Man's Works Burned Off the Earth at Jesus' Coming

[Randy Kluth]

Your arguments are essentially based on "by implication," not explicit Scripture. Your foundation is built upon silence. You do that with Scripture and the ECFs, who overwhelming taught Amil fundamentals. You force your beliefs upon those texts above when they do not teach or support your speculations. I suspect you know that by your constant failure to provide direct evidence of a future millennium where the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years. The reality is: it is not in the inspired pages. It is a Premil invention.

On the contrary, depending on our presuppositions, the proof-texts we utilize appear to be enough to declare our belief in it. For example, the Premill belief is based upon the assumption that Rev 20 is literally true. And so, this is hardly a capitulation to obscure proofs that I have to read my beliefs into. The text is quite plain about this. It is hardly an "invention." That is precisely and explicitly what the text says!

But you were asking for truths beyond Rev 20 to substantiate the principles implied based on the assumption Rev 20 is literally true. And I provided them, even though based upon your own presuppositions, they would not be admissible. Whether it is logically admissible, based upon your own presuppositions, the truths underlying my position are true. Abraham was promised a nation and a family of nations. They remain unfulfilled. And the Prophets indicate they will be fulfilled, and that the knowledge of the Lord will one day cover the entire earth.

The reality is, Scripture teaches:

• The kingdom of God has already spiritually arrived. You reject that.

What I've already told you, in this regard, is that Jesus' own person arriving on the scene at his 1st Coming was a form of the Kingdom presenting itself to the Jewish world. Israel had been the caretakers of God's Kingdom on earth, and the King over that Kingdom had come. It presented the opportunity for those holding the Kingdom to meet the King over that Kingdom, which is what the Prophets declared would ultimately happen in the eschaton.

But as you know, the Jews rejected and crucifed Jesus, and the Kingdom did *not* come. As Jesus said, "the Kingdom is near." It is *not* here! Paul in 2 Thes 2 condemned the idea that Christ has already come and has already begun to establish his Kingdom on earth. Jesus is the caretaker for our Salvation in heaven, until the time set by the Father for his return to earth.

God's Kingdom in heaven, however, has always impacted the earth, and still does. Salvation takes place, as well as Judgment. But this is not to be confused with the Coming of the eschatological Kingdom, promised by the Prophets. That day has not yet arrived.

• Jesus defeated every enemy and removed every impediment to the eternal liberation of God's people. You reject that.

Yes, Satan has not yet been bound, and Death has not yet been defeated. Jesus himself conquered Death on our behalf, but until our resurrection at the 2nd Coming of Christ, Death will not yet have been defeated in that regard.

1 Cor 15.24 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

• Jesus is currently ruling over the nations (including His enemies) at the right hand of majesty. You reject that.

No, I don't reject that. Jesus rules from heaven, though only in a limited way. He has all-encompassing power, and yet he does not yet use that power to cast Satan into the pit. Satan is still on the loose, and on occasion, the saints are defeated. Our defeat, however, is only temporary, because Christ will ultimately give us the victory.

• The redeemed have now been empowered with authority to enforce Christ's great victory of 2000 years ago the great commission. They have been given authority over Satan and his minions. Being "in Christ," they currently rule in life and in death with Him. You reject that.

Yes, we have been given only limited power to declare the Gospel, to release men from bondage and to bind the wicked to their judgment. We do not yet have the capacity to cast Satan out of the world, to rise from the dead, and to become sinless.

• Satan's kingdom (the Gentile nations) has been invaded by the Gospel. The Gentiles have been enlightened for 2000 years. They are now without excuse. You reject that.

The Gospel does not keep us from being persecuted and abused. Do you reject that?

You have no answer for the explicit statements of the Word. You are more comfortable foist your false teaching upon it.

Why do you always have to turn to hostile accusations. "False Teaching?" This is my take, brother. If you can't discuss differences without turning to ad hominem attacks, then go somewhere else with your questions. I'm not interested in a fight. We're supposed to be brothers.

The reign we partake in the future is eternal. Wicked mortals are prohibited from the new glorified earth. This is a victorious reign on the new earth. There is no need for us to reign over anyone. The applicable Scriptures pertaining to the future do not demand that. Only the current ones do, where Christ and His people perfectly realize that.

I see no reason to rule or to have a reign in a world where there is nobody who needs to be supervised. Therefore, my belief is that the Millennium is the opportunity for the glorified saints to force the Devil into the pit, to test mortal humanity to see if they will still reject Christ even without Satan obscuring the truth. Sadly, many will still reject Christ, while many others will properly receive him.

 

[WPM]

On the contrary, depending on our presuppositions, the proof-texts we utilize appear to be enough to declare our belief in it. For example, the Premill belief is based upon the assumption that Rev 20 is literally true. And so, this is hardly a capitulation to obscure proofs that I have to read my beliefs into. The text is quite plain about this. It is hardly an "invention." That is precisely and explicitly what the text says!

But you were asking for truths beyond Rev 20 to substantiate the principles implied based on the assumption Rev 20 is literally true. And I provided them, even though based upon your own presuppositions, they would not be admissible. Whether it is logically admissible, based upon your own presuppositions, the truths underlying my position are true. Abraham was promised a nation and a family of nations. They remain unfulfilled. And the Prophets indicate they will be fulfilled, and that the knowledge of the Lord will one day cover the entire earth.

You are ducking around the issue again. Where in Rev 20 teaches: during the a future millennium the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years?

What I've already told you, in this regard, is that Jesus' own person arriving on the scene at his 1st Coming was a form of the Kingdom presenting itself to the Jewish world. Israel had been the caretakers of God's Kingdom on earth, and the King over that Kingdom had come. It presented the opportunity for those holding the Kingdom to meet the King over that Kingdom, which is what the Prophets declared would ultimately happen in the eschaton.

But as you know, the Jews rejected and crucifed Jesus, and the Kingdom did *not* come. As Jesus said, "the Kingdom is near." It is *not* here! Paul in 2 Thes 2 condemned the idea that Christ has already come and has already begun to establish his Kingdom on earth. Jesus is the caretaker for our Salvation in heaven, until the time set by the Father for his return to earth.

God's Kingdom in heaven, however, has always impacted the earth, and still does. Salvation takes place, as well as Judgment. But this is not to be confused with the Coming of the eschatological Kingdom, promised by the Prophets. That day has not yet arrived.

Yes, Satan has not yet been bound, and Death has not yet been defeated. Jesus himself conquered Death on our behalf, but until our resurrection at the 2nd Coming of Christ, Death will not yet have been defeated in that regard.

1 Cor 15.24 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

No, I don't reject that. Jesus rules from heaven, though only in a limited way. He has all-encompassing power, and yet he does not yet use that power to cast Satan into the pit. Satan is still on the loose, and on occasion, the saints are defeated. Our defeat, however, is only temporary, because Christ will ultimately give us the victory.

Yes, we have been given only limited power to declare the Gospel, to release men from bondage and to bind the wicked to their judgment. We do not yet have the capacity to cast Satan out of the world, to rise from the dead, and to become sinless.

The Gospel does not keep us from being persecuted and abused. Do you reject that?

Why do you always have to turn to hostile accusations. "False Teaching?" This is my take, brother. If you can't discuss differences without turning to ad hominem attacks, then go somewhere else with your questions. I'm not interested in a fight. We're supposed to be brothers.

I see no reason to rule or to have a reign in a world where there is nobody who needs to be supervised. Therefore, my belief is that the Millennium is the opportunity for the glorified saints to force the Devil into the pit, to test mortal humanity to see if they will still reject Christ even without Satan obscuring the truth. Sadly, many will still reject Christ, while many others will properly receive him.

You are ducking around the issue again. Can you give us one Scripture that teaches: during the a future millennium the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years?

 

[Randy Kluth]

You are ducking around the issue again. Where in Rev 20 teaches: during the a future millennium the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years?

You have too many "ducks." I gave you the Scriptures, and you don't take them seriously.

You are ducking around the issue again. Can you give us one Scripture that teaches: during the a future millennium the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years?

The Scriptures I gave you suffice for me. If they don't for you, I'll understand.

 

[WPM]

You have too many "ducks." I gave you the Scriptures, and you don't take them seriously.

The Scriptures I gave you suffice for me. If they don't for you, I'll understand.

LOL. Exactly. You have nothing. That is the basis of many of your claims. If you had it you would present it. A doctrine built upon silence is unbiblical.

 

[WPM]

You have too many "ducks." I gave you the Scriptures, and you don't take them seriously.

The Scriptures I gave you suffice for me. If they don't for you, I'll understand.

OK, lets put your claims to the test:

1. Where in Romans 15.12 does it teach a future millennium where the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years?
2. Where in 2 Timothy 2.12 does it teach a future millennium where the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years?
3. Where in Revelation 2.26 does it teach a future millennium where the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years?
4. Where in Revelation 5.10 does it teach a future millennium where the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years?
5. Where in Revelation 12.5 does it teach a future millennium where the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years?
6. Where in Revelation 19.15 does it teach a future millennium where the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years?
7. Where in Revelation 20.4 does it teach a future millennium where the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years?

 

[Davy]

Yes, I do believe that both the saved and the unsaved are resurrected into new bodies. The only thing here that I disagree with is that when the Lord comes back I believe there will be a literal Millennium, with the earth's history continuing as is for another thousand years. Mortal humanity will still be here, whereas the Christians up to that point will be resurrected into new glorious bodies.

That the flesh continues I don't see that Biblically. I agree with Isaiah 25 where Apostle Paul quoted from about 'death being swallowed up in victory', as it is pointing to all... nations having the vail cast off, not just those in Christ Jesus.

And so, during the Millennium the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies, while earth's mortal history continues for another thousand years. The resurrection of the lost takes place at the end of the thousand years, I believe. So I suppose we're just disagreeing on the Premil/Amil thing, or am I missing something?

Again, I do not see that Biblically. Continuing in the flesh after Christ's future return is a tradition of men, created usually to support the false old Jewish 'dead in the ground' theories (i.e., belief that at death we sleep in the graveyard). It shows lack of understanding of the two different dimensions of existence written of in God's Word.

 

[Davy]

You are not "keeping what Apostle Paul taught there in 1 Corinthians 15", but rather translating by your own understanding. Since you do not know what "the change", "the flesh cast off", "the day of the Lord", and the "last trump" actually refer to--I will tell you:

​

I certainly am... keeping to what Apostle Paul taught in 1 Corinthians 15.

It is YOU that is bound by men's traditions about that chapter instead of staying with what Paul was actually teaching there.

The 'change' at the 'twinkling of an eye' is about the casting off of this vail of this fleshy world per Isaiah 25:6-9, which is where Apostle Paul was quoting about 'death swallowed up in victory'. YOU OBVIOUSLY ARE BLIND TO THAT ISAIAH SCRIPTURE.

Thus you are also blinded by what Paul said that as we have borne the "image of the earthy" we shall also bear the "image of the heavenly". Why? because have not the wicked also borne the "image of the earthy"? In 1 Cor.15:53-54 Paul showed that TWO CHANGES must happen to have eternal life through Jesus Christ. One's mortal soul ("this mortal" - KJV) must also put on immortality. The spiritually dead who have not received Jesus Christ is the state those who rejected Him will be in after His future return.

Jesus revealed the idea of spiritual death vs. being 'born again' by The Spirit. The change to the body of incorruption (a "spiritual body"), does not guarantee His Salvation. One's soul MUST ALSO be "born again" of The Spirit like He showed Nicodemus in John 3. That is why the ONLY type of death remaining after His future return is the "second death", or did you MISS that in reading your Bible too?

 

[Randy Kluth]

That the flesh continues I don't see that Biblically. I agree with Isaiah 25 where Apostle Paul quoted from about 'death being swallowed up in victory', as it is pointing to all... nations having the vail cast off, not just those in Christ Jesus.

Yea, I understand. Certainly we both believe that when Christ returns "death will be swallowed up in victory." I believe this refers to the general resurrection of the righteous. You believe this refers to all, exhaustively. You have to decide for yourself. It can be applied either way, I think. I just base my views on the separation of resurrections on Rev 20, where 2 resurrections are mentioned.

Again, I do not see that Biblically. Continuing in the flesh after Christ's future return is a tradition of men, created usually to support the false old Jewish 'dead in the ground' theories (i.e., belief that at death we sleep in the graveyard). It shows lack of understanding of the two different dimensions of existence written of in God's Word.

I don't personally hold to any view based on "old Jewish theories." I don't believe in "Soul Sleep," or that people's souls remain in the grave after death. The spirits of men fly upwards like sparks, as we read in Eccles. They either go to God or somewhere else, waiting for final sentencing.

 

[WPM]

Yea, I understand. Certainly we both believe that when Christ returns "death will be swallowed up in victory." I believe this refers to the general resurrection of the righteous. You believe this refers to all, exhaustively. You have to decide for yourself. It can be applied either way, I think. I just based my views on the separation of resurrections on Rev 20, where 2 resurrections are mentioned.

This sums up your theology! All end-time Scripture is viewed through the lens of Revelation 20. This is not a very wise way to establish any truth or doctrine. Take this highly symbolic passage that is located in the most obscure setting in Scripture out of the equation and Premillennialism has nothing in the inspired pages to support their main tenets. I have a problem with that, and very much disagree with this form of hermeneutics and exegesis. You should be interpreting revelation 20 through the lens of the rest of scripture. If you would do that you would quickly see that Premillennialism is unbiblical.

Your mantra on these boards is: what saith Rev 20? What saith Rev 20? What saith Rev 20? What saith Rev 20? What saith Rev 20? What saith Rev 20? What saith Rev 20?

The sad part is: you have a false understanding of Rev 20. So, this explains why you cannot take any other passage literal in its meaning and import.

Amils mantra is (in the words of Paul): "what saith the Scripture?" Employ that and it will open up end-time theology to you.

 

[Randy Kluth]

OK, lets put your claims to the test:

1. Where in Romans 15.12 does it teach a future millennium where the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years?
2. Where in 2 Timothy 2.12 does it teach a future millennium where the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years?
3. Where in Revelation 2.26 does it teach a future millennium where the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years?
4. Where in Revelation 5.10 does it teach a future millennium where the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years?
5. Where in Revelation 12.5 does it teach a future millennium where the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years?
6. Where in Revelation 19.15 does it teach a future millennium where the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years?
7. Where in Revelation 20.4 does it teach a future millennium where the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years?

You're saying that *all* of the elements must be in place to prove any aspect of what I'm proposing? Certainly not! If a theft took place last night in my home while I was out, I don't have to prove all 3 things at once for any one of them to be true! I can prove a theft took place, I can prove it was last night that a theft took place, and I can prove I was out last night. Putting all of these points together is needless for the police--all I have to do is propose to them what happened, and then I can substantiate each point separately. Each element fits in with the entire story.

In all of the verses I listed I proved there is a period in which Christians "reign" on earth. It can also be proven that Christ comes back with Christians to reign on earth. It can be proven that we will reign with Christ for a thousand years on the earth.

Finally, it can be proven that mortals continue to live on earth, by the fact that not all are resurrected at the "1st Resurrection." A 2nd Resurrection implies that many people on earth are still mortals. As well, we have a number of passages indicating that after Christ returns, mortals will witness this, will weep, will bury dead bodies, that birds will devour corpses at Armageddon, etc.

But the whole idea of a Christian "reign" indicates that people on earth still need to be subjugated, or "ruled over," suggesting that mortal humanity continues even after the Church is glorified, ie the saints of the present and past ages have entered into their glory.

I'm offering proof primarily of the "reign of the immortal Church," which suggests, in each case, that the earth still needs to be subdued. That is the "proof" for me. I understand that it isn't for you. But the way I think should be pretty clear?

 

[Randy Kluth]

This sums up your theology! All end-time Scripture is viewed through the lens of Revelation 20. This is not a very wise way to establish any truth or doctrine. Take this highly symbolic passage that is located in the most obscure setting in Scripture out of the equation and Premillennialism has nothing in the inspired pages to support their main tenets. I have a problem with that, and very much disagree with this form of hermeneutics and exegesis. You should be interpreting revelation 20 through the lens of the rest of scripture. If you would do that you would quickly see that Premillennialism is unbiblical.

Your mantra on these boards is: what saith Rev 20? What saith Rev 20? What saith Rev 20? What saith Rev 20? What saith Rev 20? What saith Rev 20? What saith Rev 20?

The sad part is: you have a false understanding of Rev 20. So, this explains why you cannot take any other passage literal in its meaning and import.

Amils mantra is (in the words of Paul): "what saith the Scripture?" Employ that and it will open up end-time theology to you.

That isn't accurate. I don't base my Premill beliefs on Rev 20 alone. I only base the *time period of a thousand years* on that passage alone. At least, that's the only place I know of where the time period is given within the Scriptures. Jewish belief in a future Messianic Reign, and in the subjugation of the hostile nations, as well as in a thousand year period, predated John's revelation.

As I've said many times, there is more than one element substantiating the Millennium in the Scriptures. It is not just the time period of a thousand years! Much more, it is the fact of the continuation of mortal history until all of God's promises to Abraham are fulfilled.

In the Prophets it is described as the Eschaton, a future Messianic Kingdom, in which Israel will never again be punished as a nation by exile or conquest. And many nations of faith will be incorporated into this promise together with them.

The only thing you seem to be concerned with is confirming the time period of a "thousand years?" But there are many prophecies in the Bible that have very little confirmation in other places in the Scripture, largely because the elements involved do not require a lot of substantiation--the heart of the matter is elsewhere, and the few details just provide "icing on the cake."

For example, we get very little about the Virgin Birth in OT Scriptures, and it is even kind of obscure there until it is fully portrayed in the real history of Jesus and in the Gospel stories. But the heart of the matter was the Incarnation, in which God's Word was to become flesh. It is stated many times in Scriptures that a Messianic redeemer is coming to Israel and that only God can provide this redemption. It could not come by Israel's priests since they could not qualify to eternally redeem sinful Israel.

So the Virgin Birth just adds a necessary detail to what otherwise is more importantly established, which is the necessity of a Divine Messiah who suffers and forgives our sins, accomplishing eternal redemption. All of these facets come together over time. A suffering Messiah, the need for atonement from God alone, the Virgin Birth.

It is the same with the Millennial Kingdom. The Messianic Kingdom is established in the Prophets as the fulfillment of Israel's Hope, and the Hope of Gentile Nations. The time during which this takes place, ie the thousand years, is just "icing on the cake," a final detail.

 

[WPM]

You're saying that *all* of the elements must be in place to prove any aspect of what I'm proposing? Certainly not! If a theft took place last night in my home while I was out, I don't have to prove all 3 things at once for any one of them to be true! I can prove a theft took place, I can prove it was last night that a theft took place, and I can prove I was out last night. Putting all of these points together is needless for the police--all I have to do is propose to them what happened, and then I can substantiate each point separately. Each element fits in with the entire story.

In all of the verses I listed I proved there is a period in which Christians "reign" on earth. It can also be proven that Christ comes back with Christians to reign on earth. It can be proven that we will reign with Christ for a thousand years on the earth.

Finally, it can be proven that mortals continue to live on earth, by the fact that not all are resurrected at the "1st Resurrection." A 2nd Resurrection implies that many people on earth are still mortals. As well, we have a number of passages indicating that after Christ returns, mortals will witness this, will weep, will bury dead bodies, that birds will devour corpses at Armageddon, etc.

But the whole idea of a Christian "reign" indicates that people on earth still need to be subjugated, or "ruled over," suggesting that mortal humanity continues even after the Church is glorified, ie the saints of the present and past ages have entered into their glory.

I'm offering proof primarily of the "reign of the immortal Church," which suggests, in each case, that the earth still needs to be subdued. That is the "proof" for me. I understand that it isn't for you. But the way I think should be pretty clear?

You have so many false premises here, none of which you are able to prove, and all of them that have been strongly refuted over the years. Obviously, you just do not want to receive. You are married to your doctrine, and no one is going to shift you. Notwithstanding, the only reason I engage with you is to help others with the truth.

(1) Rev 20 does not teach a future millennium where the righteous will reign in glorious new bodies while earth's mortal will continue for another thousand years.
(2)Rev 19 is the end of the world where all surviving mortal life is destroyed - "the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great." You refuse to take this literally because it exposes your beliefs. Ironically, Premil hangs its doctrine on a very precarious frayed thread: that of Revelation 20 following Revelation 19 chronologically in time. To hold this, it has to dismiss the different recaps (or different camera views pertaining to the intra-Advent period) that exist throughout the book of Revelation, divorce it from repeated Scripture on this matter and also explain away the clear and explicit climactic detail that pertains to Revelation 19. Premil is dependent upon the dubious premise that Revelation 20 is chronological to Revelation 19. That is it! Disprove that and Premil falls apart.
(3) Rev 20 takes us back to the first resurrection where Christ defeated, sin, death, Satan, Hades, and eternal punishment. It shows the strong man being spiritually bound in order that the Gentiles could be enlightened. It is currently ongoing.
(4) Christ's reign when He comes is not temporary but eternal. It is not in some imaginary future millennium ravaged by all the same old same old bondage of corruption, but on a new perfect regenerated earth. Christ and the glorified redeemed reign forever and ever. Are you saying there must be wicked mortals upon earth from them to fulfil that? So who are the eternal glorified saints reigning over in Revelation 22:4-5? "And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads. And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever." So, obviously, if you were consistent, which you are not, this text (referring to the glorified NHNE), and the whole idea of a Christian "reign," indicates that people on earth still need to be subjugated, or "ruled over," suggesting that mortal humanity continues even after the Church is glorified, ie the saints of the present and past ages have entered into their glory.

 

[WPM]

That isn't accurate. I don't base my Premill beliefs on Rev 20 alone. I only base the *time period of a thousand years* on that passage alone. At least, that's the only place I know of where the time period is given within the Scriptures. Jewish belief in a future Messianic Reign, and in the subjugation of the hostile nations, as well as in a thousand year period, predated John's revelation.

As I've said many times, there is more than one element substantiating the Millennium in the Scriptures. It is not just the time period of a thousand years! Much more, it is the fact of the continuation of mortal history until all of God's promises to Abraham are fulfilled.

In the Prophets it is described as the Eschaton, a future Messianic Kingdom, in which Israel will never again be punished as a nation by exile or conquest. And many nations of faith will be incorporated into this promise together with them.

The only thing you seem to be concerned with is confirming the time period of a "thousand years?" But there are many prophecies in the Bible that have very little confirmation in other places in the Scripture, largely because the elements involved do not require a lot of substantiation--the heart of the matter is elsewhere, and the few details just provide "icing on the cake."

For example, we get very little about the Virgin Birth in OT Scriptures, and it is even kind of obscure there until it is fully portrayed in the real history of Jesus and in the Gospel stories. But the heart of the matter was the Incarnation, in which God's Word was to become flesh. It is stated many times in Scriptures that a Messianic redeemer is coming to Israel and that only God can provide this redemption. It could not come by Israel's priests since they could not qualify to eternally redeem sinful Israel.

So the Virgin Birth just adds a necessary detail to what otherwise is more importantly established, which is the necessity of a Divine Messiah who suffers and forgives our sins, accomplishing eternal redemption. All of these facets come together over time. A suffering Messiah, the need for atonement from God alone, the Virgin Birth.

It is the same with the Millennial Kingdom. The Messianic Kingdom is established in the Prophets as the fulfillment of Israel's Hope, and the Hope of Gentile Nations. The time during which this takes place, ie the thousand years, is just "icing on the cake," a final detail.

You are so fixated with ethnic Israel and so obsessed with real estate in the Middle East that you miss who and what the Old Testament prophets were looking for. Even though the Old Testament explores many subjects, its grand overriding theme is Christ. In fact, the Messianic hope was at the heart of Old Testament Judaism. Despite this, the overwhelming majority of Jews missed their promised Messiah when He came. He did not fit their expectation of who and what the Messiah would be. They had a carnal earthly perspective of Messiah. The Jewish leaders – the Pharisees – had no true grasp of the Messiah’s overriding mission to Israel. They were so filled with religious pride and consumed with a sense of racial superiority that they missed the reason why Jesus actually came to earth. They were so deluded with the hope of Messiah ushering in nationalist dominance that they failed to see the redemptive aspect of Christ’s earthly ministry.

The story of Israel’s history is focused in on the coming Messiah – One who would come and deliver Israel from her awful predicament. But, Israel’s greatest quandary was her sin. Not surprising, therefore, God’s chief purpose in history has been to glorify Himself through the redemption of His chosen people. The Messiah is presented in the old economy as a coming redeemer who would save Israel (and sinful man) from their sin. Granted, this was a progressive revelation.

Oddly, and sadly, you advocate similar views on this subject to those of the Christ-rejecting Pharisees of Jesus day, arguing that Christ came to set up an autocratic Israeli kingdom. But this is contrary to the expectation and predictions of the Old Testament prophets, who actually anticipated a suffering Messiah. They awaited one who would redeem Israel from their sin. The prophets, and those who had eyes to see in Israel, were fixated with Christ (thee hope of Israel), and with the redemption (deliverance) from sin He would secure.

God foretold the coming redeemer and Christ’s atoning sacrifice for sin at Calvary from the beginning in Genesis 3: “I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel” (Genesis 3:15). This prophecy in the Garden pointed straight to Calvary. It described the enormity of the cross-work. It came as a result of the fall of Adam

The language of Messianic fulfilment is written throughout the New Testament pages. John the Baptist introduced Christ in John 1:31, as “he that was to be … made manifest to Israel.” Simeon testified He was the “consolation of Israel” (Luke 2:25). Paul describes Him in Acts 28:20 as “the hope of Israel.” He is the eternal fulfilment of the vision and prophecy.

Jesus was/is the Jewish hope. He was/is the realization of every expectation that the Bible possessed under the old covenant. He was everything they ever needed.

The old covenant could never satisfy. The rituals were never adequate enough. The land was never fulfilling. The reason being, “For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did” (Hebrews 7:19). Jesus alone satisfies. Real Christians look to and for Him.

That “better hope” was Christ and the transaction He paid for sin at the cross. It was that final sacrifice for sin that perfects the redeemed. Why? Christ has satisfied every righteous demand of a holy God. He took upon Himself our sin and in turn took the penalty that was due to us.

 

[ScottA]

I certainly am... keeping to what Apostle Paul taught in 1 Corinthians 15.

It is YOU that is bound by men's traditions about that chapter instead of staying with what Paul was actually teaching there.

The 'change' at the 'twinkling of an eye' is about the casting off of this vail of this fleshy world per Isaiah 25:6-9, which is where Apostle Paul was quoting about 'death swallowed up in victory'. YOU OBVIOUSLY ARE BLIND TO THAT ISAIAH SCRIPTURE.

Thus you are also blinded by what Paul said that as we have borne the "image of the earthy" we shall also bear the "image of the heavenly". Why? because have not the wicked also borne the "image of the earthy"? In 1 Cor.15:53-54 Paul showed that TWO CHANGES must happen to have eternal life through Jesus Christ. One's mortal soul ("this mortal" - KJV) must also put on immortality. The spiritually dead who have not received Jesus Christ is the state those who rejected Him will be in after His future return.

Jesus revealed the idea of spiritual death vs. being 'born again' by The Spirit. The change to the body of incorruption (a "spiritual body"), does not guarantee His Salvation. One's soul MUST ALSO be "born again" of The Spirit like He showed Nicodemus in John 3. That is why the ONLY type of death remaining after His future return is the "second death", or did you MISS that in reading your Bible too?

Even your accusation is in error (as I have no such "traditions", nor have I ever).

Therefore, I release you to your own devises. So be it.

 

[Keraz]

Rev 20 takes us back to the first resurrection where Christ defeated, sin, death, Satan, Hades, and eternal punishment. It shows the strong man being spiritually bound in order that the Gentiles could be enlightened. It is currently ongoing.

Sheer speculative nonsense!
Revelation 20 follows on from Rev 19, the glorious Return of Jesus as King of Kings and Lord of Lords,
He comes to take up His reign, as we are plainly told; for the next thousand years. It is His reward from God. Psalms 2:7=8
That thousand years is the final period of the 7000 years which God has decreed for mankind.
Proved by the nearly 6000 years having passed now.

Your virulent attacks against anyone who refutes your beliefs, puts you in a very bad light. God has already put people who choose to believe false teachings under a spirit of confusion; Isaiah 29:9-12, and as a wise and learned person, Matthew 11:25-26, the truths of the Prophetic Word are hidden from you.

This lack of understanding applies to almost everyone, Daniel 12:10b, as it is God's intention to surprise and shock the world, when He sends His fiery wrath to change the world and commence all the prophesied things that will make His enemies His footstool, before He reigns in Jerusalem for the next 1000 years.

 

[Davy]

Yea, I understand. Certainly we both believe that when Christ returns "death will be swallowed up in victory." I believe this refers to the general resurrection of the righteous. You believe this refers to all, exhaustively. You have to decide for yourself. It can be applied either way, I think. I just base my views on the separation of resurrections on Rev 20, where 2 resurrections are mentioned.

Well, not after recognizing the Isaiah 25:6-9 Scripture where Paul was quoting about 'death swallowed up in victory' I don't see the last trump change being only about those in Christ Jesus. According to that, 1 Cor.15 cannot be applied both ways, not if one stays with what is written to include Isaiah 25 where Paul was quoting from.

This is how God's Word often is now days, because most Bibles today don't show when the New Testament is quoting the Old. So many don't bother looking back in the Old Testament quote which often gives more detail. That's what Isaiah 25 does with 'death swallowed up in victory', gives more detail of just how that is meant.

 

[Davy]

Even your accusation is in error (as I have no such "traditions", nor have I ever).

Therefore, I release you to your own devises. So be it.

I've seen enough of your posts favoring MEN'S TRADITIONS like Amillennialism which rejects the Rev.20 Scripture about Christ's FUTURE "thousand years" reign.

 

[ScottA]

I've seen enough of your posts favoring MEN'S TRADITIONS like Amillennialism which rejects the Rev.20 Scripture about Christ's FUTURE "thousand years" reign.

Wrong again.

 

[Davy]

Thus, indeed the flood of Noah was natural--but what was to come was not natural, not by natural flames, but by holy fire.

As for the "elements", "old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new"--including these "heavens and the earth" just as it is written.

Stop preaching speculations.

I'll give an example of the false Amillennialist theories you are on, right here and now.

Your above statement is suggesting that Apostle Peter's "elements" with the destruction of man's works he declared on the "day of the Lord" like it already... happened... when IT DID NOT YET!

Just in case you did not 'hear' me -- The 2 Peter 3:10 Scripture HAS NOT HAPPENED YET TODAY!

To lie and say it has, is to heed men's doctrines that TRY to say that was fulfilled already, when even Lord Jesus and Apostle Paul ALSO showed that "day of the Lord" coming "as a thief in the night" is for the LAST DAY of this present world! And if you say it is not, then you LIE against The Scriptures.

How can one be SURE that 2 Peter 3:10 event for the "day of the Lord" has not happened yet today? Simple, because it says that is when MAN'S WORKS are burned off this earth! Does anyone want to stick their foot in their mouth with telling a LIE, and say man's works have been burned off this earth already today???

 

[rwb]

One of the main phrases used in God's written Word to point to the END of this present world earth age and the day of Christ's future return is, the "day of the Lord".

You're only seeing the Day of the Lord from what is written in the New Testament. Why does James in the book of Acts, quoting Peter, tell us that at Pentecost when the Spirit was poured out is fulfillment of the prophet Joel? The Day of the Lord will indeed come again, but not to usher in another one thousand years of time, but His coming then will be with wrath and to bring judgment unto this earth.