What and when is the thousand years? Part 4

[Marty]

This is not to say that there were no more wars we know from history that there has always been wars but there is true inner peace and now all nations can live as one true church from every nation which is referred to in,

Revelation 5:9
9 And they sang a new song, saying:
“You are worthy to take the scroll
and to open its seals,
because you were slain,
and with your blood you purchased for God
persons from every tribe and language and people and nation.

And Revelation 7:9
9 After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands.

Many Christians believe that Isaiah chapter 65 speaks of the time of peace on the earth I believe that this is a mistake. Isaiah 65 speaks of the times when the Lord was angry with the Jewish nation and then the gentile nations were brought into the church during the first century as they were blended in with the believing Jews.

Isaiah 65 also mentions God blessing the believing gentiles and judging the unbelieving Jews which I believe to of happened in the year 70AD when Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans.

Isaiah 65 then goes on to say that what was taken away from the unbelieving Jews will not be taken away from the church and that we will have everlasting life as the Wolfe (gentiles) now lies with the lamb (Jews). They will feed together they will live in peace as one body in Christ within the church.

When the angle announced in
Luke 2:14
Glory to God in the highest heaven,
and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests.”

He wasn’t talking about no more wars but the true inner peace that Jesus brings us.

Future temple and sacrifices
Some Christians believe that there will be a future temple and a sin sacrifice during the 1000 years and believe that it was taught in the Old Testament is this biblical?

Hebrews 10:18
18 And where these have been forgiven, sacrifice for sin is no longer necessary.

Hebrews 7:27
27 Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself.

Paul states above that there is no more need for a temple or sacrifices. Jesus has paid the price once and for all. A future sin sacrifice would be a rejection of Jesus and all what He has done.

Satan’s release

When will satan be released and when may be the time that the earth will be destroyed?

The Holy Spirit works through the church but the church needs to be actively doing God’s work. In the book of Geneses we see how the faithful due to conforming to the unfaithful, reduced over time to just one person Noah. That was when God destroyed the earth with the flood. Two thousand years ago the church grew at an amazing speed and reached the whole earth but now the percentage of Christians seems to be dwindling over the last 100 or so years, as some of the church seems to be conforming to the ways of the world. The conforming of the faithful was the only time God destroyed the world, back in Noah’s day. It would seem to be the same reason that God will destroy the world by fire in the future.

I don’t believe that God will destroy the world just because it’s so evil, it has always been evil, even now over one million babies are aborted each year by their parents for selfish reasons. I think that alone would be enough evil for God to destroy the world. I believe God will destroy the world when the number of people to be saved has been completed and the church is reduced in numbers like we see is happening today. People are having fewer children these days, including Christians, which leads to less people learning about God. In the past century or so, in what was thought to be Christian nations, most people went to church but in our time, it is about 20% and getting lower as years go by.

I believe that we may be in the time of satan’s release, the little season, as we are being outnumbered and satan’s people seems to be surrounding us, the city God loves. The church only grows when the Holy Spirit moves in the actions of His people, that is still happening today but on a smaller scale. Many Christians are conforming to the ways of the world and have become complacent in their busy lives. Could we be allowing satan to gain ground in our world? We need to study more and know our bibles better so we can share it with the people in our lives because it reveals God’s message to the world. We need to keep praying for opportunities to share the gospel with the unsaved people that God places in our lives.

Summary
I believe that the scriptures prove that we are in the 1000-year reign now and that we could be in the time of satans release, his little season. I believe that satan has been bound from deceiving the nations since the day of Pentecost. What would be the reason for a literal 1000-year reign on the earth with a binding of satan only to have him be released to rec havoc on the earth again? There is no purpose for it as it doesn’t seem to line up with the message of the bible which is the promise of salvation to all who believe in Christ Jesus as their lord and savior.


Not once in the New Testament did Jesus nor any of the apostles teach that Jesus will reign literally on the earth for 1000 years in a time of peace.

 

[Josheb]

Summary
I believe that the scriptures prove that we are in the 1000-year reign now and that we could be in the time of satans release, his little season. I believe that satan has been bound from deceiving the nations since the day of Pentecost. What would be the reason for a literal 1000-year reign on the earth with a binding of satan only to have him be released to [wreak] havoc on the earth again? There is no purpose for it as it doesn’t seem to line up with the message of the bible which is the promise of salvation to all who believe in Christ Jesus as their lord and savior.

Man, that was a long way to go.

I believe a few errors were made along the way. For example, the first op in the series states, "Satan’s binding for 1000 years starts in Revelation chapter 20:2," but that is not correct. Satan's binding starts in Isaiah 14 and Jude 1. The commentary offered in that op answering the question, "What is the binding of Satan?" has some good content but some if it is entirely speculative and selective, and also inconsistent with the whole of scripture. For example, Satan (and his works) was defeated (and therefore bound) at Calvary, not Pentecost, but Satan was also defeated and bound twice before Calvary. His first binding occurred the moment he disobeyed God and rebelled. In that instant he became enslaved to sin. No one can sin and not be adversely affected to the point of bondage, not even Satan. His second binding occurred at the hands of God as a direct consequence of his disobedience. Satan's glory was stripped from him and he was cast out of heaven to earth here he roams as a carrion eater.

It must be remembered that Revelation is not all future to the time it was written. The opening of Revelation explicitly states the revelation of Revelation was provided because the events were going to happen quickly because the time was then near, or at hand (Gk: engys - at hand). Furthermore, a few verses later the text explicitly states some of what is revealed in Revelation had already occurred and some of it was happening at the time of the revelation of Revelation. In other words, something close to two thirds of the book of Revelation had already transpired or was transpiring when John wrote the book! Jude tells us the binding of Satan was one of those events that had already occurred. It was not something that was going to happen after Revelation was written. To pin his binding on Pentecost in neglect of Isaiah 14, Calvary, and God's building of the Church is selective at best.

Much more could be added, but to keep things abbreviated I'll offer one more salient point. In 1 Corinthians 10 states the ends of the ages had already arrived by the time Paul wrote the saints in Corinth. It was not the beginning of the age to come, nor was it the beginning of the ages. It was the ends of the ages. The conjugations are plural. Multiple ends were coming to multiple ages. There is only one mention of an end (aside from God being the beginning and the end) in Revelation and that is found in Rev. 2:26. where the saints in Thyatira are directed to endure to the end. If anything in the book of Revelation is thought to exist outside of 1 Cor. 10:11 then that case must be made first. Otherwise, everything in Revelation must be read in a manner consistent with and wholly reconcilable with the ends of the ages occurring in the first century. That would include Rev. 20's binding of Satan.

Not once in the New Testament did Jesus nor any of the apostles teach that Jesus will reign literally on the earth for 1000 years in a time of peace.

I agree.

As far as the book of Revelation goes there are to places where Jesus is reported coming to earth and neither of them occur in Revelation 20. The first mention is at the opening of chapter 14 where the Lamb is standing on Mount Zion and that verse is best rendered through Hebrews 12:12.

Hebrews 12:22-24
But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than the blood of Abel.

ALL the action prior to and following chapter 14 originates in heaven. Everything that happens on earth is commanded from heaven. No explicit report of Jesus ever being physically on earth. That Jesus-commanding-events-on-earth-from-heaven condition proceeds throughout the whole of Revelation until chapter 21 where the new Jerusalem, the new city of peace, comes down out of heaven to earth. That comes after the 1000 years of chapter 20.

 

[Marty]

Man, that was a long way to go.

I believe a few errors were made along the way. For example, the first op in the series states, "Satan’s binding for 1000 years starts in Revelation chapter 20:2," but that is not correct. Satan's binding starts in Isaiah 14 and Jude 1. The commentary offered in that op answering the question, "What is the binding of Satan?" has some good content but some if it is entirely speculative and selective, and also inconsistent with the whole of scripture. For example, Satan (and his works) was defeated (and therefore bound) at Calvary, not Pentecost, but Satan was also defeated and bound twice before Calvary. His first binding occurred the moment he disobeyed God and rebelled. In that instant he became enslaved to sin. No one can sin and not be adversely affected to the point of bondage, not even Satan. His second binding occurred at the hands of God as a direct consequence of his disobedience. Satan's glory was stripped from him and he was cast out of heaven to earth here he roams as a carrion eater.

It must be remembered that Revelation is not all future to the time it was written. The opening of Revelation explicitly states the revelation of Revelation was provided because the events were going to happen quickly because the time was then near, or at hand (Gk: engys - at hand). Furthermore, a few verses later the text explicitly states some of what is revealed in Revelation had already occurred and some of it was happening at the time of the revelation of Revelation. In other words, something close to two thirds of the book of Revelation had already transpired or was transpiring when John wrote the book! Jude tells us the binding of Satan was one of those events that had already occurred. It was not something that was going to happen after Revelation was written. To pin his binding on Pentecost in neglect of Isaiah 14, Calvary, and God's building of the Church is selective at best.

Much more could be added, but to keep things abbreviated I'll offer one more salient point. In 1 Corinthians 10 states the ends of the ages had already arrived by the time Paul wrote the saints in Corinth. It was not the beginning of the age to come, nor was it the beginning of the ages. It was the ends of the ages. The conjugations are plural. Multiple ends were coming to multiple ages. There is only one mention of an end (aside from God being the beginning and the end) in Revelation and that is found in Rev. 2:26. where the saints in Thyatira are directed to endure to the end. If anything in the book of Revelation is thought to exist outside of 1 Cor. 10:11 then that case must be made first. Otherwise, everything in Revelation must be read in a manner consistent with and wholly reconcilable with the ends of the ages occurring in the first century. That would include Rev. 20's binding of Satan.

I agree.

As far as the book of Revelation goes there are to places where Jesus is reported coming to earth and neither of them occur in Revelation 20. The first mention is at the opening of chapter 14 where the Lamb is standing on Mount Zion and that verse is best rendered through Hebrews 12:12.

Hebrews 12:22-24
But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than the blood of Abel.

ALL the action prior to and following chapter 14 originates in heaven. Everything that happens on earth is commanded from heaven. No explicit report of Jesus ever being physically on earth. That Jesus-commanding-events-on-earth-from-heaven condition proceeds throughout the whole of Revelation until chapter 21 where the new Jerusalem, the new city of peace, comes down out of heaven to earth. That comes after the 1000 years of chapter 20.

Thanks for your reply.

Yes I agree the binding of satan happened at the cross and resurrection, but my point was that the power of the gospel started at Pentecost as the Holy spirit entered the saints and then went out and spread over 5000 people were saved that day.

I also agree some of Revelation had already happened wen Revelation was penned and much more of it happened in the first century. But I believe that satan lost his position in heaven when Jesus ascended as shown in revelation chapter 12.

The end of the age I believe was the age of the Old Testament age which really ended at the cross, but the temple and sacrificial age kept going and finally ended in 70AD when God ended it physically

 

[Josheb]

Thanks for your reply.

Yes I agree the binding of satan happened at the cross and resurrection, but my point was that the power of the gospel started at Pentecost as the Holy spirit entered the saints and then went out and spread over 5000 people were saved that day.

I also agree some of Revelation had already happened wen Revelation was penned and much more of it happened in the first century. But I believe that satan lost his position in heaven when Jesus ascended as shown in revelation chapter 12.

Then post accordingly because now your posts contradict themselves! Look, I'm not trying to be harsh. The fact is Revelation 20 alone is not sufficient to define Satan's binding. Nor is it sufficient to define the 1000-year restriction on his ability to hinder the gospel.

The end of the age I believe was the age of the Old Testament age which really ended at the cross, but the temple and sacrificial age kept going and finally ended in 70AD when God ended it physically

You can believe what you want but what does scripture state? 1 Corinthians was written after Calvary so we cannot say the age had ended there.

but my point was that the power of the gospel started at Pentecost as the Holy spirit entered the saints and then went out and spread over 5000 people were saved that day.

Then say that.

But first stick to your own op. You've spent for lengthy threads trying to define the thousand years for everyone and I'm telling you there are some flaws in the case you've made. I'm not trying to be mean and I'm not try to troll. Can you walk with me to look at the plusses and minuses of your case?