The Doctrine of Millennialism is destroy by Personal Symbolizing of Scripture.

[robert derrick]

What is different from the old covenant and your so-called new old covenant arrangement in your supposed future millennium? Why do you need further sin offerings? Is the cross not enough for you?

Any difference is seen in Ezekiel's prophecy compared to the covenant and law of Moses written by Moses.

You can accuse the Lord of defaming His cross, not me.

So, you are admitting my assertion was right.

Of course. I'm not a fanatic that refuses to agree with anything anyone else says.

You got something correct about what I teach, then good for you. It's rare, so I applaud it when you do.

I also acknowledge when you actually ask an honest question, that doesn't cover a silly accusation, such as "Isn't the cross enough for you?" Gee, you certainly got me there.

You remind me of professors, that have learned all the scholar-speak to decorate their dissertations, and yet personally have not grown beyond grade school psychology.

Hello! Where is this in the Book, the Bible, not your Left Behind novels.

All good law-abiding citizens interact with good rulers and laws. During the Lord's reign, the earth will be blessed with good laws, with righteous judgement and fair execution of those laws.

Those seeking to do good, will interreact well with the Lord and His ruling saints.

And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.

Simple.

So, you are admitting my assertion was right.

I admit when you get my teaching right. I haven't yet seen anything of your teaching, that I agree with.

If I do, then I'll gladly say so, since I'm not afraid of agreeing with someone else, who on the whole disagrees with me.

The difference between you and me, is that I'm not a child that thinks this is all about gotcha games.

You can't be corrected because of pride, but I can be corrected with humility.

Do the wicked overrun your millennium - yes or no? The answer is yes!

The answer is no. It's not my millennium. And certainly not in the Lord's on earth.

I've also rebuked your self-righteous judgment of all natural people, and your fanatic hatred and disdain for all unbelievers. Which includes professing Christians that don't agree with your large teachings, filled with pompous scholar-speak.

You are so fanatic in it, that you can't even conceive any people living neighborly and abiding by good laws to provide for their own, if they don't agree with everything you think and say.

Like the Pharisees of old, you no doubt need to ceremonially cleanse your spirit and flesh, when you come into contact with an 'unbeliever'.

You are avoiding what I wrote. If there are mortal saints that surrender their lives to Christ in some supposed future millennium, and if the earth does indeed flee away after Satan's little season as Revelation 20 states, then there must be another rapture and glorification in order to rescue them from the regeneration or replacement of this current earth.

You want to move on to another teaching about a millennial reign of Christ on earth, then first acknowledge there is one.

Then we can talk about possibility of natural people during His reign becoming born again saints.

Otherwise, I don't waste time arguing with someone about something else, when I see I am beginning to waste my time arguing about the subject at hand.

You're like many people that just love to argue for argument's sake. It's called intellectual stimulation and pride that edifies nothing.

And so, unless you come yup with a new point about your teaching, or you ask honest questions about mine, then we'll be winding down pretty soon.

Once I believe I've exhausted an argument with someone, then I move on. I don't do boring.

 

[robert derrick]

Why not admit, what we can all see: you are way out of your depth on this subject?

And here we have it. People who actually think they are deep, because they are full of words.

You cannot deal with simple Scriptures and you cannot address the simple arguments of those who rebut your faulty arguments.

Long-winded theological dissertations with scholar-speak deco, may seem impressive to some, but certainly not simple.

That's the whole point of such professorial pretense. It's not just for showcasing one's supposed intellect, but it's also meant to confuse the average reader, so as to throw them off balance, rather than convince anyone with plain right words.

How forcible are right words! but what doth your arguing reprove?

 

[Randy Kluth]

I can't understand why others here think you're the "cat's meow?" You don't exhibit the good fruits of Christian fellowship, unless it is to promote yourself and your own beliefs.

Matt 5.46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

 

[rwb]

So you think the Messianic Kingdom began at the 1st Coming of Christ? If so, why did the Scripture authors continue to quote Jesus that his Kingdom is "near" well after the Age of the Gospel had already begun?

