22 major reasons to abandon the Premil doctrine

[marks]

In what context? Why are you so vague? What would the context be? How can I address that without you giving me the context of this hypothetical scenario?

That's the problem with hypotheticals, they aren't real, and you can turn them any direction you want. We don't need that further though, we've already found that a parallel passage would be understood in the same way as the Revelation passage. Having concluded the Revelation passage to be figurative, you would likewise conclude the other hypothetical passage figurative.

The number of times a term is mentioned has NOTHING to do with whether it is literal or not. The beast is referred to over 30 times in the book of Revelation. Does that make it a literal beast?

The beast is defined in the Bible about what it is, so, we have that to go by.

LOL. You are not getting the point. At all.

I think I am. But apparently that's not the only thing of which we disagree.

Much love!

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Jesus here refers to the fact that Satan presently rules over the world, and in the future, God's heavenly Kingdom will conquer the evil rulers of this world and establish His Kingdom here on earth.

Rev 11.15 The seventh angel sounded his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, which said:
“The kingdom of the world has become
the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah,
and he will reign for ever and ever.”

Notice something here. It says that at that point "the kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah". In this verse "our Lord" is referring to the Father. You think this is talking about Christ taking over the kingdom on earth, but this is talking about the time when Christ will deliver the kingdom to the Father. He has been reigning over spiritually for almost 2,000 years now to the Father, which will occur at His second coming, as the following indicates:

1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. 24 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

Paul indicated that Christ reigns now and "he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet". He will hand over the kingdom to the Father once He has defeated the last enemy, which is death. When will that happen? Paul alludes to it later in 1 Corinthians 15.

1 Corinthians 15:50 I declare to you, brothers and sisters, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. 51 Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed— 52 in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53 For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. 54 When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: “Death has been swallowed up in victory.

Death swallowed up in victory? What does that imply? It implies that death will have been destroyed and defeated (swallowed up in victory) at that point. The last enemy, death, will be defeated when death is swallowed up in victory. According to Paul that will happen at Christ's return at the last trumpet, not 1000+ years later.

 

[Randy Kluth]

No. Jesus did not in any way affirm "the promise of Israel's national restoration." Quite the opposite. He rebuked it!

No, everything Jesus did on the cross was in preparation for Israel's ultimate restoration, giving hope to sinners throughout the world.

The two verses that go before Acts 1:6 (relating to the disciples’ question) support the idea of a spiritual kingdom.

No, Jesus wasn't speaking in parables. The restoration of national Israel had real meaning to the Jews, and Jesus did not correct them for having a wrong definition for who "Israel" is!

Christ was speaking of Pentecost. He said the disciples would not die until they had “seen the kingdom come with power” – referring here the Church’s baptism of fire to win a lost world. It didn’t mean they would die when that happened.

This is a diversion to another controversial passage. This indicates you cannot justify your misinterpretation of who "national Israel" is in Acts 1.6-7.

Of course I believe Jesus spoke the truth when he said some of his disciples would see the arrival of the Kingdom's power. But this could refer to a temporal form of the Kingdom in the Church, when Pentecost came. Or it could mean something else.

Obviously, I do agree with you that God's heavenly Kingdom can take a form on the earth presently, though I limit it to a temporary form. The eschatological Kingdom will not arrive until the 2nd Coming.

What Premillennialists fail to see is: there is no mention of a future period after the second coming in the question, neither is there any intimation of that.

That is absurd. That is what the Jews believed was their final "Hope" at the time of Jesus' ministry. And Jesus never rebuked them for believing that. In fact he said that at his Coming...

Matt 24.30 “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. 31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other."

Israel had already gone through a number of reiterations of this idea in their history, so that there is no question about what it means. It means that Israel will be restored, just as it was promised under the Law.

Deut 30.4 Even if you have been banished to the most distant land under the heavens, from there the Lord your God will gather you and bring you back. 5 He will bring you to the land that belonged to your ancestors, and you will take possession of it. He will make you more prosperous and numerous than your ancestors.

Their mistaken thinking was guided by a hyper-literalist attitude to Old Testament Messianic prophecies.

