Who will populate the earth in the 1000 year Reign

Hi

Dave L said:

Jesus taught a spiritual kingdom only. You need to adjust OT prophecy to this. The prophets spoke using material entities as symbols. Abraham saw Canaan as a symbol for heaven. Elijah was a symbol for John the Baptist, etc.

Click to expand...

if by the Holy Spirit God paints a very distinct and clear message of what it to come I think he would not waste his time be declaring it for it to only be understood in a spiritual sense. When Jesus road in on the foal of a donkey was it a spiritual donkey? Or when he was betrayed for 30 pieces of silver and the money given to the potter was it spiritual silver and a spiritual potters field that was purchased with that money?

Zech says that river is coming when the LORD comes and it flows year round which implies it is continuing to flow after the LORD is king over all the earth. The New Covenant is in place when Jesus instituted it made in His blood shed at calvary and announced at the last supper.

Jesus quoted Jer 31 which promised the new covenant coming not according to the one made when they were delivered from Egypt. This covenant replaced the day of atonement and indeed it is in full force. Jesus understood that Israel was not going to accept him and that Jerusalem would be destroyed and the temple torn down. So in Jer the verses immediately after the promise of the new covenant state that Israel will never cease to be a nation in Gods eyes and that He will never cast them off for all they have done. This is followed by a clear passage that says the city (Jerusalem) will be rebuilt at a time when dead bodies are everywhere and that from that time on it will be holy and never thrown down again.

In Zech 14 we see the dead will be everywhere and the city in need of rebuilding.

Now Jesus mission in LUKE 1 is clear and the futurist view has Jesus doing exactly what was promised of him.
7 Now his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Spirit, and prophesied, saying:
68 “Blessed is the Lord God of Israel,
For He has visited and redeemed His people,
69 And has raised up a horn of salvation for us
In the house of His servant David,
70 As He spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets,
Who have been since the world began,
71 That we should be saved from our enemies
And from the hand of all who hate us,
72 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers
And to remember His holy covenant,
73 The oath which He swore to our father Abraham:
74 To grant us that we,
Being delivered from the hand of our enemies,
Might serve Him without fear,
75 In holiness and righteousness before Him all the days of our life.

See the covenant with Abraham is for the land and the before and after picture is clear that from the time Jesus deliver. Israel they will be holy again the conversion is listed. i have show you two places where the land is divided at the time the throne is established and the LORD is keeping this oath.

Think of Joseph revealing himself to his brothers and in Zech 14 it says in that day they will say the LORD is one. This is Israel seeing Jesus come in the clouds and tread the winepress of His indignation and from that day on Israel is holy and worhsips and serves without fear from that point on.

Brian Mcnamee said:

nice cut and paste how about answering with your own ideas I have shown in detail specific passages that contradict your primary assumption. If you made say a green letter Bible and took all the future passages that you have to dismiss to hold your view and saw the sum of them it is significant. If you lined them up and saw the relationships between them a future fulfillment is congruent between all relevant passages. One of the key elements of futurist is Israel and the coming temple. This is necessary for the abomination of desolation and the man of the sin to be revealed in. This specific event once not conceivable that Israel would be a nation and much less have a 3rd temple is now very much a live possibility. The Temple Institute has replicated everything necessary for this reality and even has trained priests ready to serve in it. The world is as the days of Noah and a global government is the aspiration of many and has already built its infrastructure. This is huge evidence that the future view will play out.

Click to expand...

You are trying to divide the indivisible. The ironic part of Dispy thinking is that they make "the kingdom of heaven" a carnal earthly political kingdom and "the God of God" a spiritual heavenly kingdom. This is alone absurd, contradictory, unbiblical and extra-biblical. Everything about Dispensationalism is confusing and doesn't add up.

