Where is "The Beloved City" and "the camp of the saints" of Revelation 20?

[Zao is life]

Your whole post predictably avoided answering the question: Care to explain how the armies of the beast can enter heaven and tread NJ for 42 months?

The camp of the saints on earth in the new earth is New Jerusalem, and I quoted the scripture for you in bold red here

You other error is to be unable to understand what realities are being represented symbolically in the Revelation. You seem to have some things that are literal as symbolic, and vice versa.

@ewq1938 Are you going to argue like some Amillennists that New Jerusalem on earth in the new heavens and new earth is in heaven?

 

[WPM]

But you have come to Mount Zion
and to the city of the living God,
the heavenly Jerusalem,
and to an innumerable company of angels,
to the general assembly and church of the first-born
who are written in Heaven,
and to God the judge of all,
and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
and to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant,
and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.
(Hebrews 12:22-24)​

I think you are unto to something here.

Hopefully you pick on my color coding. Green is for the mentions of the New Testament heavenly city. Blue is for the spiritual application of it with the bride of Christ.

While there are many references to the heavenly abode, the city of God, heavenly Zion, and Paradise, in the New Testament, we will look at “the holy city” or “holy Jerusalem.”

Under the old covenant, natural Jerusalem was considered “the holy city.” But after the removal of the old covenant and the introduction of the new heavenly Jerusalem became “the holy city” or “the city of my God.”

For example, in Matthew 4:5 we learn: “Then the devil took him to the holy city, and set him on the pinnacle of the temple.”

This was before the new covenant. Here we are likely looking at the physical temple in physical Jerusalem. But after the introduction of the new covenant through the death of Christ we see the movement away from natural Jerusalem to heavenly Jerusalem.

Most difficulty surrounds Matthew 27:53. What does this relate to? Is this speaking about the earthly city or the heavenly city? After the cross what was “the holy city”?

Matthew 27:53 tells us: “And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.”

The theologians have debated this passage for years and have arrived at varying positions. A lot can be influenced by one’s theological position. I would conclude that this is talking about the heavenly abode. This was a heavenly testimony of the victory of Christ.

Paul compared earthly Jerusalem to heavenly Jerusalem under the new covenant in Galatians 4:22-31, “For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.”

We see the two Jerusalems compared and contrasted here, representing two different distinct peoples – the saved and the lost. The earthly city is a symbol of bondage, whereas the heavenly city is used as a picture of freedom. Unfortunately, Premils concentrate their eyes upon the wrong Jerusalem and elevate the wrong Israel. Many today have their eyes on the wrong Jerusalem and places hopes upon it that are in clear conflict with Scripture. They seem to forget, the old temporal earthly type has been replaced by the new heavenly eternal reality.

Hebrews 12: 22-24: “But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.”

This relates to the here-and-now and are ongoing. It speaks of our immediate entry into the kingdom of God and our current spiritual standing in the New Jerusalem.

Revelation 11:8 explicitly states, “the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.”

This description was definitely not intended to be a commendation of Jerusalem but to describe it for exactly what it was/is. Many modern pro-Israel commentators today would probably throw the charge of anti-Semitic at such a charge, however, this charge comes from Christ.

The next greatest debate is over Revelation 11:1-2. Again, is this talking about the earthly or heavenly city?

Revelation 11:1-2: “And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein (the redeemed). But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles (unbelievers): and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.”

The greatest way to understand these challenging passages is to employ other relevant Scripture in the New Testament in order to aid our understanding. In this case, the other passages are all in the book of Revelation. This helps us grasp the authors intent. If we do that, we can only conclude that this is talking about the bride of Christ.

This text would seem to be insinuating that the world at the end will trample the saints of God down for a short season before the end.

Revelation 20:9 seems to parallel Revelation 11:1-2: “And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.”

There is no city mentioned or qualified in the Revelation under the new covenant to be called “the beloved city” or “the holy city” other than New Jerusalem (Christ’s bride). This telling us that the world will surround the saints before the end. Revelation 20 is the 7th of 7 parallel accounts that take us through the intra-Advent period to the coming of the Lord.

Revelation 3:12: “Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.”

Revelation 21 and 22 calls heavenly Jerusalem “the holy city” three times.

Revelation 21:1-4 declares, “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle [Gr. skēnē] of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.”

The tabernacle of His body is now complete.

Revelation 21:9-10: “And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife. And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God.”

The New Jerusalem is not just described as a city, it is also described as being the bride of Christ. This is similar to the redeemed Church being described as the temple of God made without hands in the New Testament. It is constructed with people not stones.

The New Jerusalem is described as both “that great city” and “the bride, the Lamb's wife.” This symbolism is no different from the faithful being described by the New Testament writers as stones in the temple of God made without hands.

Revelation 22:19: “And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”

 

[Marty fox]

I think you are unto to something here.

Hopefully you pick on my color coding. Green is for the mentions of the New Testament heavenly city. Blue is for the spiritual application of it with the bride of Christ.

While there are many references to the heavenly abode, the city of God, heavenly Zion, and Paradise, in the New Testament, we will look at “the holy city” or “holy Jerusalem.”

Under the old covenant, natural Jerusalem was considered “the holy city.” But after the removal of the old covenant and the introduction of the new heavenly Jerusalem became “the holy city” or “the city of my God.”

For example, in Matthew 4:5 we learn: “Then the devil took him to the holy city, and set him on the pinnacle of the temple.”

This was before the new covenant. Here we are likely looking at the physical temple in physical Jerusalem. But after the introduction of the new covenant through the death of Christ we see the movement away from natural Jerusalem to heavenly Jerusalem.

Most difficulty surrounds Matthew 27:53. What does this relate to? Is this speaking about the earthly city or the heavenly city? After the cross what was “the holy city”?

Matthew 27:53 tells us: “And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.”

The theologians have debated this passage for years and have arrived at varying positions. A lot can be influenced by one’s theological position. I would conclude that this is talking about the heavenly abode. This was a heavenly testimony of the victory of Christ.

Hebrews 12: 22-24: “But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.”

The next greatest debate is over Revelation 11:1-2. Again, is this talking about the earthly or heavenly city?

Revelation 11:1-2: “And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein (the redeemed). But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles (unbelievers): and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.”

The greatest way to understand these challenging passages is to employ other relevant Scripture in the New Testament in order to aid our understanding. In this case, the other passages are all in the book of Revelation. This helps us grasp the authors intent. If we do that, we can only conclude that this is talking about the bride of Christ.

This text would seem to be insinuating that the world at the end will trample the saints of God down for a short season before the end.

Revelation 20:9 seems to parallel this: “And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.”

There is no city mentioned or qualified in the Revelation under the new covenant to be called “the beloved city” or “the holy city” other than New Jerusalem (Christ’s bride).

The world will surround the saints before the end.

Revelation 3:12: “Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.”

Revelation 21 and 22 calls heavenly Jerusalem “the holy city” three times.

Revelation 21:1-4 declares, “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle [Gr. skēnē] of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.”

The tabernacle of His body is now complete.

Revelation 21:9-10: “And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife. And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God.”

The New Jerusalem is not just described as a city, it is also described as being the bride of Christ. This is similar to the redeemed Church being described as the temple of God made without hands in the New Testament. It is constructed with people not stones.

The New Jerusalem is described as both “that great city” and “the bride, the Lamb's wife.” This symbolism is no different from the faithful being described by the New Testament writers as stones in the temple of God made without hands.

Revelation 22:19: “And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”

Yes amen great post and Paul confirms this below

Galatians 4

Hagar and Sarah​

21 Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says? 22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. 23 His son by the slave woman was born according to the flesh, but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a divine promise.