That is not "hyper-literalist!" That is what the Bible says! Jesus was *not* a Gnostic, creating a dual world with the Jews and the material world on one side, and a spiritual Kingdom and the international Church on the other side!

Like the Pharisees, you fail to see the eschatological nature of His First Advent and the kingdom of God.

Now I'm a "Pharisee?" And you think you take the high road and play the martyr as if you alone are the victim of insults?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Maybe you don't read too many of my posts. I continually affirm that correct understandings of the Bible will harmonize with the other parts of the Bible without requiring us to discount the meaning of any part of it.

So, why did you act as if you didn't know what I meant when I was talking about corroborating your interpretation of Revelation 20 with other scripture then?

The most common reason I see for doctrinal disagreement is that one side of the argument is asserting that the plain saying of a particular passage should not be understood as what it appears to be saying.

You know that goes both ways, though, right? Amils interpret passages like John 5:28-29, Matthew 25:31-46, 2 Thess 1:7-10 and 2 Peter 3:10-13 in a very plain, straightforward sense, but premils do not.

Like in this case. It seems to say that there will be a thousand year kingdom, but if your view is correct, the more real way to say it would be there will be a kingdom of a long but unspecified duration.

I hold to the thousand years, you hold to the long but unspecified duration.

But, the difference is that I can back up my view with other straightforward scripture and you can't. Your default is to assume any given verse within highly symbolic books like Isaiah, Zechariah and Revelation is literal unless it spells it out for you otherwise. That's not a good approach. Amils, on the other hand, base our view mainly on literal, straightforward texts like John 5:28-29, Matthew 25:31-46, 2 Thess 1:7-10 and 2 Peter 3:10-13 that are not contained within books that contain a lot of symbolic text.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

That's the problem with hypotheticals, they aren't real, and you can turn them any direction you want. We don't need that further though, we've already found that a parallel passage would be understood in the same way as the Revelation passage. Having concluded the Revelation passage to be figurative, you would likewise conclude the other hypothetical passage figurative.

I would interpret this hypothetical passage with a similar approach to how I interpret Revelation 20, which is in such a way that I am careful not to contradict any other scripture with my interpretation.

The beast is defined in the Bible about what it is, so, we have that to go by.

LOL. Is this your way of telling me that you think the number of times the thousand years is referenced has anything to do with whether it is literal or not? It clearly doesn't. Why can't you acknowledge that?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

That is absurd. That is what the Jews believed was their final "Hope" at the time of Jesus' ministry. And Jesus never rebuked them for believing that.

Jesus made it clear that His kingdom "does not come with observation" (Luke 17:20) and "is not of this world" (John 18:36), so what excuse does anyone have for contradicting Him by saying His kingdom instead will come with observation and will be of this world?

Now I'm a "Pharisee?" And you think you take the high road and play the martyr as if you alone are the victim of insults?

Take it easy there, Randy. He did not call you a Pharisee. He is saying that your view has one particular thing in common with what the Pharisees believed. That does not equate to him saying you are a Pharisee and you know it. I understand that being compared to the Pharisees in any way is not pleasant, but it's still not a case of him calling you a Pharisee when he merely said you believed one thing in common with them. You're acting as if he said you, like the Pharisees, do not accept Jesus as the Messiah. Obviously, that is not what he was saying.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Notice something here. It says that at that point "the kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah". In this verse "our Lord" is referring to the Father. You think this is talking about Christ taking over the kingdom on earth, but this is talking about the time when Christ will deliver the kingdom to the Father. He has been reigning over spiritually for almost 2,000 years now to the Father, which will occur at His second coming, as the following indicates:

1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. 24 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

Paul indicated that Christ reigns now and "he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet". He will hand over the kingdom to the Father once He has defeated the last enemy, which is death. When will that happen? Paul alludes to it later in 1 Corinthians 15.

1 Corinthians 15:50 I declare to you, brothers and sisters, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. 51 Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed— 52 in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53 For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. 54 When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: “Death has been swallowed up in victory.