An elementary comparison between the two in the New Testament will show that “the kingdom of heaven” and “the kingdom of God” are just similar expressions to describe the one same Kingdom. Those who disconnect the repeated synonymous terms “the kingdom of heaven” and “the kingdom of God” do gravely undermine the simple truth that there is but one eternal righteous kingdom that belongs to “the God of heaven.” It is God ordained and God controlled; and whilst it is currently headquartered in heavenly domain it finds its earthly demonstration within the persecuted Church of Jesus Christ. Significantly, in Revelation, we see the righteous giving glory to “the God of heaven” (11:13) and the wicked blaspheming “the God of heaven” (16:10-11).

sovereigngrace said:

Exactly. It is emblematic of the overall doctrine. It must be taught to you.

Click to expand...

I see, and you were not taught your view?

food4thought said:

I see, and you were not taught your view?

Click to expand...

Actually no! I was brought up and taught Pretrib Premil. I started to study it for myself in 2000 and arrived at Posttrib Amil. Many have travelled a similar path over recent years. Sites like this are filled with many former Dispies. The colleges are the same. From my own observance, and from my sources, Dispensationalism is dying a slow death.

dispensationalism is confusing to you kind of funny that the literal interpretation and believing it says what it means and looking at the whole of it in that sense confuses you. You have Satan being bound now and the scriptures again show a great before and after picture of what happens up to the that day and what it is like after that day. Both the man of sin in 2 Thes 2 and the beast in Rev 13 are given power by Satan and are both destroyed by the brightness of the coming of the LORD. The beast in Rev 13 has 42 months to persecute and that is it game over. Jesus comes Satan is bound then. It says the nations which were deceived will no longer be deceived until the 1000 years is over. Now literally the man of sin is to be revealed in the Temple declaring he is God and many will believe him because of the lying signs and wonders. This being future is not a mystery but a near reality as Israel is a nation and certainly the nations are still deceived and plotting a one world government. If you take them all literally there is a clear message of what it coming and the kingdom age is going to be glorious. All the plagues, judgments, two witnesses, mark of the beast are going to be reality.

sovereigngrace said:

Actually no! I was brought up and taught Pretrib Premil. I started to study it for myself in 2000 and arrived at Posttrib Amil. Many have travelled a similar path over recent years. Sites like this are filled with many former Dispies. The colleges are the same. From my own observance, and from my sources, Dispensationalism is dying a slow death.

Click to expand...

So you used no sources in your study that changed your mind? You just read the Bible only and listened to noone else?

Since we're posting our favorite arguments and ignoring each other's points, I think I'll post this for those who are not dispensational:

Whatever do you do with Matthew 5:19? Are we under the law or not?

food4thought said:

So you used no sources in your study that changed your mind? You just read the Bible only and listened to noone else?

Click to expand...

I spent 6 months in Scripture alone. It was a gradual and difficult revelation to come to that I had been taught wrong. I moved from Pretrib Premil to Posttrib Premil and then to Posttrib Amil. My many premise was supporting Scripture with Scripture.

I could not find one single Scripture that describes (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a further Coming of Christ. There is not one proof text in the sacred text. I felt cheated. When I started to look at premillennialism, I saw one proof text, Revelation 20, but I could not find any corroboration from what I have been taught. Rather the opposite. Every second coming passage was climactic.

I discovered that the second coming brings a close to the day of salvation. Repeated Scripture shows that now is the only day of salvation. After showing us the destruction of this earth, the works that are in it, the heavens, the elements when Jesus comes, and after describing the longsuffering of God in the days of Noah before the destruction of all the wicked, Peter responds to the mockers scoffing at the apparent delay in Christ's return: "the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation” (2 Peter 3:15). He was reaffirming that salvation is limited to this side of the second coming. A sign of the end is that the Gospel must “be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come" (Matthew 24:14). The second coming brings the curtain down on the great commission. Once the ark door closes it is too late (Matthew 25:10-13 & Matt 28:19-20).

The age to come has no room for "mortals" (Luke 20:34-36, Romans 8:19-23, 1 Corinthians 15:50-55 and Revelation 21-22) or the unregenerate (Psalms 37:9-11, Luke 17:26-30, 1 Corinthians 6:9, I Thessalonians 5:2-3, 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10). This would be a strong argument to me that the second coming is “the end.”

