Understanding Parable and Allegory in God's Word

[Naomi25]

I am not wrong. There's no Biblical evidence for such an idea. You can try... to present Scripture evidence, and I'd be glad to show how it is not written. And remember, if there is only one single Bible verse in contradiction when presenting a Scripture as evidence, that automatically disqualifies the view.

I thought it best to start a new post for this one...its gonna be long! Because I disagree mightily with you...there is plenty biblical evidence for it. And it's nice that you have confidence in yourself and your views, but I hope that confidence is not a hardness of heart to what the bible actually teaches.

Ah yes, the 'contradiction' problem. And that is where I think the crux of the issue lies. Our interpretive grid is somewhat different. So, I suspect that no matter the verses I give, you will look at Rev 20 and say "there's your contradiction, case closed.' It's not, however, because that interpretation comes from a "literal hermeneutic" and that's the incorrect way to read Revelation.

Anyway, let me start at the beginning.

When talking about "the Millennium" (called that obviously for the 1000 year reference), we can biblically characterize this time period by the fact that Christ is reigning. Over what? A Kingdom? A people? A place? The Rev 20 passage tell us that those killed in the name of Christ, those who do not give in to "Antichrist", will 'come to life and rule and reign with Christ' during this 'Kingdom'.
It also tells us that during this time Satan is "bound from deceiving the nations".

Okay...so...given that Revelation is often not chronological, and is often symbolic in its use of imagry, most biblical scholars will tell you that the clear rule of thumb for interpreting less clear passages is to go to passages that are more clear. This is something that most scholars agree on, regardless of which school of thought they come from.

With that in mind, let's look at some other passages that speak of; the Kingdom, Christ's rule now, Christian's status in Christ now, and Satan's status now.

The Kingdom is now:

But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. -1 Corinthians 15:23–24

But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. -Matthew 12:28

Christ rules now:

that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, -Ephesians 1:20–22

who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him. -1 Peter 3:22

Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, -Philippians 2:9

Christian's status 'In Christ':

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 and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, -Ephesians 2:5–6

And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, -Colossians 2:13

Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life. -John 5:24

Do not present your members to sin as instruments for unrighteousness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments for righteousness. For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace. -Romans 6:13–14

For we who live are always being given over to death for Jesus' sake, so that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our mortal flesh.-2 Corinthians 4:11

and which now has been manifested through the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortalityto light through the gospel, -2 Timothy 1:10

Satan is bound now:

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 12:28-29

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, the point of these verses?

• The Kingdom is now...this is because; Christ outright tells us in Matt 12:28, and Paul implies, through 1 Cor 15 and Eph 1:20 that the "ruling over powers, authorities and enemies" part of the "kingdom" has already been "checked off" as Christ sat down at the right hand of God.

• Christ clearly rules now. Too many verses teach this: he sits at God the Fathers right hand, has been bestowed the name above all names, has had all powers, names, authorities, etc, placed under his feet. To say this is anything BUT ruling and reigning is playing with the sense and meaning of it.

• Christians can see, again and again in scripture that in Christ, and through grace and salvation, we "come to life". We put death behind us and "are raised up and seated in the heavenly places with Christ". Now...I don't know about you, but that sounds darn close to "come to life and rule with Christ". As far as Rev 20 goes and why is focusing in on those specifically martryed....this is not a surprise. The whole book is written to be an encouragement to those crying out "How long O Lord!!? Til you avenge our blood?" It's a story of triumph, of the Lamb, and of those who give their lives for their Lord. But...this in no way suggests that we dismiss the rest of biblical doctrine that says that ALL Christians also "come to life and reign with Christ"...because that's exactly what it says. And it's what we do the moment we give our hearts and souls to him. Read Eph 2:5-6 again, and wonder at it!

• Satan is a present foe. No one doubts his taint on the world. But Rev 20 does not claim there will be a time where he will be bound from ALL activity upon the world. It says there will be a time where he will not be able to deceive the nations. What does this mean? It should bring something immediately to mind. Jesus tells us that Satan is the Father of Lies. Lies are his thing...deception his biggest weapon; it's what he used in the garden to start this whole mess. But what happened when Christ came that put a huge stumbling block in front of that main weapon? What is the opposite to deception? Truth! What is the truth? The gospel! Christ! Jesus tells his Disciples that at his coming he "bound the strongman" in order to plunder his house! And he tells them this in direct correspondence to talking about the coming of the Kingdom...to it's arrival! He also tells them, when they marvel at their authority over demons that he saw Satan 'fall', and that he has given them authority! This is what Satan being "bound" means. The gospel has been freed to go to all Nations, just as Christ sent us. No matter the hate that stands in our way, Satan has not yet managed to "gather the nations together for war" against the Saints. You can bet he's wanted to. You can bet he's tried. In fact I've heard Pre-millennialists admit that this has not happened yet because of Satan's being 'bound'...or, 'restrained' from the fact. 2 Thess 2:6 tells us that the Antichrist, which will comes BY Satan's power of signs, wonders and....wicked deception. And yet...this has not happened yet...why not? Could it be that Satan has been bound against it? Certainly more verses than just Rev 20 imply it or outright state it.

 

[Naomi25]

I am not wrong. There's no Biblical evidence for such an idea. You can try... to present Scripture evidence, and I'd be glad to show how it is not written. And remember, if there is only one single Bible verse in contradiction when presenting a Scripture as evidence, that automatically disqualifies the view.

My final point is this: when looking at Revelation 20, people assume it has to be read literally and chronological. However, we know that Revelation is an apocolytic book. The genre of apocolypse is not TO be read 'literally'. In fact, the most 'literal' interpretation is to read the book as the genre demands, and that is looking as the signs and symbols that is replete throughout it, and how they point back to other images in scripture. It is out duty to dig into scripture to find out HOW these images, symbols and references were used by God previously. We err in our exegesis if we do not do this. My point being, Rev 20 does not come chronologically after Rev 19 and Christs return. How can we know this? Well, again, the whole structure of Revelation is not chronological, but that's a whole different conversation. The other way we can tell, however, is when we look at the sequence of things outside of Revelation. For example:

But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For “God has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “all things are put in subjection,” it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. -1 Corinthians 15:23–27

I tell you this, brothers: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality. When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written:
“Death is swallowed up in victory.”
“O death, where is your victory?
O death, where is your sting?” -1 Corinthians 15:50–55

Okay, here we have two verses that particularly speak of death being defeated AT Christ's return. It also happens at the moment of the Rapture...when we are caught up to Christ and receive our new, heavenly bodies. 1 Thess 4:15-18 confirms that the return of Christ is when the Rapture and our receiving of the 'incorruptible' body is given to us. So...we know that AT Christ's return, death is finally defeated. In Rev 20 the final defeat of death is placed AFTER the Millennium, and at the Judgement throne of God. Is there any other scripture outside of Revelation that points to this judgement throne? Yep...Matt 25

“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats....And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” -Matthew 25:31–32, 45

So, the upshot of it all? The bible clearly teaches that AT Christ's return, he will defeat death, which is evidenced by our getting our new bodies, and Judge all people. And these things, according to Rev 20, come AFTER the Millennium, when Christ reigns and Satan is bound.

So...sure...I suppose you could look at Rev 20 despite all this and say..."this one passage 'contradicts' Pre-millennialism therefore I rest on Rev 20 alone"....but my point is, to do that will be in direct contradiction of all the above verses. So...as I see it, Pre-millennialists must dwell in a space where they are entertaining at least 1 contradiction at all times; either Rev 20 contradicts all those other passages, or all those other passages contradict Rev 20. With the Amillennialist vies, however, there is not a single contradiction.

 

[Davy]

Wait...so let me get this straight: You can know from 2000 years later what the "first century" Church accurately believed, but Justin, who, by the way, IS considered an ECF, only about 70 years or so after them, is not a reliable source?
I wonder if you just proved my point once and for all that biblical doctrines shouldn't be made on what we 'believe' the early church believed, considering that even you, who declared the ECF to be the most reliable sources for these, cannot, in fact, be trusted. You've just eaten the back side out of your own metric.
Thanks.

Me thinketh thou protesteth too much, (a Shakespearean point that someone's hiding the truth). Because Justin Martyr held to a premillennial return of Christ ought to be enough proof for you of how the 1st century Church fathers held to that belief, and not Amillennialism.

So, in point of fact, you don't actually care what the EC believed. Unless you find particular sources that back Pre-millennialism, you just dismiss as "unreliable" any other source material from that time that even suggests there were, even then, differences in what the Early Church believed.
That's not sound historical discovery, that's biased reading. It's revisionist, quite frankly.
And I agree...have I not been saying all along that to come to a decent bible theology on end times and the Millennium it is always best to stick to scripture, and NOT delve into the ECF?

That's really insane thinking.

Best and most reliable source is God's Holy Writ. That was their... source too. You ought to try sticking to it instead believing a later leaven doctrine of men added to Holy Writ.

Ug. It wasn't meant to change the scriptural evidence. It was meant to point TO the scriptures as evidence and away from the ECF, who we know are fallible.
Again, you seem to be arguing in a circle. First we HAD to consider the ECF, who you insisted were reliable. Then you've managed to assert that they are not and scold me for not looking only to scripture. Dude...are you even reading what I'm saying?? How many times do I have to say it??

My direction is straight as an arrow, pointing towards God's Holy Writ. My challenge to you was that there is no such Amillennial idea written in it. But you're the one flying around in circles trying to find some prey to pick. Why don't you stop mouthing hot air and give us Biblical proof?

 

[Davy]

I thought it best to start a new post for this one...its gonna be long! Because I disagree mightily with you...there is plenty biblical evidence for it. And it's nice that you have confidence in yourself and your views, but I hope that confidence is not a hardness of heart to what the bible actually teaches.

Really no need for it to be long. If it takes a lot to explain something in God's Word, that usually means one is not really revealing what God's Word teaches, but is trying to make room to squeeze a doctrine of men into it, i.e., leaven, which then fragments the True Word of God. Likewise with your starting words about hardness of heart, because what vanity is it that you might have to think that couldn't apply to yourself??

Ah yes, the 'contradiction' problem. And that is where I think the crux of the issue lies. Our interpretive grid is somewhat different. So, I suspect that no matter the verses I give, you will look at Rev 20 and say "there's your contradiction, case closed.' It's not, however, because that interpretation comes from a "literal hermeneutic" and that's the incorrect way to read Revelation.

More just hot air without saying anything. No need to try and prep others here that might read this. I've nothing to hide. I have no problem proclaiming God's Holy Writ as written, and not man's philosophy.

When talking about "the Millennium" (called that obviously for the 1000 year reference), we can biblically characterize this time period by the fact that Christ is reigning. Over what? A Kingdom? A people? A place? The Rev 20 passage tell us that those killed in the name of Christ, those who do not give in to "Antichrist", will 'come to life and rule and reign with Christ' during this 'Kingdom'.
It also tells us that during this time Satan is "bound from deceiving the nations".

Okay...so...given that Revelation is often not chronological, and is often symbolic in its use of imagry, most biblical scholars will tell you that the clear rule of thumb for interpreting less clear passages is to go to passages that are more clear. This is something that most scholars agree on, regardless of which school of thought they come from.

You are speaking to someone who does not believe every scholar, nor do I care what worldly credentials they might have. If an idea is men's leaven, it's not that difficult to spot for someone who sticks to God's Holy Writ. So let's get off the men's 'tradition' rote to begin with. Speak God's Word, not man's.

Right off the bat you have made a misleading statement with the idea that Christ is reigning now. Your statement is an affirmation, not a true statement (for others reading this, an affirmation is when one keeps trying to affirm an idea as true without actually having evidence to back it up). Christ's reign over all nations is still future to us, and that is Biblical. And that is the reign God's Word is talking about (Matthew 25:31-34; Matthew 26:28-29; Luke 22:29-30; John 18:36; 1 Corinthians 15:50; Psalms 2; Revelation 5:10; Revelation 11:14-18; etc.).

God's Word as written on the matter: Satan is NOT yet bound today. Peter told us in 1 Peter 5:8 the devil as a roaring lion walks about seeking whom he may devour. Men's leaven traditions try to say Satan was bound by Christ's death on the cross; not so, as Peter showed. Those who think that most often don't really know what God is using Satan for during this present world, and especially at the very end of this present world. They haven't understood what the OT prophets taught about it.

With that in mind, let's look at some other passages that speak of; the Kingdom, Christ's rule now, Christian's status in Christ now, and Satan's status now.

The Kingdom is now:

But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. -1 Corinthians 15:23–24

Not so fast. There's a lot more in that 1 Cor.15 passage that affects our ole' buddy CONTEXT. Sorry, context is applicable when reading anything!

1 Cor 15:23-28
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at His coming.

Our Lord Jesus has not returned yet today. His literal return to this earth is written, including His gathering of His Church from Heaven and from the earth (Acts 1; Zechariah 14; 2 Thessalonians 2; Matthew 24:29-31; Mark 13:24-27; 1 Thessalonians 4).

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.

Jesus must first come into His Kingdom here on earth, and rule over all nations. That does not begin until the 7th Trumpet - 3rd Woe as written in Revelation 11. That reign will include His elect reigning with Him over the nations with a rod of iron, on earth (Revelation 5:10; Psalms 2). At present there are still rogue nations on today's earth that reject The Father and His Son, so the literal proof of this having yet to happen today is very easy. The "end" Paul is thus pointing to is after... Jesus has reigned on earth, for the Psalms 2 prophecy is that He will reign from Mount Zion in Jerusalem, on earth. Zechariah 14 even reveals His feet touching down there in the middle east upon the Mount of Olives when He returns. Per Acts 1 that is where He ascended into Heaven from.

25 For He must reign, till He hath put all enemies under His feet.

As is easily proven today, Jesus is NOT yet reigning over all His enemies. In Revelation 3:9, Jesus showed that even those of the "synagogue of Satan" will come to worship at the feet of His elect in that future time of His reign. That certainly is NOT happening today, nor has it ever happened in past history. That event is specifically set for when Jesus returns to reign with a rod of iron over all nations, with His elect Church. This is so simple.

26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

The last enemy to be destroyed is death when it and hell are cast into the "lake of fire" at the end of Christ's FUTURE thousand years reign of Revelation 20. This is literally written in Revelation 20:14.

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.
KJV

God has put all things under Christ's Authority. The Father is excepted from Christ's future thousand years reign of Rev.20 which begins at Christ's future return to this earth. Then, when all things are subdued by Christ Jesus in that future reign on earth, at the end of it when death is destroyed, then The Son will deliver up the Kingdom to The Father, and the full Godhead will be all in all.

But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. -Matthew 12:28

That Matt.12:28 verse is often misunderstood. In Luke 17:21 our Lord Jesus also said that the kingdom of God is within you. Even in the Luke 10:10-12 example He gave His disciples entering into a city to preach and if they are rejected, He showed that idea of the kingdom having come nigh to them is about The Gospel Good News, i.e., the Kingdom of God. It didn't mean Christ's literal Kingdom on earth was then going to manifest in final, but in Power it was then here via The Spirit. That also is the meaning of the kingdom being within you, i.e., involving The Spirit making those who receive Jesus Christ as The Saviour "a new creature" like Apostle Paul taught (2 Corinthians 5:17).

This still does not mean there will be no literal Kingdom on earth when Jesus returns, for there definitely will be, even as He promised His 12 Apostles they each would sit upon thrones judging over the twelve tribes of Israel, and that Christ's elect would be kings and priests (Matthew 19:28; Revelation 5:10).

As for what throne Jesus inherits, per Luke 1:31-32 Jesus is to inherit the throne of David, an earthly throne. In most cases, Jesus is shown on the right hand of The Father in Heaven, and not yet having inherited David's throne, which involves His future Kingdom on earth (Ezekiel 37; Genesis 49:10).
....

 

[Davy]

....
Christ rules now:

that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, -Ephesians 1:20–22

who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him. -1 Peter 3:22

Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, -Philippians 2:9

I pretty much responded to that idea at the end of my previous post:

As for what throne Jesus inherits, per Luke 1:31-32 Jesus is to inherit the throne of David, an earthly throne. In most cases, Jesus is shown on the right hand of The Father in Heaven, and not yet having inherited David's throne, which involves His future Kingdom on earth (Ezekiel 37; Genesis 49:10).

There's more that goes with that declaration of Jesus sitting on the right hand of The Father...

Heb 10:12-13
12 But this man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
13 From henceforth expecting till His enemies be made His footstool.
KJV

That is to say, Jesus is now sitting on the right hand of The Father in Heaven, until it's time for ALL His enemies to be made His footstool. That isn't happening today in this present world. It is still future, and will only occur at His return as written, on the 7th Trumpet, when all the kingdoms of this world will become the kingdoms of The Father and His Son (Revelation 11:14-18).

Christian's status 'In Christ':

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 and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, -Ephesians 2:5–6

And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, -Colossians 2:13

Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life. -John 5:24

Do not present your members to sin as instruments for unrighteousness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments for righteousness. For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace. -Romans 6:13–14

For we who live are always being given over to death for Jesus' sake, so that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our mortal flesh.-2 Corinthians 4:11

and which now has been manifested through the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortalityto light through the gospel, -2 Timothy 1:10

All those things are true, for our spirit by The Spirit through Faith on Jesus Christ. It doesn't mean His Heavenly Kingdom to come is literally manifested on this earth yet though. In Spirit via our spirit inside our flesh, yes. But these flesh bodies we have today are not of the Kingdom of God, for as Apostle Paul said, "... flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption" (1 Corinthians 15:50).

Thus what Amillennialism actually preaches, and wrongly so with saying the Kingdom is now already, is a false salvation of the flesh. Our flesh cannot inherit God's Kingdom, as written. That means as long as we are in this flesh, God's Kingdom has not literally come yet. We have to cast off these flesh bodies first, and that doesn't happen until the "last trump" which Apostle Paul preached there also in 1 Corinthians 15:51-54.

Satan is bound now:

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 12:28-29

Of course our Lord Jesus Christ could bind anything on earth, for He is God with us, come in the flesh. And He worked those miracles then at His 1st coming for what reason? To show Who He was, and fulfill The Gospel Salvation by Faith. Did He bind Satan when Satan tempted Him in the wilderness for 40 days and nights? (Luke 4). No, He didn't. Nor did He when He worked miracles, and nor did He when He died on the cross.

Apostle Peter said this AFTER... Christ's death on 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

So no, Satan is NOT yet bound today. Even with Revelation 12:7-17 with the war in Heaven, that is yet to take place; that is when Satan and his angels will be kicked out of Heaven in our near future, and booted down here on earth, in OUR dimension. That makes any idea of his already being bound in the pit today a joke. Sorry, but anyone who's read enough of their Bible isn't going to take you folks seriously on his being bound already.


The rest of your post is just more affirmations, and no actual Bible Scripture evidence for such. Even what Scripture you've shown is often fragments taken out of the context of the Bible topic.

 

[Naomi25]

Me thinketh thou protesteth too much, (a Shakespearean point that someone's hiding the truth). Because Justin Martyr held to a premillennial return of Christ ought to be enough proof for you of how the 1st century Church fathers held to that belief, and not Amillennialism.

Protesting? Maybe I am...but "too much"? I don't think so. In fact, since you have now flip-flopped on your own opinion about the reliability of the ECF, I don't think I'm protesting enough.
You can't keep changing your story or how it is you view the beliefs of the ECF just to suit your purposes. First, they were reliable because 'most' were Pre-Mill. Then, when one of your pre-mill ECF's stated there were "many" other valid views held at the same point in time, you dismissed his view as "not worthy". Now suddenly he's worthy again simply because he's Pre-mill.
Here's the deal: either Justin IS a valid and reliable source, in which case there WERE other, valid views held AT that point in history. Or, he's not, in which case who cares which view he held, 'cause the guy is unreliable.

That's really insane thinking.

Best and most reliable source is God's Holy Writ. That was their... source too. You ought to try sticking to it instead believing a later leaven doctrine of men added to Holy Writ.

It's insane to hold to a consistent and constant way of thinking? And objecting over others who cannot or will not? It's insane to object to someone disregarding history, or putting it on a pedestal just because of a single doctrine or belief held by them? It's insane to suggest that doing that is 'revisionist'? Because...not really.

And DUDE....I've been saying from the beginning that the ONLY place we ought to be pulling our doctrines from is scripture.
You call me insane because I point out your flip-flopping ideas...(in which, might I add, you appear to be trying to defend this view from outside of scripture even though you are scolding me for the same thing, which is ridiculous if you re-read what I've written); and then you try and righteously make a claim that...if you will go back to post #34, I tried steering us towards in the first place.

