Replacement Theology thrown down in 1 verse?

[CoreIssue]

Israel does not nourish itself. Listen to how Paul talks about the tree and branches here:

If the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, so is the whole lump, and if the root is holy, so are the branches.
But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing root of the olive tree, do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you. Then you will say, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith. So do not become proud, but fear. For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God's kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off. And even they, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again. For if you were cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, the natural branches, be grafted back into their own olive tree. -Romans 11:16–24

In the image here, of a tree, we clearly have a nourishing root and branches. The branches are Israel and the root is Christ. The root is holy, the root supports the believers. Those who are "believers" are grafted onto the root. Those who are not believers, are broken off the root.
When we combine this image with the one where Christ tells us that he is the vine and we are the branches, and that those who do not "abide" in him will be cut off and thrown into the fire". The imagry is the same, and cannot be doubted.

Israel does not nourish itself, even if it hasn't been "broken off"...even if it is believing Israel, it still must be connected to the holy, nourishing root.

The fig tree was symbolic of Israel in the Old Testament when Jesus Christ did not exist.

The root is Abraham. His covenant feeds the branches.

 

[Naomi25]

The fig tree was symbolic of Israel in the Old Testament when Jesus Christ did not exist.

Yes. And then Jesus came. Remember how he changed stuff?

The root is Abraham. His covenant feeds the branches.

You keep missing this point:

Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ. -Galatians 3:16

And this one:

For all the promises of God find their Yes in him. That is why it is through him that we utter our Amen to God for his glory. -2 Corinthians 1:20

Which is to say: Jesus IS the ultimate recipient and fulfilment of Abrahams covenant. Which makes him the root, not Abraham. How on earth can you ascribe to Abraham the position of something that by right and by scripture must be taken by one who is Holy. Only the Perfect Son of God, the Lamb who takes away the sins of the world, can possibly be that. Saying that Abraham is the root is as ridiculous as saying that "the whole bible is about Israel", which I've heard people say before. Anyone who misses the point that the bible is about Christ is way...way off the beaten path of doctrine.

 

[CoreIssue]

Yes. And then Jesus came. Remember how he changed stuff?



You keep missing this point:

Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ. -Galatians 3:16

And this one:

For all the promises of God find their Yes in him. That is why it is through him that we utter our Amen to God for his glory. -2 Corinthians 1:20

Which is to say: Jesus IS the ultimate recipient and fulfilment of Abrahams covenant. Which makes him the root, not Abraham. How on earth can you ascribe to Abraham the position of something that by right and by scripture must be taken by one who is Holy. Only the Perfect Son of God, the Lamb who takes away the sins of the world, can possibly be that. Saying that Abraham is the root is as ridiculous as saying that "the whole bible is about Israel", which I've heard people say before. Anyone who misses the point that the bible is about Christ is way...way off the beaten path of doctrine.

Do not get it and do not want to get it.

The Bible is about salvation and salvation through Christ.

But it is also about more.

 

[Naomi25]

Do not get it and do not want to get it.

The Bible is about salvation and salvation through Christ.

But it is also about more.

And yet, when I ask for you to show, biblically, this "more", you either can't, or just don't.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Fig tree is figurative of Israel, not Christ.

Question maybe we should ask is why ‘fig leaves’ in Genesis 3:7. Even what they used God planned. Genesis 3:7
[7] And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

Matthew 21:20-22
[20] And when the disciples saw it , they marvelled, saying, How soon is the fig tree withered away! [21] Jesus answered and said unto them, Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do this which is done to the fig tree, but also if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be done. [22] And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.

Numbers 7:89
[89] And when Moses was gone into the tabernacle of the congregation to speak with him, then he heard the voice of one speaking unto him from off the mercy seat that was upon the ark of testimony, from between the two cherubims: and he spake unto him.

Who do you think was speaking from the mercy seat? The Lord. He is the root. It is all about Him.

 

[Trekson]

Sorry, I'm not sure I get your point. You think what I've said is the best (which is bad, because you think replacement theology is bad) representation of RT that you've heard? And you disagree? Is that what you're saying? Because if it is, how is any of what I've said unbiblical?
Also, it's not strictly wrong for saved Jews to think of themselves as "completed" Jews. As I keep saying...those Jews who are in Christ, they have remained attached to the "root" naturally! They belong there naturally! It is we that have been grafted in. So, for them to consider themselves "completed" is not wrong at all, it is exactly as they were born...destined to be.

I am complimenting you on your presentation of your point of view, I've been at this for over 25 years and you are right, most dispensationalists are inaccurate in their hysterical representation. I will get back to you on our scriptural differences after I do a little study on what you said. After all since you took the time to explain something clearly than you deserve the same consideration.

 

[Naomi25]

I am complimenting you on your presentation of your point of view, I've been at this for over 25 years and you are right, most dispensationalists are inaccurate in their hysterical representation. I will get back to you on our scriptural differences after I do a little study on what you said. After all since you took the time to explain something clearly than you deserve the same consideration.

That's cool...sometimes I find people's statements a little ambiguous, and am not sure which way to go, so find its just best to say outright that I feeling my way. But sure...certainly get back to me on the differences. I welcome the conversation about it.

 

[Trekson]

“I have kept for myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace. -Romans 11:1–5
Paul is clearly saying here that God has not rejected his people, because the remnant still exists. What 'remnant' is this? It is these 'children of promise' that Paul talks about elsewhere, the 'true offspring of Abraham'.

Hi Naomi, I would say this "remnant" are citizens of national Israel. Acts 2:5 - "And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven." Acts 2:41 - 3000 souls, Acts 4:4 - 5000 souls. We aren't told how long Peter preached before he had the vision concerning Cornelius but all the souls saved until the gospel was offered to the Gentiles would be considered the believing remnant of national Israel of that day.

Now it's my understanding that replacement theology sees no place in God's plan for the nation of Israel but we know the gospel to the Gentiles has a limited timeline. "a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in." We believe that this is referring to and is the same as Rev. 11:2 - "But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months." So we know at some point concerning Israel there will be a final 3 1/2 yr. period of judgment.

I see Revelation as literal and future when it speaks about 12,000 from each tribe in Rev. 7:4-8. One of the reasons I believe it is future as that the tribes have changed from what they originally were. The tribe of Dan was replaced by the tribe of Manassas (one of Joseph's sons). You are correct when you say that during this time until the time of the Gentiles is fulfilled there is no place for national Israel, but when that time is over there will come a change.

Your words, "But if any of National Israel is to be saved it must be through Christ, which we know, how then do we make up a new, different category for them, apart from "Church of Christ"?"

The 144,000 will be born again believers but that doesn't take away their nationality. In your earlier reference Greek doesn't mean Greek, it means gentile. God has a purpose for the nation of Israel and a future prophetic fulfillment. Zech. 12:10 - "And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn."

In the future, Israel will have to make a choice, follow Christ or the anti-Christ, those that choose Christ will be the 144,000+ and we see them going to safety for a period of 3 1/2 yrs. (Rev. 12:14) In Rev. 12:17, once they are out of his hands, the a/c will turn his attention to the church and that will be the beginning of the end of the GT. Jesus wants there to be a national Israeli presence in the millennium to help re-populate the earth but mainly to keep all the land promises he has made to the nation of Israel but that doesn't mean they will come to Him under any other way than Grace. God keeps His promises. I believe all this is necessary to fulfill other prophecies regarding the "Marriage and the NJ but that's for another post at a future date. So, the summation is that there will be a nation of born again Israeli's during the millennium, part of the church but still a human remnant of Israel.

 

[Naomi25]

Hi Naomi, I would say this "remnant" are citizens of national Israel. Acts 2:5 - "And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven." Acts 2:41 - 3000 souls, Acts 4:4 - 5000 souls. We aren't told how long Peter preached before he had the vision concerning Cornelius but all the souls saved until the gospel was offered to the Gentiles would be considered the believing remnant of national Israel of that day.

But, it's all much of a muchness, don't you see? It's the very nature of becoming one in Christ.
Yes, those 'devout' men who came to Christ were no doubt part of the 'remnant'. But, when they came to Christ, they also became part of the Church. It would have been they, in Acts 8, after the persecution arose, who spread out from Jerusalem and took the gospel to "Samaria and Judia and the ends of the earth"...or beginning to!
However, as they were still Jews, nationally, they would have retained their status as the remnant...the proof, in Paul's eyes, that even throughout those (and these) days, that God still has not abandoned 'Israel' completely.

Now it's my understanding that replacement theology sees no place in God's plan for the nation of Israel but we know the gospel to the Gentiles has a limited timeline. "a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in." We believe that this is referring to and is the same as Rev. 11:2 - "But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months." So we know at some point concerning Israel there will be a final 3 1/2 yr. period of judgment.

Well, actually, you're wrong here. To start with "replacement theology" rarely means what those who toss it at us says it does. But within "our" camp, I'd say there are two types: those who see Romans 11 saying that God will, before the end, bring in large numbers of national Jews. The others see that passage as saying that by the time of the end, the number of 'remnant' over the years will have added up to "all of Israel being saved". I tend to go with the former, as I see the language being more of a "mystery", more of "if they've turned now, then they'll return" sort of thing, aimed at bringing radical glory to God.

Actually, in regards to the passage in Rev 11:2 that you referred to above, the interpreation I hold to in regards to that is quite different. All throughout the NT...after the Church was established, anyway, when the term "temple" is used, is it used in regards to the Christian, or, the Church. We are the "temple of God". When we see things being "measured" in scripture, it's not really just something being determined for size. It has theological meaning, usually one of preservation, rather than destruction. So, in Revelation when we see the inner Temple being measured, but the outter courts not, we correctly surmise something. God perserves the Christian inwardly, even though outwardly we may perish. This is something backed up by multiple scriptures...that though we suffer and die, when we belong to Christ, we triumph.

I see Revelation as literal and future when it speaks about 12,000 from each tribe in Rev. 7:4-8. One of the reasons I believe it is future as that the tribes have changed from what they originally were. The tribe of Dan was replaced by the tribe of Manassas (one of Joseph's sons). You are correct when you say that during this time until the time of the Gentiles is fulfilled there is no place for national Israel, but when that time is over there will come a change.

Your words, "But if any of National Israel is to be saved it must be through Christ, which we know, how then do we make up a new, different category for them, apart from "Church of Christ"?"

The 144,000 will be born again believers but that doesn't take away their nationality. In your earlier reference Greek doesn't mean Greek, it means gentile. God has a purpose for the nation of Israel and a future prophetic fulfillment. Zech. 12:10 - "And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn."

The problem with this is: while the 144000 won't loose their nationality...neither have any of the other Jews who became Christians, and therefore part of the Church. They were still Jews...still clearly Israel. But also clearly part of the Church. But now, suddenly, they are expected to have their nationality weigh more than their 'church' status? The only way that works is if the doctrine of Dispensationalism is more important than the verses that Paul has given us stating otherwise. It only works if there are verses that directly tell us that there will come a time that when they come to Christ they will not be considered part of the body of Christ. But there isn't such a verse, because every single verse in scripture that talks about a person...regardless of their nationality...coming to Christ, talks about it in a way that, by necessity, makes them part of the body of Christ. You cannot be saved by his blood, recipients of the Holy Spirit and members of his body without being a member of his Church. And there is not a single verse in the NT that excuses making a separate place or timing for these 'Jewish' believers. Paul is far too adamant about us all being one in Christ. About those in Christ being the true children of promise. To do as Dispensationalist suggest, we have to throw away all those verses. Even with the Church tucked in heaven, those verses still make too much trouble. People still come to Christ...even Jews. They still receive the Holy Spirit and become one body together. All the conditions are the same...which leaves, in my mind, very little compelling evidence for a Pretribulational rapture.

In the future, Israel will have to make a choice, follow Christ or the anti-Christ, those that choose Christ will be the 144,000+ and we see them going to safety for a period of 3 1/2 yrs. (Rev. 12:14) In Rev. 12:17, once they are out of his hands, the a/c will turn his attention to the church and that will be the beginning of the end of the GT. Jesus wants there to be a national Israeli presence in the millennium to help re-populate the earth but mainly to keep all the land promises he has made to the nation of Israel but that doesn't mean they will come to Him under any other way than Grace. God keeps His promises. I believe all this is necessary to fulfill other prophecies regarding the "Marriage and the NJ but that's for another post at a future date. So, the summation is that there will be a nation of born again Israeli's during the millennium, part of the church but still a human remnant of Israel.

Oh, boy. I really need a whole post to deal with this. I have a great deal of trouble with how the Dispensationalist sees the Millennium, partly because of how there appears to be people with natural bodies and resurrection bodies living side by side. I simply cannot see any biblical evidence anywhere for it, and when really considered, it makes such a mess. What sort of 'age' is this supposed to be? Christ will be here reigning outright, the world will have a 'sort of' makeover. In reality, it should be Eden restored. Except there will be people who are still not perfect...still able to have fallen thoughts and impulses. Still able to think of themselves and their desires rather than on Christ. People who will, in essence, spark another fall and rebellion against the great king.
I can't find any of it in scripture. To me, every bit of bible that talks about Jesus' return, speaks of finality. No more chances, no more death, no more sin. Everything will be made new...new us, new earth, new ruler, new perfection. None of this half/half stuff.
So...I just have no idea where it is found, I'm sorry.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

I have a great deal of trouble with how the Dispensationalist sees the Millennium, partly because of how there appears to be people with natural bodies and resurrection bodies living side by side. I simply cannot see any biblical evidence anywhere for it, and when really considered, it makes such a mess. What sort of 'age' is this supposed to be? Christ will be here reigning outright, the world will have a 'sort of' makeover. In reality, it should be Eden restored. Except there will be people who are still not perfect...still able to have fallen thoughts and impulses. Still able to think of themselves and their desires rather than on Christ. People who will, in essence, spark another fall and rebellion against the great king.
I can't find any of it in scripture. To me, every bit of bible that talks about Jesus' return, speaks of finality. No more chances, no more death, no more sin. Everything will be made new...new us, new earth, new ruler, new perfection. None of this half/half stuff.
So...I just have no idea where it is found, I'm sorry.

Your post are so comforting!

Revelation 21:5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

 

[Naomi25]

Your post are so comforting!

Revelation 21:5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

Thank you! But I suspect, as you have posted, it's mostly his word that is doing it! Should all of it be comforting? "Comfort each other with these words?" I just see the bible saying so emphatically, that when Jesus returns...no more! No more mess. Just him! Isn't that the point of his return?

 

[Trekson]

partly because of how there appears to be people with natural bodies and resurrection bodies living side by side. I simply cannot see any biblical evidence anywhere for it, and when really considered, it makes such a mess. What sort of 'age' is this supposed to be? Christ will be here reigning outright, the world will have a 'sort of' makeover. In reality, it should be Eden restored. Except there will be people who are still not perfect...still able to have fallen thoughts and impulses. Still able to think of themselves and their desires rather than on Christ. People who will, in essence, spark another fall and rebellion against the great king

Hi Naomi, Instead of going back and forth to your post, I'm just going to offer a narrative here. We are much closer than you realize in how we see things. I'm not your typical dispensationalist, I guess you could consider me a quasi-dispensationalist. What do I mean by that? It's all in how one views future Israel. The idea that the raptured church (in our glorified bodies) is going to dwell on earth during the millennium in some sort of pastoral existence, raising livestock and tending our little gardens is just a bunch of poppycock! Our home is in heaven. Some may be ruling and reigning here per Christ's teaching but though we will be able to travel from heaven to earth in a blink of an eye, we will do so at our Master's command for whatever purpose He desires. Christ will be ruling and reigning here on earth to fulfill the prophecy of David's throne (and others) being here eternally. While presently, we have different responsibilities within the body of Christ, that will also carry over to eternity. It's hard to comprehend what our eternal life will consist of but there will be work of some sort to do. The pictures of us sitting on clouds and strumming our harps or just having an eternally long church service are totally unrealistic. The bible also says that in some ways our glorified bodies will be similar to the angels and I can't picture them farming either.

The main difference between the millennial national Israel and the glorified church is simply a matter of destiny and knowing that parts of the body of Christ have different responsibilities as is taught. They will still be part of the church but they maintain their living humanity to repopulate the earth along with the gentiles who survive the sheep and goat judgment of Matt. 25. It is prophesied that life will be greatly extended in the millennium. Although humanity keeps its free will, there will be no sin until Satan is let loose at the end of the millennium. The free will is what makes it necessary for Jesus to rule "with a rod of iron."

Here, imo, is what a lot of people get wrong. Most Christians think that everyone who goes to the GWTJ is sentenced to hell, and that is just wrong. There will be those who have never heard of Jesus in days past and they will be judged by the knowledge of good and evil that resides in everyone, believer or not, like tribal Africa, the Aborigines or the Orientals and those who died during the millennium will be there as well.

The end result will be the eternal unification of Israel and the church which the marriage and the description of the new Jerusalem is all about.

Regarding the temple, yes our bodies have become the temple (dwelling place) of God, but that doesn't eliminate the need for an earthly temple for Jesus to rule over the earth from, as prophesied, during the millennium. The measuring of the temple is in some way connected to the prophetic measuring of it in the latter chapters of Ezekiel although I don't know exactly how, imo. While there are still many unknowns, prophetically speaking, this all makes sense to me but I'm not so rigid that I'm not open to the possibility that future revelations might change some aspects of the picture of the end times that I have.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Thank you! But I suspect, as you have posted, it's mostly his word that is doing it! Should all of it be comforting? "Comfort each other with these words?" I just see the bible saying so emphatically, that when Jesus returns...no more! No more mess. Just him! Isn't that the point of his return?

Agree. God has given you a gift though of being able to untangle all the different views and to help others (you have helped me) see “what does the word actually say”. No add in’s or forcing it to say something it doesn’t say. That is why I like your post. You have helped answer many questions I’ve had of “that just doesn’t fit what the word says.” But honestly, you have also caused me to pause and consider maybe I need to listen more and talk less. There are some really big questions I still have in who God is. Questions like freewill and how some are said to perish. I know this isn’t the thread for it but maybe one day God will lead to an opportunity to bring those out. Anyways, thank you for staying in His word. I wouldn’t say we agree on everything but I like your no-nonsense approach to sticking to what is there and what is not.

 

[Naomi25]

Hi Naomi, Instead of going back and forth to your post, I'm just going to offer a narrative here. We are much closer than you realize in how we see things. I'm not your typical dispensationalist, I guess you could consider me a quasi-dispensationalist. What do I mean by that? It's all in how one views future Israel. The idea that the raptured church (in our glorified bodies) is going to dwell on earth during the millennium in some sort of pastoral existence, raising livestock and tending our little gardens is just a bunch of poppycock! Our home is in heaven. Some may be ruling and reigning here per Christ's teaching but though we will be able to travel from heaven to earth in a blink of an eye, we will do so at our Master's command for whatever purpose He desires. Christ will be ruling and reigning here on earth to fulfill the prophecy of David's throne (and others) being here eternally. While presently, we have different responsibilities within the body of Christ, that will also carry over to eternity. It's hard to comprehend what our eternal life will consist of but there will be work of some sort to do. The pictures of us sitting on clouds and strumming our harps or just having an eternally long church service are totally unrealistic. The bible also says that in some ways our glorified bodies will be similar to the angels and I can't picture them farming either.

I totally agree that sitting on clouds will not be our eternal destiny! Work to the glory of God will be what we're called to do, except, in a place where there is no sin, it won't really be "work". It will be satisfying and enjoyable, something we do with ease and comaraderie with others. No toil or frustration. I'm looking forward to it!
However...in regards to your other idea...of during the millennium the Church will be in heaven while everyone else will be, I assume, in normal bodies down here with Christ reigning over them...I still have some problems with it. Firstly...I find no scripture evidence for it. Secondly, it still leaves us with a bit of a mess, does it not? What could be the purpose for such a time? Consider...our current age comes to an end...people have either resoundedly chosen Christ or the ruler of this world when Christ returns. The bible describes this return, by the way, as when judgements are made and imperishable bodies are given, so I'm entirely unsure how these people go into the millennium like this. But let's just say they do. Why? It's basically just a compressed version of this age again, except this time we should believe that with no Satan present but with Christ present people who are born new into this time will still revolt against him and have another...I don't know...Armeggedom event? Why? Why have this happen all again when it happen difinitively at the end of this age? Where does the bible give us any sort of passage to assume this will happen again? We "fit it" in because of the mention of 1000 years in Rev 20, so say it "has to be" like this. But honestly and truly...where are the bible passages, if we step back from this 1000 years for just a second...that tell us that this separation between immortal bodies of Rapture people and normal bodies of other saved people is going to happen? That the resounded event of Christ's second coming is NOT the great be all and end all? Because every scripture I read that talks of his second coming doesn't seem to leave much wiggle room to me.
My point is two fold: when we read scripture and see passages that are overwhelmingly obvious and straight up, like the repeated references to Christ's second coming, which tells us that when he does he will: raise the dead, judge all people, give out resurrection bodies to all, remake the cosmos. Then we are left with no where to go...when Jesus comes again, that is the end, my friend! So...what do we do with passages like Rev 20? Well, we certainly don't let one passage in an apocolyptic (hard to interpret) book tell us how to interpret these easier passages. But but push comes to shove, Rev 20 isn't too hard. Numbers are hugely symbolic in Revelation...in all of scripture, but especially Revelation. If you do a search throughout scripture, you can see that the number 1000 is often used to denote completeness, like "God owns the cattle on a 1000 hills" (really he owns all the cattle everywhere), or "God blesses them through 1000 generations" (actually, all the generation). So when we come to Rev 20, we see that it need not, to start with, be held strictly to that number, only that God is telling us that when these 1000 years is up, his plan will have been completed. And what about Satan being bound? That's sort of huge. Many people can't swallow the idea that Satan could be bound now, as us Amillennialists say he is. But, we need to consider what the text actually says. It says that Satan is bound so that "he may deceive the nations no longer". And in particular, so that he may not deceive them unto war. War against whom? Against us, the Saints. Do you remember when Jesus told his disciples that the only way you could plunder a strong mans house was to first bind him? Listen to what he says:

And if I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they will be your judges. But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. Or how can someone enter a strong man's house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house. -Matthew 12:27–29

Jesus says that he has come to Satans 'house' to plunder his goods...he has come to take souls, win people for the Kingdom, right from under Satan's nose, and there's not one thing Satan can do about that...at the moment. Why? He is bound.

The seventy-two returned with joy, saying, “Lord, even the demons are subject to us in your name!” And he said to them, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall hurt you. -Luke 10:17–19

So...when we come to Rev 20, it is not such a foreign idea that Satan, in this age, is impotent to stop the work of the gospel. He cannot gather the nations together in a concerted effort to wipe the people of God off the face of the Earth. Not yet. But, as Rev 20 says, near the end, he must be "released for a little while".

The other thing I would say about the idea of an earthly Millennium is that we must keep in mind that the OT promises have gone world wide. What do I mean by that? Most people believe that the OT prophecies cannot be fulfilled unless Christ comes back and sits on an actual throne in actual Israel. But they miss the rather obvious point the NT makes about what happened when Jesus came. Consider the Abrahamic Covenant. The NT reinterprets the OT physical Canaan as a figure of the true "land" - the earth in its entirety (For the promise to Abraham and his offspring that he would be heir of the world did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith. -Romans 4:13). And there is a huge thing in Hebrews 3 about its author equating 'entering God's rest' with entering the land passages found in Psalms, Numbers, Deut, etc.
The Davidic Covenant promised David that someone of his house would sit on his throne and reign forever. This is where people run into trouble. Indeed this Covenant is fulfilled in Christ, but Christ's reign is from heaven as Lord, not from an earthly throne. Consider: when Gabriel came to Mary, he told her that God would give Jesus "the throne of his father David; and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and his kingdom will have no end." And, after Christ's resurrection, Jesus told his disciples, "All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth." It was at his ascention, however, that the final aspect of the Covenant came to pass, when the "true seed" of David sat down on the "throne of David" where he is now reigning with all power (Mark 16:19; Luke 22:69; Eph 1:20-23; Col 3:1; Heb 1:3; 1 Pet 3:21-22; Rev 1:5; 3:21). In fact, Peter outright tells us in Acts 2:22-36 how Christ, through his resurrection and ascention fulfilled the Davidic Covenant.

All this to say...I see absolutely no biblical need or evidence for an eartly Millennial Kingdom.

 

[Naomi25]

Agree. God has given you a gift though of being able to untangle all the different views and to help others (you have helped me) see “what does the word actually say”. No add in’s or forcing it to say something it doesn’t say. That is why I like your post. You have helped answer many questions I’ve had of “that just doesn’t fit what the word says.” But honestly, you have also caused me to pause and consider maybe I need to listen more and talk less. There are some really big questions I still have in who God is. Questions like freewill and how some are said to perish. I know this isn’t the thread for it but maybe one day God will lead to an opportunity to bring those out. Anyways, thank you for staying in His word. I wouldn’t say we agree on everything but I like your no-nonsense approach to sticking to what is there and what is not.

Well, I think that's the nicest compliment I've ever received, thank you! I have no doubt I get many...many things wrong...but that's all I want, to remain true to Gods word. It's precious, and it's powerful.
Freewill, huh? Going for the big guns! To be perfectly honest, I've tiptoed around that one thus far...too heavy for this tiny mind. God might grow me to the point I feel I can tackle it head on, but at the moment I just *trust*. I trust God's got it. I know he is good. I know he is just. I know he sees the bigger picture, and that he holds all things. So I rest in that. And I know that if/when I'm ready to tackle it later, the bible will tell me all I need to know on it!

 

[CoreIssue]

I totally agree that sitting on clouds will not be our eternal destiny! Work to the glory of God will be what we're called to do, except, in a place where there is no sin, it won't really be "work". It will be satisfying and enjoyable, something we do with ease and comaraderie with others. No toil or frustration. I'm looking forward to it!
However...in regards to your other idea...of during the millennium the Church will be in heaven while everyone else will be, I assume, in normal bodies down here with Christ reigning over them...I still have some problems with it. Firstly...I find no scripture evidence for it. Secondly, it still leaves us with a bit of a mess, does it not? What could be the purpose for such a time? Consider...our current age comes to an end...people have either resoundedly chosen Christ or the ruler of this world when Christ returns. The bible describes this return, by the way, as when judgements are made and imperishable bodies are given, so I'm entirely unsure how these people go into the millennium like this. But let's just say they do. Why? It's basically just a compressed version of this age again, except this time we should believe that with no Satan present but with Christ present people who are born new into this time will still revolt against him and have another...I don't know...Armeggedom event? Why? Why have this happen all again when it happen difinitively at the end of this age? Where does the bible give us any sort of passage to assume this will happen again? We "fit it" in because of the mention of 1000 years in Rev 20, so say it "has to be" like this. But honestly and truly...where are the bible passages, if we step back from this 1000 years for just a second...that tell us that this separation between immortal bodies of Rapture people and normal bodies of other saved people is going to happen? That the resounded event of Christ's second coming is NOT the great be all and end all? Because every scripture I read that talks of his second coming doesn't seem to leave much wiggle room to me.
My point is two fold: when we read scripture and see passages that are overwhelmingly obvious and straight up, like the repeated references to Christ's second coming, which tells us that when he does he will: raise the dead, judge all people, give out resurrection bodies to all, remake the cosmos. Then we are left with no where to go...when Jesus comes again, that is the end, my friend! So...what do we do with passages like Rev 20? Well, we certainly don't let one passage in an apocolyptic (hard to interpret) book tell us how to interpret these easier passages. But but push comes to shove, Rev 20 isn't too hard. Numbers are hugely symbolic in Revelation...in all of scripture, but especially Revelation. If you do a search throughout scripture, you can see that the number 1000 is often used to denote completeness, like "God owns the cattle on a 1000 hills" (really he owns all the cattle everywhere), or "God blesses them through 1000 generations" (actually, all the generation). So when we come to Rev 20, we see that it need not, to start with, be held strictly to that number, only that God is telling us that when these 1000 years is up, his plan will have been completed. And what about Satan being bound? That's sort of huge. Many people can't swallow the idea that Satan could be bound now, as us Amillennialists say he is. But, we need to consider what the text actually says. It says that Satan is bound so that "he may deceive the nations no longer". And in particular, so that he may not deceive them unto war. War against whom? Against us, the Saints. Do you remember when Jesus told his disciples that the only way you could plunder a strong mans house was to first bind him? Listen to what he says:

And if I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they will be your judges. But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. Or how can someone enter a strong man's house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house. -Matthew 12:27–29

Jesus says that he has come to Satans 'house' to plunder his goods...he has come to take souls, win people for the Kingdom, right from under Satan's nose, and there's not one thing Satan can do about that...at the moment. Why? He is bound.

The seventy-two returned with joy, saying, “Lord, even the demons are subject to us in your name!” And he said to them, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall hurt you. -Luke 10:17–19

So...when we come to Rev 20, it is not such a foreign idea that Satan, in this age, is impotent to stop the work of the gospel. He cannot gather the nations together in a concerted effort to wipe the people of God off the face of the Earth. Not yet. But, as Rev 20 says, near the end, he must be "released for a little while".

The other thing I would say about the idea of an earthly Millennium is that we must keep in mind that the OT promises have gone world wide. What do I mean by that? Most people believe that the OT prophecies cannot be fulfilled unless Christ comes back and sits on an actual throne in actual Israel. But they miss the rather obvious point the NT makes about what happened when Jesus came. Consider the Abrahamic Covenant. The NT reinterprets the OT physical Canaan as a figure of the true "land" - the earth in its entirety (For the promise to Abraham and his offspring that he would be heir of the world did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith. -Romans 4:13). And there is a huge thing in Hebrews 3 about its author equating 'entering God's rest' with entering the land passages found in Psalms, Numbers, Deut, etc.
The Davidic Covenant promised David that someone of his house would sit on his throne and reign forever. This is where people run into trouble. Indeed this Covenant is fulfilled in Christ, but Christ's reign is from heaven as Lord, not from an earthly throne. Consider: when Gabriel came to Mary, he told her that God would give Jesus "the throne of his father David; and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and his kingdom will have no end." And, after Christ's resurrection, Jesus told his disciples, "All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth." It was at his ascention, however, that the final aspect of the Covenant came to pass, when the "true seed" of David sat down on the "throne of David" where he is now reigning with all power (Mark 16:19; Luke 22:69; Eph 1:20-23; Col 3:1; Heb 1:3; 1 Pet 3:21-22; Rev 1:5; 3:21). In fact, Peter outright tells us in Acts 2:22-36 how Christ, through his resurrection and ascention fulfilled the Davidic Covenant.

All this to say...I see absolutely no biblical need or evidence for an eartly Millennial Kingdom.

11.4. Summary of the Millennial Kingdom Commentary - A Testimony of Jesus Christ

Relevant Bible Teaching - The Millennial Kingdom

 

[Enoch111]

All this to say...I see absolutely no biblical need or evidence for an earthly Millennial Kingdom.

That's what naysayers say, using their humanistic reasoning. But for God it is a divine necessity. He created this earth to rule the inhabitants as God and King. And He has given Christ all power and authority in Heaven and on earth. That should be reason enough.

 

[Naomi25]

11.4. Summary of the Millennial Kingdom Commentary - A Testimony of Jesus Christ

Relevant Bible Teaching - The Millennial Kingdom

Sorry, I don't have the time to read linked to stuff. I can barely keep up here.

 

[Naomi25]

That's what naysayers say, using their humanistic reasoning. But for God it is a divine necessity. He created this earth to rule the inhabitants as God and King. And He has given Christ all power and authority in Heaven and on earth. That should be reason enough.

Humanistic reasoning? My reasoning comes directly from Christ and Paul and what they tell us of the OT and the future.
You know. It strikes me that I give what feels like copious of scriptures to back and suport my opinions.
You just give your opinions.
Humanistic. Snort.

 

[CoreIssue]

Sorry, I don't have the time to read linked to stuff. I can barely keep up here.

Then you cannot argue here until you do.