John 6:39-44, 54, John 11:21-27, John 12:48, Ephesians 1:10 and Revelation 10:5-7 would seem to suggest that time reaches its fullness at the climactic return of Christ. This would be a strong argument to me that the second coming is “the end.”

Luke 20:34-36, Acts 3:19-21, Romans 8:19-23, 1 Corinthians 15:50-55 ,1 Peter 1:3-5 and Revelation 21:1-5) all show that the end of the bondage of corrupt occurs when Jesus comes. This would be a strong argument to me that the second coming is “the end.”

1 Corinthians 13:12, Ephesians 4:13 and Revelation 10:5-7 show that the curtain coming down on the mystery of God, thus confirming we are at the end of time and entering into eternity when all will finally be revealed. This would be a strong argument to me that the second coming is “the end.”

Repeated Scripture locates the replacement of the current heavens and earth with the new heavens and earth and incorruption at the second coming. Job 14:12-14, Isaiah 13:9-11, Isaiah 34:1-4, 8, Isaiah 65:17-21, Isaiah 66:22-24, Joel 2:3, Joel 2:10-11, Malachi 4:1-3, Matthew 24:29-30, Matthew 24:35-44, Mark 13:24-26, Luke 21:25-27, Romans 8:18-23, 1 Corinthians 15:23-24, 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10, 2 Peter 3:10-13, Hebrews 1:10-12, Revelation 6:13-17, Revelation 16:15-20, Revelation 19:11-16 and Revelation 20:11-15 shows us that this occurs at the second coming. This is indeed the end of time, the end of corruption, the end of the wicked, the end of sin, the end of death, the end for the devil. It is the beginning of eternity. It is the beginning of perfection. It is the beginning of incorruption. It is the beginning of a new arrangement.

It seems like whatever angle you examine the second coming it appears to be climactic, final and glorious.

food4thought said:

So you used no sources in your study that changed your mind? You just read the Bible only and listened to noone else?

Click to expand...

I was getting ready to ask him the same, but it looks like you beat me to it.

Suppose someone were on an airplane, and that this airplane crashed on a deserted island. There is only one survivor. Suppose this person has never read the Bible one single time in his entire life. And suppose in the wreckage that this person finds a Bible that belonged to one of the passengers who didn't survive.

Suppose this person is never rescued off this island but lives for another 20 years. During this 20 years he reads the Bible cover to cover numerous times. Is one to believe, that he on his own, without any outside influence of any kind, is eventually going to conclude Amil is what Revelation is teaching? I don't buy it myself. No one could possibly conclude that from their own readings of the Bible, unless they were already familiar with Amil to begin with. Someone has to first plant a seed in someone's mind before they could ever conclude Amil is what Revelation is teaching.

rhern said:

The 2nd Coming, The return of Christ begins a new era.

Who will populate the earth. and how will this happen.

Click to expand...

The millennium is already here. It is not a literal 1000 years. Jesus comes many times in many ways for many reasons. There is not specific mention of a "Second Coming" in the Bible and all the various mentions of Jesus coming again should not be treated as a single event. The people who populate the earth are both weeds and wheat and it is not until the end that they are separated.

This has been the mainstream view within Christianity for 20 centuries and it was not until the mid-1800s and the rise of apocalyptic movements (Millerites, Campbellites, Darbyites, SDA, JWs, LDS, Dispensationalism) that what you're asking was even considered, much less considered veracious.

Brian Mcnamee said:

dispensationalism is confusing to you kind of funny that the literal interpretation and believing it says what it means and looking at the whole of it in that sense confuses you. You have Satan being bound now and the scriptures again show a great before and after picture of what happens up to the that day and what it is like after that day. Both the man of sin in 2 Thes 2 and the beast in Rev 13 are given power by Satan and are both destroyed by the brightness of the coming of the LORD. The beast in Rev 13 has 42 months to persecute and that is it game over. Jesus comes Satan is bound then. It says the nations which were deceived will no longer be deceived until the 1000 years is over. Now literally the man of sin is to be revealed in the Temple declaring he is God and many will believe him because of the lying signs and wonders. This being future is not a mystery but a near reality as Israel is a nation and certainly the nations are still deceived and plotting a one world government. If you take them all literally there is a clear message of what it coming and the kingdom age is going to be glorious. All the plagues, judgments, two witnesses, mark of the beast are going to be reality.

