PDA

View Full Version : John 5:28-29 supports the amillenial view



Raybob
Dec 10th 2008, 07:11 AM
Everyone seems to recognize that the dead in Christ will rise first and those alive shall be caught up (1 Thes. 4:16-5:4) but many here seem to not also realize what else happens at this time. Jesus tells us quite plainly:

Joh 5:28-29 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, (29) And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

All that are in the grave clearly indicates everyone, followers of Christ or not, will rise within that hour. To imply that Jesus actually meant to say "the 1000 year period is coming," instead of "the hour is coming" would be adding mucho text to what is written.


Raybob

DurbanDude
Dec 10th 2008, 08:43 AM
Everyone seems to recognize that the dead in Christ will rise first and those alive shall be caught up (1 Thes. 4:16-5:4) but many here seem to not also realize what else happens at this time. Jesus tells us quite plainly:

Joh 5:28-29 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, (29) And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

All that are in the grave clearly indicates everyone, followers of Christ or not, will rise within that hour. To imply that Jesus actually meant to say "the 1000 year period is coming," instead of "the hour is coming" would be adding mucho text to what is written.


Raybob

"the hour is coming" . This is not an exact 60 minute period, nothing further is implied except that there are two separate resurrections. We can't jump to timing conclusions when the hour so obviously isn't literal.

Partaker of Christ
Dec 10th 2008, 02:30 PM
Everyone seems to recognize that the dead in Christ will rise first and those alive shall be caught up (1 Thes. 4:16-5:4) but many here seem to not also realize what else happens at this time. Jesus tells us quite plainly:

Joh 5:28-29 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, (29) And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

All that are in the grave clearly indicates everyone, followers of Christ or not, will rise within that hour. To imply that Jesus actually meant to say "the 1000 year period is coming," instead of "the hour is coming" would be adding mucho text to what is written.


Raybob

Lets try a few more verses:

John 5:24 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.

John 5:25 "Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.
John 5:26 "For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself;
John 5:27 and He gave Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of Man.

John 5:28 "Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice,
John 5:29 and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment.

wpm
Dec 10th 2008, 02:38 PM
"the hour is coming" . This is not an exact 60 minute period, nothing further is implied except that there are two separate resurrections. We can't jump to timing conclusions when the hour so obviously isn't literal.

You either have a shout that continues for centuries or 2 shouts (that there is no mention of)!!!

wpm
Dec 10th 2008, 02:39 PM
Lets try a few more verses:

John 5:24 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.

John 5:25 "Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.
John 5:26 "For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself;
John 5:27 and He gave Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of Man.

John 5:28 "Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice,
John 5:29 and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment.

These are the two resurrections believers experience. Please note the second is the physical resurrection.

Raybob
Dec 10th 2008, 05:14 PM
"the hour is coming" . This is not an exact 60 minute period, nothing further is implied except that there are two separate resurrections. We can't jump to timing conclusions when the hour so obviously isn't literal.

"the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth..."


The point is that it clearly says "all that are in the graves". When the dead in Christ hear, so does everyone else that is in the graves, according to the words of Jesus. :pp

Raybob

kenrank
Dec 10th 2008, 05:31 PM
You either have a shout that continues for centuries or 2 shouts (that there is no mention of)!!!

Didn't Shaul write that the dead in Messiah rise "at the last trumpet?"

Peace.
Ken

Raybob
Dec 10th 2008, 05:44 PM
Didn't Shaul write that the dead in Messiah rise "at the last trumpet?"

Peace.
Ken

Paul wrote about what happens to Christians at this hour but Jesus here tells us what happens to the others, like so many other places in scripture.

Dan 12:1-2 ... at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. (2) And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

John146
Dec 10th 2008, 06:26 PM
"the hour is coming" . This is not an exact 60 minute period, nothing further is implied except that there are two separate resurrections. We can't jump to timing conclusions when the hour so obviously isn't literal.The implication is that all who are in the graves "come forth" at that same hour or time. It does not at all imply two resurrections separated by a significant period of time such as a thousand years. It implies a future singular event or moment in time when this will occur.

The same Greek phrase is used here:

25These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father.

Here, Jesus is speaking about an actual time when He would no more speak to them in proverbs but show them plainly. That would happen at some moment in time in the future.

The same phrase is also used here:

John 7:30 Then they sought to take him: but no man laid hands on him, because his hour was not yet come.

John 13:1 Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end.

Is this speaking of a long period of time to come or a specific moment in time or event that was coming? Clearly, this is referring to Jesus' time to die on the cross.

The phrase is also used here:

John 12:23 And Jesus answered them, saying, The hour is come, that the Son of man should be glorified.

Once again, it is used in terms of a single point in time and not to a long period of time or to two different points in time.

John146
Dec 10th 2008, 06:35 PM
"the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth..."


The point is that it clearly says "all that are in the graves". When the dead in Christ hear, so does everyone else that is in the graves, according to the words of Jesus. :pp

RaybobExactly. All, saved and lost, who are in the graves will hear His voice at that same hour or time. That is what the text says. Daniel 12:2 is similar.

2And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Once again, we have no indication whatsoever that the saved are resurrected long before the lost are resurrected. The implication once again is that they are resurrected at the same time and each group is resurrected unto a different eternal destiny.

Here is what Paul says:

Acts 24:15 And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.

There will be a singular resurrection of the dead. Not two resurrections as premils believe. This singular resurrection of the dead will include both the just and unjust.

Jesus taught this in the parable of the wheat and tares as well:

Matt 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

Notice that both the wheat (believers) and the tares (unbelievers) are gathered at the same time. Jesus later explains that the harvest is the end of the age. Jesus returns at the end of the age. At that time, all the dead, saved and lost, will be resurrected and will be gathered before the throne along with those who were still alive for the judgment. That is what we see taught in Matthew 25:31-46 as well. These passages do not allow for an intermediate thousand year time period between the resurrection of the saved and lost or between the reward/judgment of the saved and lost. They all clearly teach that all the dead will be raised at the same time and all will be rewarded/judged at the same time.

wpm
Dec 10th 2008, 06:43 PM
Didn't Shaul write that the dead in Messiah rise "at the last trumpet?"

Peace.
Ken

Who is Shaul, please?

Cyberseeker
Dec 10th 2008, 07:46 PM
Who is Shaul, please?

Duh, :dunno:

Its what you wrap around your shoulders in winter.

markdrums
Dec 10th 2008, 08:01 PM
"the hour is coming" . This is not an exact 60 minute period, nothing further is implied except that there are two separate resurrections. We can't jump to timing conclusions when the hour so obviously isn't literal.

True.... and neither is the "one thousand years" in Revelation.
;)

And I think it was also pointed out that the FIRST resurrection is "Spiritual" & occurs at the time of conversion.
The SECOND Resurrection is physical, & occurs as ONE EVENT. The second coming / second resurrection / judgment day, are not several different events at different times.

Just as the O.P. notes, ALL shall hear his voice & come forth.... some resurrected to eternal life, & some to eternal condemnation.
The same event.

wpm
Dec 10th 2008, 08:10 PM
Duh, :dunno:

Its what you wrap around your shoulders in winter.

Ahhhhhhh. How stuupit. :B I should have known. :rofl:

John146
Dec 10th 2008, 08:50 PM
Ahhhhhhh. How stuupit. :B I should have known. :rofl:It was so obvious. Come on, Paul, you're slipping. :D

modanufu
Dec 11th 2008, 11:43 AM
Hi DurbanDude,


"the hour is coming" . This is not an exact 60 minute period, nothing further is implied except that there are two separate resurrections. We can't jump to timing conclusions when the hour so obviously isn't literal.

But there is more, as you probably will know. I mean all those verses in John about the last day.

How long is that last day?

Joh 6:39 And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the lastday.
Joh 6:40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the lastday.
Joh 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the lastday.
Joh 6:54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the lastday.
Joh 11:24 Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the lastday.

According to Paul this resurrection will happen "in the twinkling of an eye".

1 Cor. 15:52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

Now the same gospel of John also says that the unbelievers will be judged on the last day:

Joh 12:48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the lastday.

So this also happens in that same moment. God doesn't need any time to make a end to all things.

I know from my own experience as a premil that we automatically translate the word "day" in "a thousand years" as soon as we see that it does not agree with our system. There is a lot of resistance in us to be "open" to the Word of God (this also counts for me). It's been such a nice neat scheme we had and it seemed to explain so many verses in the OT (but not all). But if we dig into NT references to the OT with their amazing implications then we'll see that these new wine is put into new sacks... A lot of things are kept unexplained but what's necessary for us to know it's there!

Will we follow the NT also in our Bible explanations? That is the question.

Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

It's all in the OT but we can only see it if we change our method of reading the Scriptures. That's what I learned slowly, too slowly... :blush:
Kind regards,

Dik

DurbanDude
Dec 11th 2008, 12:19 PM
These are the two resurrections believers experience. Please note the second is the physical resurrection.

John 5:29 and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment

These are the 2 resurrections I was referring to.

kenrank
Dec 11th 2008, 12:20 PM
Everyone seems to recognize that the dead in Christ will rise first and those alive shall be caught up (1 Thes. 4:16-5:4)
Raybob

Greetings all. I generally don't do much talking about end times beause of the great amount of interpretation that must go into it. I find it frustrating at times...because there is an expert around every corner, and rarely do they agree. :) I also generally believe that nobody will "completely" understand any prophecy until it has come to pass, at which time we can look back, probably smack ourselves in the head, and realize how clear scripture was.

In any event, I wanted to share my view so somebody might tell me what "category" my view fits into. Is it amillenial, post...what's the difference anyway?

I believe that there is no pre-trib rapture, and that if there is one...I don't believe we are taken to heaven. I believe it happens at the end of the tribulation and that we will be here, on earth, through the whole thing. I also am starting to wonder...if the rapture isn't a return of God's people to the land...though I realize that is an aside from the rest of the paragraph.

Thanks.
ken

DurbanDude
Dec 11th 2008, 01:30 PM
It's all in the OT but we can only see it if we change our method of reading the Scriptures. That's what I learned slowly, too slowly... :blush:
Kind regards,

Dik

Hi Dik,

There is just no way all those OT verses can be translated symbolically, let me list some of them again:

Zechariah 12/13 , Zephaniah , Joel 3, Ezekiel 38/39 , Isaiah 2, Rev 19:15, Jeremiah 4:27 , Isaiah 25, Daniel 7, Rev 11:15, Zechariah 8, Isaiah 34, Isaiah 61, Zechariah 14, Psalm 2

There are too many references to this earth surviving, certain nations , certain regions, and certain individuals.

I have never seen any premill explain these in any level of satisfaction. These verses have detail that to a logical man cannot apply symbolically to the current church age. Only by a stretch of the imagination.

I do acknowledge that there are a few verses in the NT that imply complete destruction at the second coming, but this is written to the church. We know salvation is of utmost importance, so at the second coming there is only one choice for us, resurrected with Christ .... or the lake of fire. If the lake of fire comes 1000 years later or not makes no difference to us, the warnings are to be prepared for the second coming, and its our last chance. This is the day of reckoning for all mankind, this is something I have always agreed with amills on.

To us it makes no difference who or what we reign over, as long as we are with Christ forever, right from the second coming.

To the OT Jews however, the Messianic rule over the nations in a period of peace when the Messiah rules from Mount Zion was highly important to them. , therefore the importance of the detailed explanation of the events after the Messiah has destroyed their enemies and established His physical reign in Israel. This special period for Jews has never happened yet , and will still happen, the verses listed above are clear.

So I do hear what you are saying, but you have to understand the concept of progressive fulfilment in prophecy (the "gap theory"):

A) I can give you many verses in the OT that describe the events of the first coming of Christ and then follow on about the events of the second coming without any break, even though these events are thousands of years apart.

B) I can give you a few verses in the gospels that describe events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD and then go on to prophesy about the far future war in Israel without even a break. The initial events were all fulflled but the later events in the prophesy are clealry not yet fulfilled (eg there was no profusion of false "Christs" back in 70 AD, the elect were not gathered by the angels, every eye did not see Christ on the clouds, every mountain and island are still in place)

C) Daniel 11 speaks clearly of Antiochus and then goes on to talk about a future antichrist without a break.

So another rule of interpreting biblical prophecy goes something like this:

When a major event is being prophesied about, in the spiritual realm and spiritual mind-set of the prophet, it can start reminding the prophet about another similar end-time event of utmost importance, and the prophet then starts prophesying about the far future end-time event without even breaking the prophecy.

This cannot be understood by the Einstein's and Newton's of this world, they can write-off off all interpretation as illogical, and pick apart each viewpoint as biblically impossible, but then you will have nothing left. God is more a poet full of emotion than a list writer. His warnings are full of stressing the importance and ramifications of making the right decision rather than a sequential list. We just cannot ignore the OT prophecies about the wonderful Messianic age of earth because of the over-literalisation of a few debatable NT verses.

RevLogos
Dec 11th 2008, 02:29 PM
Lets try a few more verses:

John 5:24 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.

John 5:25 "Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.


To add to this a bit.

The dead Jesus refers to in 5:25 are the same spiritually dead he refers to in 5:24

Joh 5:24 "I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.
Joh 5:25 I tell you the truth, a time is coming and has now come when the dead [Referring to the spiritually dead from 5:24] will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live [or in terms of 5:24: will cross over from death to life].

