Poll: Truth7t7 most famous replies

[rwb]

When does Christ Kingdom come? At the 7th trumpet
15And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever

That verse doesn't say Christ's Kingdom will not come until the seventh trumpet sounds. It says the kingdoms of this world become of our Lord. Christ proves by His miracles that His Kingdom has come and is within you when He came to earth a man.

Luke 11:20 (KJV) But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you.

John 18:36 (KJV) Jesus answered, 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.

Luke 17:21 (KJV) Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

 

[rwb]

why would it be symbolic. of what?

Symbolizing TIME given the Church on earth to proclaim the Gospel unto all the nations of the earth so the spiritual Kingdom of God in heaven could be completed.

 

[rwb]

lol - did i say 'books' - lol = i meant chapters

ALL of us are born ignorant.
Thank God we have been 'Born-Again' so that we can know and believe the TRUTH

The Truth (in relation to the literal vs symbolic 1,000 years of Revelation ch20) that we can SEE in the first five chapters is summed up in Adam in chapter 5

"This is the book of the genealogy of Adam. In the day that God created man, He made him in the likeness of God. He created them male and female, and blessed them and called them Mankind in the day they were created. And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth. After he begot Seth, the days of Adam were eight hundred years; and he had sons and daughters. So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died."

P.S. - as you know, religion likes to keep us ignorant

How does that explain a thousand years being literal or symbolic?

 

[Timtofly]

The context presents a thousand years is both past and future? How do you explain that?

No, there is no context that presents that erroneous interpretation. The point is made that Satan is bound for the same 1,000 years as the reign of Christ the King on the earth. Satan is then loosed upon the earth, not heaven, and not in the NHNE. The excuse that it is not future is that Satan's empire was prior to the Cross, even though the Romans were still much alive and in control. The Roman empire was still strong 300 years after the Cross. Certainly it was not dealt a mortal wound in the first century, nor was revived. Nor did Satan have total control of the earth in an Abomination of desolation scenario. That all has to happen prior to Satan being bound in context with Revelation 20. Satan is not given 100% control of the earth in an AoD situation after the thousand years. The last enemy defeated is death, not Satan. Those who are consumed by fire are the last to die, and Satan is cast into the LOF, not defeated. Satan is not part of the Gog Magog gathering, but only convinces those humans to rebel.

"And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them. And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever."

No mention of a dragon or seven head beast after the thousand years. That symbolism was destroyed when Satan was bound in the pit.


Only the first generation are the rulers. They reign over their offspring for a thousand years, 20 to 30 generations. No one dies. No one takes over their rule because they retire. To reign a thousand years is just that, the whole 1,000 years, without stopping.

The point is that even Adam in sin lived over 900 years on the earth. There will be no sin, so living and reigning for a thousand years is not the issue. You don't reign over people in the short 70 to 80 years you currently live on earth. If there is reigning now, it is done by those seated in heavenly places already in Paradise. Because the kingdom you are claiming is without observation. It is a spiritual reign in heavenly places. But those who physically died in the last year cannot reign a thousand years, and the 24 elders have already reigned for 1993 years or less as some died within 40 years of the Cross.

The context is only those alive at the beginning of the thousand years reign. Not any new generation. They will not even move around like people do today per Isaiah 65:

"And they shall build houses, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and eat the fruit of them. They shall not build, and another inhabit; they shall not plant, and another eat: for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands. They shall not labour in vain, nor bring forth for trouble; for they are the seed of the blessed of the Lord, and their offspring with them."

That is certainly not how people live today nor the last "indefinite time period" since the Cross, according to Amil. Isaiah 65 is the fulfillment of Daniel 9:24. So is Jesus ruling on the earth as King the fulfillment of Daniel 9:24-27. Jesus is the Prince to come, just like He was the Messiah to come.

Of course Jesus was always their Messiah and Prince as the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. The first century was not the only point Jesus was Christ and King. Jesus was physically on the earth as Christ. So why would He not also be physically on the earth at the Second Coming as King. Amil make no sense that they allow a physical ministry on earth as Christ, then deny a physical rule on earth as King at the Second Coming. The Second Coming did not happen in the first century, because Israel was put on hold until the fulness of the Gentiles comes in. We are still waiting until God declares time is up.

