The thousand years

[wingnut-]

Hello again inchrist,

 

I think I was pretty clear about the fact that no one dies once the new heaven and earth come to be.  You quoted me saying as much, so it should be clear to you as well.  The passage from Isaiah 65 you believe is literal, and I do not.  That is where we disagree, I believe that the passage is imagery/ symbolic/ metaphorical, whatever description makes sense to you.

 

The reason I disagree with your literal viewpoint is because there is no death following the new heavens and earth.  You want to insert a chronology that the text does not support, and this is precisely why I believe it is symbolic.   You offer no explanation as to why you wish to change the chronology, simply that you say it does, and that is not a good enough reason for me.

 

The same is true regarding Isaiah 34, you wish to insert a chronology that the text does not support, no explanation as to why.  You saying so is not good enough.  You are certainly entitled to your opinion regarding me personally, but your opinion won't dissuade me from posting what the Lord puts on my heart to share.  I pray that what myself and others have tried to show you in other threads will eventually get through to you, God bless.

[Guest]

Just a side note:

 

And as for your Everlasting torment, in Matthew 25:46,

 

it is the punishment, which is everlasting,

 

and not the sinners.

 

Also the word used is ‘punishment’ not ‘punishing’.

 

It is complete and irreversible extinction for all eternity,

 

that is the punishment, wicked people will not ever have immortality in anyway shape or form.

 

 

There's nothing wrong with sharing....

 

but perhaps listen to the Lord first before you share....

 

?

 

What Did

 

And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye,

 

than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: Where their worm dieth not,

 

and the fire is not quenched. Mark 9:47-48

 

Jesus Say....

 

And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,

 

And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth,

 

Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle:

 

the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.

 

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.

 

And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone,

 

where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. Revelation 20:7-10

 

And Why Should We Care

 

I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches.

 

I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

 

And the Spirit and the bride say, Come.

 

And let him that heareth say, Come.

 

And let him that is athirst come.

 

And whosoever will,

 

let him take the water of life freely. Revelation 22:16-17

 

That's Why

 

By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples,

 

if ye have love one to another. John 13:35

[wingnut-]

 

Do we not take God at His Word? What could be more carnal than assuming that God did not mean what He said literally, and then trying to nullify His Word with the doctrine of men to now spiritualise things away?

 

 

 

Hello again inchrist,

 

Of course we should take God at His word, but this is just another deflection on your part to avoid the reality of the situation.  There are literal and symbolic references throughout scripture, so I will just give you one of the most obvious examples to consider.  Was Jesus a man or was He a lamb?  At some point you have to make a choice as to which is literal and which is symbolic, both cannot be taken literally.

 

You want to argue that the lake of fire is not eternal suffering for the wicked, in spite of the numerous verses that state otherwise.  So clearly you are not taking them literally, I guess that means by your definition you are spiritualizing them away.  Fresno Joe offered some more excellent examples of this reality in his post, so if everything is literal, explain your contradiction.  How about addressing this specific passage?

 

 

Mark 9:⁴² “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe to stumble, it would be better for him if, with a heavy millstone hung around his neck, he had been cast into the sea. ⁴³ If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire, ⁴⁴ [where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.] ⁴⁵ If your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life lame, than, having your two feet, to be cast into hell, ⁴⁶ [where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.] ⁴⁷ If your eye causes you to stumble, throw it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, than, having two eyes, to be cast into hell, ⁴⁸ where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.

 

 

My approach is to view everything as literal, until a literal interpretation conflicts with previously established facts.  At that point, one of the two subjects must be symbolic.  Prophecy is heavily laden with symbolism, so this argument you are trying to make is truly pointless.  There is no justification for inserting chronologies that the text does not support for something you don't understand, which is basically your methodology here.  Symbolism however, is fully supported and used in scripture in a multitude of cases.

[wingnut-]

Wingnut

Why do you also take what I say out of context? You know im talking about our topic on Isaiah specifically...then you go on some tangent

 

 

 

This is what you said, directly quoted from your post.  Pay particular attention to the bolded section which clearly displays you were not referencing Isaiah 65 specifically.

 

 

Your view is incapable of being consistent with the repeated promises and expectations detailed throughout the Bible to us.

 

Do we not take God at His Word? What could be more carnal than assuming that God did not mean what He said literally, and then trying to nullify His Word with the doctrine of men to now spiritualise things away?

 

 

 

I didn't take you out of context at all, I simply exposed the flawed argument you attempted to use for what it was.

 

 

 You want to argue that the lake of fire is not eternal suffering for the wicked, in spite of the numerous verses that state otherwise.  So clearly you are not taking them literally, I guess that means by your definition you are spiritualizing them away.

Can you please stop putting words in my mouth where did I say the fire is not literal?

 

 

 

Nothing in what I said remotely comes close to me saying you did not see the fire as literal.  Either your reading comprehension is not very good, or you are just attempting to avoid addressing the issue at hand.  I honestly don't know, maybe English is not your first language, but I suggest thinking on what I wrote again.

 

 

Lol and still scratching my head you still have not afford any evidence why Isaiah should be symbolic

 

 

 

I did, in the exact portion of my post that you quoted prior to this statement.  Here is the portion you missed that I am referring to, " My approach is to view everything as literal, until a literal interpretation conflicts with previously established facts.  At that point, one of the two subjects must be symbolic."  What you are still avoiding addressing is this question.  If the passages in question belonged in the time prior to the new heavens and earth, then why didn't Isaiah include it in the first 16 verses of chapter 65?

 

 

you ignore the evidence of the curse existing in your theory

 

 

 

No, I'm not ignoring it, the answer is found in a reality you mistakenly argue against.  Since you didn't respond to the passage from Mark that I posted, I will offer you the key points again and also compare them to one of the passages you offered from Isaiah 66.  Carefully consider the words.

 

From Mark 9, verses 44, 46, and 48.   where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.

 

Isaiah 66:²⁴ “Then they will go forth and look

On the corpses of the men

Who have transgressed against Me.

For their worm will not die

And their fire will not be quenched;

And they will be an abhorrence to all mankind.”

 

 

You ignore the literal readings in the verse.

 

 

 

No, I'm not ignoring anything about the verses, I just don't agree that they are literal for the reasons I have already stated.

[dprprb]

I have to take path of saying that since Genesis does not literally contain the same correlation 1:1000 as Peter ,or vice versa, I cannot rightfully connect anything. Prophecies, the main corollaries between books, are (usually?) distinctly crossreferenced by the author and to my knowledge this does not occur. Six days for creation ok! -but to an eternal being time is literally meaningless. We know precisely that time can tick slower without argument and having God around and the energy expenditure of Creation= I don't need any more ingredients to create a discontinuity, BUT a fixed rational has eluded intelligent minds for centuries.  I get the distinct impression that 'reading between the lines' is taken as adding something which is not there and we are forewarned. But I also take issue in that something such as this disagreement is literally blocking Christians from applying the same thing in a 'moving forward' type attitude towards other passages and other SIMILAR implications. So if two Christians don't agree where does that put Jesus? I didn't read between the lines, I simply looked at it's reflection and am asking if there is something else I should be knowing-Am I wiser yet in the fullness of The Word?

It is built to last is all I have to say...

PS you cant make that up.

[wingnut-]

Is this symbolic or literal?

Isaiah65: 21

And they shall build houses, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and eat the fruit of them.

 

 

A symbolic understanding of this verse would look something like this.  The houses that will be inhabited =  the imperishable body.  The vineyards being planted from which the fruit will be eaten =  People reap what they sow.

 

Could it be literal?  That seems highly unlikely.  But, I have no idea what we will be doing for all eternity, and neither does anyone else at this point.

 

 

II Corinthians 5  For we know that if the earthly tent which is our house is torn down, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. ² For indeed in this house we groan, longing to be clothed with our dwelling from heaven, ³ inasmuch as we, having put it on, will not be found naked. ⁴ For indeed while we are in this tent, we groan, being burdened, because we do not want to be unclothed but to be clothed, so that what is mortal will be swallowed up by life. ⁵ Now He who prepared us for this very purpose is God, who gave to us the Spirit as a pledge.

[wingnut-]

An individuals eternal destination is based on the life they live now and the choices they make.  According to scripture there will be rewards, how that works I cannot say, it is not something I spend time thinking about.  I am more concerned with how I live out the time I have here, whatever the Lord has in store for me in eternity is more than I deserve.

[wingnut-]

I have to take path of saying that since Genesis does not literally contain the same correlation 1:1000 as Peter ,or vice versa, I cannot rightfully connect anything. Prophecies, the main corollaries between books, are (usually?) distinctly crossreferenced by the author and to my knowledge this does not occur. Six days for creation ok! -but to an eternal being time is literally meaningless. We know precisely that time can tick slower without argument and having God around and the energy expenditure of Creation= I don't need any more ingredients to create a discontinuity, BUT a fixed rational has eluded intelligent minds for centuries.  I get the distinct impression that 'reading between the lines' is taken as adding something which is not there and we are forewarned. But I also take issue in that something such as this disagreement is literally blocking Christians from applying the same thing in a 'moving forward' type attitude towards other passages and other SIMILAR implications. So if two Christians don't agree where does that put Jesus? I didn't read between the lines, I simply looked at it's reflection and am asking if there is something else I should be knowing-Am I wiser yet in the fullness of The Word?

