8 days, the 8th day leading to a new beginning.

[1stCenturyLady]

Paul said that influence of sin remains in the world and in our flesh

9 But you are not in the flesh

You are confusing our body for the flesh that Paul is speaking of - the carnal sin nature

Understand yet???

I'll read the rest later. Romans 7:14-25 is going right over your head and you aren't even noticing. Read the chapter carefully starting with verse one and finishing with chapter 8 verse 9. Pay better attention to Romans 7:5-6 which is free from the law that is 14-25!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Read it slowly!

If you still can't see that 14-25 are those UNDER THE LAW instead of the Spirit, then I pray you aren't irrevocably brainwashed. Most who believe as you do, do so just because Paul uses "I" in 14-25 as a normal human, like 1 Corinthians 2:14, and not those with the Holy Spirit like 9-13, 15-16 below. But if that is the case Paul also uses "ME" in Romans 8:2 which is the same personal tense as the verses that undo 14-25. So don't use the personal word, "I" an excuse like the Reformation church fathers. That is an eastern style of writing that the apostles used, just like John did in 1 John 1, another chapter that Protestants mess up royally! No, I'm not RCC, or Orthodox. I've had to give up all denominations as a member, and visit a few churches that I like the people. But I try to make appointments with the pastors to discuss scripture with them.

9 But as it is written:

“Eye has not seen, nor ear heard,
Nor have entered into the heart of man
The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.”

10 But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. 11 For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.

13 These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 But he who is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is rightly judged by no one. 16 For “who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct Him?” But we have the mind of Christ.

Does verse 14, describe you? Do you believe in the gifts of the Spirit, or do you believe they have all ceased?

 

[PinSeeker]

What matters is whether we as believers on Jesus Christ...

Well, are believers on Jesus Christ, right, so we should just leave it at that.

As I said...

Yep, I know what you said... <smile>

Can't just read that Acts 2:34-35 passage by itself...

Right... I don't, but you singled that one out from what I had said, so I was replying to that...

...it goes with what Apostle Paul was covering in 1 Cor.15:24-28 that Christ must reign over all his enemies until they are made His footstool. That's how that Acts 2:34-35 passage is meant.

Sure, agreed.

You haven't tried to redirect me to anything.

<chuckles> Who are you to tell me what I have or have not tried to do? Maybe the problem is, rather, speaking to wooden ears... <smile>

Continued...

 

[PinSeeker]

You vainly ATTEMPTED to use that 'redemption' idea to establish the doctrine of man that wrongly believes Christ's Kingdom is of this present world...

I don't even understand what you're talking about here. I mean I get that you're so entrenched in what you are entrenched in that you can't ~ or won't ~ listen to plain reasoning, but still, yeah... "used that 'redemption' idea to establish that Christ's kingdom is present"... I mean that doesn't even make sense. Having said that, here is what you said above ~ parsed out a bit to respond to your individual points ~ and my responses:

Davy: "Lord Jesus at His 1st coming said His Kingdom is not of this world, meaning not of this present time... His Kingdom is still future, is what He said."
PinSeeker: Both (present and future) are true... His saying His Kingdom is not of this world ~ notice the word 'is' in there ~ means not that it is future, but that it is present... and of heaven, not of the world. Lord Jesus also said, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Matthew 4:17; 10:7). Not "will be," Davy, but is. Is at hand, meaning very present. And what He's saying is that it is present and growing to completion... here in part now, it has come to be and is growing, so present in that sense, and, yes, it will be brought to completion, so future in that sense.

Again, He was King over God's Israel then ~ as He affirmed on several occasions, most notably to Pontius Pilate before His crucifixion, and still is, of course... but God's Israel is not yet complete, but growing to completion, which is what Paul says at the end of Ephesians 2, where, to the Gentile Christians in Ephesus he said, "...you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God..." ~ this is God's Israel ~ "... built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the cornerstone, in Whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In Him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit."

Davy: What Lord Jesus brought by His death on the cross was remission of the sins of those who believe, and His Promise of our redemption when He returns.
PinSeeker: What Lord Jesus DID by His death on the cross was pay the wages of sin on our behalf, so our redemption is accomplished ~ made possible and made sure. His final words were, "It is finished!" ~ and

Davy: The only part of His Kingdom that came at His 1st coming was the gift of The Holy Spirit...
PinSeeker: The Holy Spirit, Davy, is Himself promised ~ by Jesus, of course, in John 14, Whom we are "sealed with" and as such "is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it," which is exactly what Paul says in Ephesians 1.

Davy: ...thus creating His Church on earth with the cross.
PinSeeker: I don't really disagree with this but would rather you use the term 'establishing' and 'building'... I think there is an important difference there... As He told Peter, "on this rock..." (meaning on the same confession that Peter made, that He is the Christ, the Son of the living God ~ "...I will build My church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matthew 16).

Davy: He said in Luke 17:21 that "the kingdom of God is within you." And it does mean inside us, by our spirit being "born again" by The Holy Spirit.
PinSeeker: And here is a very important distinction. His Spirit is in us, given to us by the Father, and yes, we are born again of the Spirit and thus have this new spirit. That's important to understand, yes, but concerning the kingdom, Davy, WE ARE the Kingdom, and we, as Paul says in Ephesians 2 (again), we "are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit." The Kingdom, Davy, is a people, not some parcel of land. As John says in Revelation 1:6, "To Him Who loves us and has freed us from our sins by His blood and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father, to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen." You see?

