". That reminds me of this passage...

2 Corinthians 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? 15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? 16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.

See how Paul contrasts unbelievers and characteristics of unbelievers with believers and characteristics of believers here? That's how I see the great city Babylon in contrast to the holy city New Jerusalem. Notice Paul indicated that the Lord said: "Come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing". That is very similar to Revelation 18:4 where God says to come out of her (Babylon) which is described as being "a cage of every unclean and hateful bird". I see a correlation between not touching the unclean thing and Babylon being "a cage of every unclean and hateful bird". So, I see the destruction of Babylon as occurring when Jesus returns because all of the teachings and things that oppose God will be destroyed on that day.

 

[ScottA]

More foolishness from you, as usual. You have no spiritual discernment whatsoever. Literally none. To deny His bodily second coming is heresy! You need to repent of your hyper-spiritualization of physical realities!

Acts 1:9 Now when He had spoken these things, while they watched, He was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight. 10 And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven as He went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel, 11 who also said, “Men of Galilee, why do you stand gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven.”

The manner in which He ascended to heaven was visibly and bodily. He will come from heaven in like manner, visibly and bodily. You live in your own world where nothing is real, nothing is physical. You come across like you're some kind of New Age spiritual guru.

If your comment here is what you consider to be true--that is the problem.

You are saying He "ascended"--but it actually says He was "taken up." You and most of Christendom have been looking at it from the WRONG perspective--from the perspective of men and of this world. But that is not the perspective that "taken up" is from. "Ascended" is what people saw--but He was "taken up" spiritually--by God who is spirit--and what should you have learned (but apparently did not) from Jesus about "everyone who is born of the spirit?"

John 3:8​

The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”​

You have much to learn...and yet you accuse me, and are in need of rebuke and correction.

@rwb
@amigo de christo

 

[ScottA]

It would appear that you are never thinking through what you are saying. Ever. Every post of yours is complete foolishness. He will be physically destroying all living unbelievers when He comes. That is clearly taught in other passages as well like 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12. After that, according to Matthew 25:31-46, will be when He judges all people and gives out eternal rewards and sentences. He will take vengeance on those who were dead by resurrecting them, having them stand before Him to give an account of themselves and then casting them into "everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels" (Matthew 25:41).

You don't understand what you are reading in the scriptures. That is only what is taught among men--the teachings of men.

 

[rwb]

That wasn't so hard to answer my question, right? I really wish I knew why you are so evasive at times.

Since you wish to know I will give you, my opinion! IMO you have a reputation in these forums of being offensive, abrasive and exceedingly rude. I'm guarded when replying to you because I fear being drawn into a heated debate where I could easily allow myself to be of the same attitude. This attitude does not bring glory and honor to God, so I try to be very careful or refrain altogether from discussions with you and others here who have attitudes similar to yours. Perhaps you'll forgive me for being blunt, but your said "I really wish I knew why you are so evasive at times".

 

[rwb]

It seems that your understanding is similar to how preterists interpret it. I never realized before that you are a partial preterist or at least believe similarly to them when it comes to the book of Revelation, apparently.

In these forums I have repeatedly denied both full and partial preterism. PP find all their answers for fulfillment of what is written of Old wrapped up in 70 AD. I do NOT! I find my answers for prophesy in the cross and resurrection of Christ's coming including the manner in which I have come to understand Rev 19. If you've followed all that I've said in this thread, you should know that I view Rev 19 as prophecy from the first advent of Christ that has been on-going from the time of Christ until the last trumpet sounds that time given the church to build the Kingdom of God in heaven has expired.

 

[Marty fox]

Yes but he is speaking of something completely unrelated to Rev 20. Paul was alive when he said those things but Rev 20 is about dead people coming back to life in the resurrection.




Mine is backed up by the same scriptures.




A symbolic thing in the lives of 1st century Christians. Not the rod of iron rule over the nations promised to happen AFTER the events of Armageddon, in Rev 19.

So it can be symbolic then why can’t the amil view?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

If your comment here is what you consider to be true--that is the problem.

