cure-real
Page 7 of 18 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415161718 LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 258

Thread: The Old Testament in Revelation 20 (Why are there no "millennial" references?)

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Outside of the box. Where else?
    Posts
    10,167

    Unhappy Re: The Old Testament in Revelation 20 (Why are there no "millennial" references?)

    Getting back to Revelation 1:5-6 for a bit, here's what it says according to the KJV.

    Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
    6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

    Verse 6 states..And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father.

    Revelation 5:9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
    10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

    The first thing to keep in mind here, this scene would literally be in heaven. So while in heaven they are singing a new song. Now what does it say in this new song? And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth. So how exactly are those singing the new song in heaven supposed to reign on the earth as kings and priests, the fact they're now in heaven? Isn't it then logical that they're meaning when they return to the earth with Jesus, that's when they will be reigning as priests and kings? Something else to keep in mind here, if both the physically alive on the earth and those that have since passed on to heaven are to be reigning as priests with Christ a thousand years, then it looks like those in heaven are being cut out of their part in this reign, since Revelation 5:10 clearly shows this reigning takes place on earth, not in heaven.

  2. #92
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Probably looking over your shoulder
    Posts
    750

    Re: The Old Testament in Revelation 20 (Why are there no "millennial" references?)

    Quote Originally Posted by divaD View Post
    Getting back to Revelation 1:5-6 for a bit, here's what it says according to the KJV.

    Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
    6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

    Verse 6 states..And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father.

    Revelation 5:9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
    10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

    The first thing to keep in mind here, this scene would literally be in heaven. So while in heaven they are singing a new song. Now what does it say in this new song? And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth. So how exactly are those singing the new song in heaven supposed to reign on the earth as kings and priests, the fact they're now in heaven? Isn't it then logical that they're meaning when they return to the earth with Jesus, that's when they will be reigning as priests and kings? Something else to keep in mind here, if both the physically alive on the earth and those that have since passed on to heaven are to be reigning as priests with Christ a thousand years, then it looks like those in heaven are being cut out of their part in this reign, since Revelation 5:10 clearly shows this reigning takes place on earth, not in heaven.
    Well let me ask you this: Is Jesus waiting to "reign" until he comes to earth? Or is he in some sense reigning right now in heaven? Why would it be any different for us? I think the implication throughout Revelation is that the government of God proceeds from the temple in heaven, where Christ sits on the throne, but that the final goal is for heaven and earth to become one, the New Jerusalem descending to the earth and God dwelling with man. So yes, Christ will reign on the earth, and we will then reign on the earth with him, but right now he reigns from the temple in heaven, where the saints in heaven are seated with him. Note the promise to the overcomers of the church of Laodicea: "To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with me on my throne, as I also overcame and sat down with my father on his throne." Jesus is already on the throne, in heaven, which makes me doubt that he intends to arbitrarily withhold this promise to those who have overcome until the throne is located on the earth.

    - Hitman


    "Test all things; hold fast what is good." - Advice from the Apostle Paul


  3. #93
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Heavenly places in Christ Jesus (Eph 2:6)
    Posts
    14,928

    Re: The Old Testament in Revelation 20 (Why are there no "millennial" references?)

    Quote Originally Posted by divaD View Post
    Since I tend to see this as a literal city that will be existing literally in Jerusalem, then I would see that only being relevant to those that have the right to the tree of life, which would be in the midst of the city. But there would still be those outside of the city. Zech 14 for one clearly shows this. Isaiah 25:8 would not be applicable to those outside of the city, nor would it be applicable to anyone who ends up in the LOF.
    That doesn't have anything to do with the question I asked, though. What I was asking is when exactly you believe Isaiah 25:8 would be fulfilled, particularly in relation to the second coming of Christ? I ask that because you said "So when ch 25 is starting up, this to me is describing the beginning of this 1000 years.".

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Heavenly places in Christ Jesus (Eph 2:6)
    Posts
    14,928

    Re: The Old Testament in Revelation 20 (Why are there no "millennial" references?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Matthehitmanhart View Post
    Concerning the subject of the saints reigning with Christ: the only reason it's so hard for many in our culture to believe that we currently reign with Christ is due to an unbiblical understanding of what it means to reign.