Click to expand...

Genesis 3:15, Matthew 12:22-29, Mark 3:11, 23-27, Luke 10:18-19, Luke 11:20-22, John 16:11, Colossians 2:13-15, Hebrews 2:14-15, I John 3:8, Revelation 9:1-11 and Revelation 20:2 depict Satan as bound, injured, defeated, incapacitated, immobilized, divested of power, disarmed, brought to naught, undone, stripped, judged and spiritually imprisoned through Christ's sinless life, atoning death and triumphant resurrection. As a result of this, John 12:31-33 and Revelation 12:9-13 records Satan being eternally banished from heaven, along with his demonic angels.

Because Christ’s mission was fully accomplished, Revelation 5:5 affirms: “behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed” Jesus testifies in Revelation 3:21: “I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.” Christ now possesses all power and authority (Matthew 28:18). Christ now holds supreme power over the kingdom of darkness. Jesus testified in Revelation 1:18: “I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys (or authority) of hell (Hades) and of death.” 1 Peter 3:22 shows that Christ, “who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God (now!!!); angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.” There is nothing that is not under His feet (1 Corinthians 15:27-28, Ephesians 1:17-23, Colossians 1:15-17 and Hebrews 1:1-3). He opens and no man shuts, He shuts and no man opens (Revelation 3:7).

Because Christ overcame, Satan and his minions are now restrained by spiritual chains in a spiritual prison (2 Peter 2:4, Jude v 6, Revelation 9:1-11 and Revelation 20:3). While there is no direct Scripture that show the actual moment when the beast is cast into the abyss, Revelation 11:7-9 and Revelation 17:7-8 show him located there during the intra-Advent period.

Scripture shows the abyss being opened near the end whereupon Satan and his demons are released from their spiritual restraint (Revelation 9:1-11 and Revelation 20:7). This parallels with the beast also rising from the abyss (Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 17:8). This corresponds with the restraint being taken off the mystery of iniquity in 2 Thessalonians 2:7 before Christ’s return.

Daniel 7:9-11, 2 Thessalonians 2:8 and Revelation 19:19-20 show the beast being obliterated at the second coming. Isaiah 26:19-27:1 and Revelation 20:10–14 show this to be the same time when Satan is finally destroyed.

This all proves that Revelation 20 runs from Christ’s first resurrection till the second coming.

Josheb said:

The millennium is already here. It is not a literal 1000 years. Jesus comes many times in many ways for many reasons. There is not specific mention of a "Second Coming" in the Bible and all the various mentions of Jesus coming again should not be treated as a single event. The people who populate the earth are both weeds and wheat and it is not until the end that they are separated.

This has been the mainstream view within Christianity for 20 centuries and it was not until the mid-1800s and the rise of apocalyptic movements (Millerites, Campbellites, Darbyites, SDA, JWs, LDS, Dispensationalism) that what you're asking was even considered, much less considered veracious.

Click to expand...

1. You do not believe in a literal future coming of Christ?
2. You do not believe in a physical future coming of Christ?
3. You do not believe in a visible future coming of Christ?
4. You do not believe in an audible future coming of Christ?
5. You do not believe in a bodily future coming of Christ?
6. Is the second coming of Christ a past event, an ongoing process or a literal future physical climactic event?
7. Is the resurrection of the dead a past event, an ongoing process or a literal future physical climactic event?

DavidPT said:

I was getting ready to ask him the same, but it looks like you beat me to it.

Suppose someone were on an airplane, and that this airplane crashed on a deserted island. There is only one survivor. Suppose this person has never read the Bible one single time in his entire life. And suppose in the wreckage that this person finds a Bible that belonged to one of the passengers who didn't survive.