My direction is straight as an arrow, pointing towards God's Holy Writ. My challenge to you was that there is no such Amillennial idea written in it. But you're the one flying around in circles trying to find some prey to pick. Why don't you stop mouthing hot air and give us Biblical proof?

Oh, so now we're getting nasty? Perhaps you should have read the rest of my posts before accusing me of being full of hot air. I've provided plenty of scripture...

And as far as "trying to find some prey to pick"....sure. Whatever. I'm preying upon you because I attempted from the beginning to bring the discussion of eschatology back to scripture, rather than historical figures. And I'm preying on you because I had the nous to pick up on the fact that you're wobbling so much with your back and forth opinion of the ECF, its slightly hilarious.
But sure, let's keep going around. I believe for you next post, its time you for to see-saw back against and inform how Justin is NOT reliable. Then you can tell me after that how he MUST be and how therefore Pre-Mill is the only logical choice.
Sure, that makes sense. But I'm the insane one...

 

[Davy]

My final point is this: when looking at Revelation 20, people assume it has to be read literally and chronological. However, we know that Revelation is an apocolytic book. The genre of apocolypse is not TO be read 'literally'. In fact, the most 'literal' interpretation is to read the book as the genre demands, and that is looking as the signs and symbols that is replete throughout it, and how they point back to other images in scripture. It is out duty to dig into scripture to find out HOW these images, symbols and references were used by God previously. We err in our exegesis if we do not do this. My point being, Rev 20 does not come chronologically after Rev 19 and Christs return. How can we know this? Well, again, the whole structure of Revelation is not chronological, but that's a whole different conversation. The other way we can tell, however, is when we look at the sequence of things outside of Revelation. For example:

1. I well understand not all the events written in Revelation are given in sequential order. The key is to understand the events and their relation to Bible prophecy, and that involves the Old Testament Books quite a bit. The writing style of Revelation by The Holy Spirit is much like the Books of the OT prophets. Those who question its authenticity because of how different its style is compared to the rest of the New Testament Books show a probable lack of OT study in the prophets.
2. Just as in the Books of the OT prophets the subject flow can change very quickly timeline wise, even between phrases in just one verse, our Lord's Book of Revelation sometimes does the same thing. Other NT Epistles also do this, it shouldn't be a mystery, nor an excuse to apply some "genre" apocalyptic formula.
3. Just as with all Bible Scripture, it was written through holy men by The Holy Spirit, and He is our key for understanding it. This is one of the reasons for showing only Christ being able to open up the Seals for us. We have to go through Him.
4. Many of the signs and symbols were first given back in the OT prophets, and even back in the Book of Genesis.
5. Interpreting Rev.19 events as not flowing into Rev.20 has to be because of some 'outside' doctrine of men; Rev.19 reveals judgment has happened upon the Babylon harlot. And we are specifically told right then The LORD God reigneth (Revelation 19:6). The marriage of The Lamb is shown then having come, with His wife being arrayed in fine linen which is the righteousness of the saints (a reference to the Millennial chapter of Ezekiel 44, and to the robes of the "great multitude" of Revelation 7:9-17, all which is still about Christ's future reign).

There's just too much Scripture that goes against your ideas. I'm not convinced.

But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For “God has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “all things are put in subjection,” it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. -1 Corinthians 15:23–27

I tell you this, brothers: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality. When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written:
“Death is swallowed up in victory.”
“O death, where is your victory?
O death, where is your sting?” -1 Corinthians 15:50–55

Okay, here we have two verses that particularly speak of death being defeated AT Christ's return. It also happens at the moment of the Rapture...when we are caught up to Christ and receive our new, heavenly bodies. 1 Thess 4:15-18 confirms that the return of Christ is when the Rapture and our receiving of the 'incorruptible' body is given to us. So...we know that AT Christ's return, death is finally defeated. In Rev 20 the final defeat of death is placed AFTER the Millennium, and at the Judgement throne of God. Is there any other scripture outside of Revelation that points to this judgement throne? Yep...Matt 25

No, death absolute is not yet defeated when Jesus returns. There will still be the "second death" as shown in Rev.20. As a matter of fact, the "second death" is the ONLY type of death mentioned in the Rev.20 Chapter. It's because that is the ONLY type of death remaining, as it involves the casting of the unbelieving into the future "lake of fire" after God's GWT Judgment.

1. Rev.20 shows only those of the 1st resurrection will be about Christ's elect.
2. Christ's elect will not be subject to the "second death". That means their souls will be made immortal at Christ's coming per the change Paul taught.
3. In John 5:28-29, Jesus showed that BOTH resurrections occur on the same day of His 2nd coming.
4. Only the "resurrection of damnation" will be subject to the "second death". They go through that thousand years reign by Christ and His elect. The only type of death remaining during that thousand years is spiritual death, death of one's spiritual body with soul. Time to explain...

Isaiah 25 is where Apostle Paul was pulling from about death being swallowed up in victory. In Isaiah 25, it is pointing to the 'change' at the twinkling of an eye being for ALL... peoples still alive on earth on that "last trump", not just those in Christ Jesus. Just as it was Paul's hope that there would be both a resurrection of the just and the unjust, that hope for the unjust was not in vengeance. It was in hope that some of those spiritually dead souls of the "resurrection of damnation" might be saved during Christ's thousand years reign. Because John 5:28-29 shows the wicked dead are raised on the day of Christ's coming too, that means they are part of the unsaved nations Jesus and His elect reign over with the rod of iron during the future thousand years. Those are of the "resurrection of damnation", meaning their souls are still in a liable to perish condition, being without Christ.

Thus the 'change' on the 'last trump' represents the resurrection of all those still alive on earth on the day of Jesus' return, both the just and the unjust. All will be in the resurrection type body. But not all souls will have put on immortality through Christ Jesus. Paul covered this in the Greek of 1 Corinthians 15:50-54 by using four different Greek words to represent four different states, corruption to incorruption, and this mortal to putting on immortality. Those are two separate changes, not one. The first is about our flesh body being changed to the incorruptible "spiritual body". The this mortal putting on immortality is about our mortal soul being made immortal through Christ.

“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats....And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” -Matthew 25:31–32, 45

So, the upshot of it all? The bible clearly teaches that AT Christ's return, he will defeat death, which is evidenced by our getting our new bodies, and Judge all people. And these things, according to Rev 20, come AFTER the Millennium, when Christ reigns and Satan is bound.

Not really, because when our Lord Jesus returns, that is not the GWT Judgment upon the wicked of the casting into the "lake of fire". When Jesus gave that summary of events in Matt.25 He didn't yet give us His Book of Revelation, which gives us more detail as to those events and their order. The way you're interpreting it is like His Book of Revelation doesn't exist. It also denies other Scripture like Zechariah 14 which reveals His reign over those left of the nations that came up against Jerusalem. Even in 1 Cor.5 about the believer in the Church there that was having sexual intercourse with his father's wife, Paul showed a possible saving grace period for that one's spirit in "the day of the Lord Jesus", pointing to Christ's future "thousand years" reign of Rev.20. Even that idea that his spirit might be saved is a direct pointer to the state of the "resurrection of damnation" of unsaved souls which Jesus and His elect will literally reign over at His 2nd coming.

So...sure...I suppose you could look at Rev 20 despite all this and say..."this one passage 'contradicts' Pre-millennialism therefore I rest on Rev 20 alone"....but my point is, to do that will be in direct contradiction of all the above verses. So...as I see it, Pre-millennialists must dwell in a space where they are entertaining at least 1 contradiction at all times; either Rev 20 contradicts all those other passages, or all those other passages contradict Rev 20. With the Amillennialist vies, however, there is not a single contradiction.

I've pretty well shown enough contradictions in your interpretation from keeping to simple Bible Scripture. I could probably write a book on many more contradictions against simple Bible Scripture just from what you've presented.

 

[Naomi25]

Really no need for it to be long. If it takes a lot to explain something in God's Word, that usually means one is not really revealing what God's Word teaches, but is trying to make room to squeeze a doctrine of men into it, i.e., leaven, which then fragments the True Word of God. Likewise with your starting words about hardness of heart, because what vanity is it that you might have to think that couldn't apply to yourself??

It did apply to myself; I used to be a Dispensationalist. But the Spirit bought me great discomfort on that doctrine and pushed me to look for it in scripture. It wasn't there...as you know. However, the more I read, studied and prayed about it, I found Pre-Millennialism wasn't there either.
The fact that you, apparently, can't even engage in a decent conversation about the topic with a sister in Christ, speaks more to you than me, I'd wager.
Could I be wrong? Sure...and surprising or not, I'm completely open to that notion. God might not be done leading me. However, I'm not going to persuaded by arrogant men who have more time for their own opinions than for another humble searcher.
If you want to disagree with me biblically, then do so as I present my case. If you are just going to start out a conversation with "I'm right and you're SO wrong I laugh at the length of your pathetic case"...then I have to shake my head at the irony of everything you said above. Look in a mirror, huh?

More just hot air without saying anything. No need to try and prep others here that might read this. I've nothing to hide. I have no problem proclaiming God's Holy Writ as written, and not man's philosophy.

You're really very rude for a Christian, did you know that?
But, no...it's not hot air. Is it hot air to claim that the Pentateuch needs to be read as history and not poetry? Is it hot air to suggest it's important to read Daniel as apocalyptic rather than a psalm? Is it hot air to say that the epistles need to be read as letters rather than prophecy?
Of course its not, and anyone who's been through Primary school has been taught that. Genre matters. If you ever tried to hand in poetry for what was supposed to be a book report...you would have failed. And so, suggesting that approaching each bible book as the genre it was written, is ONLY hot air if you failed English.
And I didn't accuse you of HIDING anything.

You are speaking to someone who does not believe every scholar, nor do I care what worldly credentials they might have. If an idea is men's leaven, it's not that difficult to spot for someone who sticks to God's Holy Writ. So let's get off the men's 'tradition' rote to begin with. Speak God's Word, not man's.

But Early Church Fathers...those are cool, you trust them to be right. Except when you don't...which seems to be a matrix that only you can figure out. Oh...and based on the fact that they were Pre-Mill AND needed to be championing it at all time. Poor Justin...he just HAD to say there were other valid views, didn't he? Now he's out.

