As a thief in the night.

[LiturgyInDMinor]

Scofield dispensationalism

Exactly the problem with the church today(in the US I am speaking of).

thanks for listening.

 

[MrJG]

Christ's Kingdom IS the millennium. Even Matthew 13 shoes this because it says that after Christ's return and the end of the age that they will live in the kingdom. Christ's millennial kingdom was prophesied in the OT and also foretold in Revelation numerous times. That is why the Jews rejected Christ as the Messiah, because they were looking for Him to back and establish His kingdom not to die on the cross.

I will not make this in to a nondispensationalism vs. dispensationlism debate.

 

[the particular baptist]

Christ's Kingdom IS the millennium. Even Matthew 13 shoes this because it says that after Christ's return and the end of the age that they will live in the kingdom. Christ's millennial kingdom was prophesied in the OT and also foretold in Revelation numerous times. That is why the Jews rejected Christ as the Messiah, because they were looking for Him to back and establish His kingdom not to die on the cross.

There is no scripture that plainly teaches a millenium. Matthew 13 reads that the kingdom is now but both seeds exist until judgment, after wards the New Creation where only the righteous exist.

I will not make this in to a nondispensationalism vs. dispensationlism debate.

There is no avoiding it when discussing eschatology. The hermeneutic used determines how scripture is understood. We all approach scripture with presuppositions.

 

[MrJG]

There is no scripture that plainly teaches a millenium. Matthew 13 reads that the kingdom is now but both seeds exist until judgment, after wards the New Creation where only the righteous exist.

So, you just throw the book of Revelation out the window because it doesn't agree with your stance on a millennial kingdom? (This might sound like a harsh accusation, but it is not meant that way, it is meant as an honest question)

 

[the particular baptist]

So, you just throw the book of Revelation out the window because it doesn't agree with your stance on a millennial kingdom? (This might sound like a harsh accusation, but it is not meant that way, it is meant as an honest question)

Ofcourse not. The Last Revelation of Jesus Christ is for the churches, and always will be for the churches. More specifically, to the persecuted churches, then and now. It is a letter of hope and encouragement to Christians with seemingly very little hope, in the language of the Old Testament. To understand it the way the early church did, we need to study the language of the Old Testament. The early church did not read Revelation and go, you know, this is for 2000 years from now. It was for them and it is for us.

 

[MrJG]

It was for them and it is for us.

I agree that the Book of Revelation was written for the church in all periods of time, but it clearly states that there will be a 1000 year reign of Christ on earth after the Tribulation. This is pretty clear. After this reign, Satan will be loosed and will lead another rebellion against Christ during which, Satan will finally be defeated and we will go into eternity.

How can you still say that there will be no millennial kingdom?

 

[DD2008]

I agree that the Book of Revelation was written for the church in all periods of time, but it clearly states that there will be a 1000 year reign of Christ on earth after the Tribulation. This is pretty clear. After this reign, Satan will be loosed and will lead another rebellion against Christ during which, Satan will finally be defeated and we will go into eternity.

How can you still say that there will be no millennial kingdom?

Will you give the specific passage you speak of?

 

[the particular baptist]

I think he's referring to Revelation 20.

Everywhere else in all of scripture where the number 1000 is used, it is a metaphor. Cattle on a thousand hills, a thousand is like a day ect, ect, and everyone agrees with this, but for some reason people go all "Left Behind" when reading Rev 20, where in a book full of types, images, metaphors, a metaphorical number is read literally. I would have no problem if it was plainly taught elsewhere in the NT, but it isnt.

If the millennium is as important as our dispensational brethren say it is, surely it would be corroborated elsewhere in the NT. It isnt though. The NT only recognizes 2 Ages. This one that will end, and the one to come that will never end. They are separated by the Judgment and New Creation.

 

[MrJG]

I think he's referring to Revelation 20.

Yes, I am referring to Revelation 20.

Everywhere else in all of scripture where the number 1000 is used, it is a metaphor. Cattle on a thousand hills, a thousand is like a day ect, ect, and everyone agrees with this, but for some reason people go all "Left Behind" when reading Rev 20, where in a book full of types, images, metaphors, a metaphorical number is read literally. I would have no problem if it was plainly taught elsewhere in the NT, but it isnt.


If the millennium is as important as our dispensational brethren say it is, surely it would be corroborated elsewhere in the NT. It isnt though. The NT only recognizes 2 Ages. This one that will end, and the one to come that will never end. They are separated by the Judgment and New Creation.

