Question: Why not believe in Christ's millennial reign on earth?

[ewq1938]

I personally think that he will only come momentarily, before returning to heaven to rule over the earth from there, together with his glorified saints.

SDA's believe something very similar.

It goes against this:

Psa 110:2 The LORD shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies.

Rev 2 and 19 both promise a rule over the nations past the second coming and they are the enemies he will rule in the midst, on the Earth.

 

[Timtofly]

You are seeing things! Where is your so-called future millennium mentioned there? Read the text. The end comes at the second coming. There is no space for time and continued sin and sinners. You force it into the next, as usual.

Who said anything about sin and sinners?

Paul gives us an order. You strictly deny any order at all. You outright reject Paul's order, and claim a single point of time the redeemed are collected.

You literally leave all those is Abraham's bosom until a last day in the future. That is futurism. You teach all souls currently go to Abraham's bosom, and that is Judaism.

You are stuck in a recap that has to be taught, and you have no resemblance of Paul's teachings in your posted statement of belief.

You deny the first resurrection is physical, and call the second birth this alleged, in your terms, a first "spiritual" resurrection, but yet leave all souls in Abraham's bosom, because you reject the order Paul gives.

The firstfruits are the first physical resurrection of those souls in Abraham's bosom. They have permanent incorruptible physical bodies in Paradise.

The Second Coming allows those alive in Adam's dead corruptible flesh to receive the first resurrection into permanent incorruptible physical bodies.

At the end, those who lived for those 1,000 years after the Second Coming already have permanent incorruptible physical bodies. They are presented to God with the rest of creation without spot or blemish.

3 orders of presentation, by Christ to God.

You read the text: "then comes the end." It does not define the Second Coming as the end. The end is defined by the rule of Christ as King after the Second Coming. Jesus has reigned eternal since He created the heavens and earth. The last 1,000 years are on earth, even though most of the church may reject that point. Jesus reigned while souls were in Abraham's bosom. Jesus has reigned since presenting those souls from Abraham's bosom to God, and giving them a first resurrection, into permanent incorruptible physical bodies. Jesus will reign on earth after the Second Coming, because the whole point of the Second Coming is to finish the King part of the promised Messiah the Prince given to Daniel's people.

Christ was cut off for the fulness of the Gentiles. Daniel 9:26

"And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself:"

Are you going to deny this is for the fulness of the Gentiles, because it is not explicitly stated in this verse? You seem to base most of your Amil position on verses that do not even specifically state your position. Now you deny the very reason in this verse, that Jesus was not made King at the time He was the Christ.

You claim He was physically Messiah on earth, and then deny He will be physically Prince on earth as well. When we know full well He was cut off, not for an earthly ministry, but for the fulness of the Gentiles, until He comes the Second time without sin, for a holy and righteous kingdom that is with observation. Creation is handed back whole, 1,000 years after sin and Satan are removed.

 

[Timtofly]

Because unbiblical doctrine is a lie! If one defends and promotes false doctrine, they are deceivers. What does Scripture say about those who teach false doctrine? If we promote false doctrine, can we really be living and walking with Jesus?

Amil is a false doctrine. Those who embrace it are deceived.

In fact, they have to demand that people see it their way. If it was so easy to see from Scripture, that demand would not be necessary.

Jesus did not teach all the things about Revelation 20, that Amil demand Revelation 20 claims. Jesus did not teach that Revelation 20 is the here and now between the first century and His return.

 

[Randy Kluth]

SDA's believe something very similar.

It goes against this:

Psa 110:2 The LORD shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies.

Rev 2 and 19 both promise a rule over the nations past the second coming and they are the enemies he will rule in the midst, on the Earth.

I'm not SDA, but I'm not dead set on the idea of the immortal saints ruling with Christ from heaven. It's just my own theory. It's only because I can't see immortal saints sharing the earth with mortal sinners--anymore than Jesus himself, in his immortal state, and angels, who are sinless, share this earth with sinful mankind today.

When the Scriptures speak of Jesus returning to earth "in the same way he left," I cannot deny that Jesus will literally come back in human form and be seen of men. But how will the whole world see him at his coming "like lightning?"

It sounds to me as if Jesus will appear on earth, but will be viewed by the world as a revelation of divine judgment indicating to the world that the apocalypse has come. Just like he appeared and disappeared after his resurrection, I should think he can return here in the flesh, and again disappear into heaven. We just aren't told much about how he will rule.

My assumption is that Jesus will rule in the Millennium through new converts to him as his coming, who will then become the new Millennial Church. And the glorified saints in heaven will judge Satan, keeping him bound for a thousand years. Somehow the immortal saints will also rule on earth, though I think it will be more like rendering heavenly decisions than actually being on earth judging individual cases. It's purely speculative based on my limited knowledge of Scriptures on this subject.

 

[bbyrd009]

there's got to be something more spiritual to it

may i suggest that one contemplates the millenial reign that they might participate in, going on right now?
after all, when doe Christ “come?”
Only Yah knows, right? (bc only Yah knows when you will get it?)

 

[bbyrd009]

I'm not SDA, but I'm not dead set on the idea of the immortal saints ruling with Christ from heaven. It's just my own theory. It's only because I can't see immortal saints sharing the earth with mortal sinners--anymore than Jesus himself, in his immortal state, and angels, who are sinless, share this earth with sinful mankind today.

When the Scriptures speak of Jesus returning to earth "in the same way he left," I cannot deny that Jesus will literally come back in human form and be seen of men. But how will the whole world see him at his coming "like lightning?"

It sounds to me as if Jesus will appear on earth, but will be viewed by the world as a revelation of divine judgment indicating to the world that the apocalypse has come. Just like he appeared and disappeared after his resurrection, I should think he can return here in the flesh, and again disappear into heaven. We just aren't told much about how he will rule.

My assumption is that Jesus will rule in the Millennium through new converts to him as his coming, who will then become the new Millennial Church. And the glorified saints in heaven will judge Satan, keeping him bound for a thousand years. Somehow the immortal saints will also rule on earth, though I think it will be more like rendering heavenly decisions than actually being on earth judging individual cases. It's purely speculative based on my limited knowledge of Scriptures on this subject.

witness how the false hope of immortality colors every interpretation!
There is only One Immortal, Who dwells alone in unapproachable light

 

[Randy Kluth]

"National Salvation For Israel" Is Sci-Fi Found No Place In Scripture, With All Love, Kindness, Respect, And Big Hugs

Jesus Is The Lord

I'm not looking for "hugs"--just looking for honesty and good Christian character. It's not what I need--it's what the Scripture demands of us, delivering a message and also being that message.

 

[Randy Kluth]

witness how the false hope of immortality colors every interpretation!
There is only One Immortal, Who dwells alone in unapproachable light

We are promised immortality when Christ comes again. If you don't believe that, I feel sorry for you.

 

[bbyrd009]

We are promised immortality when Christ comes again. If you don't believe that, I feel sorry for you.

well randy, when you can Quote that i will be interested, but right now wadr there is just too much other Scripture that makes your unsubstantiated claim into a lie, and imo you are not even trying very hard bro…well, that might be a little harsh, so let me say you might at least qualify your statements a bit more

and also, i totally agree, in a sense, but then you are waiting for a literal return that you also cannot find, right?

 

[Randy Kluth]

well randy, when you can Quote that i will be interested, but right now wadr there is just too much other Scripture that makes your unsubstantiated claim into a lie, and imo you are not even trying very hard bro…well, that might be a little harsh, so let me say you might at least qualify your statements a bit more

and also, i totally agree, in a sense, but then you are waiting for a literal return that you also cannot find, right?

I'm not sure what your concern is. The Scriptures state, repeatedly, that we will obtain in our resurrection immortal bodies. 1 Cor 15. So why you wish to dismiss me on that basis confuses me.

Jesus' literal return is present in Acts 1 where it is stated, unequivocally, that Jesus is returning in the same way he left. He left his disciples physically, ascending into heaven. He will therefore come back from heaven to earth, quite literally. Why is this a problem for you?

 

[bbyrd009]

The Scriptures state, repeatedly, that we will obtain in our resurrection immortal bodies

and you are once again making absolute statements that agree with your desires, wadr
No, the Bible does not repeatedly state any such thing, and in fact states quite the opposite much more directly, in those vv that you have chosen to disregard, imo
have a good one

 

[bbyrd009]

Jesus' literal return is present in Acts 1 where it is stated, unequivocally, that Jesus is returning in the same way he left

if that were the case then standing there looking up into the sky would be the right thing to do, right? Cmon bro, you arent even trying very hard! Not even mentioning that you cannot Quote "Jesus, returning" one, single, time in the original language (shuvu, hupo strepho)

and bonus, know what you get when you go looking for that?
Return to Me, and I will return to you
(x2, for a Witness)

why do you have a problem with that?

 

[bbyrd009]

He will therefore come back from heaven to earth, quite literally

you might notice how sure you are, like all the time? Need we review the parameters of dunning-kruger syndrome, someone will surely ask

 

[Randy Kluth]

you might notice how sure you are, like all the time? Need we review the parameters of dunning-kruger syndrome, someone will surely ask

I'm *relatively certain* about things that are *relatively clear* to me are what Scriptures literally say. There are yet *many things* I am not yet "certain" of in this regard. But having been a Christian my entire life and having lived a long time there are many things I'm relatively certain about.

What I don't do is doubt something that is clear to me in God's word, merely because a great number of people question it. I'm not weak in this regard, and will not fold simply because people wish to trust in people rather than in their conscience.

 

[Randy Kluth]

if that were the case then standing there looking up into the sky would be the right thing to do, right? Cmon bro, you arent even trying very hard! Not even mentioning that you cannot Quote "Jesus, returning" one, single, time in the original language (shuvu, hupo strepho)

and bonus, know what you get when you go looking for that?
Return to Me, and I will return to you
(x2, for a Witness)

why do you have a problem with that?

You think that because you can make reference to a few words in the original biblical languages that you suddenly are an authority on what these passages mean? A perfectly good translation suffices, brother.

Jesus' return from heaven is everywhere in the Scriptures, beginning with Dan 7, the Son of Man coming down from heaven. That's where Paul gets his theology in 1 Thes 4, a *descent* from heaven.

 

[Randy Kluth]

and you are once again making absolute statements that agree with your desires, wadr
No, the Bible does not repeatedly state any such thing, and in fact states quite the opposite much more directly, in those vv that you have chosen to disregard, imo
have a good one

1 Cor 15.

 

[Keraz]

1 Cor 15.

1 Corinthians 15:50-56 refers to the time AFTER the Millennium, as the sequence of Revelation 20 shows. Proved by how it is only then that the Bool of Life is opened and Death will be no more. Rev 21:4

ONLY the martyrs killed for their faith, will be resurrected when Jesus Returns. Rev 20:4

 

[Randy Kluth]

1 Corinthians 15:50-56 refers to the time AFTER the Millennium, as the sequence of Revelation 20 shows. Proved by how it is only then that the Bool of Life is opened and Death will be no more. Rev 21:4

ONLY the martyrs killed for their faith, will be resurrected when Jesus Returns. Rev 20:4

I'd have to go back and read the whole conversation, but I believe the argument was against the hope of physical immortality for the Church. You're talking about something else.

 

[bbyrd009]

I'm *relatively certain* about things that are *relatively clear* to me are what Scriptures literally say. There are yet *many things* I am not yet "certain" of in this regard. But having been a Christian my entire life and having lived a long time there are many things I'm relatively certain about.

What I don't do is doubt something that is clear to me in God's word, merely because a great number of people question it. I'm not weak in this regard, and will not fold simply because people wish to trust in people rather than in their conscience.

the irony of someone stating that something from "God's Word" when "the Bible" is what was meant cannot be understated imo

but if you wanna have a little fun, ill show you a secret; state something that is "clear" to you, from the Bible, if you like
but you arent gonna like this, ok
short answer, the Bible says ezackly the opposite thing too!

 

[bbyrd009]

You think that because you can make reference to a few words in the original biblical languages that you suddenly are an authority on what these passages mean?

oh heck no; i am frequently mistaken, and seek better wisdom

A perfectly good translation suffices, brother.

so you say, yes
and nevermind all those warnings about scribes xlating what we want to hear, right?

Jesus' return from heaven is everywhere in the Scriptures, beginning with Dan 7, the Son of Man coming down from heaven. That's where Paul gets his theology in 1 Thes 4, a *descent* from heaven.

and yet you cannot Quote "Jesus, returning" one single time, from OT or new
hmm