Right off the bat you have made a misleading statement with the idea that Christ is reigning now. Your statement is an affirmation, not a true statement (for others reading this, an affirmation is when one keeps trying to affirm an idea as true without actually having evidence to back it up).

I'm sorry...you think Christ is NOT reigning now? You think I didn't "back it up" with scripture? Then...what about all the scripture? Is it cool to ignore scripture?

that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, -Ephesians 1:20–22

I'm sorry, but how does this imply Christ's reign is only in the future? Where does it say "will put all things under his feet"? It doesn't, it says "he put"...present tense. 'When he raised him from the dead'...that's not future, that was 2000 years ago. "This age and the age to come"...also present tense, just ongoing into the next one...

Please tell me HOW the above verse teaches only a FUTURE reign of Christ?

who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him. -1 Peter 3:22

"IS at"...not 'will be at'. "Having BEEN subjected to him"....not 'will be subjected to him. Again, please tell me HOW this teaches only a future reign?

Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, -Philippians 2:9

"God HAS highly exalted him"...not 'God will highly exult him'. "Bestowed on him"...not 'will bestow'.
HOW does this teach only a future reign?

Christ's reign over all nations is still future to us, and that is Biblical. And that is the reign God's Word is talking about (Matthew 25:31-34; Matthew 26:28-29; Luke 22:29-30; John 18:36; 1 Corinthians 15:50; Psalms 2; Revelation 5:10; Revelation 11:14-18; etc.).

Except, Matt 25:31-34 isn't talking about reigning...its talking about judgement. And yes, that IS future. But sitting in judgement is not the same as the verses that TELL us outright that Christ IS ruling and reigning now.
Again, Matt 26:28-29 is not speaking of reigning, just of being reunited with his bride. Which is the messianic banquet. Still not talking about ruling NOW, and still doesn't contradict the verses I gave above.
Luke 22:29-30...nope...still not speaking of his current reign (or not reign). It's speaking of the the future age, eternity, when we shall receive our rewards in the presence of Christ. YOu will note, however, that Christ says that he will give us our rewards, just as the Father 'assigned to him a Kingdom'. Not "will assign". Again, not proof that Christ is NOT reigning now.
1 Cor 15:50...now you're starting to list verses that outright support my view! This tells us ONLY that the corruptible cannot inherit the Kingdom. Two clear points here: one, Christ can totally reign over this Kingdom, as he was the firstfruits to receive the incorruptible body...plus, you know, he's Christ. Plus, the verse says INHERIT. This would only be a problem if the Kingdom that Christ reigns over is to end before his second coming. The fact is, we know that 'his Kingdom will last forever'. In other words, all this verse is saying is; we gotta get the upgrade before the Kingdom is fully consummated. Before we get heaven...paradise on earth, we must pass through death or the return of Christ. Again...sorry, this verse does NOT contradict the verses that tells us Christ reigns NOW.
Psalm 2...ah...you do know that this was written BEFORE Christ came, died and was resurrected, yeah? Therefore any 'future reign' it speaks of...would be future...of course. You can't use this to try and prove what future. For the OT prophets, future was future. They saw all comings as one. They did not have the special revelation that let them know Christ would have 2 comings. Sorry.
Rev 5:10...this is not even talking about Christ! Its speaking of his Church being 'kings and priests'...which is interesting, really, as there are other verses that can prove that this is happening now (1 Pet 2:9). But still....NOT about Christ and his ruling status.
Rev 11:14-18...nice verse, but still not what you need. Remember in the Lord's prayer how we pray "your Kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven"? This is what this verse is about...the moment when Christ's will is done everywhere; heaven, earth, in all hearts and minds. This does NOT say he is not currently ruling, just that there is a time coming when heaven is bought to earth in a way it is not currently.\

Now...again. You've made some fairly hefty and rude accusation at me. And while my sarcasm always leaps to the fore when that happens, I am trying my darndest to stick solely to the argument at hand. And the argument is this: I have several verses that OUTRIGHT tell us that Christ rules now. You appear to only have verses that you BELIEVE tells us that it is yet future. None of them, I'm sorry, contradicts or casts doubts on the verses that speak to it outright.

 

[Naomi25]

God's Word as written on the matter: Satan is NOT yet bound today. Peter told us in 1 Peter 5:8 the devil as a roaring lion walks about seeking whom he may devour. Men's leaven traditions try to say Satan was bound by Christ's death on the cross; not so, as Peter showed. Those who think that most often don't really know what God is using Satan for during this present world, and especially at the very end of this present world. They haven't understood what the OT prophets taught about it.

I wonder how many times Amillennialists are forced to point out a basic exegetical mistake like this. I know you pride yourself on being 'a straight arrow pointing to scripture', so how can you say that Revelation 20 says that Satan will not be allowed to 'seek whom he may devour"? Let me remind you....Rev 20 says ONLY that Satan will be bound from "deceiving the nations". That's it. It does NOT say that he is bound completely. That he is restricted in all that he may do. That's SO reading into the text.
So let me bounce this idea off you; we KNOW that God CAN restrict Satan without completely taking him out of the picture. Consider Lot...God was clear what Satan was, and was not, allowed to do. And Satan had to comply. Now...if God has 'bound' Satan from deceiving the nations...in a very particular way ("deceiving the nations to gather them together for war" Rev 20:8), and he was no longer able to do that...its going to make him a little mad, wouldn't you say? Perhaps he might become like a roaring Lion...trying to do as much damage as he is allowed to do in the little time he has it?
You may not agree with me on this, but you cannot deny that Rev 20 does and does not say certain things. And what you claim...it does not say. And we all know that God CAN restrict Satan without completely locking him away. Biblical fact, not opinion. Or 'leaven', or whatever phrase you've got in your head.

Not so fast. There's a lot more in that 1 Cor.15 passage that affects our ole' buddy CONTEXT. Sorry, context is applicable when reading anything!

Really? You give me rude grief in the beginning for taking TOO long with my stupid case, and now I haven't dug into the detail enough?
Did I mention before how you have a consistency problem?

1 Cor 15:23-28
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at His coming.

Our Lord Jesus has not returned yet today. His literal return to this earth is written, including His gathering of His Church from Heaven and from the earth (Acts 1; Zechariah 14; 2 Thessalonians 2; Matthew 24:29-31; Mark 13:24-27; 1 Thessalonians 4).

So? I don't disagree that Christ has not yet returned.
What this verse does highlight for us, however, is that it is AT Christ's return that we receive our 'firstfruit' bodies, that which Christ received when he was resurrected.

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.

Jesus must first come into His Kingdom here on earth, and rule over all nations. That does not begin until the 7th Trumpet - 3rd Woe as written in Revelation 11. That reign will include His elect reigning with Him over the nations with a rod of iron, on earth (Revelation 5:10; Psalms 2). At present there are still rogue nations on today's earth that reject The Father and His Son, so the literal proof of this having yet to happen today is very easy. The "end" Paul is thus pointing to is after... Jesus has reigned on earth, for the Psalms 2 prophecy is that He will reign from Mount Zion in Jerusalem, on earth. Zechariah 14 even reveals His feet touching down there in the middle east upon the Mount of Olives when He returns. Per Acts 1 that is where He ascended into Heaven from.

Uh, uh...that's NOT what it says! You're reading into it a gap. It doesn't say there will be a gap. It says: AT Christ's return we will receive our new bodies. THEN the END comes, WHEN he delivers over the Kingdom.
Question...how can he give over a Kingdom AT this time if it hasn't started yet?
You can try and confuse the issue with those other verses again (which, once more, doesn't help your argument), but it doesn't change the fact that this verse just gave us the timeline of the events, and it solidly places the Kingdom as being 'delivered to the Father', rather than starting.
And we know, from other scriptures and common sense, that when Christ returns in all his glory, all those powers and authorities...they WILL be helpless to do anything but what Christ says. In fact, we are told that there is only 1 more enemy that must yet be defeated. I'm sure you mention it, so...

25 For He must reign, till He hath put all enemies under His feet.

As is easily proven today, Jesus is NOT yet reigning over all His enemies. In Revelation 3:9, Jesus showed that even those of the "synagogue of Satan" will come to worship at the feet of His elect in that future time of His reign. That certainly is NOT happening today, nor has it ever happened in past history. That event is specifically set for when Jesus returns to reign with a rod of iron over all nations, with His elect Church. This is so simple.

So...you don't believe Christ is sovereign over all? You think that the powers on this earth are not ultimately under his divine rule or sway? That Satan himself was NOT defeated upon the cross?
See, here is the theological problem in thinking Jesus does NOT rule now: you place other powers higher than him. The point of the resurrection was to show that nothing is higher than him. When the last enemy is defeated, then he hands over all his power to the Father, and once that is done, God, in his Trinity, will be as it should; all in all.
If you think that ISIS, or the foolish climate warriors, or the crazy little dictator in North Korea have ultimate power over their own destinies...then sure; let's say Christ doesn't rule. Let's throw away all those verses that say differently and say "oh...evil still exists, that means Christ doesn't rule".
The problem is; the bible DOES have those verses, and it also tells us that things will continue this way UNTIL Christ comes back to destroy the last enemy.

You say its "easily proven that Christ doesn't reign now", except the only 'proof' you give is that in the future his enemies will acknowledge him. That proves nothing about 'now' and you have in no way satisfactorily dismissed the verses saying outright that he IS.
Let me put it to you in this way: Our cat dragged a mouse into our bathroom the other day...gross and unfortunate. She likes the bathroom because there's nothing for the mouse to escape under. Not wanting to try and catch the mouse, or have it escape into my house, I just shut the door and hoped the cat would get on with it. Knowing it would probably wouldn't. It would probably play with it, the way cats do. Have you ever seen that? The mouse dashes this way and that, believing that because it has freedom of movement it has a chance. It doesn't. The cat is just biding its time, waiting until it gets sick of everything, then it'll just bring down its paw...and that's that.
Christ is in absolute control of everything NOW. Every Christian ought to believe that. And while he might not be waiting until he gets bored, rather he waits with patience and love; a time WILL come when he brings down that paw, and the world will be his. But don't you see? The world HAS to be his before that, before he can just drop the hammer like that. The mouse already has to be caught for the cat to just decide 'now'. Christ will not be fighting tooth and nail up until the moment he finally has the upper hand and can bring about the end. The point of the cross and his resurrection was that he won THEN! He's been in that ultimate place of authority and power since then.
Saying otherwise leaves your Lord impotent and the resurrection meaningless.