You are saying He "ascended"--but it actually says He was "taken up." You and most of Christendom have been looking at it from the WRONG perspective--from the perspective of men and of this world. But that is not the perspective that "taken up" is from. "Ascended" is what people saw--but He was "taken up" spiritually--by God who is spirit--and what should you have learned (but apparently did not) from Jesus about "everyone who is born of the spirit?"

John 3:8​

The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”​

You have much to learn...and yet you accuse me, and are in need of rebuke and correction.

@rwb
@amigo de christo

And even more foolishness from you. Will you never stop? They saw Him ascend and be taken up BODILY. They saw that with their own two physical eyes. You are not someone that anyone should take seriously at all.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Since you wish to know I will give you, my opinion! IMO you have a reputation in these forums of being offensive, abrasive and exceedingly rude.

Yes, the truth comes across as rude. It's offensive to be told that you're wrong. I rebuke foolishness like people here do when they blatantly twist the word of God and I will never apologize for that. As if you haven't done the same? Get off your high horse. We don't need to sugarcoat things when people are blatantly twisting the word of God.

I'm guarded when replying to you because I fear being drawn into a heated debate where I could easily allow myself to be of the same attitude. This attitude does not bring glory and honor to God,

Do you think twisting the word of God as you do in relation to the topic of Satan and fallen angels brings glory and honor to God? Do you think trying to make a guardian cherub created perfect in all his ways who protects the holy mountain of God into an imaginary figure or into a reference to a human brings glory and honor to God? Do you think making God, who is love (1 John 4:8) into someone who hates most people instead of being the God who loves the world brings glory and honor to God? Your false beliefs and teaching do not bring glory and honor to God, so focus on fixing yourself before you try to fix others.

so I try to be very careful or refrain altogether from discussions with you and others here who have attitudes similar to yours. Perhaps you'll forgive me for being blunt, but your said "I really wish I knew why you are so evasive at times".

If you would just stop blatantly twisting the holy word of God, you would have no trouble with me. But, that is something that is just unacceptable and I let people know about it and won't apologize for that.

 

[ewq1938]

So it can be symbolic then why can’t the amil view?

I already explained the differences, the beheading and resurrection part that is very different than what Paul wrote of where he didn't mention anyone being murdered in order to be spiritually in that heavenly place. You are just comparing apples and oranges.

 

[Marty fox]

I already explained the differences, the beheading and resurrection part that is very different than what Paul wrote of where he didn't mention anyone being murdered in order to be spiritually in that heavenly place. You are just comparing apples and oranges.

Revelation 20:4
4 I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

This is one of the most controversial verses in the entire bible and a lot of Christians believe that it has to be a future event because they believe that it's on the resurrection day. But according to Paul he stated three times that it was a current reality back in his day.

Here below are the three texts.

Ephesians 2:4-6
4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. 6 And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus,

In the verses above Paul states that we were already made alive, raised up and seated with Christ in the heavenly realms.

Colossians 3:1
Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God.

Once again Paul states that we have already been raised up with Christ.

Romans 5:17
17 For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!

Finally in the verse above Paul states that we reign in life through Jesus.

All of these verses were a current reality while alive in the physical body almost two thousand years ago. If it was a reality back, then it is still a reality today.

Paul ties three events directly to Revelation 20:4 "that we have been made alive", "seated with Christ in the heavenly realms" and that "we reign (in life) through Jesus".

Why do so many Christians not accept this even though Paul declares it? Because they are focused on it being physical not spiritual. They focus on the physical because it mentions saints that were beheaded by the beast and the thousand years.

But let's let scripture interpret scripture. Paul teaches that its spiritual and what John is saying in Revelation 20:4 is that even though the saints are beheaded they still live and reign spiritually the soul doesn't die with the body. It's a promise even though you may die for Jesus you will still live and reign spiritually. The beast can kill the body but not the soul.

Thus, according to Paul we reign in life now and have been for almost two thousand years we are not limited to a literal thousand years God has a better longer plan.

 

[ScottA]

And even more foolishness from you. Will you never stop? They saw Him ascend and be taken up BODILY. They saw that with their own two physical eyes. You are not someone that anyone should take seriously at all.

The spiritual--"the glory of the Father" is "foolishness" says you--now fully revealed There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. So be it.