Isaiah 65:17 vs. Revelation 21:1. How many NHNEs does that equal?

[Randy Kluth]

Satan is under Christ’s kingship today. Jesus defeated him on his own playing field 2000 years ago. He now rules over him. Satan was spiritually bound through the earthly ministry of Christ, he is consequently limited in his power, influence and movement today. His territory has been invaded throughout the world since through the great commission. A bright light is shining throughout the nations. The ignorance that deceived the Gentiles for thousands of years has been lifted. They are now without excuses.

Yes that's the standard Amill response, and as we've discussed before, even some of the early Chiliasts may have used similar language of Satan being "bound" at the cross. I just don't happen to believe that Satan was ever free of Christ's reign. The word of God was always superior to Satan and ruling over him.

Christ at the cross did bind Satan in the sense that he lost a legal basis for condemning Christians. Satan is still roaming about seeking to devour souls, but when they take refuge in Christ there is nothing Satan can do to condemn them to the Lake of Fire.

Amazingly, the Church has been given power over the devil. They have been chosen and empowered to represent Christ on this earth. The light they possess overcomes the darkness wherever they go. Satan is powerless to resist the impetus of the great commission as the Church functions in obedience to God and exercises its divine authority. Satan is completely unable to prevent the free-spread of the Gospel to all tongues, tribes, and nations, as Pinseeker said.

Well yes, I would agree with you up to a point. When we are commissioned by God to do anything, Satan cannot stop us. On the other hand, God has allowed Satan to persecute us and oppress us in various ways. He is not, however, able to take us away from Eternal Life.

Granted, the devil can deceive individuals, he also has been given freedom to accomplish his misdeeds under the careful supervision of God's sovereign will, but he cannot do what he wants. He is a slave to the Lord. He can only do that which advances the cause of Christ. His attacks against the Church ultimately backfire on him. Satan can certainly disrupt the purpose of the Gospel, but he cannot stop them. Satan can resist the Gospel, but God’s people can resist him, whereupon he must immediately flee/vanish. Light overcomes darkness, not the other way around.

Yes, but this has little do with our eschatology. As Christians we have the same experience. We just may describe it using biblical terminology differently because we interpret some things differently.

The evil one cannot access heaven any more. He cannot accuse the saints before the throne of God. He cannot condemn the saints to everlasting spiritual death.

I don't know--it may be possible for Satan to access Heaven. He did so in the time of Job, and I still think he's a heavenly ruler. But as you said, he lost some of his powers when Christ rose from the dead. Those who live in Christ have a mandate from God and cannot be condemned to have Eternal Life taken away from them.

He has lost the legal authority to attack God’s people because Jesus took back what the devil had stolen from Adam. He cannot therefore win! The battle is already won!

Glad to know we agree on some things!

 

[WPM]

Yes that's the standard Amill response, and as we've discussed before, even some of the early Chiliasts may have used similar language of Satan being "bound" at the cross. I just don't happen to believe that Satan was ever free of Christ's reign. The word of God was always superior to Satan and ruling over him.

Christ at the cross did bind Satan in the sense that he lost a legal basis for condemning Christians. Satan is still roaming about seeking to devour souls, but when they take refuge in Christ there is nothing Satan can do to condemn them to the Lake of Fire.

Well yes, I would agree with you up to a point. When we are commissioned by God to do anything, Satan cannot stop us. On the other hand, God has allowed Satan to persecute us and oppress us in various ways. He is not, however, able to take us away from Eternal Life.

Yes, but this has little do with our eschatology. As Christians we have the same experience. We just may describe it using biblical terminology differently because we interpret some things differently.

I don't know--it may be possible for Satan to access Heaven. He did so in the time of Job, and I still think he's a heavenly ruler. But as you said, he lost some of his powers when Christ rose from the dead. Those who live in Christ have a mandate from God and cannot be condemned to have Eternal Life taken away from them.

Glad to know we agree on some things!

Before I address this, can you address where we left off?

This is how I'm applying my answers to the questions you're asking. The "bondage to corruption" is removed from the Church when it is glorified at Christ's 2nd Coming.

There is a direct connection between the liberation of “creation” and the liberation of the “sons of God.” Both the creature and creation are waiting for “the adoption, [to wit], the redemption of our body” – or resurrection day. This is the day when both will simultaneously be delivered from the aforementioned “bondage of corruption.” The day of redemption is shown throughout Scripture to be the second coming of Christ. It is there is that man experiences the final part of redemption – the redemption of his body.

Premils have no answer to the fact that Scripture shows the regeneration of the earth, heavens and elements to occur at Christ's return, not after some imaginary future millennial kingdom blighted with sin and sinners, dying and crying, corruption and crime, war and terror of the Premil scenario, including the pointless slaughter of countless innocent animals during that period.

The fact is: sin, death, disease, Satan, the wicked, wickedness and decay corrupt this current age, but are banished from the age to come at the end with the regeneration of the whole cosmos.

Peter said in 2 Peter 3:10-13: “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. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 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? Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”

In the Premil paradigm, the scoffers and scoffing survive the coming of the Lord, largely uncensored. These rebels remain able to continue their irrational sneer “since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.” The reason being, many Premil propel the fiery judgment depicted in this reading forward 1,000+ years. But the actual thing Peter is warning them about in this passage is the impending wide-ranging destruction of the old heavens, elements, earth, and works upon the earth and the wholesale replacement of them with a brand-new heavens and a new earth. He is warning them that this will catch them unexpectedly. It will involve the complete destruction of the old arrangement, and the complete replacement with a new arrangement.

The Millennial Earth does not suffer *as much* violence as it does in the present age because Satan is bound, and nations are not at war.

You make statement after statement like this in your posts without any scriptural support. That is because it is not derived from the Book. It is what you have thought up or been taught.

The New Earth is the final liberation of earth from corruption when people are compartmentalized, depending on their judgment. Then wicked deeds will no longer be tolerated, and Nature will be at final peace.

