Revelation is very symbolic and needs to be interpreted in light of Matthew 24-25, 2 Peter and 1 Corinthians 15.
the latter three books are very clear and unmistakable -
when Jesus returns, it is the last day.
there is NO possibility for a literal 1,000 year reign. NONE.
I challenge anyone to read Matthew 24-25 and tell me at what verse this millennial reign starts and what verse it ends.
>> “Revelation is very symbolic and needs to be interpreted...” <<
.
Spoken like a true nicolaitan!
Nothing in Revelation is symbolic, it is John’s representation of what he saw, some of which he had no way of identifying but saying what the closest thing to it he had ever seen in his life was.
None of God’s word is to be “interpreted.”
To interpret is to change, which is forbidden.
It is to be read and heard.
.
I will ask again. Where in Matthew 24 or 25 do we get the finality of 2 Peter 3:10.
I pointed this out several times for a reason. As in the literal, not symbolic, accounts of Revelation 19-21. The second coming and Day of The Lord are recorded in chapter 19. We agree those are literal yet to occur events. In chapter 20 we have the literal first and second resurrections separated by a 1,000 years and then the GWT judgment. Then we have in chapter 21 the literal passing of the old creation for the new. That is where Peter’s passage comes to be.
I will also point out Revelation is an unveiling, thus the name and is credited by John in chapter one as coming directly from Christ. We cannot ignore that fact.
I also encourage you to look at all the NT and OT passages on The Day of The Lord.