Matt 4.17 From that time on Jesus began to preach, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.”
Matt 10.7 As you go, proclaim this message: ‘The kingdom of heaven has come near.’
Rom 13.11 And do this, understanding the present time: The hour has already come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed.
Rom 13.12 The night is nearly over; the day is almost here.
Phil 4.5 Let your gentleness be evident to all. The Lord is near.
Jam 5.8 You too, be patient and stand firm, because the Lord’s coming is near.

If you think Jesus taught the Kingdom was to be initiated at the beginning of the Church Age, why did the apostles claim that the Kingdom was still only "near?" Clearly, you are interpreting "at hand" to mean something other than what John the Baptist, in context, intended to convey. He was actually declaring that Jesus *represented the Kingdom as its Messiah," and thus stood as an immediate sense that the Kingdom was sure to be initiated at the coming of his Kingdom.

I know you won't be able to answer this question because quite frankly, you can't. It's always going to be a pebble in the shoe of all Amills.

The New Testament attests to the FACT the Kingdom is at hand because it has been "at hand" or "near" to whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord since the advent of Christ come to earth a man. Christ came in His Kingdom, and those who believe Him both know and enter into the Kingdom of God the moment they are born again of the Spirit.

John 3:3 (KJV) Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

John 3:5-8 (KJV) Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

 

[WPM]

And here we have it. People who actually think they are deep, because they are full of words.




Long-winded theological dissertations with scholar-speak deco, may seem impressive to some, but certainly not simple.

That's the whole point of such professorial pretense. It's not just for showcasing one's supposed intellect, but it's also meant to confuse the average reader, so as to throw them off balance, rather than convince anyone with plain right words.

How forcible are right words! but what doth your arguing reprove?

I said that because of your ongoing distain for scholarship. You obviously have no answer to the detailed Amil arguments. Your rebuttals are full of private interpretation and ad hominem.

I have learned, that when someone speaks of making "A careful study" of something, they are only diverting attention away from their glaring errors, with longwinded displays of scholarship. They also always include the learned words of great theological dissertation, such as passages, assumptions reinforced, holy bar of God, eternal sentences, mortal rebels, giftings, and unnecessary dives into original languages.

It is nothing but cover for missing the obvious, like swallowing camels while straining at gnats

I'm thinking one of the main reasons some people are so vehemently against the Lord and King reigning over His kingdom on earth, is that it's much more intellectually stimulating and fun to spend countless hours perfecting pseudo-scholarship, rather than just take Scripture as written and believe it.

O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called.

You pretend spiritual understanding with fanciful words only, not with Scriptural truth.

Scripture always proves itself, without any need whatsoever for the pseudo-science of man's scholarship. That is why the wise of this world despise the plain speech of the Bible.

Look in the mirror! Your attacks are vicious and un-called for. Are you trying to mimic Randy K and Davy here?

incorporate that into your teaching, and it will be less of your own mindset and more by Scripture of truth.

Otherwise, You need to stick with learned scholars, that appreciate learned scholarship and endless disputes, that please the intellectual glands only.

For all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell, or to hear some new thing.

Your vicious insults are obviously a smokescreen to cover your lack of biblical support.

You can treat Scripture like you want, according to your own personal faith and imagination, but I don't.

You want to pick and choose what is real in Scripture and what is not, solely by the pseudo 'discernment' of your own faith and imagination…

Your willful practice of making what Scripture is real or not to you, is entirely by your own faith and imagination. The only discipline to it, is your own desire to believe what you want.

Any objective reader can see you pick and choose what is real in Scripture and what is not, because they do not share in all your choices.

How about actually address the questions instead of your usual ad hominem and avoidance. This is a classic Premil trait. You have no answers to the truth of Amil, thus your continued frustration.

 

[Randy Kluth]

I like the way you use context for determining Scriptural expression as well as meaning. It can also be called the sense of Scripture, or even common sense.

So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.

An example is Jotham's allegory in Judges 9. Context makes the chapter an obvious allegory about himself and the usurpers of Shechem.

By context, no one can possibly think he was calling himself a fig tree.

This seems beyond obvious, but when dealing with undiscipline and rampant over spiritualizing and symbolizing of Scripture, then strict rules of discipline must be held to.

I had to go back and read that story. It's been awhile! Yes, Judges 9 is an obvious allegory, and the context makes that clear.