Death swallowed up in victory? What does that imply? It implies that death will have been destroyed and defeated (swallowed up in victory) at that point. The last enemy, death, will be defeated when death is swallowed up in victory. According to Paul that will happen at Christ's return at the last trumpet, not 1000+ years later.

Well yes, that's a great passage to quote in this regard. It doesn't set aside the passages about Israel's inheritance of the Millennial Kingdom, nor about the inheritance of Christian nations of the Millennial Kingdom. But it does point out that unless there is a true spiritual conversion, the fallen flesh will disqualify anybody in the Millennium from inheriting God's eternal Kingdom, even while it rules on the earth. They will die, and be only a temporary inhabitant of that Kingdom age, and will not inherit it for eternity.

Your view of Rev 11 seems strange, with all due respect. It is talking about the inception of the Messianic Kingdom, and not just the Kingdom of the Father! And if that's when Messiah's reign begins, then it must be a future Kingdom, not yet here.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Jesus made it clear that His kingdom "does not come with observation" (Luke 17:20) and "is not of this world" (John 18:36), so what excuse does anyone have for contradicting Him by saying His kingdom instead will come with observation and will be of this world?

Take it easy there, Randy. He did not call you a Pharisee. He is saying that your view has one particular thing in common with what the Pharisees believed. That does not equate to him saying you are a Pharisee and you know it. I understand that being compared to the Pharisees in any way is not pleasant, but it's still not a case of him calling you a Pharisee when he merely said you believed one thing in common with them. You're acting as if he said you, like the Pharisees, do not accept Jesus as the Messiah. Obviously, that is not what he was saying.

Yes, I considered that. But he has steadily said that the entire eschatological system of modern Premillennialism is based on heretical teachings. That would make all Premills today "heretics," right?

Furthermore, WPM always complains when I identify him as RT, etc. So how is this any different?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Yes, I considered that. But he has steadily said that the entire eschatological system of modern Premillennialism is based on heretical teachings. That would make all Premills today "heretics," right?

From what I recall, I don't believe he said premillennialism itself is heretical. Wrong, but not heretical. I believe he indicated that the ones who initially taught it were heretics for reasons besides teaching premillennialism. So, it seems that the point is that it is not a good idea to believe in a doctrine that was originally taught by heretics. That's different than saying the teaching itself is heretical. But, if it was originally taught by heretics, that should cast doubt on how trustworthy that doctrine is.

Furthermore, WPM always complains when I identify him as RT, etc. So how is this any different?

Because what he said is true (your understanding of the eschatological kingdom is like how the Pharisees understood it should be), but you identifying his view as RT is not true when it comes to what most people understand RT to be.

 

[marks]

I would interpret this hypothetical passage with a similar approach to how I interpret Revelation 20, which is in such a way that I am careful not to contradict any other scripture with my interpretation.

LOL. Is this your way of telling me that you think the number of times the thousand years is referenced has anything to do with whether it is literal or not? It clearly doesn't. Why can't you acknowledge that?

I'm saying given the way God emphasizes this point . . . why not see what He's saying here?

I think we understand each other at this stage, don't you?

Much love!

 

[marks]

So, why did you act as if you didn't know what I meant when I was talking about corroborating your interpretation of Revelation 20 with other scripture then?

That's not what was doing, I was responding in the fuller meaning of corroboration, and signalling to you what I was doing. Anyway, we off into metacommunication now, and I'm about out of time for today.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Your default is to assume any given verse within highly symbolic books like Isaiah, Zechariah and Revelation is literal unless it spells it out for you otherwise.

My default is to use Scripture to interpret Scripture.

Jesus will rule the earth. This is Scripture.
David will be king of Israel.
The 12 apostles will sit on 12 thrones judging the tribes of Israel.
The law will go out from Jesus in Jerusalem over all the earth.
The nations of the earth will come to Israel to worship Jesus.

And Revelation supplies another piece of information, this will continue for 1000 years. Then judgment, then the new heaven and new earth.

Much love!

 

[Truth7t7]

Yes I believe in a bodily resurrection of those 2 groups at the end.