Suppose this person is never rescued off this island but lives for another 20 years. During this 20 years he reads the Bible cover to cover numerous times. Is one to believe, that he on his own, without any outside influence of any kind, is eventually going to conclude Amil is what Revelation is teaching? I don't buy it myself. No one could possibly conclude that from their own readings of the Bible, unless they were already familiar with Amil to begin with. Someone has to first plant a seed in someone's mind before they could ever conclude Amil is what Revelation is teaching.

Click to expand...

The opposite is the truth!

I put all the views aside in 2000, like the Reformers did 500 years ago, when abandoning Romanism. I started with a blank sheet. The Reformers had to start all over again. They questioned everything they had heard. They trusted only in the Word. I too trusted only in the Book when I started researching this matter 20 years ago. I arrived at where they did. Repeated Scripture teaches a climactic coming. Please see my post above.

An open unindoctrinated Christian would have to acknowledge the all-consummating nature of Christ's return. Since abandoning Premil I have engaged in many debates/discussions on the matter of the second coming, end-times and the here-after. These are some of the major weaknesses I find in the Premil doctrine, and are strong reasons why I believe the dogma should be rejected.

(1) Premil is totally preoccupied with, and dependent upon, Revelation 20. It interprets the rest of Scripture in the light of its opinion of one lone highly-debated chapter located in the most figurative and obscure book in the Bible. All end-time Scripture is viewed through the lens of Revelation 20. This is not a very wise way to establish any truth or doctrine.

(2) Premil hangs its doctrine on a very precarious frayed thread: that of Revelation 20 following Revelation 19 chronologically in time. To hold this, it has to dismiss the different recaps (or different camera views pertaining to the intra-Advent period) that exist throughout the book of Revelation, divorce it from repeated Scripture on this matter and also explain away the clear and explicit climactic detail that pertains to Revelation 19. Premil is dependent upon the dubious premise that Revelation 20 is chronological to Revelation 19. That is it! Disprove that and Premil falls apart.

(3) The detail Premil attributes to Revelation 20 compared to what the actual text explicitly says is day and night. Revelation 20 does not remotely say what Premil attribute to it. Many extravagant characteristics, events and ideas are inserted into Revelation 20 that do not exist in the said chapter.

(4) Premil's interpretation of Revelation 20 contradicts numerous explicit climactic Scripture.

(5) Premil is always explaining away the clear and explicit New Testament Scripture (the fuller revelation) by the shadow, type and vaguer Old Testament. It uses indistinct or misunderstood Old Testament Scripture to negate and reject clear and explicit New Testament Scripture that teaches otherwise. We Christians have the benefit of the New Testament to explain what is difficult or obscure in the Old Testament. Christ has superseded the old covenant arrangement and now fulfils the new covenant arrangement as predicted. The New Testament is the greater revelation. The interpretation placed on the Old Testament by Christ and the New Testament writers override all other opinions and interpretations of man. As Augustine wrote: “The New Testament is in the Old Testament concealed, the Old Testament is in the New Testament revealed.”

(6) Premil spiritualizes the literal passages and literalizes the spiritual passages. Their hyper-literalistic approach to highly-figurative Revelation is a case-in-point.

(7) Premil lacks corroboration for all its fundamental beliefs on Revelation 20. Whether you look at the binding of Satan, the release of Satan 1,000 years after the second coming, the restoration of animal sacrifices in an alleged future millennium, a thousand years of peace, perfection and prosperity, two different judgment days, two different resurrection days, the rebellion of the wicked at the end of the millennium, these enjoy no other support in Scripture. I struggle with this, because the only way to authenticate and understand any doctrine is interpret it with other Scripture.

(8) Because these thousand years cannot be found anywhere else in Scripture, apart from the highly symbolic Revelation 20, Premil is forced to insert a thousand years in text after text where it doesn't exist. Objective Bible students should struggle with building their eschatology on the 3rd last chapter of the Bible, in a highly figurative setting, especially when we are supposedly talking about the 2nd greatest age ever. The scriptural silence elsewhere speaks loud to most of us!