The same is asserted here:

Eph 2:1 As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins,
Eph 2:2 in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient.
Eph 2:3 All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath.
Eph 2:4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy,
Eph 2:5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved.

I never really liked “first resurrection” as a term for the bringing to life of the spirit as expressed in these verses. I think Matthew Henry uses this term. A resurrection implies one was alive before being dead. The spiritually dead were never alive that I can tell.

In Rev 20, John uses the terms first resurrection and second death for the same event which occurs at judgment. Which it is for one depends on whether or not their name is in the Book of Life.

RevLogos
Dec 11th 2008, 02:35 PM
Let's also not forget Jesus' conversation with Martha:

Joh 11:23 Jesus said to her, "Your brother will rise again."
Joh 11:24 Martha answered, "I know he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day."
Joh 11:25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies;
Joh 11:26 and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"
Joh 11:27 "Yes, Lord," she told him, "I believe that you are the Christ, the Son of God, who was to come into the world."

Martha was taught one resurrection, which Jesus confirms.

Jesus did NOT say:

"I am two resurrections and the life. For cryin’ out loud get it right for once already Martha. And I’m the rapture too, but no big deal if you miss it, it’l just cost a bit more but you can still get in."

BroRog
Dec 11th 2008, 02:40 PM
Everyone seems to recognize that the dead in Christ will rise first and those alive shall be caught up (1 Thes. 4:16-5:4) but many here seem to not also realize what else happens at this time. Jesus tells us quite plainly:

Joh 5:28-29 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, (29) And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

All that are in the grave clearly indicates everyone, followers of Christ or not, will rise within that hour. To imply that Jesus actually meant to say "the 1000 year period is coming," instead of "the hour is coming" would be adding mucho text to what is written.


Raybob

Now I'm really confused. I was lead to believe that the Amil view has the saints in heaven, not in graves on earth.

BroRog
Dec 11th 2008, 02:45 PM
And I think it was also pointed out that the FIRST resurrection is "Spiritual" & occurs at the time of conversion.
The SECOND Resurrection is physical, & occurs as ONE EVENT.

Mark, doesn't this disprove rather than prove Amil? I was lead to believe that the saints would be in heaven awaiting physical resurrection.

"Why shout Jesus, I'm standing right here." :)

David Taylor
Dec 11th 2008, 03:04 PM
Now I'm really confused. I was lead to believe that the Amil view has the saints in heaven, not in graves on earth.

The bodies of the saints are in the graves awaiting the resurrection at His return.

The spirits of the saints are in Heaven now, in the presence of the Lord; just as Jesus showed us in His death, burial, and resurrection example. His Spirit went to the Father at death, His body went to the grave and awaited the resurrection; then at His resurrection; a new glorified and immortal, incorruptible body never known to humankind came out of the tomb.....we shall follow that same pattern; albeit our wait is gonna be longer than 3 days.

Only the SDA and JW groups (that I am aware of) believe Heaven is completely empty and both the body AND soul lay unconscious in the tomb, separated from Christ by death for hundreds and thousands of years, until the Return of Christ.

John146
Dec 11th 2008, 05:04 PM
Now I'm really confused. I was lead to believe that the Amil view has the saints in heaven, not in graves on earth.Their bodies are in the graves but their souls are in heaven. Unless you believe in soul sleep, this shouldn't be hard to understand.

modanufu
Dec 11th 2008, 06:07 PM
Hi DurbanDude,

Thanks for all the info. Perhaps when I'll have time and energy I will try to "attack" one of the problems you note. This "progressive revelation" idea is wellknown to me as an ex-dispensationalist.

I think Matthew 24 can easily be explained without any time gap and without any partial preterism by assuming two layers of meaning in some parts. That they are there can be proved from the narrow relation of this chapter with 2 Thessalonians 2.

And the explanation of some passages with a seeming gap like that in Malachi 3 depends on our view of the relation between the Lord's first and his second coming.

Dan. 10-12 I admit I cannot explain without a gap at the moment but that's is because I have been used to reading Daniel in a futurist way. I am still thinking that over but I have to set priorities and first prepare my Revelation notes into a readable form.


A point which nobody can ignore are the many lines from the NT to the OT. They cannot be silenced by splitting up prophecy in a section for the church and another section for Israel. For instance, Acts 2:29-36 explains undoubtedly that the Lord Jesus Christ since his ascension into Heaven is King (Kyrios = King, Messiah = King) on the throne of David and that this throne is none other than that at the right hand of God in Heaven. This makes a future throne of David on earth redundant, however we as modern westerners wish the OT to be logically understandable. I have no choice, I have to interpret a lot of OT prophecies about Israel as prophetic language cast in terms understandable to them in order to warn and encourage them to keep on serving their God.

As to Rev. 11:15-18 this is one of the clear amil passages in Revelation.



Rev. 11:18 And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

This is the Last Judgment at the Second Coming... Not a trace of a future millennial intermezzo. But perhaps you posit here a gap too. Then you have two gaps: one of 2000+ years and one of 1000 years. Ah, well, that's premillennialism, isn't it? :)

Kind regards,

Dik

DurbanDude
Dec 11th 2008, 07:29 PM
Hi DurbanDude,

Thanks for all the info. Perhaps when I'll have time and energy I will try to "attack" one of the problems you note. This "progressive revelation" idea is wellknown to me as an ex-dispensationalist.



Hi Dik,

Ok, looking forward to your ideas on progressive fulfilment.

DD

DurbanDude
Dec 11th 2008, 08:03 PM
But there is more, as you probably will know. I mean all those verses in John about the last day.

How long is that last day?

Joh 6:39 And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the lastday.
Joh 6:40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the lastday.
Joh 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the lastday.
Joh 6:54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the lastday.
Joh 11:24 Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the lastday.

According to Paul this resurrection will happen "in the twinkling of an eye".

1 Cor. 15:52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

Now the same gospel of John also says that the unbelievers will be judged on the last day:

Joh 12:48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the lastday.

So this also happens in that same moment. God doesn't need any time to make a end to all things.


Someone else was also making a point about the "last day". I agree all these events happen at the second coming. The second coming is the last day of this age. The phrase "last day" has to be seen in context, but we all agree here , doesn't seem to be any conflict.

Some people think the word "judge" has to be ONLY associated with the final judgment of the deeds of all men, but obviously this viewpoint is not true, the word "judge" can be associated with any judgement and the bible has used this word many times for many different events.

BroRog
Dec 11th 2008, 08:04 PM
Their bodies are in the graves but their souls are in heaven. Unless you believe in soul sleep, this shouldn't be hard to understand.

John and David,

If the saints are in heaven, they hear him from heaven, not from the grave.

David Taylor
Dec 11th 2008, 08:23 PM
John and David,

If the saints are in heaven, they hear him from heaven, not from the grave.

When their bodies and souls are runited in the grave at the resurrection; they come out. Pretty simple. However the technical aspect of that will occur, I am sure we will follow the same example that Jesus did.

He died, and his body went to the grave, and His spirit went to the Father in Heaven. When He arose, He arose again as a body/spirit unit; but this time immortal, imperishable, and incorruptible.

Same will be for us at His return.

markdrums
Dec 12th 2008, 12:18 AM
Mark, doesn't this disprove rather than prove Amil? I was lead to believe that the saints would be in heaven awaiting physical resurrection.

"Why shout Jesus, I'm standing right here." :)

I don't see how this would disprove or be an issue at all.....?
Every "Born Again Christian" is with the Lord in Spirit/Soul when they physically die. The Resurrection on the last day is the "second" resurrection... when ALL will be called, and come out of their graves (Physically)... some will rise to eternal life, & some to eternal condemnation.

How would this work against an A-Mill view?
I'm a bit puzzled as to what the problem would be...

:confused

I guess I either don't understand what you're asking... or you misunderstood my earlier post.

:saint: ?

wpm
Dec 12th 2008, 03:07 AM
Someone else was also making a point about the "last day". I agree all these events happen at the second coming. The second coming is the last day of this age. The phrase "last day" has to be seen in context, but we all agree here , doesn't seem to be any conflict.

Some people think the word "judge" has to be ONLY associated with the final judgment of the deeds of all men, but obviously this viewpoint is not true, the word "judge" can be associated with any judgement and the bible has used this word many times for many different events.

This concluding last day is not just a day of resurrection and judgment for the righteous but also for the wicked. This is confirmed by Christ in John 12:48, when He said, “He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.”

Here the wicked are judged on the same day that the righteous are judged, namely, the “last day” of the “last days.” The term “the last day” is quoted different times in the New Testament without any form (or undoubted requirement) of qualification or any hint that there are two separate last days, as the Premillennialist would try and argue.

When Christ or any other person referred to that final day in the New Testament it was always constantly in the context of its all-consummating nature, each time referring to the matter of the resurrection / judgment of both the wicked and the righteous. The references expressly refer to the last day of this age (the Gospel age), the day that ushers in the new heaven and the new earth.

2 Timothy 4:1 says, “I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom.”

Adam’s race – in total – is therefore judged “at his (Christ’s) epifaneian (or) appearing and his kingdom.” Everyman that has ever lived from the foundation of the world will be then brought before the final judgment bar of God to account for their earthly lives. This is undoubtedly an all-inclusive general judgment. The persons involved and the occasion referred to could not be clearer.

BroRog
Dec 12th 2008, 03:19 AM
When their bodies and souls are runited in the grave at the resurrection; they come out. Pretty simple. However the technical aspect of that will occur, I am sure we will follow the same example that Jesus did.

He died, and his body went to the grave, and His spirit went to the Father in Heaven. When He arose, He arose again as a body/spirit unit; but this time immortal, imperishable, and incorruptible.

Same will be for us at His return.

What makes you think his spirit went to the Father in heaven? John's gospel says he didn't. John 20:17.

:)

Raybob
Dec 12th 2008, 05:10 AM
What makes you think his spirit went to the Father in heaven? John's gospel says he didn't. John 20:17.

:)

Luk 23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.


John 20:17 speaks of His bodily ascension.
Raybob

kenrank
Dec 12th 2008, 05:18 AM
Thanks folks, I appreciate the help. I will try the net.

Ken

Raybob
Dec 12th 2008, 06:33 AM
Thanks folks, I appreciate the help. I will try the net.

Ken

I'm sorry you were ignored. Believing the rapture happens at the end of the trib makes you post-trib. If you believe that happens the same time that the non-Christians are judged and the same time this earth melts with fervent heat and the new earth is ushered in, then you would be amil too.

Raybob

DurbanDude
Dec 12th 2008, 07:35 AM
When Christ or any other person referred to that final day in the New Testament it was always constantly in the context of its all-consummating nature, each time referring to the matter of the resurrection / judgment of both the wicked and the righteous. The references expressly refer to the last day of this age (the Gospel age), the day that ushers in the new heaven and the new earth. .

Do you realise what you have just said: You have categorically stated that every mention of the "last day" in the NT, mentions the resurrection of the righteous and mentions the resurrection of the unrighteous, the judment of the ungodly, and is an all-consummating event.

John 6:38-44 has NO mention of an all-consummating day, NO mention of a judgement, NO mention of a general resurrection or resurrection of the unrighteous, just mentions a resurrection of the righteous.

John 11:24-25 has NO mention of an all-consummating day, NO mention of a judgement, NO mention of a general resurrection or resurrection of the unrighteous, just mentions a resurrection of the righteous

John12:48 has No mention of an all-consummating day, NO mention of ANY resurrection, just mentions a judgement of the unrighteous.

As far as I can see , there is nothing to contradict the pre-mill position in any NT verse with the phrase "last day".

Cyberseeker
Dec 12th 2008, 08:25 AM
In any event, I wanted to share my view so somebody might tell me what "category" my view fits into. Is it amillenial, post...what's the difference anyway?

ken

Hi Ken,

I find diagrams the easiest way to get an overview of the main views. :idea: Try this link and click on the thumbnails on the top line - Pre-mill view, Historic view, and A-mill view.

http://5loaves2fishes.net/node/25

All the best.

BroRog
Dec 12th 2008, 02:16 PM
Luk 23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.


John 20:17 speaks of His bodily ascension.
Raybob

Jesus says he didn't ascend to his father. If he had gone there in spirit, he couldn't say he hadn't been there.

Please people, get over your spirit-body disconnect. Why do you think a bodily resurrection is paramount in the concept of eternal life?

BroRog
Dec 12th 2008, 02:19 PM
Where are the souls of the dead in Christ now?

The Bible says we go to a place to await the final judgment. The Hebrews call it Sheol; the Greeks call it Hades. I can multiply verses to this effect. I searched for hours last night and couldn't find a single verse that says we go to heaven.

John146
Dec 12th 2008, 03:30 PM
Do you realise what you have just said: You have categorically stated that every mention of the "last day" in the NT, mentions the resurrection of the righteous and mentions the resurrection of the unrighteous, the judment of the ungodly, and is an all-consummating event.

John 6:38-44 has NO mention of an all-consummating day, NO mention of a judgement, NO mention of a general resurrection or resurrection of the unrighteous, just mentions a resurrection of the righteous.