At the Second Coming, the church is removed and Jesus sets up His glorious throne on earth as King, no longer the Messiah on a Cross. Being cut off as Messiah was for the fulness of the Gentiles. (The whole point of Israel being removed as husbandmen and given to a different people/nation) The fulness of the Gentiles was not accomplished in the first century. That is still an ongoing phenomenon despite any major apostasy of the church. Today's apostasy is no different than every other apostasy in the last 1993 years. Seems humans need a revival about every 3 generations.

 

[David in NJ]

the red dragon represents satan, it is stated in the passage

what could 1000 years represent?

Revelation ch20 lies the 'KEY' = the "red dragon" is clarified for us as being symbolic by revealing exactly who it is in the same passage.
Yet, there is no hidden meaning of the thousand years, so it remains as stated = literal.

 

[David in NJ]

How does that explain a thousand years being literal or symbolic?

You should know the answer (compliment).

Let me know when you SEE it.

 

[rwb]

You should know the answer (compliment).

Let me know when you SEE it.

I've already explained how I see it in this thread. A/the thousand years equates symbolically to TIME the Church is given to proclaim the Gospel unto all the nations of the world to build the spiritual Kingdom of God as people hear the Gospel and through the power of the Spirit believe Christ and spiritually enter the Kingdom of God through Christ's Spirit in them. That's how the martyred saints of vs 4 have lived and reigned (past tense) with Christ while living in time (a thousand years). And how those of vs 6 shall reign (future tense) with Christ during this same time period of time, symbolized a thousand years.

 

[rwb]

No, there is no context that presents that erroneous interpretation. The point is made that Satan is bound for the same 1,000 years as the reign of Christ the King on the earth. Satan is then loosed upon the earth, not heaven, and not in the NHNE.

Yes, this too is key to understanding a/the thousand years symbolize time for preaching the Gospel. When this symbolic time expires Satan is set free for a little season on this earth AFTER the spiritual Kingdom of God in heaven is complete. The ultimate purpose for Satan being set free is so the power of God will be seen mightily as He sends down fire from heaven to destroy all that are with him.

 

[Timtofly]

They won't be made physically alive again until an hour coming when the seventh trumpet sounds. The martyred saints did not have to come to physical life AGAIN to reign with Christ for a thousand years. Because they LIVED (past tense) and REIGNED (past tense) with Christ for a thousand years before they physically died. That's why John sees them as living souls in heaven after they physically died on earth.

Name one human who lived for a thousand years. Do you not understand that ruling is not for a day or a year or even 70 years? It is literally living and reigning for a thousand years, and then they still never die.

You think the time frame is only a thousand symbolic years or indefinite. No. They are resurrected and then live forever. The first part of forever is the time Satan is bound.

They cannot be martyrs unless physically killed. You call them martyrs, yet they are some how killed after they reign? When the verses clearly point out they reign after they are physically dead, and then resurrected. The verses don't even call them martyrs. That is your made up assumption, you force onto the text.

So you currently make a profession of faith, and baptized as your testimony of Christ. That is the second birth. That is what beheading is for these people. Instead of making a profession and being baptized, they have their head chopped off, to experience the second birth. That is not being a martyr in the general sense of the word. A martyr is a person willing to be killed over their profession of faith when that profession is deemed anti-human by those in authority. Normally not over salvation but some stupid doctrine they have enforced on people. In fact the authorities ignore your profession of faith and claim you are only saved after recanting your rebellious attitude towards their erroneous doctrines. (Although even in these forums people tend to tie salvation to one's eschatology. ) We don't kill people so they can experience the second birth. Humans martyr people who don't conform to their government or society.

Even if Satan killed people for the mere reason they claimed to be Christians, that is not the point of these people loosing their heads. This beheading is the choice between receiving the mark in their foreheads, or not having a head so the mark can be received.

"and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, (in contrast to: ) and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years."

Two options mentioned here beheading and receiving the mark and worshipping Satan. Their witness of Jesus and the Word of God was the very act of chopping their head off. No one has ever been martyred to be saved. Interestingly, that in Islam, those making a profession are subject to instant beheading. But that is still not the point of Revelation 20. They don't receive a mark if their head is not chopped off today. The mark has not even been instituted, since it is from God after the 7th Trumpet.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Symbolizing TIME given the Church on earth to proclaim the Gospel unto all the nations of the earth so the spiritual Kingdom of God in heaven could be completed.

who said it was about the church? and who said it was about completing the kingdom? Where is this shown?

 

[Timtofly]

Yes, this too is key to understanding a/the thousand years symbolize time for preaching the Gospel. When this symbolic time expires Satan is set free for a little season on this earth AFTER the spiritual Kingdom of God in heaven is complete. The ultimate purpose for Satan being set free is so the power of God will be seen mightily as He sends down fire from heaven to destroy all that are with him.

This is still future, because it is after a physical reign on earth. No one is physically reigning on earth, now. The verse does not say "have" reigned. You are adding the word "have" to the text. Satan is only bound after the dragon kingdom is defeated at Armageddon. It is that dragon that is bound, not merely Satan. You claim that the dragon kingdom is in the short season after the thousand years. It is not. The dragon is not even an empire until after the 7th Trumpet is heard. Did the 7th Trumpet sound before Jesus was baptized in the first century?

No one knows why God allows Satan to deceive Eve or any one else for that matter. If you think you have God all figured out, that is on you. Of course God destroys them with fire, but you turn it into a destruction pre-determined by God. If no one listens to Satan, does that means God is a failure? It has not happened yet. John saw a what if. You interpret it as God killed those people on purpose. God has already proven His might throughout the last 7,000 years. Is God just impressing those He purposely burned up? No one else on earth still alive needed that to happen to be impressed by God. Having eternal life would already be pretty impressive, no?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

There's nothing wrong with his understanding. Jesus changed the application of the Passover lamb at the last supper in that He did not take the flesh of the lamb, which represented the sacrifice that saved the first born of Israel from the angel of death, and say, "Take, eat, this is My body.."

Instead, He took the unleavened bread and gave that as the representation of His body that was to be sacrificed.

Have you never read,

"For the priesthood being changed, there is of necessity a change made in the law also." (Hebrews 1:12)?

The Feast of Tabernacles no longer requires any sacrifice for sin.​

That's Hebrews 7:12, not Hebrews 1:12. Also, it says nothing about the feast of tabernacles. You are making things up there. You are stretching that verse way beyond what it actually says.

You always go out of your way to ignore whatever scriptures don't fit the Amil theology,​

I don't ignore anything. You are a liar. It's always interesting when people realize they have no arguments left and start lying about people. It's all you have. Sad.

such as the fact that Paul stated very clearly:

"But of this present time [nŷn] we do not yet see all things having been put under him. But (what) we (do) see (is) Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death,
crowned with glory and honor, that He by the grace of God should taste death for every son." (Hebrews 2:8-9).​

What am I ignoring about this exactly? You make a statement and then give no explanation for why you made it. Why should I take you seriously? I can't.

You also always conveniently ignore the fact that Jesus said,

"But of this present time [Greek: nŷn] My kingdom is not from here."​

What am I supposedly ignoring about this? That is the same as Him saying that His kingdom does not come with observation (Luke 17:20) and is not of this world (John 18:36). That means His kingdom is heavenly in nature, not earthly. That lines up perfectly with my understanding of His kingdom.

You also always conveniently ignore the fact that though God said,

“I will declare the decree of the LORD. He has said to Me, You are My Son; today I have begotten You. Ask of Me, and I shall give the nations for Your inheritance; and the uttermost parts of the earth for Your possession.” (Psalm 2:7-8); and​

What am I ignoring about this? Do you look at the next verse following that for context or do you ignore it? What does it indicate that He will do with "the nations" (better translated as "the heathen")?

Psalm 2:7 I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. 8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. 9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.

There it is. You think He will rule over them, but this indicates that He will break/destroy them. Which lines up with this:

Revelation 19:15 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.

Psalm 8:3-9

"When I look at Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, the moon and the stars which You have established;
what is man that You are mindful of him, and the son of man, that You visit him?

For You have made him a little lower than God (Hebrew: 'elohiym, see Genesis 1:26-27 Hebrews 1:3), and have crowned him with glory and honor.

You made him rule over the works of Your hands; You have put all things under his feet:
all sheep and oxen, yes, and the beasts of the field; the birds of the heavens, and the fish of the sea, and all that pass through the paths of the seas.

yet when Jesus was in the world, He said:

John 18:36
"My kingdom is not of this world [kósmos]. If my kingdom were of this world, then My servants would fight so that I might not be delivered to the Jews." ​

How does any of this refute Amil? It doesn't. You have no idea of what you're talking about.

Then He completed what He was saying with the words:

But of this present time [Greek: nŷn] My kingdom is not from here." ​

Already addressed this above. How does this refute Amil? It doesn't at all.

He also said, regarding the future,

"Not everyone who says to Me, Lord! Lord! shall enter the kingdom of Heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in Heaven." ​

Do you not understand the already, but not yet nature of the kingdom? Apparently not. We are in His kingdom spiritually right now, but we will inherit it in its fullness with ushering in of the eternal new heavens and new earth in the future.

And Paul said,

"But of this present time [nŷn] we do not yet see all things having been put under him. But (what) we (do) see (is) Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death,
crowned with glory and honor, that He by the grace of God should taste death for every son." (Hebrews 2:8-9).

Yet you agree that He will not hand the Kingdom over to God the Father before all things have been placed under His feet.​

Yes. What is your point? All current things are under His feet now. That's what passages like Ephesians 1:19-22 mean. If you disagree, then name one current person or thing that is not under His feet right now. But, passages like Hebrews 2:8-9 are talking about when all things that will ever be under His feet have been put under His feet. That will happen when He returns at the end of the age when time will end and eternity will begin.

The truth is that Jesus has already been given authority over all things, and in this sense all things have already been placed under His feet,

So, you do recognize that. What is all the bluster you have said up to this point all about then?

BUT Satan has still been allowed to roam all this time deceiving the nations by blinding them so that they cannot understand the gospel.

Do you think he has been completely unrestrained all this time? Do you think he has had the same amount of power and influence in the world in NT times as he had in OT times? What is your understanding of passages like these:

Hebrews 2:14 Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil— 15 and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death.

1 John 3:8 The one who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work.

Acts 26:14 We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic,[a] ‘Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.’ 15 “Then I asked, ‘Who are you, Lord?’ "‘I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,’ the Lord replied. 16 ‘Now get up and stand on your feet. I have appeared to you to appoint you as a servant and as a witness of what you have seen and will see of me. 17 I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them 18 to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.’

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Jesus has not yet taken up His Kingly role to shepherd all nations with a rod of iron (all the verses in the Revelation say He is going to - future tense - shepherd all nations with a rod of iron, instead of rule as in the Psalms).

Scripture does not teach that He will do that. You try to talk about me supposedly ignoring things. You seem to be ignoring the fact that it associates His "rule" with a rod of iron with Him destroying His enemies rather than shepherding them.

Brother your belief in Amil prevents you from being able to properly understand the 'already but not yet' balance of the current status quo of the Kingdom of Christ, and so you either flatly ignore or change the plain meaning of a whole lot of scripture as you go along.​

This is a blatant lie. It is because I properly understand that concept that I am an Amil. It is Premils who have no understanding of that concept. I do not ignore or change ANY scripture. That is a lie.

This is why you falsely accuse the brethren of not being able to understand that there has been a change in the law since the priesthood has changed, and Feast of Tabernacles no longer requires any sacrifice for sin, and we do not eat the flesh of the Passover lamb in remembrance of deliverance from bondage in Egypt, but we partake of the unleavened bread which represents the flesh of our High Priest which was given for sin.​

NOWHERE does it say that "the Feast of Tabernacles no longer requires any sacrifice for sin". You are making that up. If it was required in the future then it would be kept the way it was always kept. There is no scripture which says otherwise.

