The Reality of the Millennial Kingdom

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

VictoryinJesus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,581
7,857
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
But there you're doing it again. You never were one of those "workers of iniquity", even before you came to Christ Jesus. If you had been, you would have been seeking to destroy the Faith even now. Those workers are different than the average sinner who doesn't know Christ. Those workers are the devil's own.

And Apostle Paul's kinsmen Jews there are not that "mystery of iniquity" either.

For real? How do we glaze right over the two commandments (Love God and neighbor) as if they are not even there and say He is Lord? So Paul only loved certain people? A select few of his flesh?

How does Matthew 5:44-48 become void? “But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; [45] That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. [46] For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? [47] And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others ? do not even the publicans so? [48] Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.”

John 14:15
[15] If ye love me, keep my commandments.

Romans 12:14
[14] Bless them which persecute you: bless, and curse not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Trekson

Trekson

Well-Known Member
Jul 24, 2012
2,084
218
63
67
Kentucky
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The new creation has begun. It is the new creature(s) that inherits the earth.

2 Corinthians 5:17-18
[17] Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. [18] And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;

We won't need the earth. The earth will be for the living, not the immortal. Yes, we are new creatures but in the sense that we can begin each day anew, not that we have transformed into something different. All humans have an immortal spirit be they good or evil.
 

Trekson

Well-Known Member
Jul 24, 2012
2,084
218
63
67
Kentucky
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I strongly disagree.

John 5:28-29
28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear His voice,


29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

KJV

The context there is a certain "hour", and all in the graves coming forth. That means a general resurrection. That includes the wicked dead, which verse 29 is proof of that with His mention of the "resurrection of damnation" along with the "resurrection of life".

Of course many go directly against what our Lord Jesus said there, because they'd rather keep the tradition from men they have been taught all their life.

Hi Davy, I think our difference lies in the often misconstrued belief that only sinners will be at the GWTJ. All human flesh that haven't known about or had the opportunity to hear about Christ will be judged at that time as well, also those good that died during the millennial era. The former will be judged by how they lived regarding the basic knowledge of good an evil that resides in all of us.
 

Trekson

Well-Known Member
Jul 24, 2012
2,084
218
63
67
Kentucky
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
What I said isn't about what our Lord Jesus' crucifixion represents. I know what His Blood shed on the cross represents. That's not the point.

The point is with false preachers trying to assign the 'guilt' of His crucifixion, and thus His blood, upon us, His Church.

That is an idea very close to blasphemy, simply because it was Lucifer's own elect servants ("synagogue of Satan") hidden within the Jews that stirred up the people and had Him crucified, and that blood guilt is upon those enemies of God, not us who have believed on Jesus' death and resurrection and were not even there to see His death!

Then it's simply a matter of semantics. We are guilty and deserving of eternal death, perhaps it would be better worded if you said that, "Many false teachers claim that the church is responsible for the "act" of His crucifixion. The statement that His "blood" is upon all living souls believer or not is true.
 

Naomi25

Well-Known Member
Aug 10, 2016
3,199
1,801
113
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
I’m continuing a conversation with Naomi25 concerning whether the millennium is a real thing or not.
Naomi25 said in the thread, Replacement theology, #54- “However...in regards to your other idea...of during the millennium the Church will be in heaven while everyone else will be, I assume, in normal bodies down here with Christ reigning over them...I still have some problems with it. Firstly...I find no scripture evidence for it. Secondly, it still leaves us with a bit of a mess, does it not? What could be the purpose for such a time? “
Hi Trekson. I don't have a lot of time at the moment to really get into a good, indepth debate (sadly!), but I'll try to find some time to squeeze in some comments!
About this first paragraph....I have never said that the Millennium is not a "real" thing. I just think it's a current thing. Amillennialists believe the Millennium is a symbolic period of time where Christ is ruling in his Kingdom ("My Kingdom is not of this world - John 18:36", "he is seated far above all rule and authority and power and dominion - Eph 1:20). Yes, we believe that Satan is bound (Rev 20), very specifically against deceiving the nations for war against the saints, and that towards the very end of this Age that restriction will be lifted.
But, we do see it as a very real thing. Is Christ not ruling right now? Did he not defeat sin, death and Satan on the cross and establish his Kingdom? This Kingdom may not be as exactly as you thought it would be, but I remind you, you would not be the first to be mistaken in that...the entire Jewish nation was mistaken in what they thought Messiah would establish in his first coming, and he had to tell them "my kingdom is NOT of this world". Where does that mean his Kingdom is? Where he is now seated perhaps? Where the bible tells us he is ruling above all powers? It may not fit into your slot of what this "Kingdom" should look like, but it's an entriely rational outcome from what Christ and scripture tells us.

She also said - “Well, we certainly don't let one passage in an apocolyptic (hard to interpret) book tell us how to interpret these easier passages...”

My response to this is that when one considers only the obvious symbolism when it is explained and takes the rest literally as the majority is meant to be understood, it’s really not that hard to understand at all because it doesn’t need to be “interpreted!”
Well, as I've pointed out before to Enoch111, this hermeneutic fails. Dispensationalists say that's their rule that they follow...that they only look at something in Revelation as symbolic if that 'symbol' is then 'explained', but then they can't follow through. Is there a literal woman in the stars giving birth? No explination found in the text to give you a 'symbolic' out there, so there should be an actual woman, by Dispensational rule. Is there a sword coming out of Christ's mouth when he comes? No symbolic explination there, so by literal hermeneutic, there should be a sword. Dispensationalists automatically realise that so many of the symbols are actually symbols and interpret thusly. I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm just saying that one: it's against their own hermeneutic, and two: they ought to stop criticizing others for doing just that.
The other thing I need to mention is this: Those of us who interpret Revelation 'symbolically' don't just pluck the symbols out of thin air so we can make them say whatever we want. While the explination of all the symbols may not be found in Revelation, most of them are, in fact, found throughout the bible, mostly in the OT. So, you'll find that we actually get our interpretation from there. So, while Dispensationalists wobble because of a broken hermeneutic causing them to snap back and forwards at odd times between literal and symbolic with no apparent rhyme or reason, those they critize are actually plumbing scripture for the meaning of the book.


In closing, do you realize that the “earth” is mentioned 77 times in Revelation? That seems to be a lot for a supposed “one and done” judgment day taking place in heaven! I don’t understand how anyone could consider all of Rev. as being a single “day” of judgment when in the book it has several various lengths of time mentioned, 1260 days, 42 months, five months, multiple scenarios that obviously can’t be different ways of saying the same thing over and over. From the myriad of scriptures concerning the subject it can not be denied that there is a great length of time prophesied about Christ ruling and reigning upon the Earth!
That's because we DON'T consider all of Revelation to be "one day of judgement". We consider Revelation to be a description of the time period between Christ's two advents. The book is recapitulative, it gives us several different view points of the same "play". Each time they get just a little more violent, just like birth pangs do, finally working up to the grand event itself.
Just consider this, for a second, about all the judgements: when we look at the 4 horsemen, as we love to call them...thos things have been 'riding' throughout the world forever. War, conquest and unrest, famine, disease, death. It's the same list Christ gave in the Olivet Discourse of what would be the 'beginning of birth pangs'.
But then after that, the judgements of the trumpets and bowls that fall upon the earth: in essence they are the same, bringing judgement down upon the earth in an 'anti-creation' type way, effecting land and the growing things upon it, seas, rivers and living things in them, then the sun and moon. Andthen at the end of each set of 7, we see Christ returning with 'earthquake, the sky darkening, hail' etc. Again, we see the description of this return in the Olivet Discourse.

Anyway, that's just a incredibly brief summary of how we see it, and why we don't see all of it fitting into a single day!
 

Mal'ak

Member
Jan 15, 2019
75
45
18
40
Cedar City
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If you don't understand about their existence in God's Word, then there is much of God's Word you will not truly understand.

The fact that their are false Jews is a very "meat" topic, which goes into many things. Saying someone will not understand much of God's word because they do not understand one very mature Christian topic is a little too much trolling, we are to build each other up not just smash people down to make ourselves feel smart or right. Like Paul said, he has more works then anyone will ever have probably, but if it is not done in love then it is void. The early Church had one or two letters from one of the disciples and perhaps once in their life they would have one of the disciples visit them, they did not have the entire Bible or all the answers, but they still knew God and were Christians.
 

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,996
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
About this first paragraph....I have never said that the Millennium is not a "real" thing. I just think it's a current thing.
The Lord help us all if the Millennium is a *current thing*. Satan must be rolling on the floor laughing!
 

Naomi25

Well-Known Member
Aug 10, 2016
3,199
1,801
113
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
The Lord help us all if the Millennium is a *current thing*. Satan must be rolling on the floor laughing!
That depends remarkably on whether or not your definiton of the "Millennium" is built from what the scriptures say about that time period, of if it's built from a rather mistaken understanding of scripture and just assumptions.
I've already pointed out that Rev 20 only specifies the Satan will be bound from 'deceiving the nations' during that period. You have not been able to show, biblically, otherwise.
I've pointed out elsewhere that the bible speaks clearly of two ages: this age, and the age to come. This age is always things before the coming of Christ, and 'the age to come' are things eternal. This leaves no room for a Millennial age, and I've seen no biblical evidence put forward to suggest it.
Any OT passages that have been put forward to support the 'future Millennial age' idea have either completely ignored the verses preceeding them that tell us outright that they are speaking of the new heavens and new earth, or it has been ignored how the NT takes and reinterprets many of the OT promises through Christ himself.
Any way you look at it, it's easy for you to say "satan must be rolling on the floor", but I have yet to see you attempt to back that up with scripture rather than just rolling your eyes at me. You do realise that in such matters your opinion of me, and your opinion on the topic at hand fade into the background and scriptural evidence must take precedence?
 

Naomi25

Well-Known Member
Aug 10, 2016
3,199
1,801
113
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
And I have clearly shown Naomi25 that all her arguments are false -- straw man arguments.
Shown how?!! With your disdain and dismissal? It must be that, and not biblical exegesis, because I haven't seen any of the latter!
I'm quite happy to be shown wrong if indeed I am. But I won't be shown wrong by someone's claims and opinion alone. God's word must be front and centre or else it's just words on a page. Surely you must believe that as well? This is what confuses me the most with some people. Their insistance on being right about God's word, but their reluctance to use God's word to prove it!
 
  • Like
Reactions: bbyrd009
B

brakelite

Guest
I have been a Christian for 40 years, have seen that statement countless times, but never once with a biblical text in support or confirmation.
All humans have an immortal spirit be they good or evil.
 

Trekson

Well-Known Member
Jul 24, 2012
2,084
218
63
67
Kentucky
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Hi Trekson. I don't have a lot of time at the moment to really get into a good, indepth debate (sadly!), but I'll try to find some time to squeeze in some comments!
About this first paragraph....I have never said that the Millennium is not a "real" thing. I just think it's a current thing. Amillennialists believe the Millennium is a symbolic period of time where Christ is ruling in his Kingdom ("My Kingdom is not of this world - John 18:36", "he is seated far above all rule and authority and power and dominion - Eph 1:20). Yes, we believe that Satan is bound (Rev 20), very specifically against deceiving the nations for war against the saints, and that towards the very end of this Age that restriction will be lifted. How many millions more Christians have to die before you see this is untrue.

But, we do see it as a very real thing. Is Christ not ruling right now? Did he not defeat sin, death and Satan on the cross and establish his Kingdom? By faith, yes but in reality, NO. People still die, people still sin and Satan is still at work in the world. The deception isn't about going to war with the saints. The devil's deceptions are everything in the world that points people away from Christ. This won't become a reality until after the millennium, after the GWTJ and after the new heavens and new earth. Death won't be defeated until folks stop dying.

This Kingdom may not be as exactly as you thought it would be, but I remind you, you would not be the first to be mistaken in that...the entire Jewish nation was mistaken in what they thought Messiah would establish in his first coming, and he had to tell them "my kingdom is NOT of this world". Where does that mean his Kingdom is? Where he is now seated perhaps? Where the bible tells us he is ruling above all powers? It may not fit into your slot of what this "Kingdom" should look like, but it's an entriely rational outcome from what Christ and scripture tells us.

When Jesus is speaking "My kingdom is not of this world", He is not speaking of its location. He is saying that it is not of human origin but from God. It is dependent on God and our relationship to him, So Christ's kingdom is wherever His servants are that put their trust and faith in God (within us) and this will continue into and through the millennial era.

Well, as I've pointed out before to Enoch111, this hermeneutic fails. Dispensationalists say that's their rule that they follow...that they only look at something in Revelation as symbolic if that 'symbol' is then 'explained', but then they can't follow through. Is there a literal woman in the stars giving birth? No explination found in the text to give you a 'symbolic' out there, so there should be an actual woman, by Dispensational rule.

That is untrue, it is explained within the context by the obvious clues concerning her identity. Knowledge of scripture tells you that this is relating to Joseph's dream. The context tells you: She is with child, (Mary or symbolic for Israel but because of the 12 stars which in the dream, the 11 stars counted for Joseph's brothers add Joseph and you get 12. The 12 sons are where the tribes of Israel comes from so logic dictates the woman must be Israel), she delivers a child who the devil wants to destroy. We know this child is Jesus, so again, it is either Mary or symbolic of Israel. The child will rule the nations with a rod of Iron. (Undeniably Christ). The woman flees into the desert for 3 1/2 yrs. Was this Mary going into Egypt? No. Verse 14 of Rev. 12 makes the implication that this is not a single person and is at a time when there are airplanes.

Is there a sword coming out of Christ's mouth when he comes? No symbolic explination there, so by literal hermeneutic, there should be a sword. Dispensationalists automatically realise that so many of the symbols are actually symbols and interpret thusly. I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm just saying that one: it's against their own hermeneutic, and two: they ought to stop criticizing others for doing just that.
The other thing I need to mention is this: Those of us who interpret Revelation 'symbolically' don't just pluck the symbols out of thin air so we can make them say whatever we want. While the explination of all the symbols may not be found in Revelation, most of them are, in fact, found throughout the bible, mostly in the OT. So, you'll find that we actually get our interpretation from there. So, while Dispensationalists wobble because of a broken hermeneutic causing them to snap back and forwards at odd times between literal and symbolic with no apparent rhyme or reason, those they critize are actually plumbing scripture for the meaning of the book.

No wobbling with very much a rhyme and reason for accepting Rev. as literal.



That's because we DON'T consider all of Revelation to be "one day of judgement". We consider Revelation to be a description of the time period between Christ's two advents. The book is recapitulative, it gives us several different view points of the same "play". Each time they get just a little more violent, just like birth pangs do, finally working up to the grand event itself.
Just consider this, for a second, about all the judgements: when we look at the 4 horsemen, as we love to call them...thos things have been 'riding' throughout the world forever. War, conquest and unrest, famine, disease, death. It's the same list Christ gave in the Olivet Discourse of what would be the 'beginning of birth pangs'.
But then after that, the judgements of the trumpets and bowls that fall upon the earth: in essence they are the same, bringing judgement down upon the earth in an 'anti-creation' type way, effecting land and the growing things upon it, seas, rivers and living things in them, then the sun and moon. Andthen at the end of each set of 7, we see Christ returning with 'earthquake, the sky darkening, hail' etc. Again, we see the description of this return in the Olivet Discourse.
Christ doesn't return at the end of each event as shown in another thread. Are the events similar? Yes, but they differ from source, scope and intensity. While we have had all those things since the beginning of time, there will come a time when they shall literally become the beginning of the end.