It is built to last is all I have to say...

PS you cant make that up.

 

 

Hello dpr,

 

Thanks for joining the topic.  I agree with you in regards to your view on Genesis, and I accept the creation story as literal days as well.  It isn't something I debate over because it really isn't something that can be proven, I just accept it as a matter of faith.  I also agree with your determination regarding things being cross-referenced in regards to formulas and other things.

 

As far as where Jesus is in all of this, I would hope that for a believer He is right at the center.  That is certainly the case in the issues I have regarding the thousand years.  The belief that ritual sacrifices (which God clearly states He rejects and hates)  are going to make a comeback during this time period strike right at the very foundation of what I believe in.  Jesus Christ was the perfect sacrifice, made once for all, so the notion that animal sacrifices will be re-instituted under His reign, and carried out by believers (as we represent the kings and priests during the millenial reign), seems more an attempt to diminish our Lord and Savior and what He did for all mankind.  Scripture also makes it no secret that the enemy slipped in amongst the church early on, so it shouldn't be such a stretch for believers to realize that distorted doctrines have sprung up from this.

 

I know it isn't easy for people to let go of something they have been taught all their lives.  It's not my job to convince anyone of anything, so all I can do really is offer up scripture for people to consider and trust that the Holy Spirit will speak the truth to them.  I believe the scriptural support is solid if people can look past some of the rhetoric that often accompanies topics that go against the grain.  And I agree, it is built to last.  God bless you.

[Guest]

An individuals eternal destination is based on the life they live now and the choices they make.  According to scripture there will be rewards, how that works I cannot say, it is not something I spend time thinking about.  I am more concerned with how I live out the time I have here, whatever the Lord has in store for me in eternity is more than I deserve.

So are you saying And they shall build houses is before the new heavens and new earth?

 

 

Interesting

 

Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: Matthew 6:19

 

Question

 

But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: Matthew 6:20

 

Beloved

 

For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. Matthew 6:21

 

~

 

An Estate

 

Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

 

For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

 

And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever. 1 John 2:15-17

 

Or THE Real Estate

 

In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. John 14:2

 

With A Truly

 

And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.

 

For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same shall save it.

 

For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

 

Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? Mark 8:34-37

 

Real Treasure

 

And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads. Revelation 22:4

[George]

I thought I might throw out what Barnabas said in his Epistle.  This is not scripture -- but it's one of the 'church' fathers and his writings can be found and he chimes on the subject.

 

Barnabas 15:1

Moreover concerning the Sabbath likewise it is written in the Ten Words, in which He spake to Moses face to face on Mount Sinai; And ye shall hallow the Sabbath of the Lord with pure hands and with a pure heart.

Barnabas 15:2
And in another place He saith; If my sons observe the Sabbath then I will bestow My mercy upon them.

Barnabas 15:3
Of the Sabbath He speaketh in the beginning of the creation; And God made the works of His hands in six days, and He ended on the seventh day, and rested on it, and He hallowed it.

Barnabas 15:4
Give heed, children, what this meaneth; He ended in six days. He meaneth this, that in six thousand years the Lord shall bring all things to an end; for the day with Him signifyeth a thousand years; and this He himself beareth me witness, saying; Behold, the day of the Lord shall be as a thousand years. Therefore, children, in six days, that is in six thousand years, everything shall come to an end.

Barnabas 15:5
And He rested on the seventh day. this He meaneth; when His Son shall come, and shall abolish the time of the Lawless One, and shall judge the ungodly, and shall change the sun and the moon and the stars, then shall he truly rest on the seventh day.

Barnabas 15:6
Yea and furthermore He saith; Thou shalt hallow it with pure hands and with a pure heart. If therefore a man is able now to hallow the day which God hallowed, though he be pure in heart, we have gone utterly astray.

Barnabas 15:7
But if after all then and not till then shall we truly rest and hallow it, when we shall ourselves be able to do so after being justified and receiving the promise, when iniquity is no more and all things have been made new by the Lord, we shall be able to hallow it then, because we ourselves shall have been hallowed first.

 

Just some food for thought ... as you consider the original question -- Is the thousand years literal or symbolic?