This is also why you have changed the facts mentioned in Revelation 20:1-6 also in order to force scripture to comply with Amil.​

I have not changed anything. You are a liar.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

nice side step.

My comments were about animal sacrifices which are future.

even so. zech 14 is a future event. God is not punishing people for failing to Go to Jerusalem to worship him.. as he is not there

Side step? I was staying on topic and you changed the topic. The question I was getting at is whether God would want animal sacrifices to be reinstated in the future or not. I wasn't talking about whether or not people would try to do that against His wishes. I believe the answer is a clear no to the question of whether God would want animal sacrifices to be reinstated or not. What is your answer to that question?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

no it is not.


It says he will rule the nations with a rod of Iron.. not destroy them

Have you taken the time to see what that really means? It doesn't seem so.

Psalm 2:8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. 9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.

Revelation 19:15 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.

Can you see here that Him ruling with a rod of iron is associated with Him destroying His enemies?

then throw your bible out. it is in error

You are in error, not my Bible. You are not doing your due diligence by looking at the context.

Animal sacrifice has NEVER tsaken away sin. iot has ALWAYS been symbolic (you need to study Hebrews) It was used as a teaching tool. to lead people to christ.

so no. it will not be done FOR SIN.

I know it never took away sin, but they were done as sin offerings. You're telling me to study Hebrews? That's very ironic since it seems that you have never studied it carefully. Have you ever read this:

Hebrews 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect. 2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins. 3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year. 4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. 5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: 6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. 7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. 8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; 9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. 10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

This shows that the animal sacrifices that were part of the old covenant law were only done for the purpose of foreshadowing Christ's sacrifice. So, they already served their purpose. Where does scripture teach that they would ever be required again? Nowhere. This passage says that once Christ came into the world God had no desire for animal sacrifices any longer and took no pleasure in them. So, why would He ever reinstate them? That makes no sense. Jesus made His "once for all" sacrifice so that no other sacrifices would ever be required.

 

[David in NJ]

I've already explained how I see it in this thread. A/the thousand years equates symbolically to TIME the Church is given to proclaim the Gospel unto all the nations of the world to build the spiritual Kingdom of God as people hear the Gospel and through the power of the Spirit believe Christ and spiritually enter the Kingdom of God through Christ's Spirit in them. That's how the martyred saints of vs 4 have lived and reigned (past tense) with Christ while living in time (a thousand years). And how those of vs 6 shall reign (future tense) with Christ during this same time period of time, symbolized a thousand years.

God established the 1,000 years as literal = from the Beginning.

 

[rwb]

Name one human who lived for a thousand years. Do you not understand that ruling is not for a day or a year or even 70 years? It is literally living and reigning for a thousand years, and then they still never die.

It isn't necessary to live for a thousand literal years because a thousand years symbolizes TIME in which every human lives in. To have lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years symbolizes having lived and reigned with Christ during time. Not a thousand literal years but in TIME.

 

[rwb]

God established the 1,000 years as literal = from the Beginning.

Then please provide the verses from Scripture that prove this opinion? It is not found in Genesis.

 

[rwb]

who said it was about the church? and who said it was about completing the kingdom? Where is this shown?

We know it is about the Church because the letters are addressed to Her. What was the mandate Christ gave His disciples (Church) before He departed from this earth? Wasn't it to go into all the world and preach the Gospel? When the Gospel is proclaimed in the power of the Spirit people are saved according to grace through faith. That means the Kingdom of God is being built, and there will come a time; when the thousand years expire, when the Kingdom of God is complete and time shall be no more. When the seventh angel begins to sound time (a thousand years) shall be no longer (see Rev 10:5-7).

 

[David in NJ]

Then please provide the verses from Scripture that prove this opinion? It is not found in Genesis.

Forget about opinions = mine, yours and others.

LOOK at what our God has done = Genesis ch5

This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, He made him in His own likeness. 2Male and female He created them, and He blessed them. And in the day they were created, He called them “man.”
3When Adam was 130 years old, he had a son in his own likeness, after his own image; and he named him Seth. 4And after he had become the father of Seth, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters.
5So Adam lived a total of 930 years, and then he died.