John 11:24-25 has NO mention of an all-consummating day, NO mention of a judgement, NO mention of a general resurrection or resurrection of the unrighteous, just mentions a resurrection of the righteous

John12:48 has No mention of an all-consummating day, NO mention of ANY resurrection, just mentions a judgement of the unrighteous.

As far as I can see , there is nothing to contradict the pre-mill position in any NT verse with the phrase "last day". What you have said is a gross misrepresentation of the bible.Are those passages not speaking of the same "last day"? What does the "last day" refer to then if it is not the last day of this temporal age?

David Taylor
Dec 12th 2008, 05:04 PM
All of the threads advancing soul-sleep, and arguing for/against have been deleted because they are derailing this thread.

Soul-sleep is against for forum rules to advance anyway, because it is a devisive topic that isn't held by mainstream protestantism, and is most widespread taught out of SDA and JW groups.

I am moving John146's post that showed the scriptural basis for the mainstream protestant believe of the spirit/soul consciously returning to the Father in Heaven at death to the World Religions forum. Anyone interested in sharing further reasons why this is not an tendable biblical teaching, can continue that discussion there; adding to John146's post. However, soul-sleep advocates may not advance or argue in favor of that teaching.

Now, back on track with the topic of this OP.

wpm
Dec 12th 2008, 05:17 PM
Do you realise what you have just said: You have categorically stated that every mention of the "last day" in the NT, mentions the resurrection of the righteous and mentions the resurrection of the unrighteous, the judment of the ungodly, and is an all-consummating event.

John 6:38-44 has NO mention of an all-consummating day, NO mention of a judgement, NO mention of a general resurrection or resurrection of the unrighteous, just mentions a resurrection of the righteous.

Jesus is talking about the resurrection at His Coming.


John 11:24-25 has NO mention of an all-consummating day, NO mention of a judgement, NO mention of a general resurrection or resurrection of the unrighteous, just mentions a resurrection of the righteous

Jesus is talking about the resurrection at His Coming.



John12:48 has No mention of an all-consummating day, NO mention of ANY resurrection, just mentions a judgement of the unrighteous.
Jesus is talking about the judgment of the wicked at His Coming.



As far as I can see , there is nothing to contradict the pre-mill position in any NT verse with the phrase "last day".
Please exgete the passages you are dismissing as climactic and locate them where you think they occur.

DeafPosttrib
Dec 12th 2008, 10:45 PM
Isn't it too difficult for you to understand what "last day" means?

Many kids at school, know what "last day of school" means. They are exciting and cannot wait for summer. When the last day of school falls on the day of the calendar. They know, the next day after 'last day of school' past, means no more class, no more homework. They will be exciting for fun throughout long summer time with no class and no homework.

Also, old people who are in age late 60's or 70's. They are looking forward for their last day of work, they are exciting looking forward for their retirement come follow the "last day" of work. When the last day of their work have arrive, they are exciting, no more work. They are RETIRED!

Same with common sense of 'last day' what Christ was talking about.

Jer. 8:20 tells us, clear when the harvest once come, and the summer past then we are not saved. Simple means, when once Christ comes with his angels, then the opporunity of gospel will be done, time for the judgment to come upon all nations. There will be too late for people who currently reject the gospel, will have no time to repent of salvation as when once summer is past same as when once the gospel is past, then they are not saved. They will be gathering and cast them away into fire.

Nowhere in the four gospels that, Christ did mention 'one thousand years'. Neither Christ say there will be gap period beyond his coming and the last day. He simple says, 'last day' means last day, no more add another next 100 or 1000 years either. That's it.

John 6:39,40,44, & 54 -'last day' hit me in year 2000 whilst myself was premill before. I decided yield up premill belief, and rather follow what Christ saying. I am rejoice and have the truth in Christ. Amen praise the Lord. :pp

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

DurbanDude
Dec 12th 2008, 11:00 PM
Isn't it too difficult for you to understand what "last day" means?

Many kids at school, know what "last day of school" means. They are exciting and cannot wait for summer. When the last day of school falls on the day of the calendar. They know, the next day after 'last day of school' past, means no more class, no more homework. They will be exciting for fun throughout long summer time with no class and no homework.

Then the kids go back to school the next year.

The last day means the last day of this age. Do you honestly think that God will have no more ages in the entire eternity? No more periods of significance, no more build-ups to greater things?(rhetorical question)

I believe there will be many exciting ages to come , the phrase "the last day" can in no way be interpreted as meaning the last day of any significant occurence in the future of eternity.

We can go in circles arguing this point , let's rather agree to disagree here.

Partaker of Christ
Dec 13th 2008, 12:09 AM
Then the kids go back to school the next year.

The last day means the last day of this age. Do you honestly think that God will have no more ages in the entire eternity? No more periods of significance, no more build-ups to greater things?(rhetorical question)

I believe there will be many exciting ages to come , the phrase "the last day" can in no way be interpreted as meaning the last day of any significant occurence in the future of eternity.

We can go in circles arguing this point , let's rather agree to disagree here.

Hi DurbanDude!

This also speaks of 'ages' to come:

Eph 2:6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:
Eph 2:7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

DeafPosttrib
Dec 13th 2008, 02:28 AM
I understand 'ageS' of Eph. 2:7 could be means more than one or two ages. Also, it could also means periods or times.

My understanding of Eph. 2:7, the point is talking about grace contextually with Eph. 2:8-9. His grace shown of no limited toward us, who believe in Jesus Christ, his rich blessing pour upon us with no limited of his grace. Eph. 2:7 doesn't show there is a point of age or time, but speak of his grace. His grace is no mercy. Even, also his grace was always right there throughout Old Testament period, not just only in the "Church Age" period as what dispensationalism teachings. His grace always there from the beginning to the end at His coming. His grace is no limited, it is richly eternality blessing upon us whosoever have faith in Jesus.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

modanufu
Dec 13th 2008, 11:07 AM
Hi DurbanDude,


Hi Dik,

Ok, looking forward to your ideas on progressive fulfilment.

DD

That's nice. But first I would like to hear your opinion on Acts 2:29-36 and Rev. 11:8. You haven't discussed these points yet. :)

Kind regards,

Dik

DurbanDude
Dec 13th 2008, 11:36 AM
For instance, Acts 2:29-36 explains undoubtedly that the Lord Jesus Christ since his ascension into Heaven is King (Kyrios = King, Messiah = King) on the throne of David and that this throne is none other than that at the right hand of God in Heaven. This makes a future throne of David on earth redundant, however we as modern westerners wish the OT to be logically understandable. I have no choice, I have to interpret a lot of OT prophecies about Israel as prophetic language cast in terms understandable to them in order to warn and encourage them to keep on serving their God.

Modern westerner? Maybe you, but I'm from Africa, and my kids think I'm old fashioned :lol:

I agree with you that the bible isn't always logical to our mindsets. You and I know that the is a lot of doctrinal agreement between amills and premills concerning this present age. eg.the message of salvation. No-one has ever denied that God is God, and God is in charge. Whether Jews of the OT, or no matter what eschatological viewpoint God is in charge, the events unfold according to God's timetable. So if you show me verses like Acts 2:29-36 that state that when Jesus was resurrected he joined God and rules and is the Christ we all know that this does not contradict any pre-mill doctrine in any way. This is the foundation of all our Christian faith, that Jesus was crucified and rose again , and was the predicted Christ and Messiah and sits at the right hand of God reigning.

Obviously pre-mills are already aware of these basics to Christianity and yet believe the OT verses about a physical Messianic Age are to be fulfilled anyway.




As to Rev. 11:15-18 this is one of the clear amil passages in Revelation.

This is the Last Judgment at the Second Coming... Not a trace of a future millennial intermezzo. But perhaps you posit here a gap too. Then you have two gaps: one of 2000+ years and one of 1000 years.

I notice you didn't comment on Rev 19:15, this verse was earlier in my list :hmm:

Raybob
Dec 13th 2008, 05:37 PM
..So if you show me verses like Acts 2:29-36 that state that when Jesus was resurrected he joined God and rules and is the Christ we all know that this does not contradict any pre-mill doctrine in any way. This is the foundation of all our Christian faith, that Jesus was crucified and rose again , and was the predicted Christ and Messiah and sits at the right hand of God reigning.


Actually, Acts 2:29-36 totally blows the theory of a future millennial kingdom. The future kingdom is supposed to have a literal throne of David in a literal temple where Jesus will sit. Acts 2:29-36 proves that the throne of David that the patriarchs were looking forward to in the OT IS the throne where Jesus is NOW. Since Jesus is on the throne of David NOW, any future literal temple with a future literal throne of David makes no sense.

Raybob

Sirus
Dec 13th 2008, 07:42 PM
Really? If they are one and the same kingdom why did Jesus specify they are two?

Luk 22:29-30 And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Act 1:6-8 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

Jesus never denied but affirmed a future earthly kingdom. It's in a few other places as well.

Raybob
Dec 13th 2008, 08:08 PM
Really? If they are one and the same kingdom why did Jesus specify they are two?

Luk 22:29-30 And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

I don't think you see the symbolic nature of "eat and drink at my table", or "judging the twelve tribes". Do you really think there will ever be 12 tribes, not just Judah (Jews), that will need judging in the future? Will they judge divorce cases, murder cases, etc.?


Act 1:6-8 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

Jesus never denied but affirmed a future earthly kingdom. It's in a few other places as well.
He most surely DID deny it. If He affirmed a supposed earthly kingdom, where did He do that???:o
In ignorance at that time, of what was about to happen, they asked Him "IF" He would restore a kingdom on earth. He clearly did NOT say "yes." Insead, He told them things about the kingdom of God that is "within". He told them of the empowerment of the Holy Spirit to reign with Him, to have the power to bind Satan with the armor of God, the Helmet of Salvation and to wear that crown of Righteousness.

Raybob

Sirus
Dec 13th 2008, 08:20 PM
I don't think you see the symbolic nature of "eat and drink at my table", or "judging the twelve tribes". Do you really think there will ever be 12 tribes, not just Judah (Jews), that will need judging in the future? Will they judge divorce cases, murder cases, etc.?Absolutely! I doubt divorce cases but yes....



He most surely DID deny it. If He affirmed a supposed earthly kingdom, where did He do that???:o

Mat 20:21 And he said unto her, What wilt thou? She saith unto him, Grant that these my two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on the left, in thy kingdom.
Mat 20:22 But Jesus answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? They say unto him, We are able.
Mat 20:23 And he saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father.
Mat 20:24 And when the ten heard it, they were moved with indignation against the two brethren.

Mar 10:40 But to sit on my right hand and on my left hand is not mine to give; but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared.



In ignorance at that time, of what was about to happen, they asked Him "IF" He would restore a kingdom on earth. He clearly did NOT say "yes." Insead, He told them things about the kingdom of God that is "within". He told them of the empowerment of the Holy Spirit to reign with Him, to have the power to bind Satan with the armor of God, the Helmet of Salvation and to wear that crown of Righteousness.He said it was not time for that but time to build His Church.

Why didn't Jesus just plainly tell them the earthly thing just wasn't going to happen? If He did, where?

Sirus
Dec 13th 2008, 08:30 PM
Again this goes back to understanding the kingdoms (heaven and God) and their differences revealed by Jesus as kingdom mysteries that it was given the disciples and not the multitudes at that time to know. They clearly didn't understand everything at the time as Jesus plainly said but He said He would send the Comforter to reveal everything hidden concerning the mysteries of the kingdom. That is the context. He didn't light the candle to have it hid. They didn't understand what Jesus meant by a wheat of corn falling dying and bringing forth much fruit. Paul came along 15-20 years later with that revelation (dead and risen in and with Christ). That it was more than just those seen in Jerusalem after the resurrection, it was for us here and now. Dead TO sin and alive TO God.

Raybob
Dec 13th 2008, 08:47 PM
Absolutely! I doubt divorce cases but yes....
I get it. They won't divorce because they are all virgins.:rofl:


Mat 20:21 And he said unto her, What wilt thou? She saith unto him, Grant that these my two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on the left, in thy kingdom.
Mat 20:22 But Jesus answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? They say unto him, We are able.
Mat 20:23 And he saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father.
Mat 20:24 And when the ten heard it, they were moved with indignation against the two brethren.

Mar 10:40 But to sit on my right hand and on my left hand is not mine to give; but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared.
Being baptized with His spirit IS the kingdom on earth He spoke of here.




Why didn't Jesus just plainly tell them the earthly thing just wasn't going to happen? If He did, where?He did, at least "the Word" said it in the very next chapter. Of course, He told them the nature of the kingdom in many ways before.

Mat 12:28 But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.

Raybob

DurbanDude
Dec 13th 2008, 09:08 PM
Actually, Acts 2:29-36 totally blows the theory of a future millennial kingdom. The future kingdom is supposed to have a literal throne of David in a literal temple where Jesus will sit. Acts 2:29-36 proves that the throne of David that the patriarchs were looking forward to in the OT IS the throne where Jesus is NOW. Since Jesus is on the throne of David NOW, any future literal temple with a future literal throne of David makes no sense.

Raybob

Hi Raybob,

Jesus is spiritually on the throne now just as you say, but there is still a physical Messianic age to come. Acts 2 is definitely not excluding any further Messianic fulfilments of Jesus.