Since there is renewed violence after the Millennium, the New Earth has not yet arrived, in my thinking. The New Earth *follows* the Millennial Age, when things are at relative peace before the final conflict.

Again, where does it mention "relative peace" during "the Millennial Age"?

People are not born "religious phonies." They make choices and become "religious phones" when they make the choice to adopt a facade of religion.

In the Millennium people can choose to become Nominal Christians. When Satan is released many Nominal Christians will choose to follow Satan, since his powerful delusions will encourage them to pursue complete rebellion against God and true religion.

You are ducking around the issue once again! How can you remotely argue that billions of ungodly religious phonies who have abode in the presence of the glorified Christ and the glorified saints, and have showed themselves to be the most deluded religious actors in history, stubbornly and relentlessly feigning allegiance to Christ throughout your supposed future millennium, do not possibly sin and die for 1000 years and yet at the first sight of their master Satan rise up in rebellion against Jesus and the Church? This is deception on a scale never seen before in history!

The "Wicked" being spoken of here refer to the Antichristian forces that oppose the coming of Christ with his Kingdom. It is depicted in Dan 7. That's where the term "Antichrist" comes from. The "Little Horn" rises up to oppose the coming of the Son of Man from heaven to set up his Kingdom on earth.

All forces opposing the coming of Christ's Kingdom will be destroyed. This is not an all-encompassing concept, indicating nobody will ever do wickedness again. Obviously, if people survive nuclear wars and Armageddon itself, they will be able to return to wickedness at some point.

The earth repopulated after Noah's Flood. We are told the 2nd Coming will be like the Flood. After the forces opposing Christ's Coming are completely destroyed, the world that remains will be able to continue choosing where they want to be, with God or without God. And ultimately, the forces opposing God will rise again.

The text itself exposes your reasoning. BTW, which unregenerate are excluded from the description of "them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ" (2 Thessalonians 1:8)?

 

[Randy Kluth]

Right. Resolved. Except ~ and you may agree ~ the unsaved never were alive spiritually.

Yes, I agree. The Unsaved can become what I call "Nominal Christians," and can experience the powers of Christ, just as Judas did. However, it was never "Eternal Life" that they experienced. That requires a full commitment to Christ, resulting in spiritual regeneration.

Right. Resolved. But again, the unsaved never were alive spiritually. Adam and Eve did indeed die that very day in Genesis 3 (albeit spiritually, but not yet physically, when Eve was deceived and Adam disobeyed God) just as God told Adam they would in Genesis 2:17.

This language has always been somewhat hard for me. How did Adam and Eve "die" that day? Was this just talking about the fact they *would die* at some point in the present "day," or era?

Clearly, Adam and Eve, in crossing God's word lost some level of spiritual connection with God. And legally, they lost their right to an unbreakable, permanent relationship with God. Sin broke that connection in some sense, rendering them owners of a "Sin Nature."

But I'm not sure I can say they experienced "spiritual death." To me, "spiritual death" refers to the "2nd Death," which is eternal judgment. But I can understand and agree with where you're coming from. It's just the terminology I'm hung up on.

Well, again, it's no mere thing... And I say, away from the One Who is Light, Jesus. The unsaved are in spiritual darkness now; you and I have been brought out of this darkness into His marvelous light (1 Peter 2:9). But the outer darkness Jesus speaks of, that's a whole 'nother thing...

Of course. Current darkness is temporary. Outer Darkness is permanent.

They are not glorified until after they physically die; you agree with that, do you not? Right now, for you and me, we have been born again, but we are not yet fully glorified. Right?

Correct. I see "glorification" as synonymous with "resurrection to immortality." It is donning bodies that can never again be separated from God's word.

In the application of redemption, regeneration (being born again of the Spirit) is the beginning of glorification because it is the creation of a new nature that will come to its fullest expression when we are glorified.

But I don't find that language in the Scriptures. In the Scriptures, glorification refers to our resurrection to immortality, unless you can find otherwise?

Glorification is sanctification (renewal after the image of Christ) made perfect. The Holy Spirit is the agent of the glorification of God’s people. God will immediately glorify all believers in the resurrection on the last day, conforming them perfectly to the image of His risen and glorified Son. The glorification of believers will include being renewed to perfection by God, without sin, in their glorified bodies.

So what is it--glorification by sanctification now, or glorification on the last day? I say glorification refers to the last day. I agree in principle with your sense of sanctification--I just don't think biblical language describes our sanctification today as an act of "glorification." I would need a Scripture in order to defend that language.

When we are born again of the Spirit, we are raised and seated with Christ in the heavenly places. Yes.

Yet that is not an actual "resurrection." To be "raised up in Christ" Paul indicates a *legal sense* of being "raised up." He is not talking about an actual resurrection, obviously.

Not even our human spirits have been raised up to heaven with Christ. They are still in our mortal bodies, unless we've put off those bodies, have died, and gone to be with the Lord!

So to be "raised up with Christ" is to infer that we spiritually participate in the benefits Christ obtained for us. We legally benefit from his vicarious death so that our redemptive status is sealed, and we can walk with those benefits.

I don't believe this is what the "1st Resurrection" in Rev 20 referred to. Christ literally rose from the dead in a physical sense.

But *we* are raised up with him in a purely legal sense, though there are real and immediate benefits to this. None of those benefits mean our spirits have literally been raised up to heaven to be with Christ. We must die to do that.

We have spiritual life; it's in Him that we live and move and have our being. I say "limited spiritual benefits" is understating it somewhat...

Yes, I've had debates on this with "Power Evangelist" people, or "Kingdom Now" people since the 80s. We can't cast Satan out of the universe. We can't heal and empty all of the hospitals on earth. We can't act as if the Kingdom is already realized now on earth. We do indeed have only "limited spiritual benefits" in that sense!

The big thing is that we have Eternal Life now, and we are able to carry out our callings and gifts to testify to Christ. That is significant--no doubt about that!

Dude, we have eternal life. "Limited"? I think not...

Yes, but I wasn't undermining that, nor marginalizing it. I was pointing out how this side of Heaven we suffer. The Kingdom suffers violence from those who wish to take God's territory on earth by force. That's what Jesus said brother.

No, if they are unreached. Let's take China, for example, or Iran. Are they unreached, with respect to the Gospel of Jesus?

The Gospel prevails through resistance. That's how Jesus originally instructed his Disciples and Apostles.

Yes, same to you! Grace and peace to you.

Thanks, same to you.

 

[Timtofly]

So, your supposed future millennium is a day of ongoing destruction and desolation? After all, a "day" in Scripture, regardless of how long, is always marked for its duration by the detail attributed to it. I prefer the perfect and righteous Amil new earth to your depressing hope.

Nope. The Day comes like a thief in the night. Do you think no one will notice the second coming just because the word thief is used?

There may be years of cleaning house, not just the baptism of fire or the heavens dissolving and all the angels appearing on the earth.

Jesus will sit in judgment until all of Adam's offspring are physically dead. The winepress of God's wrath being the last act of the 7th Trumpet sounding.

 

[WPM]

Nope. The Day comes like a thief in the night. Do you think no one will notice the second coming just because the word thief is used?

There may be years of cleaning house, not just the baptism of fire or the heavens dissolving and all the angels appearing on the earth.

Jesus will sit in judgment until all of Adam's offspring are physically dead. The winepress of God's wrath being the last act of the 7th Trumpet sounding.

None of this is in the Word. It is what you have been taught or thought up. The wicked are all destroyed when Jesus comes. There is no wicked to overrun your millennium.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Before I address this, can you address where we left off?

Of course.

There is a direct connection between the liberation of “creation” and the liberation of the “sons of God.” Both the creature and creation are waiting for “the adoption, [to wit], the redemption of our body” – or resurrection day.

I'm not sure this is true--not sure how it is to be read? It could be read that the creation, in its corruptible state, is awaiting Christ to complete his mission in 2 stages, 1st to bring immortality to the Church and 2nd to bringing about a "New Creation" of the earth itself.

I don't know that these events are simultaneous. I know that both events require waiting for Christ to begin with dealing with the cause of all this trouble, which is human sin, as well as Satan.

Premils have no answer to the fact that Scripture shows the regeneration of the earth, heavens and elements to occur at Christ's return...

I don't think any of us have fully resolved this issue. Can you prove that the regeneration of the earth takes place "at Christ's return?"

Peter said in 2 Peter 3:10-13: “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.

This is Armageddon. This is poetry describing, with imagery, the end of the whole world system opposing God's Kingdom. It is language similar to that used to display God's vengeance against His enemies in the OT Scriptures. And that certainly was *not* Jesus' return!

Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 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? Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”

In OT language, the melting of the earth would indicate historical incidences of divine judgments by fire. God would draw in the enemies of nations to burn their country, which melted the elements, destroyed the earth, and darkened the sky with smoke.

Again, where does it mention "relative peace" during "the Millennial Age"?

I'm not going to respond to your hostile rhetoric, but I will answer this. As I've told you numerous times I don't just see the Millennium from the perspective of Rev 20 and the thousand year period. Rather, I see it primarily as a period in which the earth is finally able to see the fulfillment of God's promises to Abraham.

Those promises require the full restoration of national Israel, as well as the full revelation of nations chosen by God across the globe. The idea of "peace" in the Millennium comes from Isaiah, where he describes that swords will be turned into plows. It also comes from Rev 20 itself, where Satan's inclinations, to stir up war on earth, is prohibited by his binding in a pit for a thousand years.

You are ducking around the issue once again! How can you remotely argue that billions of ungodly religious phonies who have abode in the presence of the glorified Christ and the glorified saints, and have showed themselves to be the most deluded religious actors in history, stubbornly and relentlessly feigning allegiance to Christ throughout your supposed future millennium, do not possibly sin and die for 1000 years and yet at the first sight of their master Satan rise up in rebellion against Jesus and the Church? This is deception on a scale never seen before in history!

I've answered this numerous times with you personally. Nominal Christianity exists right now, and the earth enjoys times of relative peace and at other times a period of warfare and conflict. The suppression of Satan during the Millennium will reduce the temptation to engage in a conspiracy against divine rule.

But once Satan is released, those who are purely nominal in their faith will feel emboldened to let their true feelings come out. Others, who are not Christian at all, who have felt incapable of mounting a challenge against Christian nations, will also feel emboldened to join in with the conspiracy against Christian territory and nations, including Jerusalem.

Just like today, many true Christians will certainly not join in any conspiracy against God and Christ. Instead they will be the targets of this mass conspiracy and attack.

And the many who have become genuine believers during the Millennium will prepare for the 2nd Resurrection by not engaging in any rebellion against God. Instead they will, like us, focus on Christ's character and so remain ready for the coming of New Jerusalem and the re-made earth.

 

[WPM]

Of course.

I'm not sure this is true--not sure how it is to be read? It could be read that the creation, in its corruptible state, is awaiting Christ to complete his mission in 2 stages, 1st to bring immortality to the Church and 2nd to bringing about a "New Creation" of the earth itself.

You are arguing with the passage itself. We do not need to explain it away. Let the Bible speak for itself.

Romans 8:16-23 declares, “The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together. For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption [Gr. phthartos or decay] into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, [to wit], the redemption of our body.”

Scripture makes it abundantly clear there will be an end to the current fallen state. There will be a day of complete deliverance. Both the creature and creation are waiting for “the adoption, [to wit], the redemption of our body” – or resurrection day. This is the day when both will be finally delivered from the aforementioned “bondage of corruption.”

It must also be noted, that the reference relating to those who desire deliverance from the present condition of “the bondage of corruption” is not restricted to the redeemed of God alone (those who “have the firstfruits of the Spirit”). The hope is more comprehensive. This passage tells us that the whole of creation is yearning for this monumental change. This only goes to show that all creation doesn’t simply experience the reality and awful cost of the Fall, but that it yearns for relief from its corrosive clutches through its continuation.

When, then, will this perpetual groaning and travailing of all “creation” in pain, for the expressed reason of the continued existence of the awful “bondage of corruption” within “the creature,” actually be finally assuaged?