On the other hand, the use of many symbols in the book of Revelation does not mean something shouldn't be taken literally when it is expressed as such. When we are told that Christ will come, Satan will be bound for a thousand years, and that martyrs of Antichrist will be resurrected and reign with Christ for a thousand years, we should take that literally.

There is no attempt at allegorizing there! Unless the context determines that a "thousand years" is to be taken as an allegory, parable, or symbol, we should take the words of Revelation seriously, just as we were warned.

 

[robert derrick]

The end of this era, will be a time of turmoil, Paul may be referring to the Tribulation period, but we have for the last 100 years experienced many wars and disasters. Matthew 24:6-8
As Jesus said: there will be incremental, worsening 'labor pangs' before the new era. Matthew 24:6-8

This cycle has occurred many times in history, beginning with Adam and Eve being driven from the garden of God.

What the Lord is promising, is that there will come a time when the that cycle ends at His return.

We have been in the last days since the apostles said so, and these last days will end with the last rise of an antichrist, last persecution of saints on earth, and last time the wicked will be allowed to have rule on earth.

Man on this earth will not be forever and endlessly repeating their own cycle of history, where nations and people rise and fall.

Remember, the greatest triublation ever seen on earth, is our own worst tribulation. Do we really care if it's the last triublation on earth?

No. All that matters to us is the one we are going through at the time, and the patience of the Lord is t endure it faithfully, either unto the grave or until His return, while we remain alive and faithful at His coming.

Persecution will come to everyone who follows Jesus, Hebrews 12:8 This totally refutes any ‘pre-trib/wrath rapture to heaven’. 1 Peter 4:12 However, the faithful Christians will be taken to a place of safety during the Great Tribulation. Revelation 12:14

This is obviously true. I've seen people try to make these saints somehow different from others, such as only Jewish Christians.

Afterall, what if the last time of great tribulation is with us?

The simple truth is, that all saints in Christ Jesus have been enduring tribulation in this world, beginning with righteous Abel, and will do so unto the end of persecution against the righteous on this earth, which is when the Lord returns to destroy the wicked, and to rule and shepherd them that would do good.

The time has come when people refuse sound teaching, they believe false theories, symbolise, allegorise or place Bible prophecy into past history, so have no proper understanding of what will happen soon. Isaiah 29:13-14, Isaiah 30:8-11

Amen to that one. Hell is cooler than we thought, and the gate is wider than Jesus said.

False teachers are more prevalent than ever, promoting their erroneous doctrines. Ministries, TV shows, books, etc, on the end times are a big business. Their judgement is coming: false teachers will all meet their end on the Lord's Day of wrath. Jeremiah14:13-16, Isaiah 56:9-12

We really don't need to go any further than this sight.

I've never seen so much weird and wild stuff here, than I could ever think of for myself, nor heard of in ministry over the past 3 decades.

It continues to be enlightening and instructional. By the need of honest correction of errors, we become more grounded in the truth of Scripoture. And by the need of remaining peaceful in spirit, we must absolutely exercise patience.

We are called upon to rebuke them sharply, but the wrath of man works not the righteousness of God.

My life and walk with Jesus has grown as a direct result of this site.

 

[Randy Kluth]

The New Testament attests to the FACT the Kingdom is at hand because it has been "at hand" or "near" to whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord since the advent of Christ come to earth a man. Christ came in His Kingdom, and those who believe Him both know and enter into the Kingdom of God the moment they are born again of the Spirit.

You say, "Christ came in his Kingdom?" It's amazing you say this when Jesus warned his Disciples to reject those who say, "Christ is here, or Christ is there." It's amazing you ignore Paul's teaching in 2 Thessalonians 2 where he warned Christians there not to believe those who said, "Jesus has come for his people." It defies logic that you continue to assert that Christ's Kingdom has come when it is presented in the book of Revelation has coming only at the 2nd Coming, and not at the 1st Coming, when "it is near" is repeated by the Apostles well after Jesus' cross, still insisting that the Kingdom has not yet come!

Entering into the Kingdom of God consists of registering our choice with God, and letting Christ represent our inheritance in heaven, before God the Father. Our inheritance is made sure, but it is not yet. The Kingdom is not yet.