Amills seem to have simplified the period after the crucifixion into the church age (the millenium) and then the new earth. The following verses (believe me, there are many more) refer to the day of the Lord , or the Messiah coming to Jerusalem and the period directly afterwards. How do you fit them into either the church age or the new earth (or fulfilled in the BC age??)

Church Age or New Earth:
Zech 13:1 In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness.
13:2 And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD of hosts, that I will cut off the names of the idols out of the land, and they shall no more be remembered: and also I will cause the prophets and the unclean spirit to pass out of the land.
13:3 And it shall come to pass, that when any shall yet prophesy, then his father and his mother that begat him shall say unto him, Thou shalt not live; for thou speakest lies in the name of the LORD: and his father and his mother that begat him shall thrust him through when he prophesieth.

Church Age or New Earth:
14:16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.
14:17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.
14:18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.

Church Age or New Earth:
Isaiah 2:2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.
2:3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
2:4 And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

Church Age or New Earth:
Isaiah 34:8 For it is the day of the LORD's vengeance, and the year of recompences for the controversy of Zion.
34:9 And the streams thereof shall be turned into pitch, and the dust thereof into brimstone, and the land thereof shall become burning pitch.
34:10 It shall not be quenched night nor day; the smoke thereof shall go up for ever: from generation to generation it shall lie waste; none shall pass through it for ever and ever.
34:11 But the cormorant and the bittern shall possess it; the owl also and the raven shall dwell in it: and he shall stretch out upon it the line of confusion, and the stones of emptiness.

Church Age or New Earth:
Zephaniah 2:11 The LORD will be terrible unto them: for he will famish all the gods of the earth; and men shall worship him, every one from his place, even all the isles of the heathen.
2:12 Ye Ethiopians also, ye shall be slain by my sword.
2:13 And he will stretch out his hand against the north, and destroy Assyria; and will make Nineveh a desolation, and dry like a wilderness.

Church Age or New Earth:
Daniel 7:11 I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.
7:12 As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.

Church Age or New Earth:
Joel 3:18 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the mountains shall drop down new wine, and the hills shall flow with milk, and all the rivers of Judah shall flow with waters, and a fountain shall come forth out of the house of the LORD, and shall water the valley of ****tim.
3:19 Egypt shall be a desolation, and Edom shall be a desolate wilderness, for the violence against the children of Judah, because they have shed innocent blood in their land.

Church Age or New Earth:
Ezekiel 39:1 Therefore, thou son of man, prophesy against Gog, and say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal:
39:2 And I will turn thee back, and leave but the sixth part of thee, and will cause thee to come up from the north parts, and will bring thee upon the mountains of Israel:

Church Age or New Earth:
39:14 And they shall sever out men of continual employment, passing through the land to bury with the passengers those that remain upon the face of the earth, to cleanse it: after the end of seven months shall they search.

Church Age or New Earth:
Jeremiah 4:26 I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the LORD, and by his fierce anger.
4:27 For thus hath the LORD said, The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full end.

Church Age or New Earth:
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.

The day any amill gives me a satisfactory answer on each of these verses and a few more that I will challenge them on, is the day that I become an amill. Until then I will continue to believe this current earth survives the second coming, as I believe each one of these verses is saying.

Cyberseeker
Dec 13th 2008, 11:07 PM
Hey Durb,

While you're on Zephaniah you may want to explain this one:


"I will sweep away everything from the face of the earth," declares the LORD. "I will sweep away both men and animals; I will sweep away the birds of the air and the fish of the sea. Neither their silver nor their gold will be able to save them on the day of the LORD's wrath. In the fire of his jealousy the whole world will be consumed, for he will make a sudden end of all who live in the earth."
(Zeph 1:2,3,18)

Sirus
Dec 14th 2008, 02:51 AM
I get it. They won't divorce because they are all virgins.:rofl:They won't because it was allowed by Moses but no so from the beginning. Jesus will rule with a rod of iron according to the law. Not the Mosaic law. Divorce will not be suffered. Adulterers will go to the pit.




Being baptized with His spirit IS the kingdom on earth He spoke of here.That's not what it says. It says

to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father.

But to sit on my right hand and on my left hand is not mine to give; but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared.

They will suffer as He did here but He will return with His reward. The baptism He spoke of was not the baptism in the Holy Ghost, it was His death.



He did, at least "the Word" said it in the very next chapter. Of course, He told them the nature of the kingdom in many ways before.

Mat 12:28 But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.No, that's the kingdom of God. Mat 20:1 says "For the kingdom of heaven is like"

RevLogos
Dec 14th 2008, 05:36 AM
Amills seem to have simplified the period after the crucifixion into the church age (the millenium) and then the new earth.

snip..


Premils seem to have created a monstrous Rube Goldberg timeline of comings and judgment and goings and comings and judgment and wars and reigns and wars and judgment. ;)

You have a lot of OT stuff here and I can’t do it justice in a short post. A look at OT prophesy would be well worth it’s own thread. But here are some quick thoughts.

Zech 13:1-3 This is the beginning of the Church Age when the Messiah comes. Note just before this in 12:10 that well known verse about Jesus on the cross. “They will look on me, the one they have pierced…”, The fountain opened is the blood of Jesus. Then in 13:7 this well known verse “"Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, against the man who is close to me!" declares the LORD Almighty. "Strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered, and I will turn my hand against the little ones.” All this is about Jesus.

Zech 14:16-18 Zechariah has not jumped from Jesus to the new age; this is still about the Messiah. This is about the spread of Christianity.

Isaiah 2:2-4 is also about the coming of the Messiah. The Mountain on the Lord’s house is Jesus.

Isaiah 34 Definitely final judgment. Describes what happens to those nations that fought against God, in this case Edom. Doesn’t appear to be any humans left. Note also that shortly before these verses the heavens fall, similar to 2 Peter.

Zeph 2 is past history relating to the conquests of Nebuchadnezzar.

Daniel 7 Final judgment. Why the other beasts were allowed to survive a short time I do not know, but it really doesn’t matter that much since it is all over and done with by 7:14. A season must not be very long.

Joel 3 The valley of what was that? All of this is rather hyperbolic. If this verse is to be taken literally, then we should also expect the mountains to drip wine and the hills flow with milk. There is a message here but it is not literal. All parallels Isaiah 34 where the lands of attacking nations are desolate but Israel, the church, is spared.

Ezekiel 39 This chapter and 38 has the only mention of Gog and Magog outside of Rev 20. Therefore however we read it, this must be details of the same event, just before the White Throne judgment. Or do we fight Gog and Magog twice?

Jeremiah 4 This is again pre-Christ prophesy of the destruction brought on by Nebuchadnezzar.

So we have a mix here of prophesy relating to pre-Christ times, the beginning of the church age when the Messiah comes followed by the destruction of Jerusalem, and some final end-times. I don’t see anything here that suggests a global war against Satan followed by a 1000 year earthly reign of Christ followed by a second global war against Satan.

DurbanDude
Dec 14th 2008, 07:50 AM
Hey Durb,

While you're on Zephaniah you may want to explain this one:

after you have explained the 11 verses , I will explain that one verse.

DurbanDude
Dec 14th 2008, 09:05 AM
Premils seem to have created a monstrous Rube Goldberg timeline of comings and judgment and goings and comings and judgment and wars and reigns and wars and judgment. ;)


Monstrous Rube Goldberg? Are you stirring a bit here Revolvr? ;) We describe 1 biblically supported Messianic Age on earth, and now you describe it as a plethora of additional complications.


Zech 13:1-3 This is the beginning of the Church Age when the Messiah comes. Note just before this in 12:10 that well known verse about Jesus on the cross. “They will look on me, the one they have pierced…”, The fountain opened is the blood of Jesus. Then in 13:7 this well known verse “"Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, against the man who is close to me!" declares the LORD Almighty. "Strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered, and I will turn my hand against the little ones.” All this is about Jesus.

Read Zechariah 12 carefully , its about the destruction of nations in Israel, its a second coming description. Zechariah 13 moves on and describes the end of prophecy and unclean spirits. Your interpretation here contradicts the NT which describes unclean spirits and godly prophets in the church age after the crucifixion. How can this be the church age:
13:1 In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness.
13:2 And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD of hosts, that I will cut off the names of the idols out of the land, and they shall no more be remembered: and also I will cause the prophets and the unclean spirit to pass out of the land.



Zech 14:16-18 Zechariah has not jumped from Jesus to the new age; this is still about the Messiah. This is about the spread of Christianity.


14:1 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.
14:2 For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.
14:3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.

Please note that if the word "Jerusalem" is associated with the church , how would you explain that the city shall be taken just before the first coming. Or "the woman ravished". How do explain that the residue of the people "shall not be cut off" from the city.

Also the phrase "day of the Lord" and the attack on Jerusalem are associated with the second coming, not the first coming. (the description of this attack also does not fit in with the events of 70AD btw.)

How do you explain the movement of mountains and the new valley reaching as far as "Azal". What does this represent if it is symbolic language? I have about 8 more questions regarding the difficulties of comparing Zechariah 14 with the first coming of Jesus and the immediate church age.




Isaiah 2:2-4 is also about the coming of the Messiah. The Mountain on the Lord’s house is Jesus.

Isaiah 2:4 nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more
There is war now in the current church age, to symbolise this into meaning that the church will be at peace when the verse is talking about nations I personally see as over-symbolising. The context of the rest of Isaiah 2 is the second coming:

2:19 And they shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into the caves of the earth, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth.
2:20 In that day a man shall cast his idols of silver, and his idols of gold, which they made each one for himself to worship, to the moles and to the bats;
2:21 To go into the clefts of the rocks, and into the tops of the ragged rocks, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth.



Isaiah 34 Definitely final judgment. Describes what happens to those nations that fought against God, in this case Edom. Doesn’t appear to be any humans left. Note also that shortly before these verses the heavens fall, similar to 2 Peter.


After the final judgment amills believe that this earth is destroyed and there is a new earth, if so why are there birds still existing in those destroyed regions. Does not seem like a destroyed earth to me. Some desolated regions stll have birds dwelling there.

34:10 It shall not be quenched night nor day; the smoke thereof shall go up for ever: from generation to generation it shall lie waste; none shall pass through it for ever and ever.
34:11 But the cormorant and the bittern shall possess it; the owl also and the raven shall dwell in it: and he shall stretch out upon it the line of confusion, and the stones of emptiness.



Zeph 2 is past history relating to the conquests of Nebuchadnezzar.


I'm not debating the whole chapter here, verse 10 is referring to earth-wide events that can't involve just the conquests of Nebuchadnezzar:

2:11 The LORD will be terrible unto them: for he will famish all the gods of the earth; and men shall worship him, every one from his place, even all the isles of the heathen.
2:12 Ye Ethiopians also, ye shall be slain by my sword.

The "isles of the heathen" survive this period when"all of the gods of the earth" are famished.



Daniel 7 Final judgment. Why the other beasts were allowed to survive a short time I do not know, but it really doesn’t matter that much since it is all over and done with by 7:14. A season must not be very long.


yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.

This does not say a short time. These beasts are four kingdoms, and they survive the second coming when Jesus destroys the fourth beast. Then after the second coming they live for a "season and a time".

This contradicts the amill view of immediate destruction of the whole earth at the second coming , and supports the view of a delayed destruction of this earth after the second coming.




Joel 3 The valley of what was that? All of this is rather hyperbolic. If this verse is to be taken literally, then we should also expect the mountains to drip wine and the hills flow with milk. There is a message here but it is not literal. All parallels Isaiah 34 where the lands of attacking nations are desolate but Israel, the church, is spared.


I agree that there is symbolism here. If the symbolism that you give for all these OT verses fitted well and was coherent, then I would acknowledge the amill view as viable, the goal is to make sense and fit in with the rest of the bible.

I believe this symbolism is symbolic of the life giving spirit that will flow in all directions from the throne of Christ in Jerusalem at the second coming. We can't just ignore the mention of the survival of specific regions just because there is some symbolism somewhere else in Joel 3. I would like to understand your view of the valleyof ****tim being watered, and other regions being desolate after the second coming. What is ****tim symbolic of, and Edom and Egypt? I doubt you are saying that the new earth will be created with regions of the same names, and some of these regions are created desolate on the new earth. This doesn't ring right.



Ezekiel 39 This chapter and 38 has the only mention of Gog and Magog outside of Rev 20. Therefore however we read it, this must be details of the same event, just before the White Throne judgment. Or do we fight Gog and Magog twice?


I'm not debating my view on this verse , just seeing if your view makes sense according to your own beliefs.

So according to you ,after the attack from Gog is the GWT judgement and the new earth. In Ezekiel 39:2 when Gog is turned back , a sixth of Gog survives. How do you explain this survival when you place the attack at the GWT judgement with the new earth.

39:14 And they shall sever out men of continual employment, passing through the land to bury with the passengers those that remain upon the face of the earth, to cleanse it: after the end of seven months shall they search.

If you believe the attack of Gog occurs at the GWT and the new earth , why does this earth have people remaining on the earth after this attack for seven months?



Jeremiah 4 This is again pre-Christ prophesy of the destruction brought on by Nebuchadnezzar.

4:26 I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the LORD, and by his fierce anger.
4:27 For thus hath the LORD said, The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full end.

Seems climactic to me, "all the cities" , "presence of the Lord" , sounds like the second coming.

I would also like to discuss Rev19:15.

These verses that we are discussing definitely appear to describe this earth surviving the second coming. Any eschatological doctrine should be able to explain them properly, because they are a large portion of end-time scripture.

RevLogos
Dec 14th 2008, 03:39 PM
I'm not debating my view on this verse , just seeing if your view makes sense according to your own beliefs.

So according to you ,after the attack from Gog is the GWT judgement and the new earth. In Ezekiel 39:2 when Gog is turned back , a sixth of Gog survives. How do you explain this survival when you place the attack at the GWT judgement with the new earth.



I'm off to church but this one should be simple. According to the premil view, when is the battle with Gog and Magog? At Armageddon or at the final battle after the 1000 years? See Rev 20:8. What happens after the 1000 years battle is done? The GWT judgment? What happens next?

RevLogos
Dec 14th 2008, 04:06 PM
I think I am beginning to see the pattern here. Let me guess, premils get their views from Darby and the dispensational crowd? Or does premil predate dispensationalism? I ask because when I look at any pre-Darby commentary I see completely different interpretations of OT prophetic writings. It could be that premil has required a fairly recent reinterpretation of OT prophesy.

In the OT there are three “end-times” written about. The end of Israel with the conquests of Nebuchadnezzar, the coming of the Messiah and the resulting destruction of Israel by the Romans, and resulting Diaspora, and then the final end-times. Sometimes these three are hard to distinguish. I rely on the experts who also know ancient world history to help differentiate between the three.

Premils take much of the OT prophetic writings as very literal, and they take Rev 20 as very literal, but they discount the Gospel teachings and the epistles, which make no mention of any of this. They try to squeeze these complex comings and goings and judgments into places where Jesus, Peter, and Paul spoke of only one judgment. OT prophesies of an end of an age historically believed to be dealing with Nebuchadnezzar become Armageddon.

Amils take the OT prophetic writings as much more symbolic, as with Revelation, but attach more importance to the Gospels and epistles.

Things get very complex, with (including the rapture) three judgments with three different groups of people, and two end-times global wars against evil. Premils hotly debate who goes into each judgment and who is left at the beginning of the millennium. It’s hotly debated because there is no clear scripture telling us the truth about any of this. I see these as extraordinary claims that require extraordinary evidence. Why is any of this needed? Why is Satan battled twice? Whats the point?

DurbanDude
Dec 14th 2008, 04:50 PM
I'm off to church but this one should be simple. According to the premil view, when is the battle with Gog and Magog? At Armageddon or at the final battle after the 1000 years? See Rev 20:8. What happens after the 1000 years battle is done? The GWT judgment? What happens next?

I was rather hoping you would continue the debate about those 11 verses that I feel support the earth surviving the second coming. Instead we are moving to new topics, I really don't get satisfactory answers from amills regarding those verses.

I believe the war described in Rev 20 is not just the attacking armies from the north and its allies but is a different war involving a unified attack from every corner of the globe:
20:8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.

The only reason Gog is mentioned is because it is the only one of the four quarters of the globe that could be named. At that time they did not know the name for the far east (Japan?) , the far west (Americas) the far south (Antarctica). Gog is mentioned as the northern quarter of the globe from an Israel perspective. This is why I believe Gog is Russia with Turkish and Middle East allies, because in Joel as well the attacking army is described as from the "far north". Only Russia is in a position of being to the "far north" of Israel.

So in Daniel you have the antichrist dwelling in Israel, and being attacked from the North and the East, all the nations are gathered and at war. The attacking armies of Gog and its allies are mainly Arabic countries. The defending countries are the antichrist and its western allies. This is the same war as Ezekiel and Joel. in this war there no survivors from the attacking army , but there are survivors from the nations.

11:44 But tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him: therefore he shall go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many.
11:45 And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.


This is a completely different war to the Rev 20 war that involves the attack from the 4 quarters of the earth , Gog being the northern quarter.

There are many differences between the two wars, in the first one the attacking armies are individually named by the bible, this is a military attack. The beast, the antichrist is destroyed, and cast into the lake of fire. The birds feast on the bodies at Armageddon. There are a few survivors from the nations. The inhabitants of earth all run and hide from Jesus, those that are not resurrected. They are scattered all over and continuing with their activities. Two in the field harvesting , two in bed.

In the second war all inhabitants of the earth are gathered against Israel, they are all gathered by Satan to attack Jerusalem , and suddenly destroyed with fire. There are no survivors on earth and the GWT judgement occurs and we have the new heaven and earth. Satan then joins the beast in the lake of fire , the beast was already there.
20:8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
20:9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.
20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

I am just editing this now,so I can answer your question clearly: The battle with specifically Gog is at the second coming at the resurrection of the saints.This is a judgement involving wordwide destructions , a massive earthquake , all the armies in Armageddon are destroyed, a separation of all believers at the resurrection, leaving the survivors in fear. Then there is the 1000 year reign on earth which ends with a gathering by Satan from all the four quarters of earth (obviously this would include Gog) against the camp of the saints and the blessed city. At this stage is the destruction of all mortals , the resurrection of the dead (unrighteous), and the GWT judgement of all deeds, and the new earth.

Please don't debate each aspect of this , we can start another thread for that, I was just answering your question out of courtesy, so you could understand the two wars involving Gog better.

DurbanDude
Dec 14th 2008, 05:02 PM
I think I am beginning to see the pattern here. Let me guess, premils get their views from Darby and the dispensational crowd? Or does premil predate dispensationalism? I ask because when I look at any pre-Darby commentary I see completely different interpretations of OT prophetic writings. It could be that premil has required a fairly recent reinterpretation of OT prophesy.

In the OT there are three “end-times” written about. The end of Israel with the conquests of Nebuchadnezzar, the coming of the Messiah and the resulting destruction of Israel by the Romans, and resulting Diaspora, and then the final end-times. Sometimes these three are hard to distinguish. I rely on the experts who also know ancient world history to help differentiate between the three.

Premils take much of the OT prophetic writings as very literal, and they take Rev 20 as very literal, but they discount the Gospel teachings and the epistles, which make no mention of any of this. They try to squeeze these complex comings and goings and judgments into places where Jesus, Peter, and Paul spoke of only one judgment. OT prophesies of an end of an age historically believed to be dealing with Nebuchadnezzar become Armageddon.

Amils take the OT prophetic writings as much more symbolic, as with Revelation, but attach more importance to the Gospels and epistles.

Things get very complex, with (including the rapture) three judgments with three different groups of people, and two end-times global wars against evil. Premils hotly debate who goes into each judgment and who is left at the beginning of the millennium. It’s hotly debated because there is no clear scripture telling us the truth about any of this. I see these as extraordinary claims that require extraordinary evidence. Why is any of this needed? Why is Satan battled twice? Whats the point?

The only endtimes books I've ever read are pre-trib rapture , I have never even heard post-trib preached anywhere. I am post-trib because this is what I understood from the bible and only afterwards I realised that there is a name for it.

There are only 2 maybe 3 mentions of a complete destruction at the Second coming, and these can be explained. As opposed to about 15 verses that speak of survival of the earth after the second coming, and some of these verses involving entire chapters describing life after the Messiah starts His physical reign on earth. And very little satisfactory explanation coming from amills.

So far this weighs in pre-mills favour. Its not very complex at all. Jesus comes, reigns on earth with an iron rod. Then God ends this earth and God brings the new earth. We don't need Rev 20 to explain this , there is a lot of evidence for this.

wpm
Dec 14th 2008, 07:43 PM
Jesus is spiritually on the throne now just as you say, but there is still a physical Messianic age to come. Acts 2 is definitely not excluding any further Messianic fulfilments of Jesus.

If you are prepared to discuss these in detail then this could be profitable. The fact is if you compare the detail of Rev 20 with all of these references you quote there is none that I can see that correlates or matches detail for detail.

Also, Acts 2:29-36, Acts 13:27-30 and Revelation 3:7 shows us that Christ is actually sitting on David's throne now.


Amills seem to have simplified the period after the crucifixion into the church age (the millenium) and then the new earth. The following verses (believe me, there are many more) refer to the day of the Lord , or the Messiah coming to Jerusalem and the period directly afterwards. How do you fit them into either the church age or the new earth (or fulfilled in the BC age??)

First, I don't believe there is any evidence elsewhere in Scripture that there is another age similar to ours with sin, death and the wicked continuing. Let us look at your readings.



Church Age or New Earth:

Zech 13:1 In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness.
13:2 And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD of hosts, that I will cut off the names of the idols out of the land, and they shall no more be remembered: and also I will cause the prophets and the unclean spirit to pass out of the land.
13:3 And it shall come to pass, that when any shall yet prophesy, then his father and his mother that begat him shall say unto him, Thou shalt not live; for thou speakest lies in the name of the LORD: and his father and his mother that begat him shall thrust him through when he prophesieth.

Church Age or New Earth:
14:16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.
14:17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.
14:18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.


Zechariah 13:1 says, “In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness.”

He already did this - praise God. That fountain is expressly opened 2,000 + years ago.

John 19:30 records, “When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, it is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.”

Hebrews 10:10-12 says, “We are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God.”

Hebrews 10:14-20 says, “For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before, This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them; And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more. Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin. Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh.”

Mark 15:37 says, “Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost. And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom. And when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so cried out, and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of God."

Hebrews 10:26 says, “For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins.”


Zechariah 13:6 says, “And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.”

John 19:5-7 records, “Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. And Pilate saith unto them, Behold the man! When the chief priests therefore and officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him, and crucify him: for I find no fault in him. The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.”

John 1:10-11 says, “He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not.”

Acts 2:36 says, “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.”

Acts 4:10 states, “Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.”

Acts 3:26 records, “Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.”

Paul the Apostle outlines this fact, when speaking of the Jews and the impending wrath of God on the nation of Israel, in 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16, “For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men: Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost.”

The very next verse in Zechariah 13, v7, states, “Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the LORD of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.”

Matthew 26:31 says, “Then saith Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written (in Zechariah 13:7), I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad.”

The thrust of Zechariah concentrates totally upon the nature and happenings of the first coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. It prophetically looked forward with anticipation to a day coming of the Lord when the incarnate Son of God would arrive on this scene of time in the flesh. The book reveals, in amazing detail, profound aspects about the Lord’s earthly ministry. In fact, we find 20 different references to the phrase “in that day” in Zechariah – all referring to that notable first coming of Christ. Significantly, 7 of the aforementioned allusions are found in Zechariah 14.

Zechariah 14:1 declares, “Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.”

Now I have covered this chapter many times, I think people impoute a meaning into the day of the Lord here that is not in the Hebrew. I will re-present this study I have done which helps us see its fulfilment.

This passage and especially its rendering in the King James Version has caused confusion to many Bible students over the years. However, a closer examination of the original dispels a lot of ambiguity surrounding the passage. Firstly, the Hebrew does not actually say “the day of the Lord” as the King James Version renders it but ‘a day is coming for the Lord’. There is no definite article in the Hebrew in the text, so “a day” would be a better translation than “the day.” There is no doubt, the phrase “the day of the Lord” normally relates to the Second Coming in Scripture, but Zechariah 14:1 does not state that in the original. Therefore, we cannot insist that it is referring to the day of the Lord. This places a completely different slant on the meaning of the whole chapter. Other versions translate the reading more accurate.

The NASB says: "Behold, a day is coming for the LORD when the spoil taken from you will be divided among you."

The YLT states: "Lo, a day hath come to Jehovah, And divided hath been thy spoil in thy midst."


We must add to this the Greek LXX Septuagint, which supports this interpretation, saying,

idou Behold
hmerai day
erxontai cometh
tou the
kuriou Lord
kai even (or indeed)
diamerisqhsetai divides
ta the
skula spoils
sou you
en with
soi you

When we look at the usage of the Greek throughout the Old Testament (in the Greek LXX Septuagint) and our New Testament we find a definite pattern in relation to the wording and identification of the day of the Lord in the original.

In the New Testament:

Of the five “day of the Lord” passages in the New Testament, they read in the original:

Three are: “hemera kurios” (Acts 2:20, 1 Thessalonians 5:2, 2 Peter 3).

Two are: “hemera ho kurios” (1 Corinthians 5:5, 2 Corinthians 1:14).

In the Greek LXX Septuagint

Of the twenty “day of the Lord” passages in the Old Testament:

Eleven are: “hemera kurios” (Isaiah 13:6, 9, Ezekiel 13:5, 30:3, Joel 1:15, 2:1, 2:31, 3:14, Obadiah 1:15, Zephaniah 1:14, Malachi 4:5)

Four are: “hemera ho kurios” (Joel 2:11, Amos 5:18, 20, Zephaniah 1:7)


We can see, fifteen align precisely with the Greek New Testament wording and confirm that this would be the normal rendering of the Coming of Christ in the Greek. That is 75%.

One reads: “hemera ekeinos kurios” (Jeremiah 46:10), also meaning day of the Lord.

One is: “hemera gar kurios” (Isaiah 2:12), literally meaning day for the Lord.

Finally, there are two references (one after the other in Zephaniah) that refer to the same climactic day. One says, “hemera thumos kurios” (Zephaniah 2:2), meaning a day of the Lord’s anger. The other reads, “hemera orge kurios” (Zephaniah 2:3), similarly meaning a day of the Lord’s anger. Plainly, they are both speaking of the same day in the same reading and in the same context.

That brings us to Zechariah 14:1, which is worded completely different from the rest, saying, “hmerai erxontai tou kuriou,” literally meaning “a day is coming for the LORD.” None of the other passages say this. It is not unreasonable to make a distinction between Zechariah’s description and that of the other nineteen references. The only similarity is the King James Version’s translation of the same in the English. Notwithstanding, regardless of how high we value our A.V. we cannot use this as conclusive proof for equating the day Zechariah is speaking of to the other nineteen. The original rendering supersedes any other translations. It seems like he may not have been referring to the day of the Lord as is commonly used to describe the last day.

If it was, it would have most likely read “hemera kurios” or “hemera ho kurios” in the Greek LXX Septuagint. Or failing that: “hemera ekeinos kurios.” Whilst the wording of Zechariah 14:1 doesn't prevent it referring to the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus the phrase ‘a day is coming for the Lord’ and ‘the day of the Lord’ are definitely not synonymous. It is therefore reasonable for us to question its identification with the Second Coming of the Lord and to consider the possibility that it relates to Christ’s first advent.

If you want to go through this passage and compare it to Rev 20 I would be very interested.

RevLogos
Dec 14th 2008, 07:59 PM
Also, Acts 2:29-36, Acts 13:27-30 and Revelation 3:7 shows us that Christ is actually sitting on David's throne now.




Indeed He is. If there were one single verse that puts to rest the notion of Jesus reigning on an earthly physical kingdom, it is this:

Joh 18:36 Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place."

Not of this world. Fundamental to Christianity. It never will be a kingdom on this earth.

wpm
Dec 14th 2008, 08:00 PM
Church Age or New Earth:
Isaiah 2:2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.
2:3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
2:4 And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

I must admit I am a little surprised that you keep presenting this as a millennial passage when there is no such mention. Quite the opposite. It is expressly speaking of "the last days." These began with Christ and terminate at the last day (singular) - when Jesus comes.

Mountains

The mountain of the Lord refers to the kingdom introduced by Christ. There is no more war there. Mountains in Scripture prophetically speak of kingdoms. That is the case in Isaiah 2 and Malachi 4.

Micah 4:1 says, “in the last days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be established in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; and people shall flow unto it.”

Isaiah 2:2 similarly says, speaking of the Lord’s first Advent, “And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.

The kingdom of God, which Christ continually spoke of, did not relate to a physical Jewish kingdom that could be viewed with human sight. Jesus said, in Luke 17:20 “The kingdom of God cometh not with observation.” Neither was it primarily directed toward the physical needs of man but rather his spiritual needs. Romans 14:17-18 says, “For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.” Finally, it could not be entered in to by sight but rather by faith. Jesus declared in John 3:3, “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”

When Christ arrived every expectation was seen in and through Him. He was the substance, the fulfilment and the reality. All the figures were removed in Him. He was Israel's true prophet, priest and king. Moreover, He was a heavenly king with a heavenly kingdom. The typical figures represented in the temporal earthly reign of the Israeli/Jewish kings only served to the heavenly reality. It did not mean that Christ had to replicate the old order, no, He came to fulfil the imperfect shadow.

The kingdom is (and is specifically called) the kingdom of heaven because that what it is. It is there that the king has His throne and Sovereignly reigns over all mankind. He does not merely rule over His people but over His enemies since the cross. That does not negate the fact that that kingdom embraces the redeemed on earth. But His kingdom is not of this world is not a natural domain. John 18:36 says, “My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight.”

In Christ's ministry, we see the changeover from the earthly, physical and temporal to the heavenly, spiritual and eternal. Christ battled to re-direct Israel's eyes. That is why they missed it. They were looking for an earthly king/kingdom in which Messiah would subjugate their enemies. However, they had a wrong concept of the eternal Davidic fulfilment in the person of Christ. The king/kingdom was indeed heavenly.

As Revolvr said, you are placing a literalist interpretation on passages that are clearly intented to be figurative.

Symbolic Language

The passage declares, “the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.” This passage vividly shows salvation going out to the nations of the world after the cross. It shows the establishment of the kingdom of God (described here as “the mountain of the Lord's house”), above all other kingdoms of the earth (described here as mountains) and smaller ethnic groups (described here as hills).

This is spiritual language describing the great advance of the kingdom of God into the nations of the earth. Daniel 2:35 says,"the stone (Christ) that smote the image became a great mountain (speaking of the kingdom of God), and filled the whole earth."

Christ already brought that eternal kingdom, of which, every blood-bought believer has currently entered. Daniel is predicting the appearing of the Kingdom of God at Christ’s first Advent. The kingdom began as a small stone with the early church and has now become (as predicted) a large mountain today throughout the world. Christ verified this with his parables re the seed and the leaven growing. This idea is employed by Christ in Matthew 13:31-32 to describe the current advance of kingdom, “The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field: Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree … The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.”

Like the figurative growth of the stone into a large mountain in Daniel 2, the spread of the Kingdom of God is here metaphorically compared to the growth of (1) a small mustard seed and (2) that of leaven.

Hebrews 12:18 says,“For ye are not come (plural perfect active indicative) unto the mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest.”

Hebrews 12:22 says,“But ye are come (plural perfect active indicative) unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels.”

These highlighted references in the original relate to the present, and are active, meaning the subject continues to exist in the state indicated by the verb. They relate to the here-and-now and are ongoing. They speak of our immediate entry into the kingdom of God and our current spiritual standing in the New Jerusalem. The heavenly Jerusalem is more than a future hope (even though it most assuredly is that), it is a present reality.

Not physical wars, spiritual

Isaiah 2 (like Micah 4) is specifically speaking of the kingdom of God (“the mountain of the Lord's house”), and the peaceful conditions that exist within that righteous domain. This spiritual kingdom contains the elect of God alone and is free of physical war and physical destruction that exists in the world. Jesus said in John 18:36: “My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.”

There is no holy Jihad in Christendom. The kingdom Christ brought did not involve a holy crusade with weapons of war, irrespective of the genocide of the Roman Church through the centuries. It is not speaking to some supposed time in the future when nations will never again learn war or conflict. Anyway, the Premil understanding doesn’t actually fit to the expressed detail of Rev 20 which shows men rising up in conflict to assault the people of God 1,000 yrs after man was supposed to learn war no more. This is a glaring contradiction in the literalist approach to these two Old Testament readings.

Despite their objection to the Amil position, Premils anticipate war on the new earth. They have men learning war again. They apply the new glorified earth with, fighting, death, bloodshed, mourning, funerals and tears. Their millennium of peace and tranquillity turns into one rebellious disaster – no different from our own day. This is another reason to relate the millennium to the here-and-now.

Ephesians 6:12 explains,“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” Ephesians 6:12 shows us that the Christian’s battle is not against"flesh and blood" (or a fight in the natural physical domain) but "against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places" (or the evil invisible spiritual domain of Satan).

2 Corinthians 10:3-4 explains, “For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds.”


Ephesians 6:11 instructs the Christian to “Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.” Verse 13 continues on the same vein, “take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.”

2 Timothy 2:3-4 declares, “endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ. No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier.”

Citizenship of the kingdom of God comes through the atoning work of Calvary. Colossians 1:13 confirms that God “hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son.” Whilst we are in the world we are not of it. Jesus said in John 15:19, “ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.” T he war-free promises relate to all those that enter into the peace of God in salvation.

Isaiah 2 and Micah 4 are not speaking of physical conflict and external persecution emanating from outside the kingdom upon the saints (and especially against the Church on this earth before Christ’s Coming in Satan’s little season), but the internal peaceful conditions that eternally exist within the kingdom of God. The true believer that has been united to Christ and truly resides within this kingdom ceases from fighting with the arm of flesh any more. Ancient foes unite in love. The weapons of war – the swords and spears – are metaphorically converted into the tools of peacetime – the plowshares and pruninghooks – (Isaiah 2:4, Micah 4:3).

wpm
Dec 14th 2008, 08:09 PM
Church Age or New Earth:
Isaiah 34:8 For it is the day of the LORD's vengeance, and the year of recompences for the controversy of Zion.
34:9 And the streams thereof shall be turned into pitch, and the dust thereof into brimstone, and the land thereof shall become burning pitch.
34:10 It shall not be quenched night nor day; the smoke thereof shall go up for ever: from generation to generation it shall lie waste; none shall pass through it for ever and ever.
34:11 But the cormorant and the bittern shall possess it; the owl also and the raven shall dwell in it: and he shall stretch out upon it the line of confusion, and the stones of emptiness.


I really don't see how you can apply this to a future millennium. None of this lines up with Rev 20. No binding of Satan. No 1,000 yrs. No 2 resurrection separated by 1,000 yrs. No 1,000 yrs. No 2 Judgment Days separated by 1,000 yrs. No Gog / Magog battle.

Isaiah 34:1-4 says, “Come near, ye nations, to hear; and hearken, ye people: let the earth hear, and all that is therein; the world, and all things that come forth of it. For the indignation of the LORD is upon all nations, and his fury upon all their armies: he hath utterly destroyed them, he hath delivered them to the slaughter. Their slain also shall be cast out, and their stink shall come up out of their carcases, and the mountains shall be melted with their blood. And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll: and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig tree.”

Verses 8-10 continues, “For it is the day of the LORD's vengeance, and the year of recompences for the controversy of Zion. And the streams thereof shall be turned into pitch, and the dust thereof into brimstone, and the land thereof shall become burning pitch. It shall not be quenched night nor day; the smoke thereof shall go up for ever: from generation to generation it shall lie waste; none shall pass through it for ever and ever.”

Isaiah describes what occurs at the Second Advent:

(1) The heavens shall pass away.
(2) The earth shall be burned up.
(3) No wicked will survive this day of destruction.

Whilst the day of the Lord is undoubtedly the day when the righteous are finally rescued, it is also, significantly, the day when the wicked are totally destroyed. The consistent teaching of Scripture shows us that the Second Coming of the Lord will see the total destruction of the world/wicked and a general resurrection / judgment at the Second Coming. It is an all-consummating event. I Thessalonians 5:4 plainly says, of those left behind at the Second Coming, “they shall not escape.” In fact they will be burnt up along with this sin-cursed world. The elements will be melted up and “none shall pass through it for ever and ever” (Isaiah 34:10).

wpm
Dec 14th 2008, 08:56 PM
Indeed He is. If there were one single verse that puts to rest the notion of Jesus reigning on an earthly physical kingdom, it is this:

Joh 18:36 Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place."

Not of this world. Fundamental to Christianity. It never will be a kingdom on this earth.

Good point, and a truth that we should not forget. :)

wpm
Dec 14th 2008, 09:23 PM
Church Age or New Earth:
Zephaniah 2:11 The LORD will be terrible unto them: for he will famish all the gods of the earth; and men shall worship him, every one from his place, even all the isles of the heathen.
2:12 Ye Ethiopians also, ye shall be slain by my sword.
2:13 And he will stretch out his hand against the north, and destroy Assyria; and will make Nineveh a desolation, and dry like a wilderness.

Cyber covers this well. Also, there is not the slightest hint of the 2 separate resurrections and judgments split by 1,000 yrs. There is no millenial detail as you see it.



Church Age or New Earth:
Daniel 7:11 I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.
7:12 As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.


Most theologians believes Daniel 7 is speaking about four consecutive empires that would arise before the earthly ministry of Christ 2,000 years ago. The last – the Roman Empire – would in fact still be in existence at the time when Christ introduced the kingdom of God 2,000 years ago. In Daniel 7, Daniel describes these four kingdoms and their ultimate end. These kingdoms began in the day of Daniel with the Babylonian Empire, each being superseded by the next, although the first three died immediately but had their existence “prolonged for a season and time” before falling.

Daniel 7:11 says, “I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.”

The body of this beast is clearly not physical; it symbolically represents the Roman Empire (as a political system), therefore, when the passages indicates that “the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame,” it is describing the destruction of the Roman Empire.

The prophet (who was at the time of the prophecy looking forward to the destruction of all four kingdoms) then demonstrates what befell the first three kingdoms, in a kind of postscript, saying, “As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time” (Daniel 7:12).

In context, the “rest of the beasts” (or empires) were indeed prior to the Roman beast spoken of here. The writer is simply retrospectively alluding to the other three beasts (or empires).

The lion (Daniel 7:4) relates to the first kingdom and represents Babylon (Daniel 2:38b).
The bear (Daniel 7:5) relates to the second kingdom and represents Medo-Persia (Daniel 2:39).
The leopard (Daniel 7:6) relates to the third kingdom and represents Greece (Daniel 2:38b).
A dreadful and terrible strong Beast (Daniel 7:4) relates to the fourth kingdom and represents Rome (Daniel 2:38b).

Each empire came to an end and was followed by the other, albeit they died a gradual death, however, the Roman empire seems to come to a sudden end in this prophecy.

I therefore believe this reading simply relates to the individual destruction of each empire in their time - before Christ. Each was evidently destroyed then; however the Roman Empire was the only one to survive the ministry of Christ.

The dominion of the 3 other beasts was "taken away" many years before Christ. Whereas, the 4th empire – the Roman Empire – was in existence at the time when Christ walked this earth.

Daniel 7:13-14 says, “I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.”

When most people read this reference to the Son of Man coming with clouds they immediately assume that it relates to the Second Coming of the Lord. However, if they would carefully examine the wording of the passage and particularly the import of the reading, they would find that it makes absolutely no mention to Christ coming to earth in the clouds, but rather, it is speaking of Christ rising into the presence of His Father – the Ancient of Days – to receive His reward. The narrative expressly says, “the Son of man … came to the Ancient of days.” This glorious event occurred after the cross when He triumphantly entered into the portals of heaven in a cloud to sit at the right hand of majesty on high.

A close study of this reading shows that it relates specifically to the Lord’s ascension. The question that emanates from here is: where, in this vision, does the son of man (Christ) go? Is it to the earth or is it to His Father? Of course the passage answers this for us; “the Son of man … came to the Ancient of days.”




Church Age or New Earth:
Joel 3:18 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the mountains shall drop down new wine, and the hills shall flow with milk, and all the rivers of Judah shall flow with waters, and a fountain shall come forth out of the house of the LORD, and shall water the valley of ****tim.
3:19 Egypt shall be a desolation, and Edom shall be a desolate wilderness, for the violence against the children of Judah, because they have shed innocent blood in their land.

Church Age or New Earth:
Ezekiel 39:1 Therefore, thou son of man, prophesy against Gog, and say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal:
39:2 And I will turn thee back, and leave but the sixth part of thee, and will cause thee to come up from the north parts, and will bring thee upon the mountains of Israel:

Church Age or New Earth:
39:14 And they shall sever out men of continual employment, passing through the land to bury with the passengers those that remain upon the face of the earth, to cleanse it: after the end of seven months shall they search ...

Church Age or New Earth:
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.


I am a bit confused here. Your millennial passages are starting to say conflicting things. You have just attributed Zechariah 14:18-19 to a supposed future millennium yet Egypt inherits the land there, yet in Joel 3 that you also present, they are destroyed at Christ's Coming. Zechariah 14:18-19 has them coming up with all the other heathen nations to the feast of taberacles, saying, "And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles."

Joel 3 refers to the complete destruction that accompanies Christ’s Coming. At this climatic event, the wicked shall be destroyed in total and their land and all wickedness shall be dissolved. Joel 3:15-19 says, “The sun and the moon shall be darkened, and the stars shall withdraw their shining. The LORD also shall roar out of Zion, and utter his voice from Jerusalem; and the heavens and the earth shall shake: but the LORD will be the hope of his people, and the strength of the children of Israel. So shall ye know that I am the LORD your God dwelling in Zion, my holy mountain: then shall Jerusalem be holy, and there shall no strangers pass through her any more. And it shall come to pass in that day, that the mountains shall drop down new wine, and the hills shall flow with milk, and all the rivers of Judah shall flow with waters, and a fountain shall come forth of the house of the LORD, and shall water the valley of ****tim. Egypt shall be a desolation.”

In the Premillennial understanding of Zechariah 14:18-19, Egypt survives the Second Advent and is ushered into a future millennial kingdom. The new earth that arrives at Christ’s Coming, is suddenly saturated with numerous Gentile strangers. This is bizarre as the Bible says the new earth is for the righteous alone. You seem to change the destruction of Egypt at Christ’s Coming (Joel 3:19) into the preservation and reward of Egypt.

Joel 3:15-19 also confirms (in relation to Jerusalem) that “there shall no strangers pass through her any more” (Joel 3:17), yet when we view the detail of the Premil proof text – Ezekiel 40-47 and Zechariah 14 – we see they describe the opposite to this. These readings fill Jerusalem with countless strangers from throughout the nations.

It seems like the Old Testament passages Premillennialists present to support their position conflict with one another in every aspect. The term ‘the stranger[s]’ in the Old Testament always relates to the heathen or Gentile nations. They are the physically uncircumcised. Whilst Joel 3:15-19 prohibits the stranger entry onto the new earth, Premillennialists apply Zechariah 14:16 to the new earth, “And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.”

How can there be strangers dwelling in the land as described above, in a post Second Advent setting; when Joel 3 tells us that no strangers will pass through Jerusalem any more?

In the Premillennial paradigm, “every one” yes “every one” – “that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem” are ushered into the millennium. The fact that this evil coalition of nations is the very vehicle that is used to destroy “God’s people” yet the one that is rewarded by being ushered into the Prtemil millennium just doesn't add up. This rebellious band of mortal rebels (of all nations) populate the new earth after Christ’s Coming as a seeming reward for their assault upon Jerusalem.

In the Premillennial scheme they inherit the new earth, which other Scripture plainly states has been prepared for the righteous alone. Moreover, these wicked nations journey up to Jerusalem "from year to year to worship the King" despite being forbidden by many Scriptures

Ezekiel 47:22-23 also says, “And it shall come to pass, that ye shall divide it by lot for an inheritance unto you, and to the strangers that sojourn among you, which shall beget children among you: and they shall be unto you as born in the country among the children of Israel; they shall have inheritance with you among the tribes of Israel. And it shall come to pass, that in what tribe the stranger sojourneth, there shall ye give him his inheritance, saith the Lord GOD.”

Here we have strangers who are “born in the country among the children of Israel” on ‘the millennial earth’ receiving an inheritance. Yet Joel 3:17 declares, “there shall no strangers pass through her any more”

What is more, Premil qualifies the destruction that destroys all flesh in Rev 19 to the nations that come against Israel at the end. They argue that the total anihilation of all flesh described there isn't literally all flesh but only the flesh of all the beast's army that comes against Israel. Rev 19 shows the total destruction of this wicked army, whereas Zech 14 has the wholesale survival of this army and has those who come against Israel possessing the land. These are elementary conflicts.


Church Age or New Earth:
Jeremiah 4:26 I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the LORD, and by his fierce anger.
4:27 For thus hath the LORD said, The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full end.


The burden of proof is with you to exgete this. It is not satisfactory to present a load of passages for others to exegete without you making the effort.



The day any amill gives me a satisfactory answer on each of these verses and a few more that I will challenge them on, is the day that I become an amill. Until then I will continue to believe this current earth survives the second coming, as I believe each one of these verses is saying.



I think I have shown in great detail that these so-called proof-texts don't agree and clearly conflict with each other.

Raybob
Dec 15th 2008, 03:55 AM
The only endtimes books I've ever read are pre-trib rapture , I have never even heard post-trib preached anywhere. I am post-trib because this is what I understood from the bible and only afterwards I realised that there is a name for it.
There's a bible study program that's a free download at e-sword.net . There, you can download commentaries too that will sync to the chapter you are studying. Two excellent commentaries there are Matthew Henry and John Gill. Both of these pre-Darby commentators give very good explanations to each of your 15 OT passages without a hint of a future earthly kingdom after the second coming.

There are only 2 maybe 3 mentions of a complete destruction at the Second coming, and these can be explained.
If there was only one passage that showed complete destruction, it might be OK to "explain" it away but since you know there are at least 2 or 3, it might not be such a good idea to just "explain" them away.

Raybob

DurbanDude
Dec 15th 2008, 06:20 AM
Hi wpm,

I often interject when two others are debating , so I normally don't mind if others do the same. However I find that when I debate with you, you seem to have have so much detail that it is nearly impossible to keep up with your posts time wise. Secondly , a lot of what you say shows a misunderstanding of my viewpoint after I have explained it to you. Also, if I make a good point , I find that you don't acknowledge it, so the whole discussion becomes completely pointless. I have sometimes acknowledged a good point you have made and really enjoy a good logical two-way discussion but these lengthy posts that you make often don't make a point.

eg




Also, Acts 2:29-36, Acts 13:27-30 and Revelation 3:7 shows us that Christ is actually sitting on David's throne now.


I have always agreed with this , so I don't understand your point. Obviously I believe Jesus is on the throne now in heaven , yet will also be on the throne on earth from the second coming. This point you make shows that after many weeks of debate , you still don't understand what points will contradict my point of view and what points confirm it. This point confirms it, I am a Christian who believes Jesus died and rose again and sits at the right hand of God , reigning with God.



Zechariah 13:1 says, “In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness.”

He already did this - praise God. That fountain is expressly opened 2,000 + years ago.

John 19:30 records, “When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, it is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.”

Hebrews 10:10-12 says, “We are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God.”

Hebrews 10:14-20 says, “For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before, This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them; And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more. Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin. Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh.”

Mark 15:37 says, “Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost. And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom. And when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so cried out, and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of God."

Hebrews 10:26 says, “For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins.”


We both agree on all these verses you quote, a logical argument would be showing me
1)this fountain in its context can be exclusively interpreted as relating to the crucifixion, without that exclusivity the verse can also be applied to a future stream of living water after the second coming.
2) why you have said Zech 13 is the church age and yet there have been prophets in the church age and Zech 13 says that prophecy will cease in this age. This was the actual focus of my point to show that amills INCORRECTLY place this in the church age, because the bible shows that godly prophets existed AFTER the crucifixion.

So I really believe your first point regarding Zech 13 has not even started to address the actual point of discussion.

Also , I feel that you fail to understand that ANY verse that shows that any nation or piece of land thatwill survive on this current earth is a contradiction of the amill view thatthe earth will be completely destroyed at the second coming.



I really don't see how you can apply this to a future millennium. None of this lines up with Rev 20. No binding of Satan. No 1,000 yrs. No 2 resurrection separated by 1,000 yrs. No 1,000 yrs. No 2 Judgment Days separated by 1,000 yrs. No Gog / Magog battle.


You seem to be suggesting that every aspect of the millenium must be shown in any verse to disprove ammillenialism , but there is no such requirement, if any verse shows that the earth survives, this is a complete problem for the amillenialist that must be addressed, and supports the idea of the earth surviving the second coming which supports premills. Your suggestion above that many aspects of the millenium have to be addressed I find to be very illogical, one supporting verse at a time is a good way to make a point.

DurbanDude
Dec 15th 2008, 06:33 AM
I really don't see how you can apply this to a future millennium. None of this lines up with Rev 20. No binding of Satan. No 1,000 yrs. No 2 resurrection separated by 1,000 yrs. No 1,000 yrs. No 2 Judgment Days separated by 1,000 yrs. No Gog / Magog battle.

Isaiah 34:1-4 says, “Come near, ye nations, to hear; and hearken, ye people: let the earth hear, and all that is therein; the world, and all things that come forth of it. For the indignation of the LORD is upon all nations, and his fury upon all their armies: he hath utterly destroyed them, he hath delivered them to the slaughter. Their slain also shall be cast out, and their stink shall come up out of their carcases, and the mountains shall be melted with their blood. And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll: and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig tree.”

Verses 8-10 continues, “For it is the day of the LORD's vengeance, and the year of recompences for the controversy of Zion. And the streams thereof shall be turned into pitch, and the dust thereof into brimstone, and the land thereof shall become burning pitch. It shall not be quenched night nor day; the smoke thereof shall go up for ever: from generation to generation it shall lie waste; none shall pass through it for ever and ever.”

Isaiah describes what occurs at the Second Advent:

(1) The heavens shall pass away.
(2) The earth shall be burned up.
(3) No wicked will survive this day of destruction.

Whilst the day of the Lord is undoubtedly the day when the righteous are finally rescued, it is also, significantly, the day when the wicked are totally destroyed. The consistent teaching of Scripture shows us that the Second Coming of the Lord will see the total destruction of the world/wicked and a general resurrection / judgment at the Second Coming. It is an all-consummating event. I Thessalonians 5:4 plainly says, of those left behind at the Second Coming, “they shall not escape.” In fact they will be burnt up along with this sin-cursed world. The elements will be melted up and “none shall pass through it for ever and ever” (Isaiah 34:10).


Here you have failed to understand my point. The birds survive in the very regions that are desolated after the second coming. This shows that those regions still exist after the second coming, and birds still exist after the second coming, there is therefore no complete destruction of earth. Showing me other verses that support your view does not address this verse, and can make it appear thatyou are avoiding debating the actual question.

wpm
Dec 15th 2008, 06:34 AM
Hi wpm,

I often interject when two others are debating , so I normally don't mind if others do the same. However I find that when I debate with you, you seem to have have so much detail that it is nearly impossible to keep up with your posts time wise. Secondly , a lot of what you say shows a misunderstanding of my viewpoint after I have explained it to you. Also, if I make a good point , I find that you don't acknowledge it, so the whole discussion becomes completely pointless. I have sometimes acknowledged a good point you have made and really enjoy a good logical two-way discussion but these lengthy posts that you make often don't make a point.

eg



I have always agreed with this , so I don't understand your point. Obviously I believe Jesus is on the throne now in heaven , yet will also be on the throne on earth from the second coming. This point you make shows that after many weeks of debate , you still don't understand what points will contradict my point of view and what points confirm it. This point confirms it, I am a Christian who believes Jesus died and rose again and sits at the right hand of God , reigning with God.