26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

The last enemy to be destroyed is death when it and hell are cast into the "lake of fire" at the end of Christ's FUTURE thousand years reign of Revelation 20. This is literally written in Revelation 20:14.

Again, NOT what this passage says. It doesn't say "Christ will come...then there will be a 1000 year gap, THEN death is defeated". Nope, sorry.
It says that AT Christs return, THEN he hands over the Kingdom, AFTER defeating the last enemy; death. I notice you haven't taken the passage for all its worth; jumping down to Vv50-55, when it tells us that death is defeated when we get our new bodies. And when is that? 1000 years after he comes? Nope, the beginning of the passage tells us; AT his coming. You can't just shove a 1000 year gap in there because you want it.

 

[Naomi25]

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.
KJV

God has put all things under Christ's Authority. The Father is excepted from Christ's future thousand years reign of Rev.20 which begins at Christ's future return to this earth. Then, when all things are subdued by Christ Jesus in that future reign on earth, at the end of it when death is destroyed, then The Son will deliver up the Kingdom to The Father, and the full Godhead will be all in all.

Again, not what it says! Goodness, and you give ME grief about my "mens leaven". You can't even read a passage straight without sticking a great big gap in there that is just not there.
Do you notice all the words you used that are NOT there? 'thousand years reign', 'future reign'....those are YOUR elements, not scriptures. Nope, the bible doesn't put these events happening at the end of a 1000 years. Any straightforward reading on this text tells us that there IS no gap between Christ's return, when we receive our new bodies and death is finally defeated, and when the Kingdom is handed to the Father.
You can try and deny it, but what not there is...well just not there.
However, the verses I gave showing that Jesus IS reigning now...well...they say it loud and proud.

That Matt.12:28 verse is often misunderstood. In Luke 17:21 our Lord Jesus also said that the kingdom of God is within you. Even in the Luke 10:10-12 example He gave His disciples entering into a city to preach and if they are rejected, He showed that idea of the kingdom having come nigh to them is about The Gospel Good News, i.e., the Kingdom of God. It didn't mean Christ's literal Kingdom on earth was then going to manifest in final, but in Power it was then here via The Spirit. That also is the meaning of the kingdom being within you, i.e., involving The Spirit making those who receive Jesus Christ as The Saviour "a new creature" like Apostle Paul taught (2 Corinthians 5:17).

Okay, so here's the deal. You flip flop on ideas, then get cranky at me when I point them out. You call me insane and full of hot air. You think all my ideas are 'mens leaven'....and yet, for all that you have yet to provide any single verse that contradicts the verses I have given. You try a 'look over there' approach with other verses, but they blatantly and obviously DON'T make the claims you say they do.
And now you want me to simply take it on your word that Matt 12 is "misunderstood"...and that you know better what it means?
How about this...how about I let scripture tell me what it means.
You say none of those verses are supposed to point to Christ's literal Kingdom? Sure...I agree with that. Because his kingdom is NOT literal. Wanna know how I arrive there? He told me.

Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.” -John 18:36

That's pretty clear, yeah? Now...you could start saying that the 'Kindgom' he is talking about is a different "Kingdom" that is spoken of in 1 Cor 15...but then you fall into the same trap as the Dispensationalists, who claim all the references to Christ's 'coming' has to be talking of different comings...when it just doesn't specify that at all. You have to, like your gap, start inserting things and changing things to fit YOUR doctrine...not follow what the bible says.
And Christ clearly says that his kingdom...HIS Kingdom, is NOT of this world. Its it interesting that we are also told that we, if we belong to him, also do not belong to this world? Hmmm.

This still does not mean there will be no literal Kingdom on earth when Jesus returns, for there definitely will be, even as He promised His 12 Apostles they each would sit upon thrones judging over the twelve tribes of Israel, and that Christ's elect would be kings and priests (Matthew 19:28; Revelation 5:10).

As for what throne Jesus inherits, per Luke 1:31-32 Jesus is to inherit the throne of David, an earthly throne. In most cases, Jesus is shown on the right hand of The Father in Heaven, and not yet having inherited David's throne, which involves His future Kingdom on earth (Ezekiel 37; Genesis 49:10).

But he is on the throne. And in the new heavens and earth, when he rules all the world, not just the tiny land of Israel, the promise to David...and Abraham too, for that matter, will have come to it's full bloom. People who insist on trying to tie Christ and the nation of Israel to a certain bloodline and a tiny parcel of land, miss the point of God's promise to Abraham and the idea of the promised land...totally. But, that's another conversation to this current one, and I think we have our hands full at present.

 

[bbyrd009]

ty, Naomi. There is no "Christ returning" that you can Quote, but wth
if you can find one, single instance of "Jesus/Christ hupostrepho" NT, Strong's Greek: 5290. ὑποστρέφω (hupostrephó) -- to turn back, return
or "shuvu" OT, someone, anyone, please holla so that i can know, ty

No, that being changed there is not... an allegory. It will happen literally, just as Apostle Paul wrote it.

well, so you say anyway. Could still happen literally, yet not literally the way you currently understand it, yeh?

 

[Davy]

....

The fact that you, apparently, can't even engage in a decent conversation about the topic with a sister in Christ, speaks more to you than me, I'd wager.
Could I be wrong? Sure...and surprising or not, I'm completely open to that notion. God might not be done leading me. However, I'm not going to persuaded by arrogant men who have more time for their own opinions than for another humble searcher.
If you want to disagree with me biblically, then do so as I present my case. If you are just going to start out a conversation with "I'm right and you're SO wrong I laugh at the length of your pathetic case"...then I have to shake my head at the irony of everything you said above. Look in a mirror, huh?

I can engage in a decent conversation, just not the one you want me to which is full of men's leaven tradition and not directly in God's Holy Writ. If you're studied in God's Word then I shouldn't have to remind you of Scripture you leave out that disproves your theory, but that's exactly what I've had to do.

You're really very rude for a Christian, did you know that?
But, no...it's not hot air. Is it hot air to claim that the Pentateuch needs to be read as history and not poetry? Is it hot air to suggest it's important to read Daniel as apocalyptic rather than a psalm? Is it hot air to say that the epistles need to be read as letters rather than prophecy?
Of course its not, and anyone who's been through Primary school has been taught that. Genre matters. If you ever tried to hand in poetry for what was supposed to be a book report...you would have failed. And so, suggesting that approaching each bible book as the genre it was written, is ONLY hot air if you failed English.
And I didn't accuse you of HIDING anything.

I'm a realist. I don't have time for idle chit-chat, which is exactly what you're doing right now. It serves no edification in Christ.

But Early Church Fathers...those are cool, you trust them to be right. Except when you don't...which seems to be a matrix that only you can figure out. Oh...and based on the fact that they were Pre-Mill AND needed to be championing it at all time. Poor Justin...he just HAD to say there were other valid views, didn't he? Now he's out.

You should learn not to try and put your own words in other people's mouths. Since you have strayed off of Scripture proof for your theory, then does mean we are done??

I'm sorry...you think Christ is NOT reigning now? You think I didn't "back it up" with scripture? Then...what about all the scripture? Is it cool to ignore scripture?

that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, -Ephesians 1:20–22
....

Your only playing on that one Scripture, when there are many more Scriptures involving the time of Christ's 2nd coming and gathering of His Church, and then His millennial reign with His elect. If you want to discuss Christ's Authority over all things from the beginning, which is what that Scripture is pointing to, then know that only during His short period here on earth, meek as a Lamb, is the only time He has not been in control over all things. Christ Jesus is God, Immanuel (God with us), come in the flesh to die on the cross. That's what His 1st coming was about, not to rule on earth then, but to sacrifice Himself upon the cross for us. At His 2nd coming is when He is going to take absolute control over all peoples, all nations, and literally reign on earth, sitting upon David's throne in Jerusalem, as King of kings, and Lord of lords.

Since you don't understand how our Lord Jesus can be in control today, but still allow Satan and his host to work during this present time while we await His 2nd coming to take literal reign on earth, then it shows you might need more Bible study.

who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him. -1 Peter 3:22

It would seem that you only know a few Scriptures, since you keep repeating the same ones I've already responded to.

Heb 2:8
8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under His feet. For in that He put all in subjection under Him, He left nothing that is not put under Him. But now we see not yet all things put under Him.
KJV

You probably only read the first and second sentence of that above verse. I read and heed it all. The meaning of that of course is that He is still yet to rule over all nations on earth. Jesus has full Authority over all things, but not all things have been put under Him just yet; that will change with His 2nd coming which is when He begins His reign with "a rod of iron" (Psalms 2).

This verse is saying the same thing:

Heb 10:12-13
12 But this man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
13 From henceforth expecting till His enemies be made His footstool.
KJV

What would that idea of "From henceforth expecting" be about? Simple, it's about His being at the right hand of The Father in Heaven until His second coming. That 2nd coming still has not happened yet today. We still await His 2nd coming. It is then when all His enemies will be made His footstool. Here's a specific example of all His enemies being made His footstool in that future time after His 2nd coming...

Rev 3:9
9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.
KJV

Has that ever happened during this present world? No, of course not. Instead that synagogue of Satan is still persecuting Christ's Church today. That above verse will only happen at Jesus' 2nd coming. They will be made to come at the feet of Christ's elect to worship Jesus in that future "thousand years" reign of Revelation 20 and Zechariah 14.

So ask yourself, why is Jesus not reigning over that synagogue of Satan today? What was it He said to those about His 2nd coming? Do you remember?

Matt 23:38-39
38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see Me henceforth, till ye shall say, "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord."
KJV

Jesus wasn't saying that to believers on Him, but to His enemies that wanted Him dead. Since when did His enemies ever... say that, "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord"?

Those who believed on Jesus at His 1st coming and thought He had come then to reign said that (Matthew 21:9), but not His enemies, they haven't said it, yet. That means there is a future fulfillment of the Isaiah 40 Scripture when those unbelieving Jews will say that:

Isa 40:1-10
40:1 Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith your God.
2 Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry unto her, that her warfare is accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned: for she hath received of the LORD's hand double for all her sins.
3 The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God.
4 Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low: and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain:
5 And the glory of the LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it.
6 The voice said, Cry. And he said, What shall I cry? All flesh is grass, and all the goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field:
7 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: because the spirit of the LORD bloweth upon it: surely the people is grass.
8 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.
9 O Zion, that bringest good tidings, get thee up into the high mountain; O Jerusalem, that bringest good tidings, lift up thy voice with strength; lift it up, be not afraid; say unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God!
10 Behold, the Lord GOD will come with strong hand, and his arm shall rule for him: behold, his reward is with him, and his work before him.
KJV

A lot of preachers like to treat that as having been fulfilled with John the Baptist preparing the way at Christ's 1st coming (Matthew 3:1-3). That doesn't work because... why? Because the enemies of Christ had Jesus and John the Baptist killed. The Way was offered at Jerusalem, but the unbelieving Jews rejected it (as they still do in Jerusalem today). So no God's highway yet there in the middle east, and it is a literal highway that is about (see Isaiah 19:23-25).

 

[Davy]

I wonder how many times Amillennialists are forced to point out a basic exegetical mistake like this. I know you pride yourself on being 'a straight arrow pointing to scripture', so how can you say that Revelation 20 says that Satan will not be allowed to 'seek whom he may devour"? Let me remind you....Rev 20 says ONLY that Satan will be bound from "deceiving the nations". That's it. It does NOT say that he is bound completely. ....

Satan being bound in the pit after Jesus' return per Rev.20 is moot. It's obvious that it's temporary then, since he is loosed one final time at the end of the thousand years to tempt those nations. Why? Because during the time when he is bound in the pit (along with the evil kings with him (Isaiah 24:20-22), none of the nations will be able to be deceived away from God's Word. All peoples then will see Jesus, and will 'hear' His Word with ears to hear. Those who never heard The Gospel will then hear it, literally and spiritually. There will be no excuse to reject Christ then. All will be held accountable. God is not going to send any soul into the lake of fire unless their eyes have been opened and made fully accountable for their choice. This is why Satan will be loosed one final time, to test those.

Uh, uh...that's NOT what it says! You're reading into it a gap. It doesn't say there will be a gap. It says: AT Christ's return we will receive our new bodies. THEN the END comes, WHEN he delivers over the Kingdom.

I'm not adding anything into it. You haven't understood the simple Scripture:

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

Those statements in red are conditional. They must... happen before that delivering up of the kingdom to The Father. It's simple, all one need do is read that condition as written there. It's actually the doctrine of men that is preventing you... from properly interpreting that simple Scripture.

Question...how can he give over a Kingdom AT this time if it hasn't started yet?
You can try and confuse the issue with those other verses again (which, once more, doesn't help your argument), but it doesn't change the fact that this verse just gave us the timeline of the events, and it solidly places the Kingdom as being 'delivered to the Father', rather than starting.

You're obviously the one that is confused. Jesus won't deliver the kingdom to The Father until He has put all... His enemies under His feet, just as that Scripture shows, so how can you even think He has done that to all nations on earth today? And you say I'm confused???

And we know, from other scriptures and common sense, that when Christ returns in all his glory, all those powers and authorities...they WILL be helpless to do anything but what Christ says. In fact, we are told that there is only 1 more enemy that must yet be defeated. I'm sure you mention it, so...

Yeah, even those of the synagogue of Satan will bow the knee at the feet of Christ's elect of the Church of Philadelphia, as written (Revelation 3:9). The idea in 1 Corinthians 15:26 about the last enemy is about the "second death", which is the casting into the future "lake of fire". Do you really... believe that has happened already? And you say I'm confused???

So...you don't believe Christ is sovereign over all? You think that the powers on this earth are not ultimately under his divine rule or sway? That Satan himself was NOT defeated upon the cross?

That's one of those questions like, "Are you still beating your wife?" Of course Christ Jesus is sovereign. Do you think Jesus' enemies could murder Him on a cross without His allowing them to do it? Why did He choose to die on the cross? Have you forgotten that? Who else could die on a cross to forgive man's sins? Could any flesh man do that, or did it require The Son of God to do it? What part of the meaning of His name Emmanuel do you not understand? (Matthew 1:23).

See, here is the theological problem in thinking Jesus does NOT rule now: you place other powers higher than him. The point of the resurrection was to show that nothing is higher than him. When the last enemy is defeated, then he hands over all his power to the Father, and once that is done, God, in his Trinity, will be as it should; all in all.
If you think that ISIS, or the foolish climate warriors, or the crazy little dictator in North Korea have ultimate power over their own destinies...then sure; let's say Christ doesn't rule. Let's throw away all those verses that say differently and say "oh...evil still exists, that means Christ doesn't rule".
The problem is; the bible DOES have those verses, and it also tells us that things will continue this way UNTIL Christ comes back to destroy the last enemy.

Pretty much idle words again, and straying away from Scripture. The fact that such radicals exist on earth today ought to be enough proof to you that our Lord Jesus isn't yet ruling over them, literally. Why haven't you understood the Matthew 24:6 Scripture about the end when all wars have stopped? Obviously we are not there yet.

You say its "easily proven that Christ doesn't reign now", except the only 'proof' you give is that in the future his enemies will acknowledge him. That proves nothing about 'now' and you have in no way satisfactorily dismissed the verses saying outright that he IS.

You're showing confusion again. What is it you cannot understand that when His enemies bow to Him at the feet of His elect that is not... meaning He is then ruling over them?

Rev 3:9
9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.
KJV

Christ is in absolute control of everything NOW. Every Christian ought to believe that. And while he might not be waiting until he gets bored, rather he waits with patience and love; a time WILL come when he brings down that paw, and the world will be his. But don't you see? The world HAS to be his before that, before he can just drop the hammer like that. The mouse already has to be caught for the cat to just decide 'now'. Christ will not be fighting tooth and nail up until the moment he finally has the upper hand and can bring about the end. The point of the cross and his resurrection was that he won THEN! He's been in that ultimate place of authority and power since then.
Saying otherwise leaves your Lord impotent and the resurrection meaningless.

Making up your own rules based on your limited Bible understanding again, I see.

If our Heavenly Father is Omnipotent, having Authority and Power over all things, and He is as written, then how is it He allows Satan to operate in His kingdom if His Son is now reigning over all things? Saying that murderers and the wicked working on earth today are included under Jesus' reign shows that Jesus really doesn't have that much power to reign after all! It's like mocking His ability to reign to assume the workings of the wicked on earth today are examples of His Power and Authority.

Again, NOT what this passage says. It doesn't say "Christ will come...then there will be a 1000 year gap, THEN death is defeated". Nope, sorry....

Revelation 20 reveals that Jesus has... returned.

Rev 20:4
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.
KJV

That does not happen until Jesus' 2nd coming, you know, the coming that the Apostles spoke of when He is going to gather His Church, the one that you claim to believe in too?

That image of the beast those refused to worship is about the beast image the coming Antichrist will setup per Rev.13. It is linked to the timing of the end of this world just prior to Christ's 2nd coming. That being over and done with places this Rev.20:4 timing after Christ's 2nd coming. Moreover, the saints do not 'live'... and reign with Jesus until His 2nd coming:

Rev 2:25-27
25 But that which ye have already hold fast till I come.
26 And he that overcometh, and keepeth My works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of My Father.
KJV

That power to rule over the nations given His elect doesn't happen until He returns. We definitely are not ruling over all nations today. Instead, the nations are slowly persecuting Christ's Church on earth today more and more, even powers in the traditional Christian West are doing that.

But at Rev.20:4, Christ's elect are... in that power over the nations, with Jesus. So the timing is unmistakable.

 

[Davy]

Again, not what it says! Goodness, and you give ME grief about my "mens leaven". You can't even read a passage straight without sticking a great big gap in there that is just not there.
Do you notice all the words you used that are NOT there? 'thousand years reign', 'future reign'....those are YOUR elements, not scriptures. Nope, the bible doesn't put these events happening at the end of a 1000 years. Any straightforward reading on this text tells us that there IS no gap between Christ's return, when we receive our new bodies and death is finally defeated, and when the Kingdom is handed to the Father.
You can try and deny it, but what not there is...well just not there.
However, the verses I gave showing that Jesus IS reigning now...well...they say it loud and proud.

Those in Christ are not required to follow 'your' personal rules. The event of Christ's reign in Rev.20 is literally written and is unmistakable. You cannot just 'remove' it as if it doesn't exist there.

Here is what the doctrine of man you follow tries to do to that Rev.20 Scripture...

Rev 20:2-6
2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

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

You cannot get around that literal period of "a thousand years" that is written there! It is not symbolic, it is a literal period of time.

And as I have shown already from the Rev.20:4 verse, that is definitely only of the time after Christ's return. That is when verse 4 tells us His elect will live and reign with Him, which is pointing directly to Revelation 2:25-29.

Okay, so here's the deal. You flip flop on ideas, then get cranky at me when I point them out. You call me insane and full of hot air. You think all my ideas are 'mens leaven'....and yet, for all that you have yet to provide any single verse that contradicts the verses I have given. You try a 'look over there' approach with other verses, but they blatantly and obviously DON'T make the claims you say they do.

Talk about being rude! You are pushing a lot of hot air. Here I am responding to Scripture you post but you don't do the same. Instead, you are all over the place, acting like a trapped animal.

 

[Davy]

....
well, so you say anyway. Could still happen literally, yet not literally the way you currently understand it, yeh?

I see no problem with how Apostle Paul explained it...

1 Cor 15:50-54
50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,

52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
KJV

Change 1:
"corruptible" = Greek phthartos = decayed, perishable, i.e., a flesh body.
"incorruption" = Greek aphthrsia = incorruptibility, unending existence, i.e., the "spiritual body" Paul taught.

Change 2:
"mortal" = Greek thnetos = liable to die, i.e., a still mortal liable to die soul.
"immortality" = Greek athanasia = deathlessness, i.e., eternal life through Christ Jesus.
(definitions from Strong's Exhaustive Concordance)

Those of the "resurrection of life" will go through both changes at Christ's return.

Those of the "resurrection of damnation" will only go through the 1st change at Christ's return.

At the end of the Rev.20 "thousand years", when the books are opened, only those whose names are found in the book of life will go through the 2nd change then, and be saved unto Christ. The mention of a 1st resurrection unto Christ automatically implies at least one more later.

 

[Naomi25]

I pretty much responded to that idea at the end of my previous post:

You responded, yes. Satisfactorily...nope. Suggesting a bunch of verses that speak of the next age means Christ is NOT ruling now, doesn't actually do much for your argument. It tells us that Christ reigns THEN as well as NOW, but should that surprise us?
Look...unless you can, in some way, provide reasonable doubt as to why those verses cannot be taken at face value, I'm just going to assume the above; that Christ reigns now, and forever. Because that's what my bible says.