However the first resurrection refers to this in Jn 5...,

24 “I assure you and most solemnly say to you, the person who hears My word [the one who heeds My message], and believes and trusts in Him who sent Me, has (possesses now) eternal life [that is, eternal life actually begins—the believer is transformed], and does not come into judgment and condemnation, but has passed [over] from death into life.

25 I assure you and most solemnly say to you, a time is coming and is [here] now, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear it will live.

Bodily resurrection follows...,

28 Do not be surprised at this; for a time is coming when all those who are in the tombs will hear His voice, 29 and they will come out—those who did good things [will come out] to a resurrection of [new] life, but those who did evil things [will come out] to a resurrection of judgment [that is, to be sentenced].

We Disagree

Having part in the (First Resurrection) will be a future event, it takes place "Literally" at the second coming on last day

Being born again isn't a resurrection as you believe, it puts a believer in possession of a future resurrection of the righteous or (The First Resurrection) that literally will take place on the last day

We disagree, I fully understand your position

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

We Disagree

Having part in the (First Resurrection) will be a future event, that takes place at the second coming last day resurrection

Do you plan on telling me how it's possible that the last day can occur at the end of the thousand years when Satan's little season follows the thousand years? If you want me to take your view on this seriously, then you would need to do that.

Being born again isn't a resurrection as you believe,

I don't know about Jeff, but I don't personally claim that being born again is a resurrection. Maybe of sorts since we do go from being spiritually dead in our sins to spiritually alive in Christ when we're born again (Ephesians 2:1-6, John 5:24-25). But, my view is that we spiritually have part in Christ's resurrection (the first resurrection) when we're born again. So, in my view, the first resurrection is Christ's resurrection and we all spiritually have part in it.

it puts a believer in possession of a future resurrection of the righteous or (The First Resurrection) that literally will take place on the last day, we disagree, I fully understand your position

But, I would like you to address my question about your view as it relates to Satan's little season. You seem to have the last day occurring at the end of the thousand years, right? And that's when you believe the first resurrection occurs? That's my understanding of what you believe. Correct me if I'm wrong. If I'm correct, then how does this allow for Satan's little season to occur? It very clearly indicates that Satan's little season occurs after the thousand years ends.

 

[Truth7t7]

My default is to use Scripture to interpret Scripture.

Jesus will rule the earth. This is Scripture.
David will be king of Israel.
The 12 apostles will sit on 12 thrones judging the tribes of Israel.
The law will go out from Jesus in Jerusalem over all the earth.
The nations of the earth will come to Israel to worship Jesus.

And Revelation supplies another piece of information, this will continue for 1000 years. Then judgment, then the new heaven and new earth.

Much love!

Jesus Christ Warned His Followers, Concerning Him Being On This Earth In A Millennium (Beware)

Many claim Jesus will literally return and rule "On This Earth" In A Millennium this being false in deception

Jesus warned his followers against this teaching, Jesus wont be found anywhere upon this earth as many claim

The Antichrist will be in Jerusalem, claiming to be Messiah Returned, "Beware"!

"Believe It Not" "Go Not Forth"

Matthew 24:23-27KJV
23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
25 Behold, I have told you before.
26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Revelation 13:13-14KJV
13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.

Revelation 19:20KJV
20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

My default is to use Scripture to interpret Scripture.

So is mine. And, yet we disagree on everything. Go figure.

Jesus will rule the earth. This is Scripture.

He rules the earth now. This is Scripture.

Matthew 28:16 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

Unlike you, I actually am quoting scripture to back up my claim. Where is your scripture that backs up your claims?

David will be king of Israel.

What do you mean by this exactly?

The 12 apostles will sit on 12 thrones judging the tribes of Israel.

What do you think that means exactly? It's not very specific. Your doctrine should be based on straightforward text which you then use to help interpret vague, non-specific text like this.

The law will go out from Jesus in Jerusalem over all the earth.

Scripture?

The nations of the earth will come to Israel to worship Jesus.

That happened already long ago.

Acts 2:1 When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. 2 Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3 They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. 4 All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them. 5 Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. 6 When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard their own language being spoken. 7 Utterly amazed, they asked: “Aren’t all these who are speaking Galileans? 8 Then how is it that each of us hears them in our native language? 9 Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome 11 (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs—we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!” 12 Amazed and perplexed, they asked one another, “What does this mean?”