Actually, Psalm 50:10 is written as if God is talking Himself and really God does own the cattle on a thousand hills, because it is all His anyways. In 2 Petr 3:8, we do have a metaphor. Why though should we assume that the 1000 years in Revelation 20 is only a metaphor and not literal? What good does it do to compare 1000 years to eternity when you could just say for all eternity or whatever you believe this time span to be? I personally have never read the Left Behind series. Hmm, we believe that 144,000 is literal, and we know what is meant when the Bible mentions 12 stars in a crown, and the two witnesses, and we see that there are seven seals, seven vials, and seven trumpets, the four alleluias; so why isn't 1000 years really 1000 years? If we accept that the characters of this passage (and other numbers and characters of Revelation) of scripture (Revelation 20:1-3) to be literal, then it is logical to believe the 1000 years mentioned 6 times in the first seven verses of this chapter to also be literal. I do not reject the Biblical fact that Christ's reign will be eternal as Calvin supposed pre-millennialists to believe by professing a belief in a literal 1000 year reign of Christ on earth. On the contrary, I believe that Christ's reign will be eternal, but if we look at 1 Cor. 15:24-28, we can see the reason for the 1000 year reign of Christ and how it will be eternal.

1 Corinthians 15:24-28
"Then cometh the end, when He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when He shall have put down all rule and authority and power. For He must reign, till He hath put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For He hath put all things under His feet. But when He saith all things are put under Him, it is manifest that He is excepted, which did put all things under Him. And when all things shall be subject unto Him that put all things under Him, that God may be all in all."

This passage of scripture fits perfectly with the Millennial Reign of Christ in Revelation 20.

 

[the particular baptist]

Actually, Psalm 50:10 is written as if God is talking Himself and really God does own the cattle on a thousand hills, because it is all His anyways. In 2 Petr 3:8, we do have a metaphor. Why though should we assume that the 1000 years in Revelation 20 is only a metaphor and not literal? What good does it do to compare 1000 years to eternity when you could just say for all eternity or whatever you believe this time span to be? I personally have never read the Left Behind series. Hmm, we believe that 144,000 is literal, and we know what is meant when the Bible mentions 12 stars in a crown, and the two witnesses, and we see that there are seven seals, seven vials, and seven trumpets, the four alleluias; so why isn't 1000 years really 1000 years? If we accept that the characters of this passage (and other numbers and characters of Revelation) of scripture (Revelation 20:1-3) to be literal, then it is logical to believe the 1000 years mentioned 6 times in the first seven verses of this chapter to also be literal. I do not reject the Biblical fact that Christ's reign will be eternal as Calvin supposed pre-millennialists to believe by professing a belief in a literal 1000 year reign of Christ on earth. On the contrary, I believe that Christ's reign will be eternal, but if we look at 1 Cor. 15:24-28, we can see the reason for the 1000 year reign of Christ and how it will be eternal.

1 Corinthians 15:24-28
"Then cometh the end, when He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when He shall have put down all rule and authority and power. For He must reign, till He hath put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For He hath put all things under His feet. But when He saith all things are put under Him, it is manifest that He is excepted, which did put all things under Him. And when all things shall be subject unto Him that put all things under Him, that God may be all in all."

This passage of scripture fits perfectly with the Millennial Reign of Christ in Revelation 20.

1 Corinthians 15:24-28 does in no way plainly teach a millennium, at least, it is not plain to me, and it has to be read in the text to see it. Christ reigns now. It just isnt corroborated in the rest of the NT. As i see it, the 1000 years in Rev 20 is the period of time between the First and Second Advent of Christ.

144,000 is literal, and we know what is meant when the Bible mentions 12 stars in a crown, and the two witnesses, and we see that there are seven seals, seven vials, and seven trumpets, the four alleluias; so why isn't 1000 years really 1000 years

I just dont see these as literal seals, vials, trumpets, stars, ect. John wrote the Last Revelation to the persecuted church of the first century, and it applies to the persecuted church of the 21st century. It applied to the believers tortured during the Spanish Inquisition, and used as human torches during the Reformation. It is regrettable that dispensationalism pushes most everything in the book into the future. In Red China, Pakistan, Iran, however, the Last Revelation brings much comfort to fellow believers where it is life or death to follow Christ. The Last Revelation is about the Triumph of Christ, so lets endure to the end.

 

[DD2008]

Matthew 12:28-29
28 But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. 29 Or how can someone enter a strong man's house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house.

Revelation 20:1-3
20:1 Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the key to the bottomless pit [1] and a great chain. 2 And he seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, 3 and threw him into the pit, and shut it and sealed it over him, so that he might not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand years were ended. After that he must be released for a little while.


Is Christ recorded in Mathew as binding the devil? If that is the case isn't this proof that the thousand years began at the 1st advent of Christ?

 

[the particular baptist]

Matthew 12:28-29
28 But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. 29 Or how can someone enter a strong man's house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house.

Revelation 20:1-3
20:1 Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the key to the bottomless pit[1] and a great chain. 2 And he seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, 3 and threw him into the pit, and shut it and sealed it over him, so that he might not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand years were ended. After that he must be released for a little while.


Is Christ recorded in Mathew as binding the devil? If that is the case isn't this proof that the thousand years began at the 1st advent of Christ?

 

[MrJG]

If the Devil is bound until Christ's Second Coming, then how is he walking about seeking whom he may devour (1 Pet. 5:8)?

 

[the particular baptist]

If the Devil is bound until Christ's Second Coming, then how is he walking about seeking whom he may devour (1 Pet. 5:8)?

He is bound from interfering with the preaching of the Gospel. The restrainer is the gospel, or the preaching of the gospel. The enemy will be loosed near the end when the restrainer is removed,and allowed to deceive the nations again, thus the great falling away or apostasy. We may be in those days, we may not. I tend to think not because there is still some 2000+ languages on earth that do not have the Scriptures in their own tongue. So lets continue the work ! Either go down into the well or hold the rope for those who do

Come quickly Lord Jesus, come quickly !

 

[LiturgyInDMinor]

He is bound from interfering with the preaching of the Gospel. The restrainer is the gospel, or the preaching of the gospel. The enemy will be loosed near the end when the restrainer is removed,and allowed to deceive the nations again, thus the great falling away or apostasy. We may be in those days, we may not. I tend to think not because there is still some 2000+ languages on earth that do not have the Scriptures in their own tongue. So lets continue the work ! Either go down into the well or hold the rope for those who do

Come quickly Lord Jesus, come quickly !

That's how I always took it.

 

[DD2008]

So it appears Satan is bound from taking the elect.

However he is apparently still at work on the non-elect:

2 Corinthians 4:1-6
4:1 Therefore, having this ministry by the mercy of God, [1] we do not lose heart. 2 But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God's word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone's conscience in the sight of God. 3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing. 4 In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. 5 For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants [2] for Jesus' sake. 6 For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

 

[MrJG]

1 Corinthians 15:24-28 does in no way plainly teach a millennium, at least, it is not plain to me, and it has to be read in the text to see it. Christ reigns now. It just isnt corroborated in the rest of the NT. As i see it, the 1000 years in Rev 20 is the period of time between the First and Second Advent of Christ.

1) How could the period of time from the 1st Advent to the 2nd Advent be the 1000 years of Revelation 20:1-6 if Christ's 2nd Coming is prior to the start of the of His kingdom and the millennium?

2) If we are currently in the millennium (kingdom) then when was the Beast defeated (as this happens at Christ's 2nd Coming) and when/where is Christ ruling with a "rod of iron"?

3) If the kingdom started at Christ's 1st Advent, then why was He rejected and killed by the Jews?

4) Satan is bound after Christ's 2nd Coming, not His first. I already asked if Satan is supposed to be bound now, then why did Peter call him the roaring lion that is walking about. DD2008 answered that Satan is bound from "taking the elect," but then who was Peter talking to?

5) Also, to DD2008, you asked if I "believe that Jesus could come back today?" and I answered yes. You then said, "I hope it's today" and "Whatever Christ wants to do. I think he'll just show up one day and get his people." If you believe that Christ could return at any time, then you must believe in a pre-trib rapture as there are too many events that still have to happen before Christ's second coming. Do I understand you right?

 

[DD2008]

1) How could the period of time from the 1st Advent to the 2nd Advent be the 1000 years of Revelation 20:1-6 if Christ's 2nd Coming is prior to the start of the of His kingdom and the millennium?

2) If we are currently in the millennium (kingdom) then when was the Beast defeated (as this happens at Christ's 2nd Coming) and when/where is Christ ruling with a "rod of iron"?

3) If the kingdom started at Christ's 1st Advent, then why was He rejected and killed by the Jews?

4) Satan is bound after Christ's 2nd Coming, not His first. I already asked if Satan is supposed to be bound now, then why did Peter call him the roaring lion that is walking about. DD2008 answered that Satan is bound from "taking the elect," but then who was Peter talking to?

5) Also, to DD2008, you asked if I "believe that Jesus could come back today?" and I answered yes. You then said, "I hope it's today" and "Whatever Christ wants to do. I think he'll just show up one day and get his people." If you believe that Christ could return at any time, then you must believe in a pre-trib rapture as there are too many events that still have to happen before Christ's second coming. Do I understand you right?

Actually I just expect that Christ to come back any day. For all I know the tribulation is happening or happend. I don't think there will be a email sent to everyone saying "Tribulation Today".

He said he will come as a thief in the night. So any time now. God's time isn't our time and only he knows the day and the hour.

All we need to do is be ready.

 

[MrJG]

Actually I just expect that Christ to come back any day. For all I know the tribulation is happening or happend. I don't think there will be a email sent to everyone saying "Tribulation Today".

He said he will come as a thief in the night. So any time now. God's time isn't our time and only he knows the day and the hour.

All we need to do is be ready.

So, you do believe in a pre-trib rapture? Just curious.

 

[DD2008]

So, you do believe in a pre-trib rapture? Just curious.

I have paid the least amout of attention to this subject in theology, but from what I have gathered from scripture there is supposed to be a tribulation first.

What I was saying is that I'm not sure we'll know off hand that we are in that period of tribulation.

So, as far as I know it's over and Christ is going to come back before I press the Submit Reply button.

Only God knows the time. We are supposed to be ready and waiting hopefully for the return of the Lord.