(9) Premil is constantly exalting the power and influence of Satan and diluting the sovereign power and influence of Christ. That is nowhere more evident than in their constant rubbishing of Christ’s current kingship over His enemies at the right hand of majesty on high. Whether they mean to or not, Premils are always highlighting what Satan is doing in our day instead of what Christ is doing. Premil portrays a BIG devil and a small god; Scripture presents a small devil and a BIG God. In Premil, Satan seems sovereign in this age and God is curtailed. Premils are always lauding the ability of Satan since the cross. In Scripture, Christ is sovereign and Satan is curtailed. Scripture is always lauding the ability of Christ since the cross. As a consequence, Premil portrays an impotent beat-down New Testament Church, whereas Scripture sees a victorious potent New Testament Church invading the nations with the good news of Christ and subjugating the powers of darkness as they do so. In Scripture Christ reigns over all creation as God and His new creation as Saviour.

(10) Another major error that Premil makes is that it constantly presents the Old Testament as if the new covenant has never arrived. It is as if Jesus Christ has not come and fulfilled the old imperfect typical arrangement and introduced the new perfect eternal arrangement. It is as if the Old Testament promises have not been interpreted by the New Testament writers. What Premils insist is literal, physical, visible and earthly, the New Testament writers interpret as figurative, spiritual, invisible and heavenly. What Premils locate in their supposed future millennium, the New Testament writers locate in our current intra-Advent period.

(11) Because Premil lacks any corroboration in Scripture for a future 1,000 years’ age after the second coming, it invents 2 “last days” periods to allow Premil to fit. Mark 1 now, and Mark 2 after the second coming. Premils also invent 2 new heavens and new earths. Mark 1 they relate to their alleged future millennium and is sin-cursed and corrupt. Mark 2 is perfect and incorrupt and they equate it to 1,000 years+ after this.

(12) Premillennialists cannot even agree on the timing of the arrival of the new heavens and the new earth. They are split on whether Revelation 21 comes chronologically after Revelation 20 and therefore after the millennium kingdom and Satan’s little season in time or whether it is synonymous to that much-debated chapter and that the new heavens and new earth appears at the start of the millennium. This exposes another major weakness in the Premillennial camp: if they cannot even agree on something so simple and elementary as this in their main proof text, how can we trust their chronological approach to Revelation 19 and Revelation 20?

(13) Premil invents a 3rd group of humans that Scripture knows nothing of, that are too wicked to be raptured at the second coming and too righteous to be destroyed. It is these mortals, they argue, who populate their alleged future millennial earth. The reality is there are only two peoples in this world – the righteous and the unrighteous; those "in Adam" (the 1st birth) and those "in Christ" (2nd birth).

(14) Premil has an unhealthy obsessive focus on natural Israel, wrongly believing her to be God’s chosen people today under the new covenant. As a result, they have a mistaken fixation with natural Jerusalem in the Middle East, as if it is the epicentre of God’s workings with mankind on this earth and the place of His unconditional favour. This is wrong! They ignore much Scripture that shows that the fig tree has been cut down, the kingdom of God has been removed from Israel. Ancient Jerusalem and the temple therein was merely an Old Testament imperfect shadow of the heavenly reality that was revealed at the first advent. The New Testament repeatedly teaches that we have become one with spiritual believing Israel in the OT. It makes clear; there is only one elect people. There is only one good olive tree, not two; one body, not two; one bride, not two; one spiritual temple, not two; one people of God, not two; one household of faith, not two; one fold, not two; one new man, not “twain,” and one elect of God throughout time!

(15) General unqualified phrases like “all,” “all nations,” “the living and the dead,” “every man,” “every one,” “men,” “man,” “all men every where,” “the flesh of all men both free and bond, both small and great,” “all that dwell upon the earth … whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world ,” “they that dwell on the earth … whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world,” “the world,” “the whole world” and “all the world,” that objective and impartial Bible students acknowledge embrace the whole human race are redefined and explained away to let Premil fit. This shows that the Premil’s boast that they are literalists is inaccurate.

(16) Premil takes common linguistic terms that are easily understood by the unindoctrinated observer in any language to mean the opposite to what they actually say. For example, Premil does not believe that "first" means first and "last" means last. The English words “first” and “last” are taken from the Greek words protos and eschatos and are widely accepted by all unbiased theologians to denote exactly what they say. The word protos means first, as in the foremost in time, place, order or importance. The word eschatos on the other hand means end, last, farthest and final. It is explicitly clear from their usage, meaning and context in the New Testament that these words are the exact antithesis of each other.

(17) Premil does not believe that “the end” refers to the end. The New Testament word from which we get our phrase “the end” is the Greek word telos which refers to the point aimed at as a limit, i.e. the conclusion of an act or state. It is the termination point of a thing. When Scripture simply talks about “the beginning” without any other additional words or contextual reason to identify it with a specific event, then most sane theologians agree it is talking about “the beginning” of creation. Whilst all sound theologians agree on this many are inconsistent when it comes to “the end.” The reason I believe is because it cuts across a lot of their end-time theology they have been taught. But I believe we should treat both sayings similarly. Unless Scripture specifically identifies “the end” with a particular event or matter like “the end of barley harvest” (Ruth 2:23) “the end of the sabbath” (Matt 28:1), “the end of the year” (2 Chron 24:23), “the end of the rod” (1 Sam 14:27), or “the end of the commandment” (1 Tim 1:5), etc, etc, then we should understand it as the end of the world (which is the end of the age).

@sovereigngrace

Well, you've given me a lot to digest. This will take a while, but I will go through your posts and reply, Lord willing. For the time being, how do you reconcile Matthew 5:19 with Acts 15?

Thanks in advance and God bless;
Michael

food4thought said:

@sovereigngrace

Well, you've given me a lot to digest. This will take a while, but I will go through your posts and reply, Lord willing. For the time being, how do you reconcile Matthew 5:19 with Acts 15?

Thanks in advance and God bless;
Michael

Click to expand...

You are going to have to be a lot more detailed. I don't know what you're asking.

food4thought said:

@sovereigngrace

Well, you've given me a lot to digest. This will take a while, but I will go through your posts and reply, Lord willing. For the time being, how do you reconcile Matthew 5:19 with Acts 15?

Thanks in advance and God bless;
Michael

Click to expand...

Those verses/ chapters/, indeed all Scripture, is in perfect harmony.

If any man lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all men (all men), generously and without rebuke, (if they are not double-minded).... James.

thus the answer straight from Yahweh, today, rests in Yahweh, always.

Brian Mcnamee said:

Hi

if by the Holy Spirit God paints a very distinct and clear message of what it to come I think he would not waste his time be declaring it for it to only be understood in a spiritual sense. When Jesus road in on the foal of a donkey was it a spiritual donkey? Or when he was betrayed for 30 pieces of silver and the money given to the potter was it spiritual silver and a spiritual potters field that was purchased with that money?

Zech says that river is coming when the LORD comes and it flows year round which implies it is continuing to flow after the LORD is king over all the earth. The New Covenant is in place when Jesus instituted it made in His blood shed at calvary and announced at the last supper.

Jesus quoted Jer 31 which promised the new covenant coming not according to the one made when they were delivered from Egypt. This covenant replaced the day of atonement and indeed it is in full force. Jesus understood that Israel was not going to accept him and that Jerusalem would be destroyed and the temple torn down. So in Jer the verses immediately after the promise of the new covenant state that Israel will never cease to be a nation in Gods eyes and that He will never cast them off for all they have done. This is followed by a clear passage that says the city (Jerusalem) will be rebuilt at a time when dead bodies are everywhere and that from that time on it will be holy and never thrown down again.

In Zech 14 we see the dead will be everywhere and the city in need of rebuilding.

Now Jesus mission in LUKE 1 is clear and the futurist view has Jesus doing exactly what was promised of him.
7 Now his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Spirit, and prophesied, saying:
68 “Blessed is the Lord God of Israel,
For He has visited and redeemed His people,
69 And has raised up a horn of salvation for us
In the house of His servant David,
70 As He spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets,
Who have been since the world began,
71 That we should be saved from our enemies
And from the hand of all who hate us,
72 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers
And to remember His holy covenant,
73 The oath which He swore to our father Abraham:
74 To grant us that we,
Being delivered from the hand of our enemies,
Might serve Him without fear,
75 In holiness and righteousness before Him all the days of our life.

See the covenant with Abraham is for the land and the before and after picture is clear that from the time Jesus deliver. Israel they will be holy again the conversion is listed. i have show you two places where the land is divided at the time the throne is established and the LORD is keeping this oath.

Think of Joseph revealing himself to his brothers and in Zech 14 it says in that day they will say the LORD is one. This is Israel seeing Jesus come in the clouds and tread the winepress of His indignation and from that day on Israel is holy and worhsips and serves without fear from that point on.

Click to expand...

Jesus taught a spiritual kingdom. You need to adjust OT prophecies to that and not the other way around. The pharisees taught a 1000 year millennium and Jesus certainly did not agree with them.

food4thought said:

Yes, I can read and understand the passages, which I made a reply to that you did not address.

SovereignGrace made a similar point with far more examples, and it did make me think, for which I am thankful.

Not conceding the point yet, but let's assume you are right for a moment. That doesn't erase the prophecies Brian posted...

It is quite possible that the Kingdom comes in two phases, the Millennium and then the eternal state... one Kingdom in two phases.

I would be interested in reading your understanding of the prophecies Brian quoted.

God bless;
Michael

Click to expand...

You won't understand them until you understand Jesus and his portrayal of the spiritual kingdom.

sovereigngrace said:

1. You do not believe in a literal future coming of Christ?
2. You do not believe in a physical future coming of Christ?
3. You do not believe in a visible future coming of Christ?
4. You do not believe in an audible future coming of Christ?
5. You do not believe in a bodily future coming of Christ?
6. Is the second coming of Christ a past event, an ongoing process or a literal future physical climactic event?
7. Is the resurrection of the dead a past event, an ongoing process or a literal future physical climactic event?

Click to expand...

You don't know what I believe other than what I stated and I will thank you not to put words into my posts I did not write. It's rude and disrespectful.

Are you able to discuss our disparate views without implied ad hominem or not?


Yes to the first five questions, but my affirmation is not likely to reconcile with the way described in this op.

Question number 6 has already been answered preemptively so I now know you're reading my posts but not thinking about what you're reading. Can we agree that some thought will actually be put into what's being read expressly so questions that are already answered won't be unnecessarily asked?

Question 7 warrants clarification. I am not a full-preterist so I do not believe the resurrection alluded to in places like 1 Cor. 15 has occurred. However, the word typically translated as "resurrection" in most English translations is also translated "raised." Did you know that? The facts of scripture are that those in Christ have been currently raised but that is not the same as the future resurrection when/where we will be raised incorruptible and immortal.

So I'd like some attention paid to what just happened. I was just falsely accused of five things I do not believe. Yes, those first five statements each ended with a question mark but the wording is accusatory. So if you are capable of politely and respectfully discussing our differences then I am going to ask you to start with you and word your posts accordingly. Start with Ephesians 4:29, okay?

And, sovereigngrace, this op is not about my eschatology. This op is about the eschatology described in the op. Any and all attempts to change the topic will be noted for what they are: fallacious attempts at shifting the onus. Even genuine inquiry is irrelevant if it's not op-related. I can discuss this op without ever mentioning my eschatology and most certainly without discussing it at any length. I can make the case for how and why this op fails and I can do so using only scripture, scripture correctly-exegeted, and not in any way shape or form appeal to any of the other competing eschatologies prevalent in mainstream Christianity.

Can my critique of the op be tolerated? Can you stick to the op? Can you agree to rightly-rendered scripture as the measure of both our posts?

If so then act like it.

I'm going to repost my op-reply and ask respoonses attend to that content relevant to the op.


Nothing more about what I believe is necessary to discuss this op. If the ability to stick to the op exists then kindly post accordingly and I will lovingly bless you for having done so, even if in the end we agree to disagree.

sovereigngrace said:

You are going to have to be a lot more detailed. I don't know what you're asking.

Click to expand...

I am on my phone right now, and I prefer to answer in depth from my laptop when I get home from work.