As for what throne Jesus inherits, per Luke 1:31-32 Jesus is to inherit the throne of David, an earthly throne. In most cases, Jesus is shown on the right hand of The Father in Heaven, and not yet having inherited David's throne, which involves His future Kingdom on earth (Ezekiel 37; Genesis 49:10).

Ug. This is not something I wanted to get into in depth, because its a big conversation. I'll see if I can keep it fairly succinct.
In the OT, we see that the 'Kingdom of God' was, in fact, Israel and God was their "King", who allowed them to inhabit his land. (Isaiah 43:15, 44:6 , Exodus 19:5-6, Psalm 114:1-2, Ezekiel 36:5). But, as we know, Israel eventually wanted a human King (1 Sam 8:7), but these kings were only ruling on behalf of God (2 Chron 9:8). We see David saying: “And of all my sons, (for the LORD hath given me many sons,) he hath chosen Solomon my son to sit upon the throne of the kingdom of the LORD over Israel.” 1 Chron 28:5. In other words, God had selected and allowed David and Solomon to rule over his Kingdom.
When we continue on through the OT, and we come to Israel's dark days and evil kings, we see this:
“…and thou, profane wicked prince of Israel, whose day is come, when iniquity shall have an end, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Remove the diadem, and take off the crown: this shall not be the same: exalt him that is low, and abase him that is high. I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him.” Ezekiel 21:25-27

Not only is the 'right to rule' God's Kingdom taken from man, but it is also promised that it will be returned to the one 'whose right it is'. God also promises David:

“And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever… And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.” 2 Samuel 7:12-17

Then we come to the NT, where Mary is told this: “…and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David…he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever”” Luke 1:32-33...which takes us back to:

We know, of course, that this seed is Christ. And that the throne 'of David' he is to inherit, is, in fact, God's throne. And he will 'reign over the house of Jacob for ever'.
Then Christ begins speaking of this Kingdom, his Kingdom. He tells the people that the "Kingdom of God is at hand" and "is already upon you". He also tells us that "my Kingdom is NOT of this world" (my emphasis added). We hear him command the gospel of the Kingdom be preached in all the world and to all nations. And we see at Pentecost, after he takes his rightful place next to God, the Apostles connecting both his ascension to power and the going forth of the Kingdom proclamation, to be direct fulfillment of OT prophecy. When the Old Testament envisioned the renewal of God’s kingdom, it anticipated the day when God would heal the divided people of Israel and unify his kingdom under the Messiah King from David’s line (Ez 37:15-28). Indeed, we see the OT promises of "all the world will be blessed through you", fulfilled as the gospel reaches out to every tribe, tongue and nation.

God's Kingdom has spread from a single peoples and single land, to all peoples and every land. And the consumation of all this; Christ's return in power, will be the event that unifies all; heaven and earth, God's will to our own. And Christ will reign on his throne, his rightful throne...God's throne, which was passed to David and then to Christ.

All this to say: Yes, Christ WILL be seated on David's throne, but David's throne was God's all along; and it was also a pre-shadow or type, of 'throne' and 'Kingdom' to the real one; the one that rules over all; not just a tiny parcel of land.
And, it may all be well and good to suggest what you are suggesting, but it still doesn't address the elephant in the room; the one where you STILL haven't done anything about those pesky verses that state quite clearly that Christ reigns now.

There's more that goes with that declaration of Jesus sitting on the right hand of The Father...

Heb 10:12-13
12 But this man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
13 From henceforth expecting till His enemies be made His footstool.
KJV

That is to say, Jesus is now sitting on the right hand of The Father in Heaven, until it's time for ALL His enemies to be made His footstool. That isn't happening today in this present world. It is still future, and will only occur at His return as written, on the 7th Trumpet, when all the kingdoms of this world will become the kingdoms of The Father and His Son (Revelation 11:14-18).

You're still missing the point that 1 Cor 15 makes plainly. Christ "'must reign' until he has put ALL enemies under his feet. The last enemy is death."
Death is defeated AT his return. Which means he is currently reigning, subjecting all those powers and authorities and rulers to himself. In other words: Christ is even now bending those he has already defeated to his will. And AT his return, the final enemy will also be made to yell 'uncle'. As I've said before, all the verses you have provided speak of Christ's ongoing reign, of the expectation that final victory and consummation will be at his return. The problem with these verses is that they don't speak to his current status, and certainly don't contradict that he is, or could be, reigning right now as well. The thing about an 'eternal kingdom', is that is can go for a long time, especially when we have verses that speak of Christ reigning in "this age and the one to come". That sort of implies, or outright screams, that his reigning happens now, as well as then.

 

[Naomi25]

All those things are true, for our spirit by The Spirit through Faith on Jesus Christ. It doesn't mean His Heavenly Kingdom to come is literally manifested on this earth yet though. In Spirit via our spirit inside our flesh, yes. But these flesh bodies we have today are not of the Kingdom of God, for as Apostle Paul said, "... flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption" (1 Corinthians 15:50).

You're still missing the "my Kingdom is not of this earth" part.
Seriously; look up the verses that speak of "The Kingdom of God". All the times Jesus warned those who struggled to 'enter' it. All the parables he compared it too. It was never meant to be a 'literal Kingdom'. You enter it by faith; redemption through grace. It grows and spreads with the gospel, not with invasions and territories being taken. It changes the world through preaching, not military might.
The Kingdom has always been the Church on the earth. The only 'Literal' we can or should expect, is in the next Age, where the new heavens and earth and all people within it, declare the glory of God with one voice.

Thus what Amillennialism actually preaches, and wrongly so with saying the Kingdom is now already, is a false salvation of the flesh. Our flesh cannot inherit God's Kingdom, as written. That means as long as we are in this flesh, God's Kingdom has not literally come yet. We have to cast off these flesh bodies first, and that doesn't happen until the "last trump" which Apostle Paul preached there also in 1 Corinthians 15:51-54.

If the Kingdom of God is entered through faith and spread via preaching of the Gospel, then when the bible speaks of believers becoming 'alive in Christ', then we most certainly are a part of the Kingdom. Now.
However, you seem to be incapable of seeing that Christ's Kingdom has no end. That's clearly biblical, right? Now, if the bible teaches that through faith, through spiritual regeneration, we are part of the Kingdom NOW, how do we explain the fact that there IS coming an end? Do we say that has to be the end of one Kingdom and the beginning of another; which is what you seem to favor. The problem with that is, its not biblical. Jesus' Kingdom HAS no end. Therefore, all we can say is that the Kingdom comes in two phases, just as Christ himself will. In THIS AGE, the Kingdom is made up of believers, spiritually new in Christ, as Christ himself rules and reigns. After the defeat of the last enemy at his return, the Kingdom moves into a new phase, THE AGE TO COME, where we physically inherit the Kingdom with our new, imperishable bodies.

So sure, I may be a nasty Amillennialist, but at least I can remain faithful to scripture. In my view, Christ's Kingdom has no end...just as the bible teaches.

Of course our Lord Jesus Christ could bind anything on earth, for He is God with us, come in the flesh. And He worked those miracles then at His 1st coming for what reason? To show Who He was, and fulfill The Gospel Salvation by Faith. Did He bind Satan when Satan tempted Him in the wilderness for 40 days and nights? (Luke 4). No, He didn't. Nor did He when He worked miracles, and nor did He when He died on the cross.

Well, that's not entirely faithful to scripture either. Christ tells the disciples he saw Satan 'fall like lightning' as they went out and preached the gospel of the coming of the Kingdom. He also said that he 'bound the strong man' in order to plunder his house. Satan is the 'strong man' of this world, and yet Christ clearly says he has been bound so that Christ may call and keep his own.

Apostle Peter said this AFTER... Christ's death on 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

So no, Satan is NOT yet bound today. Even with Revelation 12:7-17 with the war in Heaven, that is yet to take place; that is when Satan and his angels will be kicked out of Heaven in our near future, and booted down here on earth, in OUR dimension. That makes any idea of his already being bound in the pit today a joke. Sorry, but anyone who's read enough of their Bible isn't going to take you folks seriously on his being bound already.

Covered this in a previous post. But: please read Rev 20 and point out to me where it tells us Satan is bound from everything...

The rest of your post is just more affirmations, and no actual Bible Scripture evidence for such. Even what Scripture you've shown is often fragments taken out of the context of the Bible topic.

Well, right back at ya. In point of fact, I'd have to say the most 'out of context' award goes to you. You dismiss the verses that tell us Christ reigns now, and instead try and prove your theory with verses that point to the future without dismissing or explaining how the verses that say NOW need to be dismissed in favor of them. Faithful bible interpretation would have to lead us to conclude, on ALL the passages, that Christ reigns now AND in the future. Which makes total sense, as his Kingdom is forever.

 

[Naomi25]

2. Just as in the Books of the OT prophets the subject flow can change very quickly timeline wise, even between phrases in just one verse, our Lord's Book of Revelation sometimes does the same thing. Other NT Epistles also do this, it shouldn't be a mystery, nor an excuse to apply some "genre" apocalyptic formula.

Apocalyptic genre is not a "formula", its simply telling us how the book was written and therefore how it must be read.
Similarly, if you read something that started with "once upon a time", you would understand immediately that what followed wasn't to be taken seriously.
Genre matters because if we don't understand the context and form something is written in, no matter how 'faithful' we wish to be to the text, we'll still stumble. Jesus' parables had very real, applicable points to them, but we are not supposed to take each 'story' as having happened literally.
Likewise, when we come to Revelation, or even parts of the book of Daniel, we know from the stated use of symbols and images, that we are not to take these things 'literally'. Jesus is not actually a lamb, Satan doesn't have scales and there's no giant women dwelling among the stars about to give birth.
Understanding the genre lets us view these images and symbols with the knowledge that they represent something else; something absolutely true and essential, but not literal.

3. Just as with all Bible Scripture, it was written through holy men by The Holy Spirit, and He is our key for understanding it. This is one of the reasons for showing only Christ being able to open up the Seals for us. We have to go through Him.