Davy: But with Christ's future 2nd coming, His Kingdom will then come in the 'physical', on earth
PinSeeker: So, in view of the above, no, it's very physical now... we are physical beings, you know... <smile> Just not yet complete. But it surely will be. <smile>

His Kingdom is still future, is what He said.

Yet again... I agree, but He also said, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Matthew 4:17; 10:7). Not will be, Davy, but is. Is. So both are true. Read Jesus's parable in Matthew 13 again, Davy, the one where He likens the Kingdom to the mustard seed and the leaven... The Kingdom is here now, and growing toward fullness, when it will become a tree in which the birds of the air come and make nests in its branches. It is also like leaven that a woman took and hid in three measures of flour, till it was all leavened. Again, it is here now and growing to fullness... and will someday ~ when God's Israel is complete ~ be fully leavened. And then... Christ will return, finally and completely defeat Satan (and sin and death), and then (after the final Judgment) the Kingdom will be ushered in in its fullness.
The difference is that, as I have said, it is not here in its fullness yet. But it will be when Christ returns, and after the final defeat of Satan, and after the final Judgment.

when Jesus said it is not.

He did not say it was not or is not. Quite the opposite; see above.

But I showed how God's Word easily counters that false doctrine you follow because of how Paul's 'redemption' idea is also used about the gathering of the saints at Christ's future 2nd coming.

No, it doesn't. We will be fully redeemed in the final Judgment. For now, we have been redeemed by Christ... we are redeemed sinners, redeemed by the blood of the Lamb, as the hymn goes... we have been justified by God, born again of the Spirit, and imputed Christ's righteousness (just as Abraham was):

"But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it ~ the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, Whom God put forward as a propitiation by His blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in His divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show His righteousness at the present time, so that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus" (Romans 3).

Hello, is there anybody in there??

Even God's creation today awaits for the manifestation of the sons of God...

The full manifestation, yes. Which is to say, too, that even now, it is partially manifest. I love what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 13, and it can be applied in multiple ways to multiple things, here included... "For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known" (1 Corinthians 13:9-12).

Like many times in God's written Word, we MUST read ALL of the relevant Scripture... to get the whole Message...

Agreed...

1 John 3:2... Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like Him; for we shall see Him as He is. KJV

Right... NOW... do you see it? Beloved, now are we the sons of God... and NOT YET... we are not yet what we fully will be, which is like Him; we will then be FULLY CONFORMED to the image of Christ ~ as opposed to only partially, which is presently true ~ which is what we were predestined by God for (Ephesians1:4-5). Now AND not yet.

Continued...

 

[PinSeeker]

<SIGH>

...you cannot just throw out false accusations like that just because I disagree with you.

I haven't accused you of anything, Davy.

I have shown you plenty of Bible Scripture already, yet you still deny the DIFFERENCE between this present world and the world to come...

That's just it; what you're talking about is not a difference, per se, but rather that what is partial now will be completed then. What is being made new now ~ as God says in Revelation 21:5 ~ will be fully new then... the New Heaven and New Earth.

....NOT manifest on earth yet today.

Not fully, right. But it is here. As I said above. So, manifest ~ being made manifest ~ but not in full yet ~ not fully/completely manifest. Again, WE are the Kingdom, Davy. Again, as John says in Revelation 1:6, "To Him Who loves us and has freed us from our sins by His blood and made us a Kingdom, priests to his God and Father, to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen." You see? .

It will only come at His future 2nd coming, and THAT is WHEN the manifesting of the sons of God will happen.

"We are sons of God" (1 John 3:2), and "(Jesus) has made us a Kingdom, priests to His God and Father" (Revelation 1:6). I mean there it is, Davy. There it is.

So you can continue to glory in this PRESENT WORLD...

Goodness gracious. I glory in Christ. Only in the sense of right now (as opposed to merely in the future) do I glory in this present world... this is my hope and prayer for you, also. If I were to glory in this present world, that would mean ~ in the context in which the Bible presents that ~ that I glory in the ways of this world, and I would still be a child of wrath, dead in my sin, rather than in the One Who Himself is the way, truth, and the life (Jesus, in case that's not clear). <smile> So, no, again, I glory in Christ. And again, I hope you do, too.

, I instead will still HOPE in the world to come...

Well, good, but this hope is a present surety. As the writer of Hebrews says, "faith is the assurance of things hoped for...", so yes, it is a surety, growing to completion. So even now, "Through Him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand..." so "...rejoice in hope of the glory of God. Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance" (Romans 5:2-3), and "rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through Whom we have now received reconciliation" (Romans 5:11), and "Rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer (Romans 12:12).

Grace and peace to you, Davy.

 

[PinSeeker]

...Revelation begins with the fact that His 1st Coming was Completed with Revelation focusing on His 2nd Coming

Right, and seven times over, actually. Revelation 19 being the sixth and Revelation 20 being the seventh.... <smile>

Grace and peace to you, David.

 

[David in NJ]

Right, and seven times over, actually. Revelation 19 being the sixth and Revelation 20 being the seventh.... <smile>

Grace and peace to you, David.

Yes, multiple 'revealings' in Revelation = of His 2nd Coming

 

[Davidpt]

I don't agree with the Amills but I admit this is pretty weak reasoning. I am always on alert when people start using a form of numerology to arrive at truth. It's the same issue I have with the "bible codes". Both use a form of kabbalic gematria which I consider occult numerology. Even the Amills, with all of their misapplication of symbols and metaphors don't result to such tactics. I prefer to take scripture in it's literal context and only apply symbology when that is not possible. I cast off numerology altogether.

Then you haven't read every post I submitted in this thread. Or that you have, but then simply misunderstood the over all point.

 

[shepherdsword]

Then you haven't read every post I submitted in this thread. Or that you have, but then simply misunderstood the over all point.

True, I did a drive by cherrypick and just honed in on the number 8 as a new beginning aspect. I think that's something we read into the text. No where in the text does it say "8 is the number for new beginnings" It's just something that is assumed because it's the next number after the 7 day cycle.

 

[Davidpt]

True, I did a drive by cherrypick and just honed in on the number 8 as a new beginning aspect. I think that's something we read into the text. No where in the text does it say "8 is the number for new beginnings" It's just something that is assumed because it's the next number after the 7 day cycle.

Let me summarize the over all point. In any 7 day week, the 7th day is never the beginning of a new week, it it is always the end of the current week. 8 days later is always the beginning of a new week.

From Adam's fall through now it has been roughly 6k years, thus 6 1K year days. Therefore, there must be one more 1K day after Christ returns in order to fulfill a 7 day week, the pattern that has been from the beginning, that a week consists of 7 days. In this case, 1K years represents 1 day. 6 days do not make up an entire week, 7 days do. Therefore, Amils are incorrect that the millennium is now. Amils are incorrect that 1 Corinthians 15:28 is fulfilled within the same 24 hour day Christ returns. Because that would then mean 6 days make up an entire week, not 7 days. And that the 7th day would not be the end of the week, it would be the beginning of a new week. A new week representing the beginning of eternity, thus 1 Corinthians 15:28. Except the pattern for a week has never been 6 days. It has always been 7 days since the beginning of time. Amil throws a monkey wrench into this pattern.

I'm not using numerology here, I'm using common sense, that a week consists of 7 days not 6 days. And that the 7th day is always the end of a week, never the beginning of a new week. Therefore, 1 Corinthians 15:28 can't get fulfilled until 7K years, thus 7 days, have preceded it first. And what comes after 7? Is it not 8? Thus 8k years after the fall of mankind is when 1 Corinthians 15:28 is initially fulfilled. Not 6K years after the fall of mankind. Thus the 8th day being the beginning of a new week. In this case, the week equaling a never ending week since 7 day cycles will no longer matter at this point.

 

[shepherdsword]

Let me summarize the over all point. In any 7 day week, the 7th day is never the beginning of a new week, it it is always the end of the current week. 8 days later is always the beginning of a new week.

From Adam's fall through now it has been roughly 6k years, thus 6 1K year days. Therefore, there must be one more 1K day after Christ returns in order to fulfill a 7 day week, the pattern that has been from the beginning, that a week consists of 7 days. In this case, 1K years represents 1 day. 6 days do not make up an entire week, 7 days do. Therefore, Amils are incorrect that the millennium is now. Amils are incorrect that 1 Corinthians 15:28 is fulfilled within the same 24 hour day Christ returns. Because that would then mean 6 days make up an entire week, not 7 days. And that the 7th day would not be the end of the week, it would be the beginning of a new week. A new week representing the beginning of eternity, thus 1 Corinthians 15:28. Except the pattern for a week has never been 6 days. It has always been 7 days since the beginning of time. Amil throws a monkey wrench into this pattern.

I'm not using numerology here, I'm using common sense, that a week consists of 7 days not 6 days. And that the 7th day is always the end of a week, never the beginning of a new week. Therefore, 1 Corinthians 15:28 can't get fulfilled until 7K years, thus 7 days, have preceded it first.

Ok, I see your point. However, it is based on the assumption there are 6000 years from Adam til the 2nd coming and the 6000 years is based on Bishop Usher's genealogy based timeline. I am not sure I trust that stuff. The whole dispensationalists theory has me in doubt. I am a historic premillennialist so I have a different view.

 

[Davy]

Well, are believers on Jesus Christ, right, so we should just leave it at that.

Nope, not so fast, because you CHOPPED OFF the rest of my statement when you tried to quote me. The rest of what I said was about 'as' believers, whether or not we HEED Christ's and His Apostle's warnings. A true believer on Jesus Christ will believe and heed what He said, and what His Apostles said.

Yep, I know what you said... <smile>

Know I said what? Confirm what I said to you.

Right... I don't, but you singled that one out from what I had said, so I was replying to that...

What you apparently don't get, is 1 Cor.15:24-28 gives more detail about Acts 2:34-35. Those who wrongly believe Jesus is reigning NOW... from Heaven, on the right hand of The Father, miss what Paul said in 1 Cor.15 about it, which reveals The Father is "excepted" in that future reign by Christ. And that means it ain't... happening now by Jesus sitting at the right hand of The Father's throne. There exists other Scripture also, by Lord Jesus when He showed only at His future 2nd coming is when He shall sit upon His Own throne of glory, and separate the nations (Matthew 25:31-32). And in Matthew 19:28 Jesus shows that also is when His 12 Apostles will also sit upon thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel.

Thusly there are quite a few Bible Scripture events associated with the future time of Christ's reign over all nations with His "rod of iron" upon His earthly throne inherited from David that only will occur at His future 2nd coming.

<chuckles> Who are you to tell me what I have or have not tried to do? Maybe the problem is, rather, speaking to wooden ears... <smile>

That's just being belligerent.

 

[Davy]

I don't even understand what you're talking about here. I mean I get that you're so entrenched in what you are entrenched in that you can't ~ or won't ~ listen to plain reasoning, but still, yeah... "used that 'redemption' idea to establish that Christ's kingdom is present"... I mean that doesn't even make sense. Having said that, here is what you said above ~ parsed out a bit to respond to your individual points ~ and my responses:

Looks like you've added a lot of fodder of confusion. What I said was specific, and to the point. But you instead are bent on trying to make me repeat myself when there is no need to. Study the Bible Scriptures I provided you instead of seeking to start a long drawn-out argument of confusion that leads nowhere.

 

[Davy]

I haven't accused you of anything, Davy.

<SIGH> back to your own self.

You did... accuse me of something, a falsehood, here is what you said...

"If you don't see Christ's first coming in Revelation 20:1, then that kind of throws you off pretty much the rest of the way."​

Now since you wrongly suggested... that I don't see Christ's 1st coming in the Revelation 20:1 verse, let's speak on that...

But let's NOT JUST STOP at that single Revelation 20:1 verse, because that verse by itself does not give timing. Let's include further Scripture in Revelation 20 that goes WITH... that 1st verse... keeping the actual FLOW of God's Word in that Revelation 20 Chapter...

Rev 20:1-6
20 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

So you think the above happened at the time of Christ's 1st coming??? Not what this Revelation 20 Scripture says, as it continues the subject of the devil ("dragon") cast to that "bottomless pit"...

3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, 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.
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.
KJV

So, did that "first resurrection" also happen at Christ's 1st coming??? That resurrection is about those who will reign with Jesus over all nations. It's POST-GATHERING of Christ's Church timing.

What does that mean for that Revelation 20:1 verse subject? It means that time of the "dragon" being BOUND in the "bottomless pit" there is at Christ's FUTURE 2ND COMING, not His 1st coming.


But I know where your idea of Satan being 'bound' at Christ's 1st coming originates from by men's doctrines. It comes from a misinterpretation of John 12:31...

John 12:31
31 Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.
KJV

Some misinterpret that above verse to try and claim at the cross is when the devil was bound in the bottomless pit. Mostly Amillennialists wrongly believe that. That's NOT the timing Jesus was pointing to though. Jesus said that in the sense of, 'now the devil is defeated', not literally bound just yet.

How can we be SURE the devil is not yet bound in the bottomless pit today? Because Apostle Peter said this about Satan AFTER... the time of the cross...

1 Peter 5:8
8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
KJV

And Lord Jesus later in His conversation in the Book of John, in the later Chapter 14, Jesus said the following about the devil "cometh"...

John 14:30
30 Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in Me.
KJV

And Lord Jesus put that coming by Satan in the future... timing, after His ascension to Heaven, because that is what He meant when He said "Hereafter I will not talk much with you:".

Thusly, Satan, the "dragon", is still NOT BOUND YET today. So the Revelation 20:1-2 Scripture cannot mean it already happened at Jesus' cross at His 1st coming. It instead will happen at Jesus' future 2nd coming.

 

[Davy]

I haven't accused you of anything, Davy.

That's an understatement of denial. You continually try to associate my Bible interpretation like I've missed what you talk about. Nah... I know exactly the false doctrines of men you speak of that you follow. And the Bible Scripture flow I quote in response reveals the falseness you follow.

That's just it; what you're talking about is not a difference, per se, but rather that what is partial now will be completed then. What is being made new now ~ as God says in Revelation 21:5 ~ will be fully new then... the New Heaven and New Earth.

That's a bunch of gibberish. Men's doctrines often try to push such gibberish speech when they are attempting to change what literal Bible Scripture is declaring.

God's Word in both The Old Testament prophets, AND The New Testament, declares the wicked will be GONE when the new heavens and a new earth timing happens. That's even the idea that Amill pushes. Problem is though, Amill wrongly treats that new heavens and a new earth time coming with Christ's future 2nd coming, when IT DOES NOT OCCUR THEN.

That is why most Amill folks hate... Bible Scripture like Zechariah 14 that reveals the wicked STILL existing AFTER Christ's future 2nd coming, just as Revelation 20 does also, and even the mere idea of mention of Christ's future "rod of iron" He will reign with over all nations when He returns, per Revelation. Even the Revelation 22:14-15 Scripture reveals the 'wicked' still existing outside the gates of the holy city when the Tree of Life is manifested for Christ's elect that have right to it inside the gates (pointing to Jesus' mention of the wicked cast to the "outer darkness" at His 2nd coming). So does Ezekiel 44 reveal the unsaved still existing during Christ's future "thousand years" reign that begins at His future 2nd coming!

So truly, you have a whole... lot of Bible study you need to do, instead of just latching onto a bunch gibberish by men's doctrines.

 

[David in NJ]

I don't agree with the Amills but I admit this is pretty weak reasoning. I am always on alert when people start using a form of numerology to arrive at truth. It's the same issue I have with the "bible codes". Both use a form of kabbalic gematria which I consider occult numerology. Even the Amills, with all of their misapplication of symbols and metaphors don't result to such tactics. I prefer to take scripture in it's literal context and only apply symbology when that is not possible. I cast off numerology altogether.

Be careful not to throw the 'baby out with the bath water'

 

[PinSeeker]

Nope, not so fast, because you CHOPPED OFF the rest of my statement when you tried to quote me. The rest of what I said was about 'as' believers, whether or not we HEED Christ's and His Apostle's warnings. A true believer on Jesus Christ will believe and heed what He said, and what His Apostles said.

Right, so I "chopped it off," because that part was not in error. <smile>

Know I said what? Confirm what I said to you.

You can treat others like kids and/or idiots all you want (though you shouldn't), but I'm not playing that game.

What you apparently don't get, is 1 Cor.15:24-28 gives more detail about Acts 2:34-35. Those who wrongly believe Jesus is reigning NOW... from Heaven, on the right hand of The Father, miss what Paul said in 1 Cor.15 about it...

Well, Davy, if it hasn't been clear to you before, although I do believe the two passages to be closely related, I do not believe ~ as you seem to believe ~ that these two passages refer to the same event and/or time. So no, one does not "give more detail." in the sense that you are saying that, to the other. The two are not complementary to each other in that way. Now, before you, um, react... <smile> ...observe, if you will:

Acts 2:34-35
Peter is preaching there in the Acts 2 passage, and the timing of this event ~ the Father saying to Jesus, "Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool" ~ is just after Christ's ascension, which Luke documents in Acts 1, and before (or at the time of) Pentecost, which was 40 days later.

1 Corinthians 15:24-28
The 1 Corinthians 15 passage we're talking about, verses 24-28 specifically, refer to "the end" (obviously, as verse 24 begins with "Then comes the end when He delivers the Kingdom to God the Father"), which is at the end of the period in which the Kingdom, which is us, Davy ~ Jesus is making, in the words of John in Revelation 1, "us a kingdom, priests to His God and Father..." ~ is being built, which exactly what Paul is talking about in Romans 11:25-26 ("Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in... in this way all Israel will be saved...") and Ephesians 2:19-22 ("For through (Christ) we both (Jews and Gentiles) have access in one Spirit to the Father. So then (Gentiles) are no longer strangers and aliens but are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God (God's Israel), built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the cornerstone, in Whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit."). When that is complete, yes, "then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father... He must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet." This period is now, Davy. We are in the midst of it now. So, Christ is reigning. Now. Thanks be to God, Christ Jesus sits on the throne of God now, in the power of God, as King over all.

Yes, the connection between the two is God making all Christ's enemies His footstool (Acts 2) and God putting all Christ's enemies under His feet (1 Corinthians 15), for sure. But again ~ and this is the shorter version... <smile>

• God is saying what He's saying to Christ at the beginning of His millennium regarding His plan for and intentions regarding the time until ~ key word, that 'until' ~ He completes that in Psalm 110 and Acts 2
• The 1 Corinthians 15 passage is speaking of the end of time period in which God completes His Israel... "at his coming those who belong to Christ," as verse 23 says.

So, I've asked it before, but I'll do so again here. You don't have to answer, as there can only be one answer, and it is... "Christ Jesus." The question? Who is your King, Davy? Right now? Who is your King?

, which reveals The Father is "excepted" in that future reign by Christ.

Hmmmm... "Excepted" from what? Or do you mean 'accepted?' I mean even then, if that's the case, then are you saying that Christ doesn't accept the Father now? Either way... goodness gracious. <chuckles> And just to head this off, no, it's not funny. At all. Goodness gracious.

And that means it ain't... happening now by Jesus sitting at the right hand of The Father's throne. There exists other Scripture also, by Lord Jesus when He showed only at His future 2nd coming is when He shall sit upon His Own throne of glory, and separate the nations (Matthew 25:31-32).

That's the final Judgment... which will occur:

• after the "thousand years" (during which God's Israel is being brought to completion; see above) is ended
• Jesus returns and defeats Satan for good
• the second resurrection (of all) occurs
• Jesus is seated in judgment over all (yes, Matthew 25:31-32; also Matthew 7:21-23), Revelation 20:11-12

Thusly there are quite a few Bible Scripture events associated with the future time of Christ's reign over all nations with His "rod of iron" upon His earthly throne inherited from David that only will occur at His future 2nd coming.

Ugh. Dispensationalism is so... frustrating. <smile>

That's just being belligerent.

Ah, well you don't know anything about belligerence, right Davy? <LOL!>

What I said was specific, and to the point.

Right, but that's very much a part of the problem, here, Davy.

But you instead are bent on trying to make me repeat myself...

No, I'm actually trying to get you to stop. <smile>

Study the Bible Scriptures I provided you instead of seeking to start a long drawn-out argument of confusion that leads nowhere.

I'm certainly not looking to start any argument, of confusion or otherwise. As for studying, I say precisely the same to you. Hopefully you understand what I said above about the Bible Scriptures you "provided" me... <smile> ...and, if not now, sometime in the near future come to understand as they should be understood.

Grace and peace to you, Davy.

 

[PinSeeker]

<SIGH> back to your own self.

That's not belligerence, is it, Davy? LOL!

You did... accuse me of something, a falsehood, here is what you said...

"If you don't see Christ's first coming in Revelation 20:1, then that kind of throws you off pretty much the rest of the way."​

"If," Davy, which is the first word of my sentence there, denotes a conditional statement, Davy. So an if-then statement... I didn't accuse you of anything.

Now since you wrongly suggested... that I don't see Christ's 1st coming in the Revelation 20:1 verse...

I suggested that possibility, yes. If you're affirming that, then... well the "then" in my statement above applies.

, let's speak on that...


But let's NOT JUST STOP at that single Revelation 20:1 verse, because that verse by itself does not give timing. Let's include further Scripture in Revelation 20 that goes WITH... that 1st verse... keeping the actual FLOW of God's Word in that Revelation 20 Chapter...

Ohhhhh goodness.. <chuckles> I mean, just verse 1 by itself describes a singular event that occurred at a specific time, so in that sense, what you said above is... bad... <smile>

Rev 20:1-6
20 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

So you think the above happened at the time of Christ's 1st coming???

Yes. Well, Jesus is the "angel coming down from heaven." Symbolically, yes, this is Jesus in His first advent. He did come... was born of Mary... <smile>

Not what this Revelation 20 Scripture says, as it continues the subject of the devil ("dragon") cast to that "bottomless pit"...

Well, verse 3 describes ~ symbolically ~ what Jesus did in His advent... not really what He did, woodenly speaking, but what happened to Satan when Jesus did come, again, symbolically described.

Hey, if somebody says... or makes some kind of gesture, which is more often the case... that they're locking their mouth and throwing away the key, so in effect saying (without actually speaking the words), "I'm not saying another word," is there really a padlock on their lips and there was a literal key that now, since they threw it away, is nowhere to be found? Well no, right? <smile> In the same way, the "bottomless pit" that is "shut and sealed over" Satan is not woodenly literal, but that it is the case that Satan is absolutely unable to deceive the nations," which is to say he can no longer keep the Gospel from the Gentiles as he once could (which God allowed him to do for a time).

So, did that "first resurrection" also happen at Christ's 1st coming???

Well, Christ was resurrected, right? And that was literally the first resurrection. So what we have to try to understand is how we come to share in it, which is what verse 6 says. And when... <smile> So ... again; I've said this a thousand (see what I did there?) times before... <smile> We come to share in this first resurrection literally in what Paul says about us in Ephesians 2 ~ "even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ ~ by grace you have been saved ~ and raised us up with Him..." (vv. 5-6)

That resurrection is about those who will reign with Jesus over all nations.

This I agree with, as I said, but not in the sense you mean that... <smile>

It's POST-GATHERING of Christ's Church timing.

If by "post-gathering" you mean that He gathers His church after His return, then, yeah, totally disagree. He's gathering His Church now, just as He said: "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me..." You follow Him now, as I do, right, Davy? <smile>

What does that mean for that Revelation 20:1 verse subject? It means that time of the "dragon" being BOUND in the "bottomless pit" there is at Christ's FUTURE 2ND COMING...

But I know where your idea of Satan being 'bound' at Christ's 1st coming originates from by men's doctrines.

And I say yours does.

It comes from a misinterpretation of John 12:31...
Some misinterpret that above verse to try and claim at the cross is when the devil was bound in the bottomless pit. Mostly Amillennialists wrongly believe that. That's NOT the timing Jesus was pointing to though.

Well if they do then they're wrong, too... <chuckles> It was not at the cross, because there were Gentiles coming to the Lord before that... <smile> But for those that do say that, they are much closer to the truth than those who say His second coming is when that will be, but still... <smile>

Jesus said that in the sense of, 'now the devil is defeated', not literally bound just yet.

How can we be SURE the devil is not yet bound in the bottomless pit today? Because Apostle Peter said this about Satan AFTER... the time of the cross...

1 Peter 5:8

John 14:30

Neither of these passages is speaking to or against Satan's "binding" or the "bottomless pit" of Revelation 20 fame.

Satan, the "dragon", is still NOT BOUND YET today.

He is. He is absolutely unable to prevent the spread of the Gospel to the nations, and Gentiles coming to Christ. This is what he's "bound" and "sealed" from doing. I, a Gentile, am living proof of that. And if you are a Gentile, then you are, too.

That's an understatement of denial.

Pish.

You continually try to associate my Bible interpretation like I've missed what you talk about.

What does this even mean? I don't even know... <chuckles>

Nah... I know exactly the false doctrines of men you speak of that you follow. And the Bible Scripture flow I quote in response reveals the falseness you follow... That's a bunch of gibberish. Men's doctrines often try to push such gibberish speech when they are attempting to change what literal Bible Scripture is declaring.

Again, nothing belligerent here, right, Davy? <LOL!>

God's Word in both The Old Testament prophets, AND The New Testament, declares the wicked will be GONE when the new heavens and a new earth timing happens.

Absolutely.

That's even the idea that Amill pushes. Problem is though, Amill wrongly treats that new heavens and a new earth time coming with Christ's future 2nd coming, when IT DOES NOT OCCUR THEN.

Oh, so at His third coming? <smile> Or maybe His second second coming? <chuckles> No, the end will come, and then Christ will return, and shortly after ~ after Christ's final defeat of Satan and the final Judgment ~ the New Heaven and New Earth will be a present (and eternal, of course) reality.

That is why most Amill folks hate... Bible Scripture Zechariah 14....

Ah, back to Zechariah 14. Such a great and glorious passage...

...reveals the wicked STILL existing AFTER Christ's future 2nd coming...

Well of course they will; "amills" don't deny that, much less hate it. I would question how you mean 'existing,' though. I mean, they will exist throughout eternity, just like the righteous in Christ will. They well just, you know, not be here, in the New Heaven and New Earth; they will be... elsewhere... <shudder> After the final Judgment, they will depart into eternal punishment and the second death (which is not a cessation of existence)... <shudder>

...Christ's future "thousand years" reign that begins at His future 2nd coming!

So truly, you have a whole... lot of Bible study you need to do instead of just latching onto a bunch gibberish by men's doctrines.

I mean, you're welcome to your opinion, but again, I would absolutely turn that around and say the exact same thing to you, Davy, although I wouldn't call it "gibberish," but just wrong. <smile> But, now, I would say this, that I don't think I would say "a whole lot"... I actually think one or two leeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeetle things would start the whole domino effect for ya... <smile>

Grace and peace!

 

[Davy]

Right, so I "chopped it off," because that part was not in error. <smile>

Doesn't matter, when you quote someone you leave the main subject they were covering, so when others read it they what the subject is. Anyone can chop up another person's words and call it a quote when it is not.

You can treat others like kids and/or idiots all you want (though you shouldn't), but I'm not playing that game.

Do you 'feel'... like an idiot sometimes when others show you your error in Scripture interpretation?

Well, Davy, if it hasn't been clear to you before, although I do believe the two passages to be closely related, I do not believe ~ as you seem to believe ~ that these two passages refer to the same event and/or time. So no, one does not "give more detail." in the sense that you are saying that, to the other. The two are not complementary to each other in that way. Now, before you, um, react... <smile> ...observe, if you will:

They are related, but 'specifically' the part in RED about about Christ's literal reign over His enemies on earth...

Acts 2:34-35
34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, "Sit Thou on My right hand,
35 Until I make Thy foes Thy footstool."
KJV

1 Cor 15:24-25
24 Then cometh the end, when He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when He shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
25 For He must reign, till He hath put all enemies under His feet.
KJV

What made you think that I said those two Scriptures do not agree with each other? I never said, nor insinuated they disagreed, so 'who' put that thought in your mind? Do you hear voices in your head?

But we are not to just stop at those two above Scriptures, because there's MORE DETAIL about that future reign given in other Bible Scripture, specifically Pslams 2 which is about Christ's future LITERAL reign as King on earth at Zion (Jerusalem) on earth, with the "rod of iron" He is promised by The Father to reign with, which Jesus also promised His elect Church also will reign with at His future 2nd coming per Revelation 2. And the Zechariah 14 Chapter gives us a detail of that future reign also. So by the time one gets to the Revelation 20 Chapter events, it should have been 'well understood' that "thousand years" will be a literal period of Christ's future reign over His enemies that begins on the day of His future second coming.

Things make sense in God's Word when we actually cover all of His Word like we are supposed to, instead of pick'n'choosing what we want to believe.

You should have understood all this already, but you have obviously chosen to follow doctrines of men, and it definitely looks like men's theory of Amillennialism is one of the major false doctrines that is deceiving you. So I'm not going to waste my time with you wanting to argue about this, since you obviously reject many Bible Scriptures as they actually written.

 

[PinSeeker]

Doesn't matter, when you quote someone you leave the main subject they were covering, so when others read it they what the subject is. Anyone can chop up another person's words and call it a quote when it is not.

All irrelevant. The part I "chopped off" I was in agreement with you on, so no need to address it further, but only the part(s) of what you said where resolution was lacking. Relevant to this, I care not about two things: a) whether you think it matters or not, because it does, even if you think it doesn't (although I think that's just a defense mechanism of sorts on your part), and b) if anyone else is reading, because this conversation is between you and me.

Do you 'feel'... like an idiot sometimes when others show you your error in Scripture interpretation?

I don't know; I'd have to have you actually do that... <smile> No, I don't think I would, though, because I never "feel like an idiot," but (maybe) just humbled to some extent. But again, you'd have to actually do that for me to really know... <smile>

They are related, but 'specifically' the part in RED about about Christ's literal reign over His enemies on earth...

Acts 2:34-35
34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, "Sit Thou on My right hand,
35 Until I make Thy foes Thy footstool."
KJV

1 Cor 15:24-25
24 Then cometh the end, when He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when He shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
25 For He must reign, till He hath put all enemies under His feet.
KJV

What made you think that I said those two Scriptures do not agree with each other? I never said, nor insinuated they disagreed, so 'who' put that thought in your mind? Do you hear voices in your head?

LOL! Nobody put any such thought in my head... whether or not Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 15 passages "agreed with each other" was never a question for either of us, Davy, and that they possibly do not was never broached or suggested by either of us.

The issue was that you said, in post 211 above, and I quote:

"1 Cor.15:24-28 gives more detail about Acts 2:34-35..."​

...so, in effect, that the 1 Corinthians passage more descriptive of and/or complementary to the Acts 2 passage, and in effect saying they were describing the same event. You said that, Davy, and that's obviously wrong, and I refuted that, saying:

"...the connection between the two is God making all Christ's enemies His footstool (Acts 2) and God putting all Christ's enemies under His feet (1 Corinthians 15)..." ~ which you agree with ~ "...for sure. But... God is saying what He's saying to Christ at the beginning of His millennium what His plan for and intentions regarding the time until ~ key word, that 'until' ~ He completes that in Psalm 110 and Acts 2..." while "...the 1 Corinthians 15 passage is speaking of the end of His millennium, the time period in which God completes His Israel... 'at his coming those who belong to Christ,' as verse 23 says."​

You know, conversations are disjointed in a venue like this, but wow. I mean, can you not keep hold on what's going on? What's actually being discussed? Or is it an intentional misdirection on your part? Neither is good, of course, but which is it? Goodness gracious.

But we are not to just stop at those two above Scriptures...

Which neither you nor I are doing...

...there's MORE DETAIL about that future reign given in other Bible Scripture...

Very often in Scripture that's true; we all understand that. But such is not the case regarding 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 in relation to Acts 2:34-35. the two passages are not describing/referring to concurrent events but rather events on opposite ends of the God's millennium, as I said above.

...specifically Psalms 2

Psalm (no 's') 2... There are multiple psalms, Davy...150 of them to be exact, but only one second Psalm... <smile> ...which by the way is true of Christ's second coming; there will only be one of those... <smile>

And just a related note on this <chuckles>... So often you hear folks say, like, "Well in Revelations 13..." (with an 's' on Revelation, as if there are multiple revelations. But John did not have 22 Revelations, but rather just one. <smile> The last book of the Bible is John's Revelation, or the Revelation according to John. So in the same way that there is no 's' on Psalm 2, there is no 's' on Revelation 13. You see? <smile>

which is about Christ's future LITERAL reign as King on earth....

Well... <chuckles> Davy, even now, do not "the nations rage and the peoples plot in vain?" Even now, Davy, do not "the kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord and against his Anointed, saying, 'Let us burst their bonds apart and cast away their cords from us'?" They absolutely do... I mean, take what's happening in Washington, D.C. right now, and the furor over separation of church and state, which to many is really separation of the United States from God, right? So there ya go... <smile>

Anyway, this is what Paul is saying in Romans 1, for example, about unbelievers in general, that they have "exchanged the truth about God for a lie..." and that they are "gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless..." and "...not only do them but give approval to those who practice them." And regarding rulers and authorities specifically, Paul says in Romans 13 that "there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God," but that even so, he insinuates, without explicitly saying so, that there are rulers and authorities that do not acknowledge this and rule and govern in sinful and ungodly (even terribly so) ways. So, yet again, Christ's reign is from heaven, now, in God's millennium, so His millennial reign. But, as David says in Psalm 2, God the Father "laughs; the Lord holds them in derision." And you said this, and I agree, that God, while certainly not sanctioning or approving of all this... bad behavior... He uses all this to accomplish His purposes, for His glory. And rest assured, Christ Jesus is the King on Zion ~ now ~ and the nations are His heritage, and the ends of the earth His possession (though so many deny it). So, it may not look like it to us (from our limited point of view), but He is "breaking them with a rod of iron and dashing them in pieces like a potter's vessel." And one day that work will be complete. Remember, in Psalm 1, David has just said that "the wicked... are like chaff that the wind drives away..." and "...will not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous..." and "...the way of the wicked will perish."

Things make sense in God's Word when we actually cover all of His Word like we are supposed to...

Agreed. <smile>

...instead of pick'n'choosing what we want to believe.

Right, so stop it. <smile>

You should have understood all this already, but you have obviously chosen to follow doctrines of men, and it definitely looks like men's theory of Amillennialism is one of the major false doctrines that is deceiving you.

Look in the mirror, my friend.

So I'm not going to waste my time with you wanting to argue about this...

You're the one picking it, Davy, not me. And you're the one all angry and... you know... stuff... <smile>

, since you obviously reject many Bible Scriptures as they actually written.

Not at all; perish the thought. The only thing I "reject" is, well, not the Scriptures themselves, of course, but how you think they are written. <smile>

Grace and peace to you, Davy. Especially grace...

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Let me summarize the over all point. In any 7 day week, the 7th day is never the beginning of a new week, it it is always the end of the current week. 8 days later is always the beginning of a new week.

From Adam's fall through now it has been roughly 6k years, thus 6 1K year days. Therefore, there must be one more 1K day after Christ returns in order to fulfill a 7 day week,

Where is this taught in scripture? Absolutely nowhere. I don't know how you can think you should be taken seriously about this when you have absolutely zero scripture to back up what you're saying.

the pattern that has been from the beginning, that a week consists of 7 days. In this case, 1K years represents 1 day. 6 days do not make up an entire week, 7 days do. Therefore, Amils are incorrect that the millennium is now.

LOL! Where does scripture make the connection between the thousand years and the number of days in the week? Nowhere! This is utterly ridiculous. Is this all you have left to try to debate Amils? If so, then you literally have nothing left. You don't even attempt to refute Amil with scripture anymore, you just resort to complete nonsense like this instead.

Amils are incorrect that 1 Corinthians 15:28 is fulfilled within the same 24 hour day Christ returns.

What are you even talking about here? How exactly do you intepret that verse?

1 Corinthians 15:25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. 27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

Verse 28 here is talking about the point when the last enemy, death, is destroyed, resulting in all of Christ's enemies being put under His feet, including the last enemy, death. How can you think that won't happen on the day Christ returns? If you read 1 Corinthians 15:50-54 you can see that death will be swallowed up in victory at the last trumpet. You understand that Christ will return at the last trumpet, don't you? That's when the last enemy, death, will be defeated/destroyed and swallowed up in victory.

Because that would then mean 6 days make up an entire week, not 7 days.

Huh? This is pure nonsense. Where did Paul write anything about the days of the week in 1 Corinthians 15?

And that the 7th day would not be the end of the week, it would be the beginning of a new week. A new week representing the beginning of eternity, thus 1 Corinthians 15:28. Except the pattern for a week has never been 6 days. It has always been 7 days since the beginning of time. Amil throws a monkey wrench into this pattern.

LOL! What?!! Where does scripture ever speak of Christ's return or anything in relation to the days of the week? Absolutely nowhwere. This is the weakest argument imaginable. You have NO scripture whatsoever to back up what you're saying here.

I'm not using numerology here, I'm using common sense, that a week consists of 7 days not 6 days.

And who says otherwise? Absolutely no one. You are so bent on trying to make Amils look bad, that you even try to say that we believe a week consists of 6 days. Talk about desperation! You have run out of arguments. That is clear.

And that the 7th day is always the end of a week, never the beginning of a new week. Therefore, 1 Corinthians 15:28 can't get fulfilled until 7K years, thus 7 days, have preceded it first.

Show me where scripture teaches this. Do you think your words are equal with scripture?

And what comes after 7? Is it not 8? Thus 8k years after the fall of mankind is when 1 Corinthians 15:28 is initially fulfilled. Not 6K years after the fall of mankind. Thus the 8th day being the beginning of a new week. In this case, the week equaling a never ending week since 7 day cycles will no longer matter at this point.

LOL. None of this is taught anywhere in scripture. Have you decided that the truth can be found outside of scripture? What has happened to you?