Pre-Millennialism?

[Carry_Your_Name]

You're just being silly now. Stubbornly insisting on continuing to argue when your arguments have been demolished.

Jesus is King now. What is He King of if He has now current Kingdom?

"But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: A sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom."
Hebrews 1:8

God bless.

I wasn't arguing about his kingship, I was arguing for his humanity. What is demolished is your docetism heresy that's he's just a spirit, not a real person.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Resurrected spiritually and reigning with Christ now. All happens before Christ's return.

You don't know your Bible, but that can be fixed.

Study up.

I know one thing you don't, that the bible is a history book, not a story book. By insisting that everything is "spiritual", you're essentially rendering the word of God as an irrelevant myth disconnected from the reality.

You're here to discuss anything that deflects from your arguments being repeatedly proven unbiblical.

You're repeatedly denying Jesus's humanity, and you're calling my argument unbiblical?

 

[Consecrated Life]

I've already addressed all of that with Scripture that contradicts your interpretation of it.

Black letters on white computer screens showed you clearly that the Bible states that the earth will be destroyed which means that your interpretation of those verses must be incorrect.

Jesus returns, then comes the end. (1 Cor. 15:23-24) The Last Day is spoken of many times throughout the Bible, Jesus Himself speaks of it 5 times in the book of John and it is mentioned a 6th time in that book. There can only be ONE Last Day. Jesus arrives on that Last Day and resurrects, judges and destroys the earth. It's God's book and God's story.

Take it up with Him.

That scripture declares that both Jesus will be King on earth from Jerusalem establishing the Peace of God , and that the Last Day will happen are not mutually exclusive occurrences.
God is fully capable to fulfil Zechariah 14 and bring the age to an end.
I understand now that with God's Word clearly describing both The Lord's Kingship over earth from Jerusalem, and the end of the age , your position leaves you no choice but to feign ignorance of Zechariah 14's existence.
Have a Very Merry Christmas.

Zec 14:9
And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.

Zec 14:11
And men shall dwell in it, and there shall be no more utter destruction; but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited.

 

[F345T]

That scripture declares that both Jesus will be King on earth from Jerusalem establishing the Peace of God , and that the Last Day will happen are not mutually exclusive occurrences.
God is fully capable to fulfil Zechariah 14 and bring the age to an end.
I understand now that with God's Word clearly describing both The Lord's Kingship over earth from Jerusalem, and the end of the age , your position leaves you no choice but to feign ignorance of Zechariah 14's existence.
Have a Very Merry Christmas.

Zec 14:9
And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.

Zec 14:11
And men shall dwell in it, and there shall be no more utter destruction; but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited.

If it makes you feel better to say so.

There can only be one Last Day.

Jesus returns on the Last Day. He only returns once. The earth is destroyed on that Last Day.

Kinda puts you in a jam, I know.

Merry Christmas!?

 

[Consecrated Life]

Jesus returns on the Last Day. He only returns once. The earth is destroyed on that Last Day.

So is this passage is a case of God being mistaken ?
Or God telling a lie ?
Or can't you say ?

Zec 14:9
"And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one."

 

[F345T]

So is this passage is a case of God being mistaken ?
Or God telling a lie ?
Or can't you say ?

Zec 14:9
"And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one."

Do you know what the difference is between a King and a Prince?

 

[Consecrated Life]

Do you know what the difference is between a King and a Prince?

I asked a question first .
Answer my question, then I will happily answer yours .
That's been my experience as to how discussions are conducted.
I thought that you wanted discussion here ?

I just wanted to start this thread to discuss the differing views...........

Thank you and God bless.

 

[jasonc]

Amilienialism ?

 

[F345T]

I asked a question first .
Answer my question, then I will happily answer yours .
That's been my experience as to how discussions are conducted.
I thought that you wanted discussion here ?

So, ... a King was, historically speaking, the 'Father' of a Prince. Regardless of relation, though, a King is "higher" in rank than a Prince.