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I'm saying given the way God emphasizes this point . . . why not see what He's saying here?

What do you mean? The number of times that a term is used does not determine it it's literal or not. Period. How can you not understand that?

I think we understand each other at this stage, don't you?

No.

 

[jeffweeder]

We Disagree

Having part in the (First Resurrection) will be a future event, it takes place "Literally" at the second coming on last day

Being born again isn't a resurrection as you believe, it puts a believer in possession of a future resurrection of the righteous or (The First Resurrection) that literally will take place on the last day

We disagree, I fully understand your position

Hi Truth7t7
I thought you didnt believe in a thousand years after the second coming.
So when do you believe the non believers have their resurrection?


And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had refused to worship the beast or his image, and had not accepted his mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.

5 The rest of the dead [the non-believers] did not come to life again until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection.

6 Blessed (happy, prosperous, to be admired) and holy is the person who takes part in the first resurrection; over these the second death [which is eternal separation from God, the lake of fire] has no power or authority, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and they will reign with Him a thousand years.

 

[WPM]

No, everything Jesus did on the cross was in preparation for Israel's ultimate restoration, giving hope to sinners throughout the world.



No, Jesus wasn't speaking in parables. The restoration of national Israel had real meaning to the Jews, and Jesus did not correct them for having a wrong definition for who "Israel" is!



This is a diversion to another controversial passage. This indicates you cannot justify your misinterpretation of who "national Israel" is in Acts 1.6-7.

Of course I believe Jesus spoke the truth when he said some of his disciples would see the arrival of the Kingdom's power. But this could refer to a temporal form of the Kingdom in the Church, when Pentecost came. Or it could mean something else.

Obviously, I do agree with you that God's heavenly Kingdom can take a form on the earth presently, though I limit it to a temporary form. The eschatological Kingdom will not arrive until the 2nd Coming.



That is absurd. That is what the Jews believed was their final "Hope" at the time of Jesus' ministry. And Jesus never rebuked them for believing that. In fact he said that at his Coming...

Matt 24.30 “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. 31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other."

Israel had already gone through a number of reiterations of this idea in their history, so that there is no question about what it means. It means that Israel will be restored, just as it was promised under the Law.

Deut 30.4 Even if you have been banished to the most distant land under the heavens, from there the Lord your God will gather you and bring you back. 5 He will bring you to the land that belonged to your ancestors, and you will take possession of it. He will make you more prosperous and numerous than your ancestors.



That is not "hyper-literalist!" That is what the Bible says! Jesus was *not* a Gnostic, creating a dual world with the Jews and the material world on one side, and a spiritual Kingdom and the international Church on the other side!



Now I'm a "Pharisee?" And you think you take the high road and play the martyr as if you alone are the victim of insults?

I did not say you were a Pharisee. Your future expectation is a Pharisaical invention. You make the same mistake they do. Christ did not teach a literal temporal territorial physical kingdom based in physical Jerusalem. He spiritualized it and showed it was a heavenly eternal kingdom that was coming. Jesus said in John 18:36, “My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.”

Christ couldn’t have made it clearer. This expectation – of a literal visible territorial political kingdom – was wrong. It exposed the ignorance which controlled the Jews. They had a defective perception of the nature of God’s kingdom and the manner in which it would appear.

Messiah would come and reveal true righteousness and divine authority, although it would be in a completely different way to what Israel expected. The kingdom of God, which Christ continually spoke of, did not relate to a physical Jewish kingdom that could be viewed with human sight. It did not relate to individual Gentile nations. Luke 17:20-21 records an interesting discourse between Christ and the Pharisees on the subject of the kingdom of God, saying, He was “demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come.”

Christ replied, “The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within (entos) you.”

The Lord revealed in this passage that the kingdom of God – His kingdom – was not a literal earthly domain neither could it be viewed like other kingdoms with their outward splendour, impressive power and magnitude. It was, rather, a spiritual kingdom, which could only be spiritually entered. Messiah had finally come to His people.

John Gill says of this passage, “it [the kingdom of God] reigns, through righteousness, unto eternal life; and by it, Christ, as king of saints, dwells and reigns in his people. Now this is not to be understood of the Scribes and Pharisees, as if they had any such internal principle in them, who were as painted sepulchres, and had nothing but rottenness and corruption in them.”

When Christ appeared at His first advent, many religious Jews imagined He would reinstate the then defunct earthly throne of Israel and reign victorious over the physical nation of Israel. They believed that the appearance of Messiah would usher in a period of physical and spiritual bliss for Israel in which their enemies would be totally destroyed. The Jewish expectation was a literal visible territorial kingdom of which the Messiah – the King – would rule over. They believed He would immediately destroy every enemy that withstood the house of Israel. Their wrong thinking was guided by a hyper-literalist interpretation of OT Messianic prophecies. These Christ confronted and exposed in His teaching.

Premillennialists are 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 Savior.

 

[WPM]

Well yes, that's a great passage to quote in this regard. It doesn't set aside the passages about Israel's inheritance of the Millennial Kingdom, nor about the inheritance of Christian nations of the Millennial Kingdom. But it does point out that unless there is a true spiritual conversion, the fallen flesh will disqualify anybody in the Millennium from inheriting God's eternal Kingdom, even while it rules on the earth. They will die, and be only a temporary inhabitant of that Kingdom age, and will not inherit it for eternity.

Your view of Rev 11 seems strange, with all due respect. It is talking about the inception of the Messianic Kingdom, and not just the Kingdom of the Father! And if that's when Messiah's reign begins, then it must be a future Kingdom, not yet here.

Jesus said in Matthew 6:33: “seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.”

As an American citizen you owe your allegiance to the American flag. But there is a higher allegiance. That is to Christ, because He is your King. The kingdom of God overrides every earthly kingdom. You are a Christian 1st, and an American 2nd.

When someone gets saved they enter into the kingdom of God, which is a spiritual kingdom and incorporates the whole domain over-which the Lord Jesus Christ exercises spiritual control. This kingship refers to the whole realm in which the rule of man becomes the rule of God; it is the area where the law of God and of righteousness are pre-eminent.

In John 3:3 Jesus declared: “Except a man be born again (or born from above), he cannot see the kingdom of God.”

We experience the kingdom of God through supernatural birth from above whereby we are supernaturally changed from a child of darkness to a child of God. Be assured, we cannot change ourselves. It must be a new birth.

Jesus continues in John 3:5, “Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”

One can only “see” and “enter” the kingdom of God by grace through faith. None of us can earn it. None of us deserve it. Before you pat yourself on the back, remember even faith is a gift from God.

Ephesians 2:8-9: "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast."

How do I know that the king is reigning in my heart?

We get a clue in Romans 14:17-18. It says, “For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. For he that in these things serveth Christ (1) is acceptable to God, and (2) approved of men.”

As natural men we sometimes get captivated with earthly matters or earthly needs. We have a habit of letting them become the focus and our main concern.

The kingdom of God is not primarily directed toward the physical needs of man but rather his spiritual needs.

The kingdom is summed up in 3 words:

· righteousness
· peace
· joy

This passage nails the lie of those that believe the kingdom of God is some physical temporal kingdom that can be naturally observed or enjoyed. It is not that! It is rather a spiritual kingdom, which is spiritually enjoyed.

This is the very reason why the Pharisees missed Jesus and missed the kingdom. They had a wrong perception of it.

Scripture shows us the proof that you have entered the kingdom of God.

· If you have experienced the righteousness of Christ you can consequently manifest the righteousness of Christ.
· If you have experienced the peace of Christ you can consequently manifest the peace of Christ.
· If you have experienced the joy of the Lord you can consequently manifest the joy of the Lord.

There should be a major difference between the character of those that are under divine authority and those that are not under divine authority. Don’t tell me that it is difficult to differentiate between the two. I don’t believe it.

B.H. Clendinning says: “The kingdom of God is the Holy Ghost in you, making Jesus Lord over every faculty of your being. That is the place where your … reason for living is to do the will of God.”