24 These things are being taken figuratively: The women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. 25 Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. 26 But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. 27 For it is written:

“Be glad, barren woman,
you who never bore a child;
shout for joy and cry aloud,
you who were never in labor;
because more are the children of the desolate woman
than of her who has a husband.”[e]

28 Now you, brothers and sisters, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29 At that time the son born according to the fleshpersecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. 30 But what does Scripture say? “Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman’s son.”[f] 31 Therefore, brothers and sisters, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.

 

[WPM]

Yes amen great post and Paul confirms this below

Galatians 4

Hagar and Sarah​

21 Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says? 22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. 23 His son by the slave woman was born according to the flesh, but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a divine promise.

24 These things are being taken figuratively: The women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. 25 Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. 26 But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. 27 For it is written:

“Be glad, barren woman,
you who never bore a child;
shout for joy and cry aloud,
you who were never in labor;
because more are the children of the desolate woman
than of her who has a husband.”[e]

28 Now you, brothers and sisters, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29 At that time the son born according to the fleshpersecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. 30 But what does Scripture say? “Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman’s son.”[f] 31 Therefore, brothers and sisters, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.

Yes! Amen! Brilliant! I am going to add thoughts I had in a word doc to my post for others to read. Thanks for that reminder. That is why I love these studies.

 

[ewq1938]

The camp of the saints on earth in the new earth is New Jerusalem, and I quoted the scripture for you in bold red here

No, the camp is there through the Millennium which is before the new Earth happens. The city is the old Jerusalem.

Are you going to argue like some Amillennists that New Jerusalem on earth in the new heavens and new earth is in heaven?

The NHNE happens after the GWTJ, then NJ descends to the new Earth. You place the NHNE and NJ far too early, going against when scripture places them.

 

[Marty fox]

Yes! Amen! Brilliant! I am going to add thoughts I had in a word doc to my post for others to read. Thanks for that reminder. That is why I love these studies.

Your very welcome isn’t it amazing how the scriptures all intertwine with each other?

 

[Zao is life]

Most difficulty surrounds Matthew 27:53. What does this relate to? Is this speaking about the earthly city or the heavenly city? After the cross what was “the holy city”?

Matthew 27:53 tells us: “And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.”

The theologians have debated this passage for years and have arrived at varying positions. A lot can be influenced by one’s theological position. I would conclude that this is talking about the heavenly abode. This was a heavenly testimony of the victory of Christ.

Without any reference to theologians or the things they say I've arrived at the same conclusion - that the above verse is more likely calling New Jerusalem the holy city - because it would be contrary to the rest of the New Testament and to the Revelation's own identification of the holy city, were it speaking about the Jerusalem that is in bondage with her children, since they were resurrected saints, therefore there would be no reason why they would not have entered into the same New Jerusalem / holy city that all saints enter through Christ, and through our faith in Christ.

There is also no historical record of disciples or anyone else seeing those resurrected ones walking about in the earthly Jerusalem, and it's extremely odd (to say the least) for there to be not one peep in recorded history of what, to every person who saw them, would have been the greatest event since the fall of Adam, aside from the resurrection of Christ.

Premils concentrate their eyes upon the wrong Jerusalem and elevate the wrong Israel.

The above is a slur. And possibly a deliberate one. I'm a Premillennialist. We do not all think the same. To begin with, Historic Premillennialism is not the same as Dispensational Premillennialism. I think you're aware of this.

So for you to put all Premillennialists into the above category is false, and can easily be seen as a failed attempt to slur Premillnennialism and Premillennialists in general.

What you say about New Jerusalem is true, in my opinion.

Many today have their eyes on the wrong Jerusalem and places hopes upon it that are in clear conflict with Scripture. They seem to forget, the old temporal earthly type has been replaced by the new heavenly eternal reality.

I agree - but Christians also need to be partially spiritually blinded by their own theology though (which is what Amillennialism always does to Christians) if they have failed to notice that the devil is at war against the Jews who are not even saved, and against their right to occupy the lands of the Davidic kingdom of Israel, part of which they currently occupy, which happens to be the same lands that God gave to their forefathers.

Of course, if anyone believes Satan is now currently bound and cannot deceive the nations, then such a person is already partially spiritually blinded by his own (false) theology, and will not notice that what is going on in the Middle East today is a spiritual war of evil against good, despite most Jews not being citizens of New Jerusalem through their unbelief of Christ.

Amillennialists ignore the inspired Word of God in Romans 11:28 which says very clearly and unambiguously that though they are enemies of the gospel they who are the seed of Abraham by birth are nevertheless beloved of God for the sake of the fathers (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob).

In Romans 11:28 God is telling ALL those who believe in Christ (but only those who have ears to hear will hear) that though most Jews do not believe in Christ, and are therefore broken off from His elect (through their unbelief), yet He still loves them for the sake of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

Amillennialists downplay or at the very least de-emphasize the word "love" [agapētós, from the word agapē] in Romans 11:28, as though God does not mean what He says.

Amillennialists also take all the promises of God made by God through the prophets of the Old Testament regarding the new earth in the new heavens and new earth, and spiritualize them into a religion that is foreign to the Christianity once delivered and established by the apostles of Christ.

This is why they remain partially blinded to the full counsel of God.

The next greatest debate is over Revelation 11:1-2. Again, is this talking about the earthly or heavenly city?

My other posts in this thread already gave my standpoint on the above. What is written in Revelation 11:1-2 is about something to take place before the 7th trumpet sounds, and cannot be talking about the same city Paul stated is in bondage with her children, and which Revelation 11:8 calls the city "spiritually called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified".

Therefore Revelation 11:1-2 can only refer to the New Testament Temple of God (which is the only Temple of God) and the same 42 months that Revelation 13:5-7 is referring to.

The greatest way to understand these challenging passages is to employ other relevant Scripture in the New Testament in order to aid our understanding.

When you always add unnecessary comments like the above which state the obvious when you are talking to adult Christians (and not to children), it rightly always appears as a veiled attempt at making a pretense of knowing better than all other adult Christians regarding the conclusions you are about to express, though some of them may be in error.

IMO you should remove all such unnecessary additions from your store-house of copy and paste posts because adults do not like to be spoken to like they are children, and you may end up annoying a lot of people, hence they will not even consider anything you say after such statements.

Though we're on the same page regarding New Jerusalem, IMO you wrongly interpret the location in time of the camp of the saints | beloved city of Revelation 20:9 - and you do this because your belief in Amil has blinded you to the extent that you completely disregard the obvious location in time of what Revelation 20:4-6 is saying, and falsely turn the binding of Satan and shutting up of Satan in the abyss, into a house-arrest where he is still free to walk to and fro on the earth as long as he reports to his probation officer - and you do so without any biblical support aside from the passages in the Bible that you have imagined support such a thing.

 

[Zao is life]

The NHNE happens after the GWTJ, then NJ descends to the new Earth. You place the NHNE and NJ far too early, going against when scripture places them.

The truth is you ignore where scripture places them, and no matter how much scripture is quoted refuting your false claim above, you will simply repeat and repeat and repeat the same false assertion. This is what most Premillennialists and all Amillennialists always do. Amillennialists place the NHNE where scripture places it, but the millennium they place where scripture does not place it, falsely calling it a symbolic 1,000 years.

Premillennialists such as yourself acknowledge the location in time of the commencement of the thousand years and acknowledge that it's a literal thousand years, but place the NHNE in a location in time where scripture does not place it, and ignore all scripture that places it where they themselves do not place it, thus denying or explaining away the scriptures that place the NHNE at a time immediately following the return of Christ - just like Amillennialists do with the thousand years.

Oh well, one day the majority of the saints will be honest with the scriptures instead of inserting their own beliefs into the scriptures.

 

[WPM]

Your very welcome isn’t it amazing how the scriptures all intertwine with each other?

Yes bro! Amen!

 

[WPM]

Without any reference to theologians or the things they say I've arrived at the same conclusion - that the above verse is more likely calling New Jerusalem the holy city - because it would be contrary to the rest of the New Testament and to the Revelation's own identification of the holy city, were it speaking about the Jerusalem that is in bondage with her children, since they were resurrected saints, therefore there would be no reason why they would not have entered into the same New Jerusalem / holy city that all saints enter through Christ, and through our faith in Christ.

There is also no historical record of disciples or anyone else seeing those resurrected ones walking about in the earthly Jerusalem, and it's extremely odd (to say the least) for there to be not one peep in recorded history of what, to every person who saw them, would have been the greatest event since the fall of Adam, aside from the resurrection of Christ.



The above is a slur. And possibly a deliberate one. I'm a Premillennialist. We do not all think the same. To begin with, Historic Premillennialism is not the same as Dispensational Premillennialism. I think you're aware of this.

So for you to put all Premillennialists into the above category is false, and can easily be seen as a failed attempt to slur Premillnennialism and Premillennialists in general.

What you say about New Jerusalem is true, in my opinion.



I agree - but Christians also need to be partially spiritually blinded by their own theology though (which is what Amillennialism always does to Christians) if they have failed to notice that the devil is at war against the Jews who are not even saved, and against their right to occupy the lands of the Davidic kingdom of Israel, part of which they currently occupy, which happens to be the same lands that God gave to their forefathers.

Of course, if anyone believes Satan is now currently bound and cannot deceive the nations, then such a person is already partially spiritually blinded by his own (false) theology, and will not notice that what is going on in the Middle East today is a spiritual war of evil against good, despite most Jews not being citizens of New Jerusalem through their unbelief of Christ.

Amillennialists ignore the inspired Word of God in Romans 11:28 which says very clearly and unambiguously that though they are enemies of the gospel they who are the seed of Abraham by birth are nevertheless beloved of God for the sake of the fathers (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob).

In Romans 11:28 God is telling ALL those who believe in Christ (but only those who have ears to hear will hear) that though most Jews do not believe in Christ, and are therefore broken off from His elect (through their unbelief), yet He still loves them for the sake of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

Amillennialists downplay or at the very least de-emphasize the word "love" [agapētós, from the word agapē] in Romans 11:28, as though God does not mean what He says.

Amillennialists also take all the promises of God made by God through the prophets of the Old Testament regarding the new earth in the new heavens and new earth, and spiritualize them into a religion that is foreign to the Christianity once delivered and established by the apostles of Christ.

This is why they remain partially blinded to the full counsel of God.



My other posts in this thread already gave my standpoint on the above. What is written in Revelation 11:1-2 is about something to take place before the 7th trumpet sounds, and cannot be talking about the same city Paul stated is in bondage with her children, and which Revelation 11:8 calls the city "spiritually called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified".

Therefore Revelation 11:1-2 can only refer to the New Testament Temple of God (which is the only Temple of God) and the same 42 months that Revelation 13:5-7 is referring to.



When you always add unnecessary comments like the above which state the obvious when you are talking to adult Christians (and not to children), it rightly always appears as a veiled attempt at making a pretense of knowing better than all other adult Christians regarding the conclusions you are about to express, though some of them may be in error.

IMO you should remove all such unnecessary additions from your store-house of copy and paste posts because adults do not like to be spoken to like they are children, and you may end up annoying a lot of people, hence they will not even consider anything you say after such statements.

Though we're on the same page regarding New Jerusalem, IMO you wrongly equate the location in time of the camp of the saints and the beloved city of Revelation 20:9 - and you do this because your belief in Amil has blinded you to the extent that you completely disregard the obvious location in time of what Revelation 20:4-6 is saying, and falsely turn the binding of Satan and shutting up of Satan in the abyss, into a house-arrest where he is still free to walk to and fro on the earth as long as he reports to his probation officer - and you do so without any biblical support aside from the passages in the Bible that you have imagined support such a thing.

Matthew 12:22-29, Mark 3:11, 23-27, Luke 10:18-19, Luke 11:20-22, John 12:31-33 Colossians 2:13-15, Hebrews 2:14-15, I John 3:8, Revelation 9:1-11 and Revelation 20:2 prove Satan was bound, defeated, incapacitated, divested of power, disarmed, brought to naught, undone, stripped and spiritually imprisoned through Christ's sinless life, atoning death and triumphant resurrection. Colossians 2:15 tells us: “having spoiled (or divested or disarmed) principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.” Satan has not been rendered immobile or inoperative but is limited in his power, kingship and influence by being defeated on the cross. He is like a dog on a chain. He is shackled.

These passages demonstrate Christ’s current power and authority over the devil and His irreversible victory against him even though he still remains free to roam about seeking whom he may devour.

 

[Red Baker]

The Two Witnesses are the Saints who have received the power to preach the gospel to the world for a symbolic period of 1,260 days which covered the New Testament period. Their testimony will not end until they are killed (by silencing their testimony with false doctrine) by those deceived by satan and his minions to come against them and END their testimony. Satan musters the nations (the army of false prophets and christs) from the four quarters of the earth to come against the camp of the saints (the church) AFTER he is loosed from the pit.

Satan brings this final spiritual warfare to the camp of the saints, with the saints still in it, to wear them out, to overcome them, and to kill (silence their testimony). And the wicked go up and are allowed of God to only hurt those (professed Christians) who do NOT yet have the seal of God. See, the New Testament congregation make up of two groups of people. The Saints and the Professed Christians. They both are within the church, but Satan can only hurt (deceive) those not truly saved, a fulfillment of the fiery words of the two witnesses testimonies. It's only AFTER they are killed that their prophesy in THIS city ends.

Therefore the Camp of the Saints and the Beloved City are not:

1.) Physical city Jerusalem (whenever it was in Preterists' 70AD or Futurists' post-1967AD)
2.) Rome

Rather they represent the NEW TESTAMENT CONGREGATION OF ISRAEL, the church, all over the world with both groups of people within her. One of them will be hurt by Satan as God's judgment for their unfaithfulness. This is how spiritual Jerusalem fell as Babylon the Great. Not literal city as you alleged.

Very good~the only exception, and it's minor, is that I would say:

This is how spiritual Jerusalem fell who is the religious sector of Mystery, Babylon the Great of Revelation 17.

 

[Zao is life]

Matthew 12:22-29, Mark 3:11, 23-27, Luke 10:18-19, Luke 11:20-22, John 12:31-33 Colossians 2:13-15, Hebrews 2:14-15, I John 3:8, Revelation 9:1-11 and Revelation 20:2

do not in any way, shape or form prove that Satan was bound, cast into the abyss and a seal set on him so that he cannot deceive the nations until the thousand years that begin when Christ returns have been fulfilled, just because Jesus used the analogy of binding a strong man before he can plunder his goods when the Pharisees blasphemously accused him of casting out demons by the power of Beelzebub.

The fact that you claim it does is only proof of the fact that like all Amillennialists, you believe the lies you have told yourself about this.

Here are the scriptures that you will not believe because you choose your own belief in the lies you have told yourself rather than scripture:

"And he cast him into the abyss and shut him up and set a seal on him, that he should deceive the nations no more until the thousand years should be fulfilled."

In Genesis chapter 3, we read of how Satan appeared in the Garden of Eden and deceived mankind.
Revelation 12:9 calls Satan "the great dragon" and "the old serpent called Devil, and Satan, who deceives the whole world."
The reason given for Satan being bound in Revelation 20:1-3 is that he should deceive the nations no more until the thousand years have expired.

If we look for statements in the New Testament implying that Satan was bound when Jesus died and rose again, all we will ever find is passages stating the opposite:

Jesus called Satan "the ruler of this world" and the New Testament calls him "the prince of the power of the air who works in the sons of disobedience", who we are told will give the beast and false prophet his seat, power and great authority (Revelation Chapter 13). The saints are warned to be weary of his wiles and to resist him, and to put on the full armor of God because "we do not wrestle against flesh and blood" ( John 12:31; 1 Peter 5:8-9; Ephesians 6:11-12; Revelation 2:9-10 & Revelation 2:13; 1 Thessalonians 2:18; James 4:7 ).

Ephesians 2:2 tells us about Satan's influence over the societies of this world, this Age.

Revelation Chapters 12-13 portray this current status quo as spanning the entire present Age and culminating in the beast's war against the saints in Revelation Chapter 13 (see Revelation 13:7).

 

[Zao is life]

prove Satan was bound, defeated, incapacitated, divested of power, disarmed, brought to naught, undone, stripped and spiritually imprisoned through Christ's sinless life, atoning death and triumphant resurrection. Colossians 2:15 tells us: “having spoiled (or divested or disarmed) principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.” Satan has not been rendered immobile or inoperative but is limited in his power, kingship and influence by being defeated on the cross. He is like a dog on a chain. He is shackled.

These passages demonstrate Christ’s current power and authority over the devil and His irreversible victory against him even though he still remains free to roam about seeking whom he may devour.

Absolute nonsense to equate Christ's victory over Satan with the binding mentioned in Revelation 20.

This is what we have been told about this:

"Since then the children have partaken of flesh and blood, He also Himself likewise partook of the same; that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death (that is, the Devil), and deliver those who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage." Hebrews 2:14-15.

"And they overcame him (the devil) because of the blood of the Lamb, and because of the word of their testimony. And they did not love their soul to the death." Revelation 12:11.

The blood of the Lamb speaks of the death of Christ.

"He who practices sin is of the Devil, for the Devil sins from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was revealed, that He might undo the works of the Devil." 1 John 3:8

"For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh." Romans 8:3

1. Satan's works consist primarily in the death that became part of human experience, and the sin that leads to death.

2. The destruction of Satan's works will not last only for a thousand years, only to be "reversed for a short period at the close of the thousand years", as though his works were merely bound for a thousand years.

3. Not only is the devil not more powerful than God, Satan is not even nearly as powerful as the Holy Spirit, and does not need to be 'bound' in order for God to work or for the gospel of the Kingdom of Christ to spread. God is infinitely more powerful than the devil, who can be bound by God at will, at any time. Jesus showed He was able to do this each time He cast out demons, even before His death and resurrection. Satan's power to cause disruption in the spread of God's Kingdom in the world has always been limited to how much God will allow him.

And the very scriptures you quote prove the above.

 

[grafted branch]

These passages demonstrate Christ’s current power and authority over the devil and His irreversible victory against him even though he still remains free to roam about seeking whom he may devour.

Whom Satan may devour is an interesting topic. From the internet there are four reasons why lions roar, one website says this

1 scare away intruders
2 send a warning to the pride
3 display dominance
4 locate pride members

Another website gives these reasons

1 communication with pride members
2 displaying health and strength to potential rivals
3 marking there territory to deter intruders
4 attracting mates


It’s interesting that some people will try to argue that Satan going about as a roaring lion means he is stalking prey, lions don’t roar when they stalk prey. A roaring lion would only be able to devour something that is already dead.

 

[ewq1938]

Premillennialists such as yourself acknowledge the location in time of the commencement of the thousand years and acknowledge that it's a literal thousand years, but place the NHNE in a location in time where scripture does not place it,

I place it right where scripture does, AFTER the GWTJ. You take it out of context and place it further back where it does not and can not fit do to many contradictions.

Your version has sea existing in the NHNE when scripture says no sea exists there. You have satan and the unsaved living openly and actively in the NHNE when they actually would be in the LOF.

Nothing lines up and that's only two of many issues.

Why get things correct up until the last part then mess it up so badly? That isn't consistent and tells me the part that is correct is likely accidental.

 

[Zao is life]

I place it right where scripture does, AFTER the GWTJ. You take it out of context and place it further back where it does not and can not fit do to many contradictions.

Your version has sea existing in the NHNE when scripture says no sea exists there. You have satan and the unsaved living openly and actively in the NHNE when they actually would be in the LOF.

Nothing lines up and that's only two of many issues.

Why get things correct up until the last part then mess it up so badly? That isn't consistent and tells me the part that is correct is likely accidental.

It's says no sea, no death, no crying for those in New Jerusalem.

You seem to have a problem with the fact that Revelation 20:6 says there will be no more death for those in New Jerusalem.

 

[Marty fox]

Matthew 12:22-29, Mark 3:11, 23-27, Luke 10:18-19, Luke 11:20-22, John 12:31-33 Colossians 2:13-15, Hebrews 2:14-15, I John 3:8, Revelation 9:1-11 and Revelation 20:2 prove Satan was bound, defeated, incapacitated, divested of power, disarmed, brought to naught, undone, stripped and spiritually imprisoned through Christ's sinless life, atoning death and triumphant resurrection. Colossians 2:15 tells us: “having spoiled (or divested or disarmed) principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.” Satan has not been rendered immobile or inoperative but is limited in his power, kingship and influence by being defeated on the cross. He is like a dog on a chain. He is shackled.

These passages demonstrate Christ’s current power and authority over the devil and His irreversible victory against him even though he still remains free to roam about seeking whom he may devour.

This is very good but I would add Revelation 12:5-12

 

[Zao is life]

This is very good but I would add Revelation 12:5-12

Sad you should see it as good. 90% true is not good enough.

Matthew 12:22-29, Mark 3:11, 23-27, Luke 10:18-19, Luke 11:20-22, John 12:31-33 Colossians 2:13-15, Hebrews 2:14-15, I John 3:8, Revelation 9:1-11 prove Satan was defeated, incapacitated, divested of power, disarmed, brought to naught, undone, stripped through Christ's sinless life, atoning death and triumphant resurrection. Colossians 2:15 tells us: “having spoiled (or divested or disarmed) principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.”

Satan has not been bound, but utterly defeated, as Revelation 12:5-12 also shows

The testimony of the saints to the prophetic Word of God is not good enough when they are exposed to be (for example) adding the word "bound" to the above scriptures (adding to scripture) so that they can take away from the meaning of Revelation 20:1-3 later on (taking away from the Revelation of Jesus Christ what it is saying).

None of the quoted scriptures that speak of Satan's utter defeat at the cross and by the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, speak of Satan also being "bound" at that point.

To add the word "bound" to those scriptures, then believe the lie produced by adding to the Word of God, and then teach the lie to others, means that their works (in this regard) will not stand in that day of Christ's judgment.

The people who add words here and take away from the scriptures there like that are not the kind of people whose testimony to the prophetic Word of God is trustworthy.

 

[grafted branch]

It's says no sea, no death, no crying for those in New Jerusalem.

You seem to have a problem with the fact that Revelation 20:6 says there will be no more death for those in New Jerusalem.

You left out Revelation 22:2 where it says “and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations”. Apparently there will still be a need to be healed in NHNE.

 

[Zao is life]

You left out Revelation 22:2 where it says “and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations”. Apparently there will still be a need to be healed in NHNE.

And the nations are mentioned there too.

Not sure what you understand by the words "the healing of the nations". I take that in a spiritual sense not a physical sense.