    We tend to think of reigning and serving as two separate and almost opposite things, and yet the very center of Jesus' message in the Gospels is a redefinition of the kingdom into the terms of servanthood (e.g. Mark 10:42-45). According to Revelation 5:5-6, it's as the Servant-Lamb that Jesus occupies the throne of God in heaven. And if Jesus reigns as a servant-ruler right now, then there is also a sense in which we, his people, reign with him through the Spirit - and (I would argue) a further sense in which those who have gone to be with him sit on his throne and reign with him in a new way (e.g. Rev 2:26-27; 3:21).

    The opening passage of Revelation says in no uncertain terms that Christ, by his blood, "has made us kings and priests". This is in the past tense. Just as Christ was exalted to the right hand of God where he "reigns", as Paul says, "until he has put all enemies under his feet", so we who are "in Christ" (we who are, as his "body", "the fullness of him who fills all in all") reign together through our union with him in baptism. That, I think, is the force of Romans 5:17 in light of the inaugurated eschatology of Romans 6, as it is also a necessary implication of Paul's point in Ephesians 1-2, of our being "seated with Christ in heavenly places".

    But how do we "reign" in the present age? This is where a fully-formed biblical theology on the subject is needed, and not just a vague conception based more on the kind of picture which Jesus repudiates in Mark 10:42-45. I can only briefly point us in what I believe to be the right direction.

    Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. Then God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth." (Genesis 1:26-28)

    From the very beginning humanity was called, as a matter of vocation, to rule over everything that God had made, which means that we were called to reflect, as God's image-bearers, the wise stewardship of the creator outward to his creation. This is a much larger vocation than a "king" (as we think of kings) "reigning" over his kingdom. At most that is a limited metaphor to describe the reality to which we were called. At worst it becomes a gross and beastly parody (as we see clearly in, say, Revelation 13:1-8). But after man was expelled from the garden, the place from which we were called to have dominion, God called Abraham to bear his covenant and carry that vocation in a broken and fallen world.

    But the question now is this: What does that kingly vocation look like in a context like this, with a largely disjointed and rebellious kingdom? As texts like Exodus 19:6 indicate (and passages like Isaiah 40-55 spell out in detail), the kingdom-vocation which God's people have been called to bear is primarily a servant-shaped and intercessory vocation, a calling to stand as representatives and reflections of God to his creation in outward-focused prayer and mission, and as representatives and reflections of creation (as God intends it to be) back to God in holiness and worship.

    And this is exactly the kind of theology which stands behind Revelation's idea of the saints "reigning" with Christ; hence the reason why the role of "kings" is constantly paired with the role "priests". The point is that these are not two separate vocations, but one: we are to be a "kingdom of priests". And it is this priestly kingship which we constantly see in operation throughout Revelation, by the prayers of the saints coming before the throne of God and helping to advance his eschatological plan of redemption (e.g. 5:8; 6:9-11; 8:3-5).

    The only difference between the apocalyptic portrait of Revelation and that of (say) Paul, is that whereas Paul's inaugurated eschatology focuses on the "church militant" on earth, John's vision focuses on the "church triumphant" in heaven, i.e. on the souls of the saints reigning with Christ from the heavenly "paradise" by "serv[ing] him day and night in his temple". As Dionysius of Alexandria said of the martyrs in Revelation: "These... who now are assessors of Christ and who share the fellowship of his kingdom, and are partakers of his decisions and judge along with him..." (Letter to Fabius, Eusebius, HE VI.42.5).

    There's so much more that can be said, but I must qualify that none of this is meant to imply that we won't ultimately "reign on the earth" in the new creation, as Revelation 5:10 says. We absolutely will. The point, though, is that since Christ really does "reign" at the right hand of God in heaven right now, so all who are "seated with him" reign as well. And if this messes with your definition of what it means to "reign", then it's probably for the best.
    Good post, Matt. I definitely feel that premils completely misunderstand what it means to reign with Christ.

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Heavenly places in Christ Jesus (Eph 2:6)
    Posts
    14,928

    Re: The Old Testament in Revelation 20 (Why are there no "millennial" references?)

    Quote Originally Posted by divaD View Post
    Christ also by His blood has made us bodily immortal, except we're not bodily immortal yet.
    We're not bodily immortal at all yet. I'm not sure what you're saying here. Can you elaborate on this statement? Do you think Rev 1:5-6 is not saying that we are currently "kings and priests unto God and his Father"? Doesn't that go along with what Peter said about us being "a holy priesthood" and "royal priesthood" in 1 Peter 2? If you agree that it does then why wouldn't that mean we are currently reigning with Christ since being a priest of Christ is directly related to reigning with Christ in Rev 20:6?

    Since you mentioned Rev 1, I would think John would share in the reigning with Christ a thousand years, if the 1000 years are now. But notice how John reacts when he comes face to face, so to speak, with the one he is supposed to be co-reigning with.

    Revelation 1:17 And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last:
    18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

    If John was supposed to be then ruling with Christ, then why did he react like this?
    Because we are supposed to revere and worship Christ. Why would reacting that way to seeing Christ somehow mean he couldn't be reigning with Christ?

    When we are all changed in the twinkling of an eye, and then see Christ face to face like John did here, will we too react in the same way, fall at His feet as if we're dead?
    Sure, why not? I'm sure it will be awe inspiring.

    And let's consider the 7 churches as well. I would think if this 1000 year reign is now, then these 7 churches would be sharing in that reign, except we see Jesus having issues with most of them. According to Rev 20:6, it says blessed and holy are they which have part in the first resurrection. That seems to contradict a lot of what Jesus said to some of these churches. One of the churches He even threatened to remove the candlestick...Revelation 2:5.
    Once again, I'm not seeing your point. Are we not a blessed and "holy priesthood" right now? That's what Peter indicated, so I think your understanding of what it means to be considered blessed and holy is flawed.

    1 Peter 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. 6Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. 7Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner, 8And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed. 9But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light;

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Heavenly places in Christ Jesus (Eph 2:6)
    Posts
    14,928

    Re: The Old Testament in Revelation 20 (Why are there no "millennial" references?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Nihil Obstat View Post
    As I mentioned briefly in my first post here, I find "already but not yet" to be ridiculous.
    The concept is not ridiculous at all. Regardless of what someone wants to call this concept, scripture indicates that we are spiritually in the kingdom of God now and yet will not inherit it bodily and in its fullness until the return of Christ.

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Heavenly places in Christ Jesus (Eph 2:6)
    Posts
    14,928

    Re: The Old Testament in Revelation 20 (Why are there no "millennial" references?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Adstars View Post
    The verses i quoted did reveal that Jesus was not reigning in the kingdoms of earth at the time of the righting of the Book of Revelation. The verses make it clear that upon His return the kingdom of the world will come under His rule.
    Scripture indicates that He will destroy the wicked and their wordly kingdom upon His return.

    Psalm 2:7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. 8Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. 9Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.

    Rev 19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

    2 Thess 1:7And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, 8In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

    Matt 24:37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 38For 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, 39And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

    2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 11Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? 13Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

    Well pretty good verse there John i must admit it has neutralized my thoughts. Funny thing is when Jesus comes back to earth, many of these kings whom you believe are loyal servants of Jesus, who is king over them, are going to be hiding in absolute terror underground in the mountains calling upon them to cave in on them to hide save them from the judgement of Jesus.
    I never said anything about them being loyal servants to Jesus. You completely misunderstood what I was saying. I was only speaking about believers, not the wicked, as being "kings and priests unto God and his Father". While Rev 1:5 does say He is the prince of the kings of the earth that does not mean Jesus rules directly over the kings of the earth. It means He has authority over them since scripture says all power in heaven and in earth was given to Him (Matt 28:18) and that He rules at the right hand of the Father "Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named" (Eph 1:21).

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Kyburz, California, United States
    Posts
    3,574
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: The Old Testament in Revelation 20 (Why are there no "millennial" references?)

    Quote Originally Posted by divaD View Post
    Getting back to Revelation 1:5-6 for a bit, here's what it says according to the KJV.

    Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
    6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

    Verse 6 states..And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father.

    Revelation 5:9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
    10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

    The first thing to keep in mind here, this scene would literally be in heaven. ...
    Why are you jumping tracks in your post of Revelation 1:6 all the way over to Revelation 5:9, which appears AFTER John is told to "come up here" in Revelation 4? John is not told to come up here before he wrote 1:6. He wrote 1:6 from the isle of Patmos, here on earth.

    And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
    (Rev 1:6)

  9. #99
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Heavenly places in Christ Jesus (Eph 2:6)
    Posts
    14,928

    Re: The Old Testament in Revelation 20 (Why are there no "millennial" references?)

    Quote Originally Posted by divaD View Post
    Getting back to Revelation 1:5-6 for a bit, here's what it says according to the KJV.

    Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
    6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

    Verse 6 states..And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father.

    Revelation 5:9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
    10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

    The first thing to keep in mind here, this scene would literally be in heaven. So while in heaven they are singing a new song. Now what does it say in this new song? And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth. So how exactly are those singing the new song in heaven supposed to reign on the earth as kings and priests, the fact they're now in heaven? Isn't it then logical that they're meaning when they return to the earth with Jesus, that's when they will be reigning as priests and kings?
    Yes, that's what I believe it means. However, that does not mean they are not already reigning with Christ as priests and kings in heaven as well.

    Something else to keep in mind here, if both the physically alive on the earth and those that have since passed on to heaven are to be reigning as priests with Christ a thousand years, then it looks like those in heaven are being cut out of their part in this reign, since Revelation 5:10 clearly shows this reigning takes place on earth, not in heaven.
    I disagree. You are making yet another argument from silence. It does not say that they don't currently reign but will one day reign on the earth. There's nothing to suggest that they don't already reign in heaven. It clearly says they are already kings and priests so how could they not already be reigning? Also, it does not say that the reign can't occur concurrently on heaven and earth, which means that there's nothing to indicate that both the dead in Christ and those who are living on earth now can't both be reigning with Christ at the same time even now.

  10. #100
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Outside of the box. Where else?
    Posts
    10,167

    Re: The Old Testament in Revelation 20 (Why are there no "millennial" references?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Raybob View Post
    Why are you jumping tracks in your post of Revelation 1:6 all the way over to Revelation 5:9, which appears AFTER John is told to "come up here" in Revelation 4? John is not told to come up here before he wrote 1:6. He wrote 1:6 from the isle of Patmos, here on earth.

    And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
    (Rev 1:6)


    I know what you're thinking, Raybob. Imagine me saying that after just only recently saying I wouldn't know what you were thinking..lol. But how do you know that when John finally penned the entire book of Revelation, that the beginning few verses weren't what he learned from these visions? Take this part for example.

    Revelation 1:4 John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;

    Why is John already addressing the 7 churches before Jesus even reveals His messages for them to him? Obviously John, in verse 4, is addressing the 7 churches based on the visions that were given to him previously of him writing verse 4. So the same could be said with Revelation 1:6. He learned that from the vision in Rev 5. And then we see John already declaring how the Lord will be returning, even before he is given any visions. Obviously then, at least to me anyway, the first 8 verses or so are based on what John learns in the visions, and that he is using this as an introduction to set the scene for these visions, so to speak. Why not, if you disagree? Seems perfectly logical to me.

  11. #101
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Kyburz, California, United States
    Posts
    3,574
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: The Old Testament in Revelation 20 (Why are there no "millennial" references?)

    Quote Originally Posted by divaD View Post
    I know what you're thinking, Raybob. Imagine me saying that after just only recently saying I wouldn't know what you were thinking..lol. But how do you know that when John finally penned the entire book of Revelation, that the beginning few verses weren't what he learned from these visions? ...
    Because that makes no sense, and also, because of what John was told to write about, past, present, AND future.

    Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;

    (Rev 1:19)

    Future events to John's time are only 1/3 of what John was told to write about. What parts of Revelation do you see as things he "hast seen" (past), and what parts are things "which are" (present to 1st century)?

  12. #102
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Probably looking over your shoulder
    Posts
    750

    Re: The Old Testament in Revelation 20 (Why are there no "millennial" references?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Nihil Obstat View Post
    I'm familiar with the "overlapping ages" bit, it's just that I've come to map that out in a new way, one that I believe is truly consonant with the whole of Scripture and with the state of the world post-ascension.
    I know you're familiar with the standard expression of inaugurated eschatology, but apparently it still needed clarifying, since your representation of it as basically contradictory ("it is but it isn't") was in fact a fairly gross misrepresentation. I don't have anything to say (positive or negative) about your new view at this point, since you haven't yet laid it all out, but I just want to make sure you don't create an artificial appearance of ridiculousness in the old view to which your new view can then look awesome by comparison. There may indeed be a problem with the old view, but your charge of inherent contradiction is not it.

    I'll try my best to get to this later today, after work.
    Sweet!

    - Hitman


    "Test all things; hold fast what is good." - Advice from the Apostle Paul


  13. #103
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    storydweller
    Posts
    3,233

    Re: The Old Testament in Revelation 20 (Why are there no "millennial" references?)

    Quote Originally Posted by John146 View Post
    The concept is not ridiculous at all.
    We're all entitled to our opinions.

    Quote Originally Posted by John146 View Post
    scripture indicates that we are spiritually in the kingdom of God now and yet will not inherit it bodily and in its fullness until the return of Christ.
    Would you show me where?
    analyze. synthesize. repeat.

    *It is the next chapter of my life, whether I'm ready or not. My time here in these forums has come to its close. I bless you as I go!*

  14. #104
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Kansas City, MO
    Posts
    3,258

    Re: The Old Testament in Revelation 20 (Why are there no "millennial" references?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Nihil Obstat View Post

    Would you show me where?
    "Seated with Christ in heavenly places"

    "But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, the kingdom of heaven has come to you."

    "The kingdom of God is neither meat nor drink but the Holy Spirit in power"
    The Rookie

    Twelve is the number of government. Thus, it is quite apropos that I am on my way towards wielding the power of twelve bars - each bar like, say, a tribe.....or a star.....or, maybe an apostle. A blue apostle. Like apostle smurfs. Does anyone remember smurfs? And all the controversy about them being from the devil? It's probably bad that I juxtaposed "apostle" and "smurf" in the same sentence. But then, I probably lost you at "blue apostle". Yes, my friends, this is what "rare jewel of a person" is actually implying. "Rare Jewel of a Person" really means, "Potentially Insane".

  15. #105
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    storydweller
    Posts
    3,233

    Re: The Old Testament in Revelation 20 (Why are there no "millennial" references?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Matthehitmanhart View Post
    I know you're familiar with the standard expression of inaugurated eschatology, but apparently it still needed clarifying, since your representation of it as basically contradictory ("it is but it isn't") was in fact a fairly gross misrepresentation.
    Would you then provide some examples of what is somehow both "already" and "not yet" so I have a "fair" representation to work off of? I feel I have a confident grasp on the matter, but after you've questioned my integrity / motives, I think I need to show myself as approved before I go on with my own suggestion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Matthehitmanhart View Post
    I just want to make sure you don't create an artificial appearance of ridiculousness in the old view to which your new view can then look awesome by comparison.
    Cute. If you were worried about me sucker-punching inaugurated eschatology, don't be, because as you yourself pointed out, I have yet to share my view with you. I find it to be founded on a misinterpreted, but not altogether misinformed, dichotomy. That's why I said that I "map" it differently.

    Quote Originally Posted by Matthehitmanhart View Post
    There may indeed be a problem with the old view, but your charge of inherent contradiction is not it.
    We'll see.
    analyze. synthesize. repeat.

    *It is the next chapter of my life, whether I'm ready or not. My time here in these forums has come to its close. I bless you as I go!*

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 137
    Last Post: May 24th 2014, 10:58 AM
  2. Replies: 17
    Last Post: Feb 7th 2010, 02:16 AM
  3. Replies: 20
    Last Post: Sep 16th 2009, 02:13 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •