Unlike Amillennialism, Premillennialism is based on assumptions and speculation rather than on any clear, straightforward scriptures
- Thread starter Spiritual Israelite
- Start date
-
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!
Revelation 11:15-17 KJV
15) And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.
16) And the four and twenty elders, which sat before God on their seats, fell upon their faces, and worshipped God,
17) Saying, We give thee thanks, O Lord God Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to come; because thou hast taken to thee thy great power, and hast reigned.
When is the 7th trumpet sounded?
Much love!
Yes, we are in His kingdom now. Just the same, this passage says nothing concerning whether Jesus will rule the earth from Jerusalem for 1000 years.
Much love!
The only priests are those who are priests now? Besides, John here is speaking in his intro about those reading the prophecy. His audience has been made kings and priests. There could be more, couldn't there?
These passages make no actual statement of whether Jesus will rule the earth from Jerusalem for 1000 years.
Much love!
LOL. This must be some kind of joke because you won't even address one single thing I said in the original posts, but you expect me to address everything you bring up. Ridiculous. You are just proving that you have nothing to refute anything I said in the original post. If you were actually confident that your interpretation of Revelation 20 was correct, then you would have no problem showing how the passages I referenced can be reconciled with your interpretation of Revelation 20. But, you won't even address one of them! That says it all about how your doctrine is based on cherry picking scripture rather than being based on all of scripture.
I showed what the Bible teaches about the things mentioned in Revelation 20 in my second post. What about teaches about the timing of Christ's reign, His followers being priests, the destruction of unbelievers, the resurrection of the dead and the judgment. Why are you unwilling to address any of that? Why do you interpret Revelation 20 in isolation from the rest of scripture which results in you contradicting many scripture passages as a result?
In the second post, I showed a lot of evidence about what the Bible teaches about the things referenced in Revelation 20. That is how I interpret scripture. Not by interpreting any scripture in isolation, but by looking at what all of scripture teaches while being careful to avoid any contradictions. Show me how your interpretation of Revelation 20 agrees with the scriptures I referenced in the second post. You act so confident that your interpretation is correct, but you seem completely unwilling to support that interpretation with any other scripture.
LOL. Unbelievable. I don't know who you think you're fooling here, but you're not fooling me. I am not talking about basing a doctrine on only one passage. That is not wise. What other passages do you use to support your Premil doctrine that you think are clear and straightforward? Would that include any of the passages I referenced in the second post? If so, show me how you reconcile those with your understanding of Revelation 20.
LOL. You are not addressing any of the scriptures I referenced in the original posts. But, you expect me to address other scriptures that you bring up. Good grief. This is a joke. How about actually addressing at least one scripture I referenced first before I reference Revelation 20 or whatever other scripture you want to discuss? It seems like you don't want to address any passage I referenced in the original posts. Why is that?
No statement concerning whether Jesus will rule the earth from Jerusalem for 1000 years.
Are you thinking that the burning up happens immediately after Jesus' return? That the moment Jesus arrives, the earth is slagged?
Much love!
Well, thank you for actually addressing something I said in the original posts. His kingdom is not an earthly kingdom. That's why we can say we are in it now because, as He said, it did not come with observation (Luke 17:20 - it's not a physical, visible kingdom like an earthly kingdom is) and it is not of this world (John 18:36). When did He say His kingdom would ever be a temporal, earthly kingdom? Nowhere that I can see. And why would Revelation 20 not be talking about the kingdom He reigns over now? What basis is there for believing that?
OK, so now you can address what I've been writing.
Much love!
How about you address what the passage does say instead of what it doesn't say?
Matthew 24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. 36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. 37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, 39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
Jesus related the passing away of heaven and earth with His second coming and He indicated that no one knows the day or hour He will come. He compared His coming directly to what happened in Noah's day when the day Noah entered the ark all unbelievers will be destroyed. Regarding that, He said "so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.". So, do you agree that all unbelievers will be destroyed when He comes? I suppose as a pre-trib you might agree with that, but then try to say that the mortals who populate the supposed earthly kingdom after that are believers, but that would contradict Matthew 25:31-46. It also would contradict Jesus saying that heaven and earth will pass away when He comes, which lines up with what Peter taught in 2 Peter 3:10-12.
Yes, of course. That is what the text indicates. Paul wrote about the same event here...
1 Thessalonians 5:2 for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. 3 While people are saying, “Peace and safety,” destruction will come on them suddenly, as labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape. 4 But you, brothers and sisters, are not in darkness so that this day should surprise you like a thief.
Paul said that the destruction that accompanies the Lord's return will happen suddenly and unexpectedly like a thief in the night and he said "they will not escape". Do you think the destruction Paul wrote about here will happen right after Jesus arrives? If so, then why would you not think the same of what Peter wrote in 2 Peter 3:10-12 about the same event? It's no wonder that Paul said "they will not escape" since the sudden destruction will be caused by fire coming down on the entire earth.
Sure, but I have to leave for now. But, I will address it when I get a chance either later today or tomorrow.
I find it amusing that you don't consider me to have been addressing what you wrote, when I've been addressing your very first statement in a number of posts.
Before we can harmonize the Scriptures, we need to first understand what any particular passage does and does not say. That is, first we need to determine the true reading and meaning of the passage in question, Revelation 20.
Only then will we be able to correctly harmonize with other passages. And if we do not see the harmony, we need to re-examine the meanings of both passages, not just one.
Many of the passages you've posted don't even address the question. As if that Jesus is ruler of all right now, still, He's not physically on the earth ruling the nations from Jerusalem, which is what the prophecies state.
I'm thinking your idea is that if Jesus is ruling in heaven now, this makes it impossible that He would set up a kingdom on the earth in the manner described, that He would be in Jerusalem ruling the world for 1000 years. I don't see the logic to that, particularly considering the prophecies we've been looking at.
Much love!
There are a lot of passages that don't relate to the 1000 year kingdom, do you want to look at them all?
Much love!
I have the idea, no matter what I will say, this will be your reply.
I've given you a number of responses, and you've given no meaningful replies, only change the rules, or to say, but what about this? but what about that?
If you give replies to what I've answered, that address what I've written, great, otherwise, why bother?
Much love!
Which passage? I assume you mean Revelation 20? The dragon is obviously symbolic of Satan. It portrays a dragon, which symbolically represents Satan, being chained up with a great chain in a prison, not Satan himself. Satan is a spirit being and can't be literally chained up. That all symbolically represents Satan's binding. How do I know? Because of how I interpret all of scripture. Scripture teaches that Jesus has been reigning since His resurrection, so that's the starting point of the figurative thousand years and the starting point of Satan's binding.
So do I. My doctrine is based on all of scripture and is particularly founded on clear, straightforward scriptures as I showed in the second post of this thread. Not all symbols are explicitly explained as to what exactly they represent.
Yes, but it doesn't explicitly tell us what the seven heads and ten horns represent. Do you think that we don't need any spiritual discernment from the Holy Spirit in order to understand some of these things?
I assumed that is what you were asking above, so see above. The beast, mark of the beast and image of the beast are all symbolic as well, but I won't go into detail on that right now.
I don't know why you're saying this. I'm simply asking you to tell me how you interpret Matthew 24:35-39 and how do you reconcile what it says with your Premil doctrine? If you read it as straightforwardly as you read Revelation 20, you should see that Jesus indicated that heaven and earth will pass away when He returns, so how can there be a thousand year earthly kingdom at that point in that case?
I find it amusing that until I asked you several times, you didn't bother addressing one single passage that I brought up in the original posts.
Our approaches to interpreting scripture are different and I don't need to interpret it the way you do. I made it clear that I establish my doctrine using clear and straightforward scriptures first and then interpret more difficult scriptures found in books like Zechariah, Isaiah, Daniel and Revelation based on those clear scriptures. You don't share that approach. You think that Revelation 20 is clear and straightforward even though there are probably a thousand different interpretations of it out there.
That is what you think the prophecies state, but the scriptures I posted make that impossible. But, if you think otherwise, then you should address them.
Why did Jesus Himself never say that He would rule over an earthly kingdom and instead said that His kingdom does not come with observation (Luke 17:20) and is not of this world (John 18:36)?
Matthew 24:34-39 KJV
34) Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
35) Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
36) But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
37) But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
38) For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
39) And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
This doesn't actually say heaven and earth would pass away at the same time Jesus returns. There is a parallel passage:
Matthew 5:17-18 KJV
17) Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18) For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Much love!
If you continued to not address anything I actually said in the original posts you would be right about that, but you ended up addressing a few of them, so we can talk about those and how to reconcile them with what is written in Revelation 20. I've already done that and you can read that in the second post in this thread. But, I'd like to know how you reconcile them with Revelation 20.
LOL. You are the one who came here and tried to dictate everything in the thread that I created. Create your own thread if you want to try to dictate what should be talked about. I'd like to talk about using other scripture to support our interpretations of Revelation 20. I've done that. Can you do that as well? I'd also like to see how you interpret the passages that I use to support my understanding of Revelation 20.
Similar threads