Some try to make the case that the Kingdom came "spiritually." This is much like the JWs indicated, when their prophecy of Christ's Coming didn't come true. It came "spiritually," in heaven, they claimed. This is a cop out.

No, I'm quite willing to admit that the Kingdom exists now, and spiritually has some impact on our world presently. But it is presently retained in heaven until the 2nd Coming, when it will be realized on earth.

That is how Daniel presents it in chapter 7...

Dan 7.26 “‘But the court will sit, and his power will be taken away and completely destroyed forever. 27 Then the sovereignty, power and greatness of all the kingdoms under heaven will be handed over to the holy people of the Most High. His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all rulers will worship and obey him.’

So the Kingdom of Christ comes at the point in time when Christ himself returns to defeat the Antichrist and to set up his Kingdom on the earth. This is precisely as Paul teaches it in 2 Thes 2, that 1st the Antichrist will be revealed. And then he will be destroyed at the Coming of Christ. The Kingdom certainly is *not* here yet!

 

[robert derrick]

Those who refuse to bow the knee to Christ take the mark.

Error. When Scripture says all knees will bow, God is not saying they will all do so humbly and with a contrite heart; otherwise, all men indeed would be saved.

Because of that they end up damned for all eternity. Simple! Those who embrace Christ receive the Father's mark of ownership.

True. All that do take the mark of the beast are damned without hope, and all that repent and confess Jesus will be saved.

The natural sheep at His coming neither take the mark, nor worship the beast, nor gather to war with the Lamb, nor do wickedly to their neighbors, nor persecuted Christians.

That has been true through all history, and will remain true when the Lord returns.

At this point, you are refusing to acknowledge any points, such as these, that I make, and only repeating yourself.

Unless you have something new to respond to, or begin to quote me and address the point made, rather than just say 'nah-ah', then we'll be drawing to a close.

I'm not a mantra sounding board.

 

[Truth7t7]

Why do you "suck up" to an abusive Christian like WPM? Anybody who disagrees with him he claims is "out of their depth," and arrogantly claims "all can see his truth" when it is only *his followers* that can "see" his truth? I've had a few exchanges with him for years now on these forums, and nothing remotely Christian-like comes from his posts when someone disagrees with him. He claims so, but they must be extremely rare.

If you support this kind of rhetoric, you're as bad as he is. Stop being a "follower" of WPM, and continue to be a follower of the Lord. Then you'll have my full support, Amlll or not.

I have yet to see any substantial refutation to Premill as I've recently presented it. Where is your refutation, as opposed to "just listen to WPM?" Amill is strong only because it has two thousand years of Church history behind it. There are, incidentally, 2000 years of Christian errors, as well, as as the glorification of Mary and Catholic Tradition indicates.

Amill got started only because Israel seemed to have failed for good. But today it's clear that Israel is turning around as a nation, and now is in position to be rebuilt at the Coming of the Lord.

But Amill's biblical basis is incredibly weak, which is why Premill is the 1st position held strongly in the Church. It was based on a literal belief in the promises God made to Abraham concerning Israel and the nations, which has yet to be fulfilled. It is based on the very real prophecies that indicate a Kingdom Age has yet to come, a Messianic Age which will be a golden age for Israel and for the nations.

But all this went away because it didn't look like it was going to happen, and the Catholic Church decided it would assume Israel's role and become the present Kingdom of God, or the "Millennial Age." The biblical claim for disposing of the Millennium as symbolism, however, had no basis for it. It just seemed the only alternative at the time, in view of Origen's symbolic system of interpretation, later adopted by Augustine.

The idea of allegorizing the Millennium in Rev 20 could be done if the context warranted it. It is argued that elsewhere in the Bible the word "thousand" is associated with hyperbole, sayings, and similes. But in the case of Rev 20 there is no such use of the word "thousand" as a metaphor, parable, or simile.

Hence, Amill has no real biblical basis for it. It is simply Replacement Theology, which flies in the fact of what Paul taught about national Israel in Rom 9-11.