Anyway, that's just a incredibly brief summary of how we see it, and why we don't see all of it fitting into a single day!
 

bbyrd009

Groper
Nov 30, 2016
33,943
12,081
113
Ute City, COLO
www.facebook.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States Minor Outlying Islands
Consider: God put it in their heart to fulfill His will, ...until the words of God be fulfilled.
well, but His Will here is not the same, I don't think, as those who worked in the field for only an hour? They "hate" her but they "eat her flesh," etc, so imo "doing God's will" here should maybe be recognized as more like "reaping what they sow?"

but I don't want to...tease you away from a valid point if you have one, either, which you still might.
I have a pretty good idea why the guy, man, Matthew 20:10 Lexicon: "When those hired first came, they thought that they would receive more; but each of them also received a denarius. (no ish anywhere, see), gets paid the same denarius as the one who worked all day, but I would just be reiterating a position anyway, namely that the parable reads completely differently--and also makes sense--when the Cult of Sol assumptions about it are removed, for instance none of these "workers" jobs is "to believe on him who sent them," the "rewards" so fervently hoped for by so many are surely misunderstood--not saying that there aren't any, but that they have surely misunderstood them, and etc..."11When they received it, they began to complain to the landowner" etc, so see, the kingdom is like this scenario in a certain way, yes, but this is I don't wanna say 'intentionally' but easily misleading imo.

This is a parable about ppl who want to get paid, just like "those who eat her flesh" I guess, so as long as "God's Will" and "the kingdom of heaven" are seen to not be in view here, then i'd be interested to hear your point, but even in this understanding the two "hours" um, come to a different conclusion, let's say? or sure seem to?
 

VictoryinJesus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,581
7,857
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
well, but His Will here is not the same, I don't think, as those who worked in the field for only an hour? They "hate" her but they "eat her flesh," etc, so imo "doing God's will" here should maybe be recognized as more like "reaping what they sow?"

but I don't want to...tease you away from a valid point if you have one, either, which you still might.
I have a pretty good idea why the guy, man, Matthew 20:10 Lexicon: "When those hired first came, they thought that they would receive more; but each of them also received a denarius. (no ish anywhere, see), gets paid the same denarius as the one who worked all day, but I would just be reiterating a position anyway, namely that the parable reads completely differently--and also makes sense--when the Cult of Sol assumptions about it are removed, for instance none of these "workers" jobs is "to believe on him who sent them," the "rewards" so fervently hoped for by so many are surely misunderstood--not saying that there aren't any, but that they have surely misunderstood them, and etc..."11When they received it, they began to complain to the landowner" etc, so see, the kingdom is like this scenario in a certain way, yes, but this is I don't wanna say 'intentionally' but easily misleading imo.

This is a parable about ppl who want to get paid, just like "those who eat her flesh" I guess, so as long as "God's Will" and "the kingdom of heaven" are seen to not be in view here, then i'd be interested to hear your point, but even in this understanding the two "hours" um, come to a different conclusion, let's say? or sure seem to?

Of course it is just an opinion but the word tells us plainly (imo)God put in their hearts to fulfill His will...until the words of God be fulfilled. Revelation 17:16-17 And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. [17] For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled.

So is it not God’s will for them to consume her flesh, to burn her with fire, to hate her and make her desolate. ‘eat her flesh’ could be taken also as to consume her flesh (away), off of her until there is none left to cover her or to give. “Desolate”...

Revelation 18:7
[7] How much she hath glorified herself, and lived deliciously, so much torment and sorrow give her: for she saith in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow.

Does she see sorrow?
 
Last edited:

Trekson

Well-Known Member
Jul 24, 2012
2,084
218
63
67
Kentucky
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I have been a Christian for 40 years, have seen that statement countless times, but never once with a biblical text in support or confirmation.
1 Thess. 5:23 - "And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ."
Within this context, the body G4983 is obvious, the spirit G4151 is the rational and immortal soul and the soul G5590 is our vitality, also explained as our "animal" sentience that feels physical events like pain, suffering, pleasure, not to be confused with emotions. These three things (spirit and soul and body) correspond exactly and respectively with H5315, H7307 and H2416. Our body is the home of the spirit and is "alive" in the sense of G5590.