This approaching change occurs at the one final future coming of Christ – the day of redemption. It is only then that the “sons of God” are finally glorified, and therefore totally and eternally delivered from this continuing “bondage of corruption” into the “glorious liberty of the children of God.” Then, all redeemed creation will be transformed from corruption to incorruption. The time of the “redemption of our body” is the time that sees creation finally and eternally delivered from bondage. This is glorification. This is shown in the whole thrust and context of the introductory verses to this reference, where Paul was talking about man’s great deliverance. He is talking about the saints being “glorified” (v 17) at His return and describing it as “the glory which shall be revealed in us” (v 18).

The new earth ushers in the eternal state. Romans 8 tells us it is free from the bondage of corruption [all the fruit of the Fall]. It is for glorified (incorruptible) beings only. 1 Corinthians 15:50 clearly states, “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.” This reading makes plain, “flesh and blood” or mortal believers cannot inherit a glorified earth that has been purified by fire of every last vestige of the curse. Man in his sinful corruptible state cannot inherit an incorruptible regenerated earth. Nothing could be plainer. The “unrighteous shall not inherit” this “kingdom” (1 Corinthians 6:9).

This is poetry describing, with imagery, the end of the whole world system opposing God's Kingdom. It is language similar to that used to display God's vengeance against His enemies in the OT Scriptures. And that certainly was *not* Jesus' return!

In OT language, the melting of the earth would indicate historical incidences of divine judgments by fire. God would draw in the enemies of nations to burn their country, which melted the elements, destroyed the earth, and darkened the sky with smoke.

Is this not classic Full Preterist reasoning? It is quite ironic over 24 years of discussions on end-time forums, it is Amillennialists who are the consistent literalists, and Premillennialists who have become perpetual spiritualizers when it comes to repeated New Testament Scripture. That is because the sacred text forbids the Premillennialist paradigm at every turn. For them to take the Scriptures at face value would force them to abandon Premillennialism and embrace Amillennialism.

2 Peter 3:8-13: “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. The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. 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. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 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? Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”

Peter is distinctly talking about the physical renewal of creation that will happen when Jesus comes. It will all be changed into a perfect state. Corruption and all wickedness are being banished forever.

Premillennialists have to limit the comprehensive scale of the destruction that accompanies Christ’s return in order to let their theology fit. They minimize the enormity of the obliteration sustained by the wicked and that of this current fallen earth. That is so that they can prolong the life of fallen creation for another 1000 years+ and populate their so-called future millennium with countless wicked mortals. While they boast of being literalists, the reality is the opposite when you examine their reasoning.

Premillennialists have to limit the destruction that occurs at the coming of Christ in 2 Peter 3 in order to explain away this explicit text. Some try to assign a limited localized extent to the devastation; others try to restrict it to the land or ground above water. Premillennialists have to limit the destruction for their doctrine to fit. But whatever way you view the earth, it is burnt up. Not only that, and as if to close any Premillennial loop-hole, he tells us that the works upon the earth are also burnt up. And as you acknowledge, this will happen at the coming of Christ. This is utter destruction!

They must limit the wrath of God at the end to allow their mistaken view of a future millennium. But the Bible says none will escape - that includes Americans, Middle East citizens and everyone else.

It is difficult to see how an objective observer making a plain reading of Scripture could come to any other conclusion than this destructive scene spells the end of mankind and the current created order. Surely Premil would have to amend the sacred text to change such a conclusion?

Surely no one would try to limit the subject and scope of the new heavens and earth in view; so why would they do it to the old heaven and earth? Why would the Lord when He comes in all His final glory introduce a replacement earth that is little (or no) different than that which He just burnt up? This simply doesn’t make sense.

 

[WPM]

I'm not going to respond to your hostile rhetoric, but I will answer this. As I've told you numerous times I don't just see the Millennium from the perspective of Rev 20 and the thousand year period. Rather, I see it primarily as a period in which the earth is finally able to see the fulfillment of God's promises to Abraham.

Those promises require the full restoration of national Israel, as well as the full revelation of nations chosen by God across the globe. The idea of "peace" in the Millennium comes from Isaiah, where he describes that swords will be turned into plows. It also comes from Rev 20 itself, where Satan's inclinations, to stir up war on earth, is prohibited by his binding in a pit for a thousand years.

I notice you do not quote Scripture. To do so might actually help you see its placement. This is referring to our day - "the last days." This is more Scripture that proves Amil. In fact, wherever you look Scripture is plainly Amil.

Isaiah 2:2-4 says, speaking of the Lord’s first Advent, “And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more."

Micah 4:1-3 parallels this teaching, saying, “in the last days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of the house of the LORD shall be established in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; and people shall flow unto it. And many nations shall come, and say, Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, and to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for the law shall go forth of Zion, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. And he shall judge among many people, and rebuke strong nations afar off; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.”

Premils are always thinking natural, physical, temporal and carnal. Amils see the movement away from the Old Testament shadow, picture and type reality to the New Testament spiritual substance, reality and fulfilment. Christ was always redirecting our eyes away from the natural to the spiritual, from the earthly to the heavenly, from the temporal to the eternal and from the visible to the invisible. The natural man is captivated with the natural, the earthly and the temporal the heavenly man is captivated with the supernatural, the heavenly and the eternal.

The old temporal earthly kingdom of Israel was merely a type of the new spiritual heavenly eternal kingdom that Christ was going to introduce at His first Advent. The whole old covenant structure was always going to be superseded by a better system. As you get into the New Testament you quickly realise that physical Jerusalem is no longer considered true Zion (or Sion). Under the new covenant, Zion is heavenly, spiritual and eternal not earthly, physical and temporal. The Old Testament was simply an imperfect type of the real.

These passages are telling us that Messiah would come and bring peace to His subjects. This would be performed through the Word of God going out of Zion to all nations in these last days. Christ did this. The Gentiles are now coming to the truth of God by their millions. Isaiah receives a pictorial vision of the approaching new covenant order, and the last days. It is given in a metaphorical style describing the incredible peace and reconciliation that comes through the success of the Gospel. The mountain of the Lord refers to the kingdom introduced by Christ. There is no more war there. Mountains in Scripture prophetically speak of kingdoms. That is the case in Isaiah 2 and Malachi 4. The peace described came with the earthly ministry of Christ. It is spiritual. It pertains to the kingdom of God. It also relates to the last days – the days we are living in.

 

[WPM]

I've answered this numerous times with you personally. Nominal Christianity exists right now, and the earth enjoys times of relative peace and at other times a period of warfare and conflict. The suppression of Satan during the Millennium will reduce the temptation to engage in a conspiracy against divine rule.

But once Satan is released, those who are purely nominal in their faith will feel emboldened to let their true feelings come out. Others, who are not Christian at all, who have felt incapable of mounting a challenge against Christian nations, will also feel emboldened to join in with the conspiracy against Christian territory and nations, including Jerusalem.

Just like today, many true Christians will certainly not join in any conspiracy against God and Christ. Instead they will be the targets of this mass conspiracy and attack.

And the many who have become genuine believers during the Millennium will prepare for the 2nd Resurrection by not engaging in any rebellion against God. Instead they will, like us, focus on Christ's character and so remain ready for the coming of New Jerusalem and the re-made earth.

This is all you have: personal speculation, elaborate theories and carnal reasoning. You have no Scripture to bring to the table. There is nothing in Revelation 20 or any other Scripture that supports this. The reality is: we are in Revelation 20 now; we might even be on the verge of Satan's little season.

 

[Timtofly]

There is absolutely no mention of your supposed future millennium here. You're adding on to Scripture again. You are so fixated with this time that does not exist in the Bible that you force it into the sacred text where it does not belong.

After talking about the righteous and their eternal bliss the prophet then turns to the awful fate of the wicked. There is no suggestion that the sinner is on the new earth. Quite the opposite. This is where he receives eternal damnation. At this stage the unregenerate are eternally separated from the redeemed.

Isaiah 65:20 says: “the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed.”

This text is basically telling us that the awful state of the wicked is eternally unchanged. They are damned and doomed eternally. They are forever accursed.

The Hebrew literally reads:

וְהַ֣חֹוטֶ֔א בֶּן־מֵאָ֥ה שָׁנָ֖ה יְקֻלָּֽל׃
wªhachowTe ben- mee'aah šā-nāh yªqulaa
the sinner an hundred years old [shall be] accursed

וְהַ֣חוֹטֶ֔א
wªhachowTe
the sinner

בֶּן־
ben-
Old

מֵאָ֥ה
mee'aah
an hundred

שָׁנָ֖ה
šā-nāh
years

יְקֻלָּֽל׃
yªqulaa
Cursed

The Hebrew word yªqulaa simply means “is cursed.”

The Hebrew word wªhachowTe simply means "sinner."

There is no mention here of the word “death” or “die” in the Hebrew!

The inclusion of the phrase “Accursed an hundred years old sinner” is simply a solemn reminder to the reader that the fate of the unbeliever is starkly different to that being depicted for the believer on the new earth. In the midst of his joy at the revelation of the new earth the Old Testament prophet compares the bliss, blessing and perfection of the glorified new earth and the horror of the fate of the wicked in hell. The solemn thought is: the eternal horror and hopelessness that will be the lot of the wicked is not just for a short time, it is forever. There is no sense that the wicked are on the new earth here. Isaiah is not describing more of the same as Premil teaches. The new earth is not a repeat or rehash of this corruptible age. This must be forced into the text.

The writer is simply making a comparison (in the midst of his joy at the thought of the new earth) between the bliss and perfection of the glorified new earth and the horror of the fate of the wicked in the lake of fire. There is no sense that the wicked are on the earth here.

So your eternity still has hundred year old cursed sinners in it.

Souls don't accumulate time. This is talking about being physically alive since birth.

Of course it is talking about being alive on earth. Certainly not talking about life that experiences time anywhere else. Does not the chapter describe a new heavens and earth?

Do you know any hundred year old souls?

Nice that you assert Isaiah 65 is talking about the LOF. Do you like accusing others of making stuff up, because you are so good at it yourself?

You have yet to explain how Revelation 20 compares to the last 2 millennia. Since you bring up death, what does "yamut" mean in Hebrew? First you claim sinner and cursed is not in the first two lines, and then deny death is mentioned in the second line.

Perhaps you are missing the point that at a hundred one is a dead sinner, if they are acursed? If they are not accursed, they live happily forever, no death necessary ever. Tell me why you think Isaiah thought every accursed person died on their hundredth birthday? Or did you mean that those in the LOF celebrated their hundredth year in the LOF? Just saying, because you are so good at making up stuff about Premil.

 

[Timtofly]

After the millennial Kingdom.

This chapter is not talking about Adam's curse. It is talking about individuals who are accursed after the Second Coming. Since you dismiss the whole Day of the Lord bit, and go straight to the next reality, you have people alive in that new reality who can still choose to disobey God who are considered accursed on their own merit, not any other human, not even their parents. But then again, you may deny procreation altogether, thus you do have to spiritualize the chapter to remove all the context of building and living on earth.

 

[WPM]

So your eternity still has hundred year old cursed sinners in it.

Souls don't accumulate time. This is talking about being physically alive since birth.

Of course it is talking about being alive on earth. Certainly not talking about life that experiences time anywhere else. Does not the chapter describe a new heavens and earth?

Do you know any hundred year old souls?

Nice that you assert Isaiah 65 is talking about the LOF. Do you like accusing others of making stuff up, because you are so good at it yourself?

You have yet to explain how Revelation 20 compares to the last 2 millennia. Since you bring up death, what does "yamut" mean in Hebrew? First you claim sinner and cursed is not in the first two lines, and then deny death is mentioned in the second line.

Perhaps you are missing the point that at a hundred one is a dead sinner, if they are acursed? If they are not accursed, they live happily forever, no death necessary ever. Tell me why you think Isaiah thought every accursed person died on their hundredth birthday? Or did you mean that those in the LOF celebrated their hundredth year in the LOF? Just saying, because you are so good at making up stuff about Premil.

Let us have a literal word-by-word look at the Hebrew pertaining to Isaiah 65:20.

לֹא־יִֽהְיֶ֨ה מִשָּׁ֜ם עֹ֗וד ע֤וּל יָמִים֙ וְזָקֵ֔ן אֲשֶׁ֥ר
Lo'- yihªyeh mishaam `owd `uwl yaamiym wªzaaqeen 'ªsher
Not be hence more an infant [of] days, an old man after

לֹֽא־יְמַלֵּ֖א אֶת־יָמָ֑יו כִּ֣י הַנַּ֗עַר בֶּן־מֵאָ֤ה שָׁנָה֙ יָמ֔וּת
Lo'- yªmalee''et- yaamaayw Kiy hana`ar ben- mee'aah shaanaah yaamuwt
Not fulfill your days inasmuch a child old an hundred years die

What is this telling us?

The exact same thing, only in different terms.

This is called synonymous parallelism. It is telling us that a child will never become old on the new earth. This line reinforces what has just been said. It confirms the thought of the impending reality of no more death in the eternal state for the righteous. In eternity there will be no more aging or dying. It is not going to be like our corrupt age where infants eventually get old. It will not be like the here-and-now where a man could live to be an old person of a hundred years of age and then die.

This passage is actually saying the opposite to what many think. What this is saying is: there will be no more aging, curse or death on the new earth. Every glorified saints will have come to full maturity in Christ with their new perfect eternal bodies. It is the next line of Isaiah 65:20 that has confused many, because the translators have not interpreted it in a literal word-for-word sense. It is not saying there will be more babies, death and old men. It is saying the opposite to what they are alleging. It is saying that there will be no more aging: children getting old, old people and people dying! It is describing eternity to an Old Testament audience in terms they can grasp.

The new heavens and new earth will indeed be a glorious victorious perfect state where death is unknown. God is saying that the eternal state will actually be free of death for young and old alike. This passage is telling us that there will be no more death on the new earth! The Hebrew word Lo' (Strong’s 3808) means “no” or “not.” The word is a simple negation. The word is found twice in this much-debated new heavens and new earth verse.

Debate in Isaiah 65:20 centers in on the use of the original word yaamuw meaning “die” or “death.” What should we relate it to? Is there indeed “death” on the new earth? Also, should the death be related to the “child” in the second phrase or the “sinner” in the third phrase? What is more, in what way should it read? I must admit, if we are to read it in its most natural way it fits perfectly with the context. So why change it? I believe it should be applied to the “child” as it should agree with the first phrase that is simply a reinforcement of the same truth. It then fits perfectly with the whole overall teaching of the prophet on the perfection and bliss of the eternal state.

No (Lo') longer will an infant become like an old man,
No (Lo') longer will a child reach one hundred and die.

This is Old Testament verbiage that describes eternity to the Old Testament listener. It is telling us: no one is going to age! This relates to the new heaven and new earth not some supposed future millennium – that will never happen.

The original Hebrew does not give us any reason to attribute death to the “child” in this second line. In fact, it does not fit the whole context which is evidently speaking of the removal of aging and death on the new earth. Interpreting it as we have, seems to (1) match the original, (2) make sense to its context, and (3) taps into the thrust of what the prophet was trying to relay. We need to remind ourselves that the whole idea here is describing the incredible eternal deliverance from the curse of corruption and the joy that “the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind” on the “new earth.”

 

[WPM]

This chapter is not talking about Adam's curse. It is talking about individuals who are accursed after the Second Coming. Since you dismiss the whole Day of the Lord bit, and go straight to the next reality, you have people alive in that new reality who can still choose to disobey God who are considered accursed on their own merit, not any other human, not even their parents. But then again, you may deny procreation altogether, thus you do have to spiritualize the chapter to remove all the context of building and living on earth.

Isaiah 65:19 says,

"the voice of weeping shall be (Lo') no more heard in her, nor the voice of crying.”

Once again, we come across the word Lo' in this text. This time we learn that there will be no more “weeping”/“crying.” This is further grounds for believing this phrase in Isaiah 65:20 relates to the eternal state (after the millennium) and that we are looking at the fact there will be no more death or ageing in the new heavens and new earth. This confirms that there will never again be sadness or sorrow in the kingdom that follows Christ’s coming. Christ will render the undertaker eternally redundant. Commenting on this passage Robert B. Strimple, says, “were it literally true that a man who died at a hundred would be considered a mere youth (65:20), then tears would be shed at his passing.”

This raises another difficulty for the Premillennialist; there can be no more tears during the whole duration of their supposed future millennial kingdom. Not another tear from a mother in childbirth, nor another cry from a child receiving correction, no more weeping from the penitent sinner under conviction, no more tears from those suffering illnesses, no more wailing during bereavement. Evidently, crying and tears either terminate on the new earth or they don’t. In the Premillennial new earth, tears not only continue but abound. In fact, as long as sin persists tears accompany its continued existence.

If there is death there will be “weeping” and “crying.” Right? Or are these myriads of millennial phonies so stiff-necked and hard hearted that they lose the ability to cry?

If there is no sorrow and crying, how then could there be death? Are people just going to be totally immune to the pain and gravity of death? Are people going to be completely insensitive during this supposed future millennial kingdom to the point where no one even cries when someone dies? Premillennialists interpret this passage in such a way that would suggest that there will be weeping on the new earth, thus contradicting Isaiah 65:19. But this cannot be so. We all know that there is no contradiction here. Such a proposal would be absurd.

Is there no more child birth?
Does no one have a heart attack?
Does anyone have kidney stones?
Does anyone have shingles?
Does nobody stub their toe in Jerusalem?
Does anyone accidentally stand on a nail?
Are there any motor bike, car, train or airplane crashes?
Does no one cry at the loss of a loved one?

Does death not provoke some type of emotion in these people? Are none of these millennial dwellers touched in their heart when they see Jesus? Are they so hard-hearted that they cannot express any emotion in this staid Premil millennium?

Premils say salvation continues but is there no more tears of repentance?

This statement refutes the Premil understanding of Isaiah 65 and shows the contradictory nature of that school of thought. Regardless of how diligently they try, the Premil cannot fit Isaiah 65:17-21 into a supposed future millennium. It would be easier to fit a square peg into a round hole.

Crying is terminated in Isaiah 65:17-21, the bondage of corruption is eliminated.

In one breath you argue there is death in your sin-cursed millennium and the next not?

So, when does weeping/crying stop? At the beginning of the millennium in Revelation 20 or after it is over in the new heaven and new earth in Revelation 21?

 

[Timtofly]

None of this is in the Word. It is what you have been taught or thought up. The wicked are all destroyed when Jesus comes. There is no wicked to overrun your millennium.

That is what I said. Then you said there is nothing in Scripture about Jesus destroying the wicked at the Second Coming. Make up your mind here.

At the Second Coming Jesus separates the sheep from the goats. At the Second Coming the tares and wheat are harvested. Of course that is Scripture Matthew 25 and 13. This does not happen in a twinkling of an eye. It could be years, months, or days. You claim it is over instantly but have no verses to prove that claim.

All you do is make up stuff you think the poster writes, just because that poster accepts God's Word as stated, but refuses doing your spirituality dance where you keep claiming nothing is physical about life after the Second Coming but only spiritual.

I have never claimed there was any wicked in the Millennium ever. Adam's state of death ends at the sounding of the 7th Trumpet. But you keep making up this false claim that I am bereft of Scripture. Of course God's Word states what I have posted, as obviously you cannot even make a point about any exact part of my quote. All you say is "none of this". So why do you think Adam's time of sin and death is up, at the 7th Trumpet, if you cannot find that point in Scripture?

You are the one making false claims that wicked overrun the Day of the Lord, which is a full Millennium. So where in Scripture do you base your claims on?

 

[WPM]

That is what I said. Then you said there is nothing in Scripture about Jesus destroying the wicked at the Second Coming. Make up your mind here.

At the Second Coming Jesus separates the sheep from the goats. At the Second Coming the tares and wheat are harvested. Of course that is Scripture Matthew 25 and 13. This does not happen in a twinkling of an eye. It could be years, months, or days. You claim it is over instantly but have no verses to prove that claim.

All you do is make up stuff you think the poster writes, just because that poster accepts God's Word as stated, but refuses doing your spirituality dance where you keep claiming nothing is physical about life after the Second Coming but only spiritual.

I have never claimed there was any wicked in the Millennium ever. Adam's state of death ends at the sounding of the 7th Trumpet. But you keep making up this false claim that I am bereft of Scripture. Of course God's Word states what I have posted, as obviously you cannot even make a point about any exact part of my quote. All you say is "none of this". So why do you think Adam's time of sin and death is up, at the 7th Trumpet, if you cannot find that point in Scripture?

You are the one making false claims that wicked overrun the Day of the Lord, which is a full Millennium. So where in Scripture do you base your claims on?

Who is this 3rd group that you are too wicked to be caught up and too righteous to be destroyed? Who are these billions of wicked who survive the coming of Christ and overrun your supposed future millennium as the sand of the sea? Are they aliens?

 

[Randy Kluth]

This is all you have: personal speculation, elaborate theories and carnal reasoning. You have no Scripture to bring to the table. There is nothing in Revelation 20 or any other Scripture that supports this. The reality is: we are in Revelation 20 now; we might even be on the verge of Satan's little season.

What makes you think my Christian opinion is "carnal reasoning?" Aren't you being judgmental?

Keep in mind that if you don't keep your heart pure and show a sincere love for your brothers and sisters in Christ, you are not adequately prepared for the coming of Christ yourself. The Kingdom of God is all about having a renewed mind--not a carnal mind. Have you really died to yourself in order to live only by the Spirit? Do you forfeit your own inner hostility to make room for God's wrath?

Carnality is really living and thinking without Christ and his Spirit. Is that what you are doing? Can you argue, discuss, or debate these subjects without hostility, without insulting another opinion? Are you able to endure and be patient with another position without calling it "carnal" or other insulting names?

In all of the years I've been on these forums, you've been unchanging in your insulting manner towards those who disagree with your Amill position. If you think that is your ministry, I think you've missed the mark. Becoming a scholar may help you understand an issue, but it can be void of spiritual ministry to the soul. You do *not* minister to my soul!

I try to be kind towards you because I don't want to get caught up in a party spirit, where one side stands solidly by one position and another one stands solidly by the opposite position. That kind of bickering is, in fact, carnal. And I don't think I'm doing that. I share this because I think you should just take some time to think about how spiritual you've really been all these years. Do you really feel like God is pleased with this kind of rhetoric? Here is what the Scriptures say to it...

Titus 3.9 But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless. 10 Warn a divisive person once, and then warn them a second time. After that, have nothing to do with them. 11 You may be sure that such people are warped and sinful; they are self-condemned.

You see we can all quote Scriptures. But what is God's Spirit trying to say to us? Is it about winning arguments or winning souls? Some kinds of arguments do the opposite of winning souls. In fact, some kinds of arguments can become an impediment to winning souls.

 

[WPM]

What makes you think my Christian opinion is "carnal reasoning?" Aren't you being judgmental?

Keep in mind that if you don't keep your heart pure and show a sincere love for your brothers and sisters in Christ, you are not adequately prepared for the coming of Christ yourself. The Kingdom of God is all about having a renewed mind--not a carnal mind. Have you really died to yourself in order to live only by the Spirit? Do you forfeit your own inner hostility to make room for God's wrath?

Carnality is really living and thinking without Christ and his Spirit. Is that what you are doing? Can you argue, discuss, or debate these subjects without hostility, without insulting another opinion? Are you able to endure and be patient with another position without calling it "carnal" or other insulting names?

In all of the years I've been on these forums, you've been unchanging in your insulting manner towards those who disagree with your Amill position. If you think that is your ministry, I think you've missed the mark. Becoming a scholar may help you understand an issue, but it can be void of spiritual ministry to the soul. You do *not* minister to my soul!

I try to be kind towards you because I don't want to get caught up in a party spirit, where one side stands solidly by one position and another one stands solidly by the opposite position. That kind of bickering is, in fact, carnal. And I don't think I'm doing that. I share this because I think you should just take some time to think about how spiritual you've really been all these years. Do you really feel like God is pleased with this kind of rhetoric? Here is what the Scriptures say to it...

Titus 3.9 But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless. 10 Warn a divisive person once, and then warn them a second time. After that, have nothing to do with them. 11 You may be sure that such people are warped and sinful; they are self-condemned.

You see we can all quote Scriptures. But what is God's Spirit trying to say to us? Is it about winning arguments or winning souls? Some kinds of arguments do the opposite of winning souls. In fact, some kinds of arguments can become an impediment to winning souls.

I have no interest in offending you. My concern has actually been a consistent gripe Amils have had with you for years, how you refuse to present hard Scripture in your posts. All we are left with is your own opinions. Sadly, your posts are marked by that. That is a fact. The reader can search your posts and find that. What should I call that? This is very frustrating for those wishing to get into the Word. I am sorry this offends you. But this is a Bible forum. Our arguments are meant to be based on Scripture.

It seems like the only time you employ Scripture is to hurl abuse.

What is more: it is OK for everyone else to try and persuade others to the validity of their position (including yourself), but when I do it, it is trying to win an argument, as if that is some gross sin. I find a blatant duplicity in your charges. I find that petty. If you have no answer to my posts then just admit it. If you do not want to be 'won by my arguments' then ignore them. But do not stoop to your usual ad hominem every time you have no rebuttal.

The bottom line is: you are too thin-skinned. You seem to want to take offence. You want to play the victim card! That is difficult to engage with.

But again, I have no desire to antagonize you. I am sorry that is what you feel.

 

[Timtofly]

Isaiah 65:19 says,

"the voice of weeping shall be (Lo') no more heard in her, nor the voice of crying.”

Once again, we come across the word Lo' in this text. This time we learn that there will be no more “weeping”/“crying.” This is further grounds for believing this phrase in Isaiah 65:20 relates to the eternal state (after the millennium) and that we are looking at the fact there will be no more death or ageing in the new heavens and new earth. This confirms that there will never again be sadness or sorrow in the kingdom that follows Christ’s coming. Christ will render the undertaker eternally redundant. Commenting on this passage Robert B. Strimple, says, “were it literally true that a man who died at a hundred would be considered a mere youth (65:20), then tears would be shed at his passing.”

This raises another difficulty for the Premillennialist; there can be no more tears during the whole duration of their supposed future millennial kingdom. Not another tear from a mother in childbirth, nor another cry from a child receiving correction, no more weeping from the penitent sinner under conviction, no more tears from those suffering illnesses, no more wailing during bereavement. Evidently, crying and tears either terminate on the new earth or they don’t. In the Premillennial new earth, tears not only continue but abound. In fact, as long as sin persists tears accompany its continued existence.

If there is death there will be “weeping” and “crying.” Right? Or are these myriads of millennial phonies so stiff-necked and hard hearted that they lose the ability to cry?

If there is no sorrow and crying, how then could there be death? Are people just going to be totally immune to the pain and gravity of death? Are people going to be completely insensitive during this supposed future millennial kingdom to the point where no one even cries when someone dies? Premillennialists interpret this passage in such a way that would suggest that there will be weeping on the new earth, thus contradicting Isaiah 65:19. But this cannot be so. We all know that there is no contradiction here. Such a proposal would be absurd.

Is there no more child birth?
Does no one have a heart attack?
Does anyone have kidney stones?
Does anyone have shingles?
Does nobody stub their toe in Jerusalem?
Does anyone accidentally stand on a nail?
Are there any motor bike, car, train or airplane crashes?
Does no one cry at the loss of a loved one?

Does death not provoke some type of emotion in these people? Are none of these millennial dwellers touched in their heart when they see Jesus? Are they so hard-hearted that they cannot express any emotion in this staid Premil millennium?

Premils say salvation continues but is there no more tears of repentance?

This statement refutes the Premil understanding of Isaiah 65 and shows the contradictory nature of that school of thought. Regardless of how diligently they try, the Premil cannot fit Isaiah 65:17-21 into a supposed future millennium. It would be easier to fit a square peg into a round hole.

Crying is terminated in Isaiah 65:17-21, the bondage of corruption is eliminated.

In one breath you argue there is death in your sin-cursed millennium and the next not?

So, when does weeping/crying stop? At the beginning of the millennium in Revelation 20 or after it is over in the new heaven and new earth in Revelation 21?

Are you asking about the chapter or your eternity?

Once again Isaiah is talking about being born. Isaiah is talking about people experiencing the passage of time. The word death is used as being definitive. They will build houses and live in the same place for hundreds of years. They will keep building and expanding across the earth.

You point out that is the NHNE. Will they procreate in the NHNE? Will people still disobey God and die in your NHNE? Can you answer all your own questions about your eternity?

 

[Timtofly]

Who is this 3rd group that you are too wicked to be caught up and too righteous to be destroyed? Who are these billions of wicked who survive the coming of Christ and overrun your supposed future millennium as the sand of the sea? Are they aliens?

Don't know. You made this third group up.

 

[WPM]

Are you asking about the chapter or your eternity?

Once again Isaiah is talking about being born. Isaiah is talking about people experiencing the passage of time. The word death is used as being definitive. They will build houses and live in the same place for hundreds of years. They will keep building and expanding across the earth.

You point out that is the NHNE. Will they procreate in the NHNE? Will people still disobey God and die in your NHNE? Can you answer all your own questions about your eternity?

Once again, you avoided every single point i made about weeping.

How is it carnal and sinful to build houses? Where does it say they will procreate?