You sound like a 3rd grade kid crying to the teacher, on how the boys won't let Randy be the captain on the baseball team

Randy your eschatology isn't found in scripture, anybody who disagrees with you is a playground bully

No different than liberal democrats that falsely cry racist against conservatives, when their claims are exposed as false

Jesus Is The Lord

 

[robert derrick]

That is simply not the truth. It is the arrogance and viciousness of your words that are palatable. That is all you have. You cannot answer simple questions to support your error. You and Randy K are like twins in the way you insult.

Palatable. A word only the professorial could love. And ever use.

Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech.

How about actually address the questions instead of your usual ad hominem and avoidance. This is a classic Premil trait. You have no answers to the truth of Amil, thus your continued frustration.

Several of the things you quoted were intended as helpful suggestions on your part.

I'm thinking you're real issue here, is how I openly disdain all your dissertative schlorastic jargonese.

It's much more pleasurable to just read something plain and forthright, because then an answer can be more clearly made, and to the point.

You've actually done it a couple of times, and I'd love to see you mature and do more.

So far, you still remind me of professor full of learned words, with the psychological manner of a spiteful 5th grader.

You can decorate it with your bejeweled grammar, but that only makes it worse.

As a jewel of gold in a swine's snout, so is a fair woman which is without discretion.

 

[robert derrick]

I said that because of your ongoing distain for scholarship. You obviously have no answer to the detailed Amil arguments. Your rebuttals are full of private interpretation and ad hominem.

Confirmed. You're real issue is disdain for your scholarship. You certainly have the scholarly wording down, just not the truth.

"Scholarship is only as good as the truth of it. All else is twaddle."

 

[robert derrick]

I had to go back and read that story. It's been awhile! Yes, Judges 9 is an obvious allegory, and the context makes that clear.

On the other hand, the use of many symbols in the book of Revelation does not mean something shouldn't be taken literally when it is expressed as such. When we are told that Christ will come, Satan will be bound for a thousand years, and that martyrs of Antichrist will be resurrected and reign with Christ for a thousand years, we should take that literally.

There is no attempt at allegorizing there! Unless the context determines that a "thousand years" is to be taken as an allegory, parable, or symbol, we should take the words of Revelation seriously, just as we were warned.

And this is what I have discovered to be exactly spot on.

People use symbolic tools described in a real event, in order to discredit the event as only symbolic.

One person here actually suggested the Lord's slaughter of the armies at Armageddon, must be symbolic, because he cannot do so with a sword coming out of His mouth.

Other than the childish absurdity of the argument, who says He can't?

But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

Do to the rampant symbolizing of the Symbol Man's Bible, I am actually moving more and more toward the literalcy of some things I once assumed must be symbolic.

 

[Truth7t7]

Again, total avoidance. That is your MO. All i am seeing is private interpretation.

There is one literal first resurrection where Christ defeated the grave. The Bible makes it clear that Christ is "the first resurrection" (Acts 26:23 and Revelation 20:6), "the firstborn from the dead" (Colossians 1:18), "the firstfruits of them that slept" (1 Corinthians 15:20), "first begotten of the dead" (Revelation 1:5).

I disagree with your claims that "First Resurrection" in Revelation 20:5-6 below pertains to the resurrection of Jesus Christ

"First Resurrection" below is stating that the saved will partake in the future "First Resurrection" to eternal life

Yes "The Second Death" is the resurrection to eternal damnation

Scripture clearly teaches when the non-literal thousand years are finished at the second coming, this is the "First Resurrection"

Revelation 20:5-6KJV
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

 

[Truth7t7]

One person here actually suggested the Lord's slaughter of the armies at Armageddon, must be symbolic, because he cannot do so with a sword coming out of His mouth.

The future battle of Armageddon will be literal humans on this earth destroyed at the second coming no question, however "The Sword" is symbolic for God's word, Jesus Christ isn't going to have a sword literally destroying the wicked, it's 100% symbolic of his word

(Sword, Symbolic For God's Words)

Revelation 19:15KJV
15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

Hebrews 4:12KJV
12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Ephesians 6:17KJV
17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:

 

[robert derrick]

a wooden literalist if ever there was one, and probably dispensational.

I normally don't intrude into other conversations.

I'm also an anti-sameion. Which is probably worse than an anti-dentite.

And I may become an iron-clad literalist yet.

I'm no longer assuming the sword out of the Lord's mouth is just symbolic. No more than His eyes being as flames of fire.

Afterall, if the Lord can slaughter them at Armeggedon any way He desires, so long as he fulfills the Scripture and does so.

That would include a truly up-close and personal attack with a sword out of His mouth.

That would be a real nice piece of psychological warfare.

There went up a smoke out of his nostrils, and fire out of his mouth devoured: coals were kindled by it.

And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:

For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

I've often tried to picture a great Lamb standing on hind legs coming with wrath smoking out of His nostrils.

That's pretty frightneing, especially with a sword shooting out of His mouth.

I'm thinking it's probably merciful too, so as to keep the fools from rising up against Him, and staying hid among the rocks.

In any case, if you have an example of my wooden literalcy, then show it, aside from the above fun and imagination, that actually produced a teaching about the Lamb making war: no quarter for the fools, and mercy for the sensible.

If I am a wooden literalist, then that's fine with me, so long as it's the truth of Scripture.

 

[WPM]

You say, "Christ came in his Kingdom?" It's amazing you say this when Jesus warned his Disciples to reject those who say, "Christ is here, or Christ is there." It's amazing you ignore Paul's teaching in 2 Thessalonians 2 where he warned Christians there not to believe those who said, "Jesus has come for his people." It defies logic that you continue to assert that Christ's Kingdom has come when it is presented in the book of Revelation has coming only at the 2nd Coming, and not at the 1st Coming, when "it is near" is repeated by the Apostles well after Jesus' cross, still insisting that the Kingdom has not yet come!

Entering into the Kingdom of God consists of registering our choice with God, and letting Christ represent our inheritance in heaven, before God the Father. Our inheritance is made sure, but it is not yet. The Kingdom is not yet.

Some try to make the case that the Kingdom came "spiritually." This is much like the JWs indicated, when their prophecy of Christ's Coming didn't come true. It came "spiritually," in heaven, they claimed. This is a cop out.

No, I'm quite willing to admit that the Kingdom exists now, and spiritually has some impact on our world presently. But it is presently retained in heaven until the 2nd Coming, when it will be realized on earth.

That is how Daniel presents it in chapter 7...

Dan 7.26 “‘But the court will sit, and his power will be taken away and completely destroyed forever. 27 Then the sovereignty, power and greatness of all the kingdoms under heaven will be handed over to the holy people of the Most High. His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all rulers will worship and obey him.’

So the Kingdom of Christ comes at the point in time when Christ himself returns to defeat the Antichrist and to set up his Kingdom on the earth. This is precisely as Paul teaches it in 2 Thes 2, that 1st the Antichrist will be revealed. And then he will be destroyed at the Coming of Christ. The Kingdom certainly is *not* here yet!

The king has already introduced His kingdom to planet earth. Wherever you find the king, you find the kingdom. Christ ushered in the kingdom of God when He came. Jesus said in Matthew 11:12, “from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth (biazo) violence, and the (biastes) violent take it by force.”

Jesus said, in Luke 16:16, “The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man (biazo) presseth into it.”

We should immediately note: for men to be able to press into the kingdom and for it to suffer violence it must already exist. The Greek word biazo here means to force, to crowd oneself into, or to seize. The kingdom of God is shown here to be a present reality that the righteous enter upon salvation. This has been the case since John the Baptist. The spiritual kingdom Christ brought was very-much alive and active from the beginning of Christ’s earthly ministry.

Sadly, the overwhelming majority of Jews missed their promised Messiah when He came. He just didn’t fit their expectation of who and what the Messiah was to be. Also, they had an erroneous political racial perception of what the kingdom was. They had a carnal earthly view of Messiah and His kingdom. They believed that the first thing He would do was subjugate all national Israel’s enemies, starting with the Romans. When Christ appeared at His first advent, the Jews imagined He would reinstate the now defunct earthly throne of Israel and reign victorious over the physical nation, restoring their ancient borders. The only problem was: they had a defective hyper-literalist understanding of Old Testament prophesies and a misconception of how the kingdom would look.

Matthew 3:1-2 records, “In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea, And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand (or eengiken or ‘is made near’ or ‘approaches’).”

Matthew 4:12, 17 records, “when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, he departed into Galilee…From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand (or eengiken).”

Mark 1:14-15 records, “Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand (or eengiken).”

Jesus told the disciples as the kingdom advances, “And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand (or eengiken)” (Matthew 10:7).

The kingdom of God exists wherever the king – the Lord Jesus Christ – exercises His spiritual jurisdiction. His kingdom embodies all those who possess the indwelling Holy Spirit – those who are born-again of the Spirit of God. Christ’s kingdom is therefore found wherever there are citizens of that Kingdom.

 

[Davy]

Personal symbolizing of scripture according to our own personal faith, leapfrogs any credibility of teaching the true doctrine of Christ. And that especially includes the millennial reign of Christ.

It also ruins the validity of the Bible, as being no different from any other book of men about myths, legends, parables, and anecdotal tales, such as that of Aesop.

Such personal symbolizing of Scripture is used by unbelievers, who want to acknowledge wisdom in the Bible, but also do away with the flood over all the earth, the crossing of the Red Sea on dry ground, the sun standing still at the word of Joshua, or even the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

And some believers use it to do away with the torment of hell, while trying to teach hell's symbolic 'significance'.

This in no way suggest, that those rejecting a millennial reign of Christ on earth after His return, as spiritual symbolism only, are also rejecting His resurrection, and the torment of hell and the lake of fire.

However, it is plain that such personal symbolizing of Scripture can certainly be ruinous to sound dcotrine of Christ.

Once we presume by personal faith alone, to 'discern' what Scripture is real or not, then we are only believing and teaching our own faith alone.

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

We are free to think whatever we want about Scripture, and decide for ourselves what is symbol and parable only, but once we begin to teach that as the truth of scripture, without any objective proof from Scripture itself, or common understanding, then we become false teachers of our own private interpretation of Scripture, as being true Scripture of God itself.

A 1958 Soviet Communist goal in taking over the West...

"27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a “religious crutch.”

From: The 45 Communist Goals - Congressional Record 1963

 

[robert derrick]

For example, maybe there was a worldwide flood and Noah needed to save 2 of each animal.

Yes, there was, and God saved the animals, by bringing them into the ark, not Noah.

Maybe in your life you will experience a great destruction and have to save what you can for posterity.

With me, yes. Not with the Lord and His prophets and apostles, which were not writing from their imagination.

And Moses said, Hereby ye shall know that the LORD hath sent me to do all these works; for I have not done them of mine own mind.

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.

Scripture is not men writing about God, but is God telling men the truth of all things in heaven and earth, yesterday, today, and forever.

You've confirmed what I've already known: Idealist Christians think more with their own imagination, than just believe what Scripture plainly says.

Along with symbologists, you turn the Bible into just another book of myths, legends, and imaginative writings of men.

 

[Adam]

Yes, there was, and God saved the animals, by bringing them into the ark, not Noah.

With me, yes. Not with the Lord and His prophets and apostles, which were not writing from their imagination.

And Moses said, Hereby ye shall know that the LORD hath sent me to do all these works; for I have not done them of mine own mind.

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.

Scripture is not men writing about God, but is God telling men the truth of all things in heaven and earth, yesterday, today, and forever.

You've confirmed what I've already known: Idealist Christians think more with their own imagination, than just believe what Scripture plainly says.

Along with symbologists, you turn the Bible into just another book of myths, legends, and imaginative writings of men.

To put my post in other words: the Bible reveals the underlying patterns of reality and human consciousness. It reveals the mould which the world is formed from. So this alone has more value than a simple historical chronicle which would put the Bible on the same level as Plutarch's Lives.

If for example, Jesus tells a story about a man who scattered seeds, and some grew into plants and others withered and died, which has more meaning to you? A man literally scattered seeds and some withered and died - a common and uninteresting occurrence; or a man spread teachings, and these teachings, amid controversy, found loyal followers, and the followers spread more seeds and created more loyal followers. Which has more meaning and truth to you?

Matthew 13
13 The same day went Jesus out of the house, and sat by the sea side.

2 And great multitudes were gathered together unto him, so that he went into a ship, and sat; and the whole multitude stood on the shore.

3 And he spake many things unto them in parables, saying, Behold, a sower went forth to sow;

4 And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up:

5 Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth:

6 And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away.

7 And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up, and choked them:

8 But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold.