Can a believer sin?

What part of the word "thousand" do you not understand--that word that is used five times in Revelation 20:2=7? Words have meanings. Do you just assign whatever meaning you want to the word "thousand"? Have you become a gnostic? Do you have some secret knowledge that we don't have? I believe what the Bible teaches Bob, not some mystical thing that the Bible doesn't teach. I would hope you would do the same.

 

1: And as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here!
2: And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
3: And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately,
4: Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?
5: And Jesus answering them began to say, Take heed lest any man deceive you:
6: For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
7: And when ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars, be ye not troubled: for such things must needs be; but the end shall not be yet.
8: For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be earthquakes in divers places, and there shall be famines and troubles: these are the beginnings of sorrows.
9: But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them.
10: And the gospel must first be published among all nations.

Tell you the truth James, I think in that Kingdom you will taking orders from others while recieving the lashes from a whip on your backside.

 

It was written in Greek, give me the word and definition.

What about He owns the cattle on a thousand hills. Is that all He owns, I wonder who owns the rest, hmmmmm????

 

The Greek word is translated "thousand" in every translation that I know of. If you go any other route, that is a lot of scholarship you are throwing away.

He owns the cattle on a thousand hills, is located in one of the Psalms, one of the Poetical Books, called that for a reason. Poetry contains many figures of speech. But Revelation is vastly different. When the word thousand is used five times in just six verses, there is no reason to believe that the word thousand should be taken in any other way but in a literal sense. The entire context would dictate a literal thousand years or it wouldn't make any sense.

 

I find it amusing that, on one side, you have someone arguing that 1,000 means indefinite period of time, and on the ME side, you have people arguing that the indefinite period of time, "forever", actually means 1,000.

If both sides got their way, we could just switch the words used in translation. :laugh:

 

Then on the side of truth, which seems to be far from you, there are those of us who advocate that "age-lasting" means "age-lasting".

Also, on the side of truth, there are those who advocate that "age-lasting" is an idiom that means "forever".

Both side are contening in a well-reasoned and thought out discussion (debate), with both sides posting Scriptures and secular evidence for the meanings and contexts.

But, then again, there's your side, which contains asininity, misdirection, obfuscation, and out-and-out lies, which when confronted with, you proudly proclaim that you will continue in such behavior.

 

That's just a code name for 1,000 years, since you insist the "age" in "age-lasting" is the 1,000 year kingdom. So, as usual, your "righteous objection" is no more than diddly squat, which is appropriate, since your whole doctrine is made of the same.

 

Why, Revelation is a book like not other. There are many things represented by beast, and different things which are not really what it is saying. I saw a great wonder in Heaven, A Women clothed with the sun. No need to quote anymore, you aready know, it just don't serve your purpose in the thousand.

 

a thousand years, and then the second resurrection will take place.
As Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale--But three doesn't really mean three and Christ really didn't rise from the dead.
On the FIRST day of the week he arose. But first means seventh the SDA's say, and so actually he arose on the Sabbath. First, seventh, what difference does it make if you can assign any meaning you want to any number you choose? It is all allegorical Bob. Just make up your own Bible, right?

 

Maybe you, I can back up everything I have said.

2Pe 3:8But, 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.

a 90:4For a thousand years in thy sight [are but] as yesterday when it is past, and [as] a watch in the night.
Psa 50:10For every beast of the forest [is] mine, [and] the cattle upon a thousand hills.

Deut 7:9
9: Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations;
(This would be around 40,000 years, and the world is 6,000, something wrong here!)

There is more, you do not have a leg to stand on DHK:

 

Well, that's what Marcion, the Heretic (died. ca. 150), did, basically - made up his own Bible. Are you surprised to find out he rejected an earthly kingdom, because it was prophesied in the OT Scritures? Sound familiar?

Marcion, the Heretic - The original hero of a-millennialism.

Origen (185- 254), however, is the allegorist. Although Origen was extremely concerned as to the literal and historical meanings, it was to have a sound base for the allegories, he championed, which contained the "real meaning" beyond the text. Origen came to believe and teach that Gentile Christianity had replaced the Jews as God's chosen people. Origen thought that God was finished with the Jews, and had turned all His promises to His chosen people over to the church. Does this, perchance, sound familiar, as well? Origen was influenced to some degree by Marcion's works, and adopted his rejection of a literal earthly kingdom, by allegorizing the references to it found in the Scripture.

Origen - The second hero of a-millennialism.

Augustine (354- 430) who originally held to a millenial position, basically consistent with such as Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Justin, changed his own mind, and adopted Origen's replacement theology. With that, there was no reason to believe in a literal physical return of the Lord to set up a physical kingdom. The church is the "new kingdom" and this "spiritual millenial reign" started with the Lord on this earth. (His crucifixion, burial, and resurrection were just a little "bump in the road, I guess.) And it has now been going on for almost two thousand years. Any of this still sounding familiar?? (So much for a 1000 year reign prophesied by John in the Revelation, which was given Him by God, and confirmed by the testimony of Jesus Christ, I guess, as well. Obviously, "1000 years" really mean almost 2000 years and counting!)

Augustine - The third great hero of a-millennialism.

Let us sum this brief history up, a bit. The speculations and heresies of Marcion became the basis for the allegories of Origen, who developed an allegorical system. And the allegorical system of Origen formed the basis for a system of theology developed by Augustine.

And those who see that Scripture teaches a future literal kingdom, centered on Israel, with Jesus Christ, Himself, sitting on the throne of David, and ruling all nations with a rod of iron, from Scripture are supposedly the ones "out in left field"? Uhh... What did I miss here?

FTR, someone explain to me exactly how did the "Can a believer sin?" thread wind up into the discussion of the Millennium, while the "How to defeat the ME (Millennial Exclusion) heresy" thread wound up into the discussion of "Can a believer sin?" ??

AND at the same time, no less? It seems to me that two trains magically jumped tracks to wind up rolling down the other, without even one car so much as getting off track. Now that physically happening would be a miracle!

Usually, it is more like this, from what I have been able to glean.


Ed

 

BB Warfield was Amillennial so too was Louis Berkhof.

 

Many more of various flavors are and were, as well. Luther, Calvin, and Beza would have been considered A-millennial as well. So would many other Baptists.

BTW, got an answer about the 'miracle'?? :laugh: :laugh:

Ed

 

Yes, more to come. Please study more.
As Keil and Delitzsch say "showing mercy to those who love Him, even to the thousandth generation"
--It is hyperbole, meant to emphasize the greatness of the mercy of God to His people in contrast to the judgement that will come upon those that rebel against God:

And He repays those who hate Him to their face, to destroy them. He will not be slow to repay him who hates Him. He will repay him to his face.

There is a great contrast between the two verses. One might ask "does God have a "face"? There are some figurative expressions used here. It is not allegory. But the language does use figures of speech which we are usually quick to recognize, and most are slow not to twist or wrest out of context.

 

What miracle? I'm kinda lost?

 

That 'miracle'.

G'nite, all.

Ed

 

So, in this case a thousand is not a thousand but a hyperbole??????????? I should of known

 

And you used good "ole" Origen against me in the past too, ain't there no shame shame anymore. If "ole" Origen helps the case we use him, but if we need him to disaprove a case, we use him. Poor "ole" Origen, just tossed too and fro.

I didn't even talk about another one you had on there that you used before Irenaeus who believe that Jesus lived to be an old man.

Sometimes we talk too much and get tripped up!!

 

Actually, I don't recall citing Origen in any particular way against anyone. I do disagree with his allegorical interpretation schemata and have openly said so. One area in which I disagree with Origen is in the area of a future physical kingdom, where he typically allegorizes it and I take it in a much more literal way.

And I did not refer to Origen in any particularly positive way, that I'm aware of, and certainly not here, where you refer. But he is a well known, so-called "church father" and I cited a site that mentioned, as I did by name, some of the better-known, so-called "church (Ante-Nicene) fathers." That is hardly a ringing endorsement or particularly agreeing with him, I'd say.
>
>
>
>
Just because you are paranoid, don't think that everyone is not out to get you!

Ed

 

Did you just now read your own post?

What was its purpose?

Was it to shower praises down on me?

I don't need them, thanks.

But there had to be a reason, I just answered it. I didn't know it was in anyone's mind to "get me", until you just said it.