22 major reasons to abandon the Premil doctrine

stunnedbygrace said:

I didn’t understand it any of the times you posted and reposted it, I guess because I speak English and not Hebrew, that’s why I didn’t respond. But I DID post the rest of the verse somewhere, to which I didn’t get a reply from anyone to my recollection. You covered the first of the verse in Hebrew, (which as I said didn’t make any sense to me), but not the rest of the verse. Not that it would have helped if you did because I read and speak in English.

So, I looked it up myself in that Hebrew thingy you used and it said:
For
The child
Old
A hundred
Years
Shall die


but…you know, I just like to read in my own language

Click to expand...

Yes the Hebrew word "yamut" shall die is in the text. That cannot be explained away. But in the OT this is part of the Law: Deuteronomy 21:18-21

"If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear."

This is not a death you mourn and cry over. This is the removal of a cursed child, and not a superstitious type of curse. This is a young human with a mindset that can never follow after God. This is what Isaiah was referring to. This is the Wycliffe Bible:

"A young child of days shall no more be there, and an eld man, that filleth not his days; for why a child of an hundred years shall die, and a sinner of an hundred years shall be cursed. (And there shall not be a young child there, who liveth only for a few days, nor an old man who filleth not all of his days, for why should any child die before a hundred years of age; but a sinner shall die there before living a hundred years, for he shall be cursed.) "

John Wycliffe lived in 1300 and was one of the first English translations. So there were theologians prior to and during the Reformation that accepted death and sin in this verse. Thus it cannot be totally construed as pertaining to the NHNE in Revelation 21. Modern day pre-mill did not invent a future Millennium. Isaiah 65 clearly shows that at the Second Coming a new heaven and earth is being created, not out of nothing, but a change from the bondage of sin and death. The physical earth itself will be free of sin and death, not just the invisible church, that starts out on earth, and gathers in Paradise.

Why is it hard to see that Jesus reigns on a changed earth, instead of just dismissing God's Word or changing God's Word for one's private biased opinions?

This verse does not mean sin reigns on earth. It means all sinners will die as soon as they are called out for being disobedient. Since it is in the text and context of a child, it will be the parents responsibility to do as God commanded concerning a rebellious child.

To totally disregard this point and claim this will go on through the next reality for a very long time, is not paying attention to the fact that Death is the last enemy, and these dead sinners in the Millennium cannot exist in a future reality after Death is defeated.

Trying to say that children live at home until they are 100 is not the point. Trying to explain death away is not the point. Another interesting point is the birth of Seth, after Adam and Eve were banned from Eden. Seth was born 130 years after some point. Neither Adam nor Eve died before 100. They were blessed and not cursed even though they were the first 2 sinners. But why did it take 130 years? In the context of Isaiah 65, 100 years is a cut off point. After 100, one seems to be safe from this curse and are not declared sinners. Nor is this a natural death, because sin is defined as breaking the law. Sin in the context of Isaiah 65 is not natural, but a curse. A child whose mind is only rebellious continually is the only reason Death is still an enemy until the Millennium is completed.

Now the account of Seth's birth, Isaiah 65, Deuteronomy 21, and Revelation 20, all corroborative Scripture, should be proof, but I am sure it will just be tossed out as "private opinion". The same as we toss out the private opinion of Amil. Neither side wants to budge on the actual text.

Sure Isaiah is saying people don't ever die and forever is a long time. Yet Isaiah confirms there is death, which falls under current reality until Death is defeated. Isaiah is not saying that there is constant sin and death. That is not the point either.

Ronald Nolette said:

Well it is where we disagree. You think 1,000 years is not 1,000 years.

Click to expand...

That's correct, a (Thousand Years) in Revelation 20:4-6 isn't future literal years upon this earth in a Millennial Kingdom as you believe and teach, it's a symbolic number representing the Lord's spiritual realm of "No Time" one day is a thousand years with the Lord

That's correct, Revelation 20:1-6 is 100% the Lord's spiritual realm, Angel, Heaven, Devil, Satan, The Souls, The Dead, God, Christ, no kingdom on this earth is seen whatsoever, as you desperately try to build one

Spiritual Israelite said:

His own private interpretation shared by millions of others. LOL.

Click to expand...

Do you give him the credit for starting Amil?

Private does not mean personal. It means from human understanding as opposed to God's understanding. Quote the whole verse before you dismiss your own point along with mine.

Is not Islam from a private human thought process? Are not Mormons the result of one man's private thoughts.