Also, we have many references in the Bible to Angels and demons (fallen angels) as Princes.

Still with me? Can you guess where I'm headed? ?

So, if it's been pointed out that satan is a Prince of this world, and it's been proven with Scripture that Jesus is the KING of this world, .... I have to ask in reference to your proof text you keep pointing out, ... what part of that explanation of King vs Prince do you not understand?

 

[F345T]

Amilienialism ?

Amillennialism is an official label for anybody who is not Pre-Mil, but ... I'm not so sure it's accurate for all who don't see Pre-Mil as unbiblical. Some say it should mean no millennium, but that's not what most Amils actually believe. I'd say most believe the Millennium time period spoken of in Rev. is not literal, just like so many other prophetic time periods and measurements are not literal.

I believe the Millennium of Jesus' reign is taking place now, and has been since His first advent, and will end upon His second advent. There is plenty of Scripture to support that perspective.

Pre-Mil has a specific interpretation of Rev. 20, and Rev. 20 alone. Most end times passages contradict the notion of a time period upon the physical earth after Christ's return. I'm guessing you know some, or most, of this, but your post was a bit vague so ... I elaborated a bit for those who may not.

God bless.

 

[jasonc]

Amillennialism is an official label for anybody who is not Pre-Mil, but ... I'm not so sure it's accurate for all who don't see Pre-Mil as unbiblical. Some say it should mean no millennium, but that's not what most Amils actually believe. I'd say most believe the Millennium time period spoken of in Rev. is not literal, just like so many other prophetic time periods and measurements are not literal.

I believe the Millennium of Jesus' reign is taking place now, and has been since His first advent, and will end upon His second advent. There is plenty of Scripture to support that perspective.

Pre-Mil has a specific interpretation of Rev. 20, and Rev. 20 alone. Most end times passages contradict the notion of a time period upon the physical earth after Christ's return. I'm guessing you know some, or most, of this, but your post was a bit vague so ... I elaborated a bit for those who may not.

God bless.

I stated that too see where you were as you sound amil

 

[Consecrated Life]

So, ... a King was, historically speaking, the 'Father' of a Prince. Regardless of relation, though, a King is "higher" in rank than a Prince.

Also, we have many references in the Bible to Angels and demons (fallen angels) as Princes.

Still with me? Can you guess where I'm headed? ?

So, if it's been pointed out that satan is a Prince of this world, and it's been proven with Scripture that Jesus is the KING of this world, .... I have to ask in reference to your proof text you keep pointing out, ... what part of that explanation of King vs Prince do you not understand?

Are you saying that the King and the Prince must be co-rulers over the world if this text is true ?
Zec 14:9
"And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one."

That sounds like what you are saying ?
If not let me know ?

 

[F345T]

Are you saying that the King and the Prince must be co-rulers over the world if this text is true ?
Zec 14:9
"And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one."

That sounds like what you are saying ?
If not let me know ?

No, I'm still elaborating on the point I've been making throughout this conversation - that Jesus is King and His Kingdom is now, not later.

But I gotta say, you bring up an interesting point.

I suppose, in a very real sense, they are co-rulers as satan is ruler of the physical, of the flesh, and Jesus is ruler of the spiritual. God is a spirit, must be worshipped in spirit, the 10 Commandments are a spiritual law, we must walk in the spirit, God's children are Israel in spirit - not in the flesh, etc.

Very interesting indeed.

 

[Consecrated Life]

No, I'm still elaborating on the point I've been making throughout this conversation - that Jesus is King and His Kingdom is now

If His Kingdom is now , then tell me when all the people of Jerusalem saw this day of His return that He promised would happen & acknowledged Him as King?
Please "Discuss" ?

Mat 23:39
For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

 

[F345T]

If His Kingdom is now , then tell me when all the people of Jerusalem saw this day of His return that He promised would happen & acknowledged Him as King?
Please "Discuss" ?

Mat 23:39
For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

Well, post the verse that says that so we can address it directly. The verse you posted doesn't say that.

I've already posted a number of verses that show Jesus to be King. Why do you reject those verses? Is it your claim that Jesus is not King?

 

[Consecrated Life]

Well, post the verse that says that so we can address it directly. The verse you posted doesn't say that.

I've already posted a number of verses that show Jesus to be King. Why do you reject those verses? Is it your claim that Jesus is not King?

Jesus is referring to a future time here , yes or no ?
Mat 23:39
For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
Let's meet in the middle in discussion of this and relax a little bit , shall we?
Let's first agree or disagree that Jesus is speaking of something future ?

 

[F345T]

Jesus is referring to a future time here , yes or no ?
Mat 23:39
For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
Let's meet in the middle in discussion of this and relax a little bit , shall we?
Let's first agree or disagree that Jesus is speaking of something future ?

You've decided to make a silly rule that only your questions need be answered. You imagine that you're an attorney and I'm in the hot seat and have to answer your questions, but can't respond in any way other than how you allow.

This is not a deposition. And I'm not playing some game that you control by your own rules. I think this conversation has run its course and we can't proceed any further because you're not being sincere. This is supposed to be a civil Biblical discussion. When you decide that only you can ask questions and that they must be answered, as if you're some high and mighty judge and I'm just some lowly peon witness at the mercy of your kangaroo court, that's where the honest discussion ends. And it's also a major sign of weakness in your argument - just like when someone attacks a messenger because they can't skillfully address the message itself.

Happy Holidays though and God bless.

Pre-Mil is not Biblical.

 

[Consecrated Life]

Jesus is referring to a future time here , yes or no ?
Mat 23:39
For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
Let's meet in the middle in discussion of this and relax a little bit , shall we?
Let's first agree or disagree that Jesus is speaking of something future ?

F345T
"You've decided to make a silly rule that only your questions need be answered. You imagine that you're an attorney and I'm in the hot seat and have to answer your questions, but can't respond in any way other than how you allow."

I just wanted to start this thread to discuss the differing views on this topic and share passages that support each.

Thank you and God bless.

Never would have thought based upon your Thread topic request to SHARE PASSAGES that SUPPORT DIFFERING VIEWS that submitting such a single verse to DISCUSS would get your mistletoe in such a bunch.
Sorry about that fella.
Thought you were interested in a serious back and forth conversation in differences of opinion ?
Obvious now that when a verse is submitted that presents the slightest challenge to you rather than talking like an adult and giving a point by point summary of why the verse does not apply , you basically say , " that does not apply, and I refuse to talk about it " :

If His Kingdom is now , then tell me when all the people of Jerusalem saw this day of His return that He promised would happen & acknowledged Him as King?
Please "Discuss" ?

Mat 23:39
For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

Well, post the verse that says that so we can address it directly. The verse you posted doesn't say that.

Just a dash for the tall grass is all we get from you when a verse is submitted you feel challenged by.
Caused by your having O% spiritual power to work with in detailing the fault with what you claim as being the misapplied Word of God .
If the Lord was with you, on it you would never be this fearful in going forward and breaking down in detail someone making misapplication for His Word.
His presence is the key to banishing your obvious lack of confidence in diving into His Word with both feet rather than sticking a little toe in and running away.
Based upon your topic thread's request for verse of differing opinion to discuss by dismissing verses given out of hand you are running an dishonest & unethical thread.

 

[GodsGrace]

Greetings wondering,

The NT verses you ask me to comment upon do not specifically mention 1000 years as this length of time is only given twice in Revelation 20. But I believe that the 1000 years mentioned there are literal, and that all the other verses that I quoted, both OT and NT, are speaking of this event and hence this period of time, when Jesus returns to the earth and establishes His Kingdom and rules from Jerusalem, sitting upon the Temple Trone of David in Jerusalem for the 1000 years.

Luke 1:30–33 (KJV): 30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. 31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. 32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: 33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
I understand the word translated "for ever" can be better understood to represent an "Age".

Hi Trevor
I don't know a lot about eschatology so I'm going to give you my understanding, and you could give me your opinion/belief for what I write.

I don't believe the word FOREVER in Luke 1:30-33 could be understood to mean an AGE.
I believe it actually means forever, one of my bibles says into eternity...which means forever.
This doesn't negate what Revelation states, and I don't understand why you may feel that you need to understand the "1,000 year reign" as also having to appear in other scripture besides Revelation.

Matthew 19:28 (KJV): 28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
Absolutely no problem here. A picture of the future Kingdom when Christ returns and a significant remnant of the mortals from the nation of Israel are converted.

Agreed.

Acts 1:10–11 (KJV): 10 And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; 11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.
Speaks of Jesus' return from heaven and in the context of their question, it will be at that time that Jesus will restore the Kingdom to Israel.

Agreed.

Acts 3:19–21 (KJV): 19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord; 20 And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: 21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

Agreed.

This includes Peter's understanding of Acts 1:10-11, that Jesus will return from heaven to establish the Kingdom. It will not be a time of burning the earth, but refreshing and restoration, and many OT prophecies could be cited to elucidate what Peter claimed here, such as Psalm 72.

Agreed. I'm just not certain if the earth will have to end/be destroyed first, or if it'll change like our bodies will be at the end.

1 Corinthians 15:20–28 (KJV): 20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. 21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming. 24 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 all authority and power. 25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. 27 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. 28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.
This is perhaps the clearest testimony, and speaks of the Kingdom and what it will accomplish. It clearly gives a picture of a long period of time without specifying 1000 years.

Interesting that you think it refers to a long period of time.
Will be thinking on this some more.

2 Timothy 4:1,6–8 (KJV): 1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the living and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; 6 For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. 7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: 8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.
This teaches that Paul looked forward to the return of Jesus and that the Judgement and then the Kingdom would occur at his return.

Kind regards
Trevor

It sounds like 2 Timothy 4:1, 6-8 is conflicting with 1 Cor 15:20-28.
Cor seems like it could mean a long period of time,
and Tim seems like everything is going to happen at once at the end of time.

 

[GodsGrace]

F345T
"You've decided to make a silly rule that only your questions need be answered. You imagine that you're an attorney and I'm in the hot seat and have to answer your questions, but can't respond in any way other than how you allow."


Never would have thought based upon your Thread topic request to SHARE PASSAGES that SUPPORT DIFFERING VIEWS that submitting such a single verse to DISCUSS would get your mistletoe in such a bunch.
Sorry about that fella.
Thought you were interested in a serious back and forth conversation in differences of opinion ?
Obvious now that when a verse is submitted that presents the slightest challenge to you rather than talking like an adult and giving a point by point summary of why the verse does not apply , you basically say , " that does not apply, and I refuse to talk about it " :



Just a dash for the tall grass is all we get from you when a verse is submitted you feel challenged by.
Caused by your having O% spiritual power to work with in detailing the fault with what you claim as being the misapplied Word of God .
If the Lord was with you, on it you would never be this fearful in going forward and breaking down in detail someone making misapplication for His Word.
His presence is the key to banishing your obvious lack of confidence in diving into His Word with both feet rather than sticking a little toe in and running away.
Based upon your topic thread's request for verse of differing opinion to discuss by dismissing verses given out of hand you are running an dishonest & unethical thread.

F345T

PLEASE COOL DOWN AND EITHER CONTINUE YOUR DISCUSSION
OR END IT HERE.
IF YOU CONTINUE REMEMBER TO RESPECT EACH OTHER'S BELIEFS
AND DO NOT MAKE PERSONAL COMMENTS.
RESPOND TO THE TOPIC ONLY.
THANKS.

DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS POST IN THIS THREAD.
USE TALK WITH STAFF IF NECESSARY.