The reason only Christ could open the seals is because he was the only one found worthy 'in heaven, or upon the earth or under it'. This means that it is because of Christ's obedience and sacrifice on the cross that makes him worthy; that is why John sees a sacrificed lamb when he looks.
This image is not telling us that that we can 'only understand the book' through the Spirit, or Christ. Yes, of course we rely on the Holy Spirits work and leading in us for all biblical understanding, but the book of Revelation is not understandable only to those who 'follow his leading' and receive special revelation about it.

5. Interpreting Rev.19 events as not flowing into Rev.20 has to be because of some 'outside' doctrine of men; Rev.19 reveals judgment has happened upon the Babylon harlot. And we are specifically told right then The LORD God reigneth (Revelation 19:6). The marriage of The Lamb is shown then having come, with His wife being arrayed in fine linen which is the righteousness of the saints (a reference to the Millennial chapter of Ezekiel 44, and to the robes of the "great multitude" of Revelation 7:9-17, all which is still about Christ's future reign).

Oh, it 'has to be from some outside doctrine of men'? Didn't you just admit above that Revelation is not chronological? Except when YOU say it has to be, apparently.
So, I'm not going to bother trying to explain the way Revelation is laid out, because I'll be wasting my time.
However, as I've said before, there is an easy way to determine the timing of Rev 20 in conjunction with the rest of the book. And that is by looking at the other verses in the NT that speak of Christ's return. 1 Cor 15 tells us that Christ returns and deals death the final blow. And when that happens, he hands the Kingdom over to the Father. We know from other passages that the Rapture and our new bodies are, yes, AT Christ's return. We also know that AT his return, he sits in judgement of all mankind. So, when we move back to Rev 20 and see that the judgement of mankind AND the defeat of death is AFTER the 1000 years.
The ONLY way you get around that is if you start adding extra judgement thrones or great big dirty gaps that are NOT in the scripture.
So whose got the dodgy doctrine...really?

There's just too much Scripture that goes against your ideas. I'm not convinced.

And you haven't shown 1 yet. So...I'm not convinced that your objections have any basis in scripture. As I keep saying, you cannot dismiss verses that speak of Christ's current reign with scriptures that just speak of his future reign. The ONLY thing that proves is that he reigns forever more; starting at his ascension and lasting into eternity. Again, as the bible says. The ONLY way for you to cast doubt on the 'now' scripture is to present scriptures that says he is not. But you can't, because they're not there.

No, death absolute is not yet defeated when Jesus returns. There will still be the "second death" as shown in Rev.20. As a matter of fact, the "second death" is the ONLY type of death mentioned in the Rev.20 Chapter. It's because that is the ONLY type of death remaining, as it involves the casting of the unbelieving into the future "lake of fire" after God's GWT Judgment.

Death is absolutely not defeated when Jesus returns? Except....that's exactly what 1 Cor 15 says. Quite clearly. And the only way you wiggle around that is to insert things into the passage that simply aren't there.
Also, Rev 20 states that "Death and Hades are thrown into the Lake of Fire". It does not say "the second death and Hades".
The misunderstanding you are having here is that you're not quite getting WHAT the first or second death is. Nor what the first resurrection is.
The first resurrection, we are told, are those who do not worship the beast. In other words, they stayed true to Christ. We are also told that those who experience the first resurrection will not experience the second death. What is the second death? The Lake of Fire.
Clearly, we have references here to regeneration and final judgement. The first resurrection is regeneration; when those who believe upon Christ move from death to life in him. The bible is replete with verses speaking of how we 'come alive' in Christ. And, once we are in him, we know that the 'second death'...the Lake of Fire, is not our destination.
However, everyone else, every other enemy...including death...physical death...will be treated to the 'second death'...the Lake of Fire, the spiritual death.
So, the first death is physical death, that we all must experience, or have Christ return. In either event we then must face what comes after; eternal life, or eternal destruction in the LOF, the second death. The problem with assuming that the LOF is just a second death judgment that comes after a 1000 year gap, is the fact that we know that ALL judgements and the giving of either life or death, happens AT Christ's return, not at the end of 1000 years. Matt 25 tells us that AT Christ's return he will judge all nations into either eternal life or eternal judgement. 1 Cor 15 tells us that at this event death IS defeated.
And IF we are judged and moved into our eternal state AT Christ's return, then suggesting that there is a 1000 year period where people in these eternal states must still be judged or experience death....well...its just not found anywhere. Your basing it off assumptions and add-ons.

 

[Naomi25]

1. Rev.20 shows only those of the 1st resurrection will be about Christ's elect.
2. Christ's elect will not be subject to the "second death". That means their souls will be made immortal at Christ's coming per the change Paul taught.
3. In John 5:28-29, Jesus showed that BOTH resurrections occur on the same day of His 2nd coming.
4. Only the "resurrection of damnation" will be subject to the "second death". They go through that thousand years reign by Christ and His elect. The only type of death remaining during that thousand years is spiritual death, death of one's spiritual body with soul. Time to explain...

Only the damned go through the 1000 year reign of Christ and then will be judged? And, can you at all prove that from the text? Where is the 1000, or mention of different judgements?
In point of fact, the only two mentions of the judgement throne; Matt 25, which discusses the judgement of the living, and Rev 20 which discusses the judgement of all those who are already 'asleep', both of them list judging the just and unjust together.
So, I'd dearly love to know where you pull that gap and distinction from.

Isaiah 25 is where Apostle Paul was pulling from about death being swallowed up in victory. In Isaiah 25, it is pointing to the 'change' at the twinkling of an eye being for ALL... peoples still alive on earth on that "last trump", not just those in Christ Jesus. Just as it was Paul's hope that there would be both a resurrection of the just and the unjust, that hope for the unjust was not in vengeance. It was in hope that some of those spiritually dead souls of the "resurrection of damnation" might be saved during Christ's thousand years reign. Because John 5:28-29 shows the wicked dead are raised on the day of Christ's coming too, that means they are part of the unsaved nations Jesus and His elect reign over with the rod of iron during the future thousand years. Those are of the "resurrection of damnation", meaning their souls are still in a liable to perish condition, being without Christ.

Paul may well have been pulling that reference from Isaiah 25, but he was applying it to Christ's return, not after it.
And let me get this straight...you think that AT Christ's return ALL people...both good and evil...are 'changed'. In other words...they receive the bodies that they'll dwell in for eternity, be in heaven or hell.
And yet, you still think there will be a 1000 year kingdom in which people are supposed to be able to sin and die?
How on earth does that even work?
And please tell me WHERE in scripture it tells us that after Christ's coming we get a second chance?
Again....just unbiblical ideas made up from assumptions. Not scripture.

Thus the 'change' on the 'last trump' represents the resurrection of all those still alive on earth on the day of Jesus' return, both the just and the unjust. All will be in the resurrection type body. But not all souls will have put on immortality through Christ Jesus. Paul covered this in the Greek of 1 Corinthians 15:50-54 by using four different Greek words to represent four different states, corruption to incorruption, and this mortal to putting on immortality. Those are two separate changes, not one. The first is about our flesh body being changed to the incorruptible "spiritual body". The this mortal putting on immortality is about our mortal soul being made immortal through Christ.

I don't disagree that AT Christ's return all will be given their new bodies. The problem comes for you when you think that we then, in this state, move on to a time period where people get a second chance and judgement has not happened.
Just as the scriptures tell us that ALL receive a new 'state', they also tell us that they "go into" eternal life or judgment. There is ZERO room in those verses for another time period where this other chance of improving their status is given. It's just NOT there.

Not really, because when our Lord Jesus returns, that is not the GWT Judgment upon the wicked of the casting into the "lake of fire". When Jesus gave that summary of events in Matt.25 He didn't yet give us His Book of Revelation, which gives us more detail as to those events and their order. The way you're interpreting it is like His Book of Revelation doesn't exist. It also denies other Scripture like Zechariah 14 which reveals His reign over those left of the nations that came up against Jerusalem. Even in 1 Cor.5 about the believer in the Church there that was having sexual intercourse with his father's wife, Paul showed a possible saving grace period for that one's spirit in "the day of the Lord Jesus", pointing to Christ's future "thousand years" reign of Rev.20. Even that idea that his spirit might be saved is a direct pointer to the state of the "resurrection of damnation" of unsaved souls which Jesus and His elect will literally reign over at His 2nd coming.

Ah, so you're resting all this on the fact that the 'throne judgement' of Matt 25 and the GWT judgment of Rev 20 HAVE to be different judgements.
Problem with that; it doesn't state that. In face when we look at the passages, the text points us in the direction that they are the same event. At the end of the Matt 25 passage, people are either ushered into eternal life, or eternal damnation. In case you wonder; eternal damnation does not give you wiggle room for an out, or 'second chance' period. And in Rev 20, we see that those who 'did not have their names written in the book of life' were tossed into the LOF, the second death. Again, this is final and leaves no wiggle room.
The other very big problem you have with separating these events, is that other scriptures contradict that view. Matt 25 speaks of the judgment of the living. Rev 20 speaks of the judgment of the dead. But 1 Cor 15:52 and 1 Thess 4:16 puts the 'resurrection and judgment' of living AND dead together. In other words, the bible tells us that AT Christ's return, both living and dead, just and unjust, are all 'dealt' with at the same time. And that means the GWT judgment and Matt 25 judgment, must be the same. If not, you've got to totally dismiss some of these other verses.

I've pretty well shown enough contradictions in your interpretation from keeping to simple Bible Scripture. I could probably write a book on many more contradictions against simple Bible Scripture just from what you've presented.

You have? Hmmm...how could I have missed them all? Oh, it probably happened while I was staring at the glaring, great hole in the text you insisted upon to make your theory work.
Sorry, all you've shown is your talent in reading what is NOT there.

 

[Naomi25]

I can engage in a decent conversation, just not the one you want me to which is full of men's leaven tradition and not directly in God's Holy Writ. If you're studied in God's Word then I shouldn't have to remind you of Scripture you leave out that disproves your theory, but that's exactly what I've had to do.

I'm a realist. I don't have time for idle chit-chat, which is exactly what you're doing right now. It serves no edification in Christ.

Wait...you CAN engage in decent, civil conversation WHEN its something you deem worthy and correct?
My goodness...how...decent of you. And not at all manipulative or narcissistic.
Well, since you've so decisively put me in my place, including all that spankingly honest bible exegesis where you most certainly did NOT read into it or wedge gaps in all over, I suppose I'll take my chit-chat elsewhere. I'm sure I can be abused somewhere else just as well.