Do you claim to have direct Revelation from God outside of Scripture that Amil comes directly from God through you, and thus your word is also Scripture? If not Amil is a private interpretation shared by unfortunately millions of humans. If you want to give Paul M all the credit for Amil, that is your point, not mine. You all have bought into the private opinion of Amil eschatology and thus it is all of your's private opinion. It definitely is not written down in Scripture, nor comes naturally without being taught. Do you claim Holy Spirit inspiration? If not it is private interpretation, because one man at some point in time put the thought out there, unless you give credit to that spirit being you keep posting about? So laugh that it is private human interpretation, the alternative other than God is not really a laughing matter.

Ronald Nolette said:

Well it is where we disagree. You think 1,000 years is not 1,000 years. You do not believe in a resurrection after jesus returns, followed by another resurrection 1,000 years later. but on this point, no matter what you think the 1,000 years stands for, there is a resurrection before it and one after it.

Superficially you seem correct on Puals verse in Corinthians. BUT "eita" in its context is referring to resurrections and not an apocalyptical return and establishemnt.

another problem you have. If Christ is reigning now- when di9d the Resurrection occur that raised up those who were beheaded and are reigning with Jesus now?

Click to expand...

The First Resurrection, On The Last Day Explained?

There are (Two) resurrections on this (Last Day) the righteous are blessed to be in the (First Resurrection) to eternal life, on such the (Second Death) resurrection has no power.

1.) (First Resurrection) To Life
2.) (Second Death) Resurrection To Damnation

Revelation 20:6KJV
Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

The (Last Day) Resurrection Of All Below

John 5:28-29KJV
28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

John 6:39-40KJV
39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

1 Corinthians 15:21-24KJV
21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.
24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

The (Last Day) Judgement

John 12:48KJV
48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

Paul Malcomson said:

1. What Scripture, if any, do you consider definitely corroborates the Premillennial interpretation of Revelation 20 that there are two distinct physical resurrection days (the first for the righteous, the second for the wicked) separated by a literal 1000 years+?
2. Where in Scripture does it mention “resurrection days” (plural), pertaining to the end?
3. Is there any other day outlined in Scripture as a day of glorification outside of the one final future coming of Christ?

Click to expand...

The claim of two resurrections being 1,000 years apart is found in Revelation Chapter 23

Paul Malcomson said:

1. What Scripture, if any, do you consider definitely corroborates the Premillennial interpretation of Revelation 20 that there are two distinct physical resurrection days (the first for the righteous, the second for the wicked) separated by a literal 1000 years+?
2. Where in Scripture does it mention “resurrection days” (plural), pertaining to the end?
3. Is there any other day outlined in Scripture as a day of glorification outside of the one final future coming of Christ?

Click to expand...

1. , 2, 3
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

the very fact that Scripture separates these two resurrections is enough, even if you reject the 1,000 years is actually 1,000 years. whatever time frame you use, even misusing 2 Peter as a doctrinal statement defining divine days- it would still be 1,000 human years!

afirst resurrection presupposes a second and verse 5 shows that there are untolde numbers who do not take part in the first resurrection.

As for Days of Glorification- I would need you to spell this out specifically what you mean before I can answer properly.

Paul Malcomson said:

Moses employs `a thousand' in Deuteronomy 7:9 saying, "Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

1 Chronicles 16:13-17 also states, "O ye seed of Israel his servant, ye children of Jacob, his chosen ones. He is the LORD our God; his judgments are in all the earth. Be ye mindful always of his covenant; the word which he commanded to a thousand generations; Even of the covenant which he made with Abraham, and of his oath unto Isaac; And hath confirmed the same to Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

A thousand and ten thousand are used together in Psalm 91, saying, "Thou shalt not be afraid for the terror by night; nor for the arrow that flieth by day; Nor for the pestilence that walketh in darkness; nor for the destruction that wasteth at noonday. A thousand shall fall at thy side, and ten thousand at thy right hand; but it shall not come nigh thee" (vv 5-7).

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

A similar contrast between these two numbers or ideas is seen in Deuteronomy 32:30, where a rhetorical question is asked, "How should one chase a thousand, and two put ten thousand to flight, except their Rock had sold them, and the Lord had shut them up?"

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

Joshua affirms, on the same vein, in chapter 23, "One man of you shall chase a thousand: for the LORD your God, he it is that fighteth for you, as he hath promised you" (v 10).

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

Isaiah the prophet similarly declares in Isaiah 30:17, "one thousand shall flee at the rebuke of one." This incidentally is the only passage in Scripture that makes mention of the actual number "one thousand," albeit, the term is used to impress a spiritual truth.

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

Psalm 84:9-10 says, "Behold, O God our shield, and look upon the face of thine anointed. For a day in thy courts is better than a thousand. I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

The figure a thousand is also employed in Psalm 50:10-11 saying, "For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills. I know all the fowls of the mountains: and the wild beasts of the field are mine."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

Ecclesiastes 7:27-28 succinctly says, "one man among a thousand have I found."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

In the same vein, Job 33:23 declares, "If there be a messenger with him, an interpreter, one among a thousand, to shew unto man his uprightness."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

The distinct contrast between one and a thousand is again found in Job 9:2-3, where Job declares, "I know it is so of a truth: but how should man be just with God? If he will contend with him, he cannot answer him one of a thousand."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

The same idea is intended in Isaiah 60:21-22, where the prophet instructs, in relation to the New Earth, "Thy people also shall be all righteous: they shall inherit the land for ever, the branch of my planting, the work of my hands, that I may be glorified. A little one shall become a thousand, and a small one a strong nation: I the Lord will hasten it in his time."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

Amos 5:1-4 says, "The virgin of Israel is fallen; she shall no more rise: she is forsaken upon her land; there is none to raise her up. For thus saith the Lord GOD; The city that went out by a thousand shall leave an hundred, and that which went forth by an hundred shall leave ten, to the house of Israel."

Is this a literal or figurative thousand?

Click to expand...

I couldn't answer. teh bible did not take a census of all those things. but I expect some of them are euphemistic. But it does not mean that every tinme a trhousand is used it must be symbolic. And if we are to rightly divide the word- every timne1,000 is symbolic it has to equal the same thing unless it specifically gives it a different value.

You do not know for sure if 1,000 generations is literal, and the Amos passage and several others! aqnd even if all other times thousand is symbolic- it does not mean that John was inspired to use a symbolic number! show me the rule that says 1,000 must always be symbolic.

Paul Malcomson said:

I am not sure where these mentions are. Can you please present us with every quote from Daniel 2, 9, Ezekiel 23, 37, Psalm 2, Revelation 2, Rev 12, and Rev 19 that mentions a future millennium?

Click to expand...

If you read them, You will see they mention that the king will rule with a rod of Iron.

Why don’t you read them, or are you afraid?

jeffweeder said:

Premill teaches that Tim , as the unrepentant somehow remain alive at the Lords coming for a 1000 years. They are not of the Faith to be glorified at his coming , yet they do not perish but survive for a thousand years =ridiculous.
Repent or perish is the Lords teaching , yet premill introduces some middle ground at his coming.

Click to expand...

Then you are just being ambiguous and not addressing the points individual pre-mill are making.

Amil here call that avoidance.

Still slander when directed at a particular poster who claims many pre-mill are wrong.

Amil make the error of pre-mill worse than actually pointing out Scripture.

Jesus as Messiah has been addressed over and over, and I get it if no one else does. But you all reject that Jesus as King is also an earthly occurrence, just as being Messiah on earth was an earthly occurrence. That point you all avoid like the covid epidemic, and then just make stuff up instead. Then when we call you out on making stuff up, you revert back to Jesus as Messiah and totally avoid Jesus on earth as King.

Matthew 25:31 is Jesus on earth as King. It is not the last 1992 years in heaven at the right hand of God.

"When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:"

That does not say:

"For the next 1992 years at the right hand of God, then shall I sit upon the throne of my glory:"

This throne is on earth and will not happen until the Second Coming. Jesus just told us in Matthew 24 about the angels. And also in Matthew 13:37-40

"He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;"

If you claim the end of this world means the very end with no more time, that is still avoiding the point. Jesus will reign on the throne for as long as it takes. Then the world will end. The point is it is on the earth. That is the point you all are avoiding. Most of you claim the earth is immediately burned to a crisp at the Second Coming, which contradicts these verses in Matthew 13, 24, and 25. Sin and death is brought to a climactic end. Adam's dead corruptible flesh is brought to a climactic end. But Jesus as King on a throne in Jerusalem is just getting started. It goes on until all creation is brought under submission.

It has been the end for the last 1992 years, but you can't say exactly when the end is, and to just dismiss a 1,000 year reign with Christ as King on earth is claiming you know the end when we have been told, no one knows the exact end. So all who keep saying "this year" is potentially the ultimate end are wrong and have been wrong for 1900 years. So if you claim there have been Amil for 1900 years, they have obviously been wrong about the last 1900 years, and are worse date setters than modern humans. The end has obviously not come in the last 1900 years.

Paul Malcomson said:

What do you mean? Do you believe the Jewish temple will be rebuilt? Will animal sacrifices be restarted?



Not so. They predicted Christ introducing His kingdom at the First Advent. He did that. The Pharisees with the hyper-literalist theology missed that. By point that you responded to referred to Revelation 20. where does it teach the restoration of an elevated position for ethnic Israel on their future millennial earth?



You are not answering my point again. You are building one error upon another error and coming up with greater error. Address my point.



Where does Rev 20 present a perfect pristine paradise of peace and harmony? Quote actual verses.



Where does Rev 20 "Jesus rules with a rod of iron"? Quote actual verses.

Click to expand...

My friend, I am not going to convince you. But people who come and read your nonsense and outright lies about premillennialism people can read

I am not here for you anymore. I am here to defend against your lies.

Paul Malcomson said:

(19) Premil has an unhealthy obsessive focus on natural Israel, wrongly believing her to be God’s chosen people today under the new covenant. As a result, they have a mistaken fixation with natural Jerusalem in the Middle East, as if it is the epicenter of God’s workings with mankind on this earth and the place of His unconditional favor. This is wrong! They ignore much Scripture that shows that the fig tree has been cut down, the kingdom of God has been removed from Israel. Ancient Jerusalem and the temple therein were merely Old Testament imperfect shadows of the heavenly reality that was revealed at the first advent. The New Testament repeatedly teaches that we have become one with spiritual believing Israel in the OT. It makes clear; there is only one elect people. There is only one good olive tree, not two; one body, not two; one bride, not two; one spiritual temple, not two; one people of God, not two; one household of faith, not two; one fold, not two; one new man, not “twain,” and one elect of God throughout time!

(20) General unqualified phrases like “all,” “all nations,” “the quick (or living) and the dead,” “every man,” “every eye,” “every one,” “men,” “man,” “all men everywhere,” “the flesh of all men both free and bond, both small and great,” “all that dwell upon the earth … whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world ,” “they that dwell on the earth … whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world,” “the world,” “the whole world” and “all the world,” that objective and impartial Bible students acknowledge embrace the whole human race (or the full amount of all the wicked) are redefined and explained away to let Premil fit. If one was to take a precise straightforward interpretation of these phrases, one could only come to conclusion that there are no exclusions here. This shows that the Premil boast that they are literalists is inaccurate.

(21) Premil takes common linguistic terms that are easily understood by the unindoctrinated observer in any language to mean the opposite to what they actually say. For example, Premil does not believe that "first" means first and "last" means last. The English words “first” and “last” are taken from the Greek words protos and eschatos and are widely accepted by all unbiased theologians to denote exactly what they say. The word protos means first, as in the foremost in time, place, order or importance. The word eschatos on the other hand means end, last, farthest and final. It is explicitly clear from their usage, meaning and context in the New Testament that these words are the exact antithesis of each other.

(22) Premil does not believe that “the end” refers to the end. The New Testament word from which we get our phrase “the end” is the Greek word telos which refers to the point aimed at as a limit, i.e. the conclusion of an act or state. It is the termination point of a thing. When Scripture simply talks about “the beginning” without any other additional words or contextual reason to identify it with a specific event, then most sane theologians agree it is talking about “the beginning” of creation. Whilst all sound theologians agree on this many are inconsistent when it comes to “the end.” The reason I believe is because it cuts across a lot of their end-time theology they have been taught. But I believe we should treat both sayings similarly. Unless Scripture specifically identifies “the end” with a particular event or matter like “the end of barley harvest” (Ruth 2:23) “the end of the sabbath” (Matt 28:1), “the end of the year” (2 Chron 24:23), “the end of the rod” (1 Sam 14:27), or “the end of the commandment” (1 Tim 1:5), etc, etc, then we should understand it as the end of the world (which is the end of the age).

Click to expand...

The problem is, though, Premillennialism is true. The Millennial period doesn't begin until Jesus returns.

Ronald Nolette said:

afirst resurrection presupposes a second and verse 5 shows that there are untolde numbers who do not take part in the first resurrection.

As for Days of Glorification- I would need you to spell this out specifically what you mean before I can answer properly.

Click to expand...

Yes there are "Two" future resurrections, and they take place on "The Last Day" at the second coming of Jesus Christ (The End) as you have been clearly shown in post #1226 above without response "Why"?

CadyandZoe said:

The problem is, though, Premillennialism is true. The Millennial period doesn't begin until Jesus returns.

Click to expand...

There's no such thing as a Millennial Kingdom on this earth found in scripture, it's a fabricated fairy tale of man

Eternally Grateful said:

My friend, I am not going to convince you. But people who come and read your nonsense and outright lies about premillennialism people can read

I am not here for you anymore. I am here to defend against your lies.

Click to expand...

Paul isn't lying as you falsely claim, perhaps one is looking into a mirror of prideful truth?

The battle has been lost when one is in a corner, left with nothing but false personal attacks

stunnedbygrace said:

I realize that’s how you see what is being said, but I believe the tribulation does not leave many alive with which to begin to repopulate the world over the course of the thousand year age and those relatively few who do remain (who didn’t take the mark) are the ones who enter into it. Sort of like a repeat of the flood. Which is another odd thing I see which I don’t know how to explain but…I get glimpses of how Genesis seems to begin working backward in a repeat. That’s probably not going to be understood by anyone. I do catch glimpses of it though.

Click to expand...

The GT doesnt leave any alive. For the sake of the born again elect does God intervene in the worlds affairs just like in Noahs time, and there will be no repeat of such a scenario ever again. Only the elect on the ark survived yes?
The GT surpasses the Catastrophe of Noahs day.


Matt 24
21 For then there will be great suffering unlike anything that has happened from the beginning of the world until now, or ever will happen. 22 And if those days had not been cut short, no one would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short.

Premill contradicts the Lords own teaching here , and has it happing all over again 1000 after the Lords immediate second coming after the GT .

Truth7t7 said:

There's no such thing as a Millennial Kingdom on this earth found in scripture, it's a fabricated fairy tale of man

Click to expand...

Since you are DIRECTLY CONTRADICTING Scripture your accusation has no merit. In fact you are accusing God of Christ of fabricating lies. That is a very serious matter.

Timtofly said:

Jesus as Messiah has been addressed over and over, and I get it if no one else does. But you all reject that Jesus as King is also an earthly occurrence, just as being Messiah on earth was an earthly occurrence. That point you all avoid like the covid epidemic, and then just make stuff up instead. Then when we call you out on making stuff up, you revert back to Jesus as Messiah and totally avoid Jesus on earth as King.

Matthew 25:31 is Jesus on earth as King. It is not the last 1992 years in heaven at the right hand of God.

"When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:"

That does not say:

"For the next 1992 years at the right hand of God, then shall I sit upon the throne of my glory:"

This throne is on earth and will not happen until the Second Coming. Jesus just told us in Matthew 24 about the angels. And also in Matthew 13:37-40

Click to expand...

Believe what you want.
Jesus clearly said that this heaven and earth pass away when comes...so how can he set up his throne on it???

35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.

36 “But as for that day and hour no one knows it—not even the angels in heaven—except the Father alone. 37 For just like the days of Noah were, so the coming of the Son of Man will be.

Peter looked for a NHNE at the promise of his coming for a very good reason...,

13 But, according to his promise, we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness truly resides.

Exhortation to the Faithful
14 Therefore, dear friends, since you are waiting for these things, strive to be found at peace, without spot or blemish, when you come into his presence. 15 And regard the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as also our dear brother Paul wrote to you, according to the wisdom given to him, 16 speaking of these things in all his letters. Some things in these letters are hard to understand, things the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they also do to the rest of the scriptures.

Enoch111 said:

Since you are DIRECTLY CONTRADICTING Scripture your accusation has no merit. In fact you are accusing God of Christ of fabricating lies. That is a very serious matter.

Click to expand...

A Millennial Kingdom on this earth is found no place in scripture, its a fabricated fairy tale of man

Revelation 20:1-6 doesn't describe a Kingdom on this earth with mortal humans present as Millennialist claim, it's 100% in the Lord's spiritual realm, where one day is a thousand years, Angel, Heaven, Devil, Satan, The Souls, The Dead, God, Christ

If that's a literal Kingdom on this earth, we have swamp land in Louisiana for sale at a $1,000,000.00 an acre, Smiles!

Revelation 20:1-6 Isnt A Millennial Kingdom On This Earth, Dont Be Deceived

Can you find the things claimed by those teaching a Literal 1,000 year Millennial Kingdom On This Earth in Revelation 20:1-6 below?

1.) Physical Earthly Kingdom?
2.) Physical Earthly Throne?
3.) Physical Mortal Humans?

The Above Claims (Don't Exist)

Revelation 20:1-6 Is 100% In The Lords (Spiritual) Angel, Heaven, Devil, Satan, The Souls, The Dead, God, Christ

100% Spiritual Realm, No "Literal" Time

2 Peter 3:8KJV
8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

Revelation 20:1-6KJV
1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
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.
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.