Your argument is with your own inconsistencies - not mine. You make it be not only a time far beyond a 1000 years but you also inappropriately place the whole church in it therefore saying it will end since the 1000 year period says it ends, while I confirm it to be a time when the saints who died for their faith reign with Christ for a period while the reign of Christ never ends.steve wrote:Allyn wrote:Actually it must have been a while since you listened to those lectures. If you would listen to them again, I do not think you would be able to say "there is no other Scripture to nail it down"—since I give multiple cross-references for every detail of Revelation 20, such as leave its interpretation in no reasonable doubt.If I remember from your verse x verse teachings you are an amillennialist - which means you take the 1000 years to be a time from the 1st century continuing on for at least 2000 years and counting. But yet the time statements have also been your teaching in your Matthew lectures.
You seem to have a problem with my honesty that Rev 20 does present a mystery for me when there is no other Scripture to nail it down as absolute according to my view or absolute according to your view for that matter.
While it is true that neither you nor I take the thousand years literally, you think it refers to a very short time, while I take its meaning to be a very long time. Given the consistent use of the number thousand throughout scripture, my identification would seem abundantly justified. Where in scripture is the number 1000 used as an indicator of a "small" number?
there is only one correct view and yours is just as apt to be wrong as mine. But at least I am consistent in my arguments.