We both agree on all these verses you quote, a logical argument would be showing me
1)this fountain in its context can be exclusively interpreted as relating to the crucifixion, without that exclusivity the verse can also be applied to a future stream of living water after the second coming.
2) why you have said Zech 13 is the church age and yet there have been prophets in the church age and Zech 13 says that prophecy will cease in this age. This was the actual focus of my point to show that amills INCORRECTLY place this in the church age, because the bible shows that godly prophets existed AFTER the crucifixion.

So I really believe your first point regarding Zech 13 has not even started to address the actual point of discussion.

First, you acknowedged Christ reigning, but my statement related to Christ reigning on David's throne now. That was an additional point, which I never saw you mention. Although, maybe I missed it. If I did I apologise, as I wasn't intending to ignore you.

Second, I think that you will find that none of these mention the millennium portrayed by Premil. Importantly, there is no correlation between Rev 20 and any of these OT references that I can see in regard to a literalist interpretation and the locating of these after the Second Coming. I have exegeted these in detail because you have made bold statements intimating that these are crystal clear millennial passages when, in my view, none of them correlate with the detail of Rev 20. What is more, a careful study of these OT passages will reveal that there are many conflicts between your various "millennial passages" and that they end up cancelling each other out.

Finally

The challenge for you is to present a detailed comparison between Rev 20 and all these supposed OT Premil proof-texts, showing us how they correlate with the detail of Rev 20. It would be helpful if you commenced at the start of Rev 20 and worked to the end, demonstrating how they match up.

Also, I feel you have to address the many conflicts that exist between your alleged proof-texts. These need resolved.

DurbanDude
Dec 15th 2008, 06:44 AM
I think I have shown in great detail that these so-called proof-texts don't agree and clearly conflict with each other.

I have only replied to the first two because I haven't time for the rest. As stated , I don't feel you have even started to address the real points.

DurbanDude
Dec 15th 2008, 07:04 AM
First, you acknowedged Christ reigning, but my statement related to Christ reigning on David's throne now. That was an additional point, which I never saw you mention. Although, maybe I missed it. If I did I apologise, as I wasn't intending to ignore you

I haven't developed a doctrine about David's throne , but regardless I don't see the logic of this point. Unless you have some proof that David's throne ends at the second comng, or even ends at the new earth , how can this point possibility be of any use? All i can do is agree, yes Jesus reigns now and will still reign in further ages to come.. Those OT prophecies show that after the second coming Jesus reigns from Mount Zion, which is an earthly mountain. If you fail to show a verse that this throne is EXCLUSIVE to the church age, this just confirms my doctrine , that Jesus rules now, and will continue to rule after the second coming.

Imagine if I used the same logic that you use, and start to say that because Jesus is reigning now on David's throne, it means He CANNOT reign on such a throne on the new earth. Can you hear how illogical that sounds. That sort of reasoning is meaningless.Jesus reigns from the crucifixion forever , no matter if there are two ages , three ages, or a thousand ages. I hope you are starting to realise why I prefer not to debate with you , its just a matter of reasoning.



Second, I think that you will find that none of these mention the millennium portrayed by Premil. Importantly, there is no correlation between Rev 20 and any of these OT references that I can see in regard to a literalist interpretation and the locating of these after the Second Coming. I have exegeted these in detail because you have made bold statements intimating that these are crystal clear millennial passages when, in my view, none of them correlate with the detail of Rev 20. What is more, a careful study of these OT passages will reveal that there are many conflicts between your various "millennial passages" and that they end up cancelling each other out.


Again , no logic here. A logical person would acknowledge that any point that can show the earth surviving the second coming supports one aspect of the premill viewpoint and dismisses the amill viewpoint , and therefore needs an explanation from amills. I am not trying to prove the whole premill viewpoint from one verse. Just the fact that this earth survives. Can you see this point? And nothing cancels eachother out.




The challenge for you is to present a detailed comparison between Rev 20 and all these supposed OT Premil proof-texts, showing us how they correlate with the detail of Rev 20. It would be helpful if you commenced at the start of Rev 20 and worked to the end, demonstrating how they match up.


This isn't my challenge , I feel this is your challenge. The OT verses together with descriptions of the resurrection that occur at the second coming fit Rev 20 just by reading Rev 20. If Rev 20 did not exist I would use all those OT verses to show that Jesus reigns on this earth, and the new earth comes later, and place the physical resurrection of the believers at the second coming which again and again matches the description of the Messiah coming to Mount Zion of OT propheies..


Also, I feel you have to address the many conflicts that exist between your alleged proof-texts. These need resolved

What conflicts?

DurbanDude
Dec 15th 2008, 08:52 AM
Indeed He is. If there were one single verse that puts to rest the notion of Jesus reigning on an earthly physical kingdom, it is this:

Joh 18:36 Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place."

Not of this world. Fundamental to Christianity. It never will be a kingdom on this earth.

You believe Jesus is reigning now and Satan is bound now, don't you? You believe the Davidic kingdom is now don't you. Your own beliefs show that Jesus can reign over this earth and yet there are those that are part of His kingdom (resurrected saints) and those that are outside His kingdom. The same principle applies to the period after the second coming , not all will be part of Jesus' spiritual kingdom during this period. This in no way contradicts the premill view, the kingdom of God is a spiritual kingdom.

modanufu
Dec 15th 2008, 09:39 AM
Hi DurbanDude,

Is the Lord Jesus Christ sitting today on the throne of David in Heaven, as Acts 2:29-36 says, also a premill doctrine? :)

I thought not. And yet what Peter says here is so unmistakably clear!

Kind regards,

Dik

DurbanDude
Dec 15th 2008, 09:55 AM
Hi DurbanDude,

Is the Lord Jesus Christ sitting today on the throne of David in Heaven, as Acts 2:29-36 says, also a premill doctrine? :)

I thought not. And yet what Peter says here is so unmistakably clear!

Kind regards,

Dik

Yes it is a premill doctrine. remember we are Christians too!:idea:

We believe Jesus died and rose again and sits at the right hand of God , in authority. This authority will carry on through the ages. My view of the current church age matches your view point for point, with very few exceptions. It's only the following age that we disagree on. Jesus reigns now, we are the kingdom of God.

wpm
Dec 15th 2008, 02:58 PM
This isn't my challenge , I feel this is your challenge. The OT verses together with descriptions of the resurrection that occur at the second coming fit Rev 20 just by reading Rev 20. If Rev 20 did not exist I would use all those OT verses to show that Jesus reigns on this earth, and the new earth comes later, and place the physical resurrection of the believers at the second coming which again and again matches the description of the Messiah coming to Mount Zion of OT propheies..



What conflicts?

To be fair, you are just throwing a number of passages out there (with big and brief statements attached) without making any attempt to show how they describe a future millennium. In fact, most of these have no exegesis. Others who disagree are forced to guess where the millennial detail is. The reality is, when one carefully examines them, the Second Coming readings actually confirm a climactic Coming of Christ and the first Coming passages agree with other Scripture relating to the intra-Advent period. It is difficult to properly deal with these reading when you refuse to exgete them. When I address them in considerable detail, showing what I believe to be their proper location, you just swiftly dismiss them with personal opinion. This is totally unsatisfactory. From what I can see there is absolutely no connection between the detail of Rev 20 taken from a literalist Premil perspective and the other readings you are forwarding. It would be impossible to do a correlation. I put it to you: the reason for this is that Rev 20 refers to the intra-Advent period and matches with the detail attributed to the intra-Advent period.

I will list a few questions:

1. Where exactly in Revelation 20 or anywhere else does it say that Christ will reign on earth for 1,000 years?

2. What will Christ be doing during that 1,000 years? Please list clear Scriptures.

3. Where is Christ in Satan's “little season”?

4. Does Satan overturn Christ's millennial power in Satan's “little season”?

5. What happens to Christ and the saints that rule with Him on earth after the thousand years expire during Satan’s little season?

6. Do they stop reigning?

I would appreciate it if you would show me Christ and His behaviour on earth in each of the OT readings you furnish us with. So far I feel there is little to support your assertions.

Paul

DurbanDude
Dec 15th 2008, 03:31 PM
To be fair, you are just throwing a number of pasages out there (with big statements attached) without making any attempt to show how they describe a future millennium. Others who disagree are forced to guess where the millennial detail is. The reality is, when one carefully examines them, the Second Coming readings actually confirm a climactic Coming of Christ and the first Coming passages agree with other Scripture relating to the intra-Advent period. It is difficult to properly deal with these reading when you refuse to exgete them. When I address them in considerable detail, showing what I believe to be their proper location, you just swiftly dismiss them with personal opinion. This is totally unsatisfactory. From what I can see there is absolutely no connection between the detail of Rev 20 taken from a literalist Premil perspective and the other readings you are forwarding. It would be impossible to do a correlation. I put it to you: the reason for this is that Rev 20 refers to the intra-Advent period and matches with the detail attributed to the intra-Advent period.

I will list a few questions:

1. Where exactly in Revelation 20 or anywhere else does it say that Christ will reign on earth for 1,000 years?

2. What will Christ be doing during that 1,000 years? Please list clear Scriptures.

3. Where is Christ in Satan's “little season”?

4. Does Satan overturn Christ's millennial power in Satan's “little season”?

5. What happens to Christ and the saints that rule with Him on earth after the thousand years expire during Satan’s little season?

6. Do they stop reigning?

I would appreciate it if you would show me Christ and His behaviour on earth in each of the OT readings you furnish us with. So far I feel there is little to support your assertions.

Paul


Paul, I'm not discussing Revelation 20 at all, I am discussing verses that point to the earth surviving the second coming. That is all. I feel that I answered the opening post, then brought up additional verses. Why go to a further subject when we are still dealing with the 11 verses I mentioned. Let's deal with those first and then move on to a Rev 20 discussion. I have happily digressed occasionally so far, but let's just stick to the point.

The areas I highlighted in the original posting of those 11 verses were the areas that I felt shows this earth or nations surviving. Maybe the logic isn't obvious to you, but the logic is there. I had no hidden agenda trying to hide my point , the highlights show this, I was open about which parts of the verse I felt were establishing doubt on the amill doctrine.

If birds survive the second coming and are the only inhabitants of certain desolate lands after the second coming, this shows the earth survives.

If certain regions survive the second coming , this shows that the earth survives the second coming.

If heathen mortals survive the second coming then this shows that the new earth cannot be established yet at the second coming.

If Jews in Jerusalem reach an old age after the second coming then this shows that there are mortal survivors of the second coming.

If a sixth part of Gog survives the second coming this shows that the earth survives the second coming.

If prophets are killed by their own family because they still prophesy, this verse cannot be referring to the church age , because godly prophets existed in this church age. And it can't be referring to the new earth because there will be no such thing as false prophecy and killing during the new earth. So there must be another age when people are ashamed of their prophecy as per Zechariah 13.

As you say, these verses are not an attempt to show a detailed future millenium , just to show that this earth survives the second coming. Still looking for logical amill answers to these verses.

wpm
Dec 15th 2008, 04:02 PM
Paul, I'm not discussing Revelation 20 at all, I am discussing verses that point to the earth surviving the second coming. That is all. I feel that I answered the opening post, then brought up additional verses. Why go to a further subject when we are still dealing with the 11 verses I mentioned. Let's deal with those first and then move on to a Rev 20 discussion. I have happily digressed occasionally so far, but let's just stick to the point.

The areas I highlighted in the original posting of those 11 verses were the areas that I felt shows this earth or nations surviving. Maybe the logic isn't obvious to you, but the logic is there. I had no hidden agenda trying to hide my point , the highlights show this, I was open about which parts of the verse I felt were establishing doubt on the amill doctrine.

If birds survive the second coming and are the only inhabitants of certain desolate lands after the second coming, this shows the earth survives.

If certain regions survive the second coming , this shows that the earth survives the second coming.

If heathen mortals survive the second coming then this shows that the new earth cannot be established yet at the second coming.

If Jews in Jerusalem reach an old age after the second coming then this shows that there are mortal survivors of the second coming.

If a sixth part of Gog survives the second coming this shows that the earth survives the second coming.

If prophets are killed by their own family because they still prophesy, this verse cannot be referring to the church age , because godly prophets existed in this church age. And it can't be referring to the new earth because there will be no such thing as false prophecy and killing during the new earth. So there must be another age when people are ashamed of their prophecy as per Zechariah 13.

As you say, these verses are not an attempt to show a detailed future millenium , just to show that this earth survives the second coming. Still looking for logical amill answers to these verses.

Thanks for your latest reply.

Even Revelation 20 doesn't locate Christ on the earth during this millennium. So, I can't ask you to corroborate something that is not in the main Premil proof-text. I am unsure which Second Coming passage you feel expressly locates Him on a millennial earth. I would be interested to view your evidence, and where He is living and what He is doing in the midst of this devastation. You are going to have to go through each reading and articulate your belief and what it relates to because I don't see what you are claiming in these verses.

As for picking out one vague reference to birds feasting on the left-overs of the destruction as proof of the millennial blue-print, I see this as a very weak proof. In fact, Isaiah 34 is another climactic passage that supports the Amil position. Look at the countless general resurrection/judgment passages that Scripture presents, look at the many destructive passages that show no wicked surviving Christ's Coming (including incidently the one we are looking at). Look at the many passages that show this world is destroyed at Christ's Coming. You are quick to dismiss these yet hold to a vague passing reference to the birds feasting on the wicked at the end.

Maybe humans are destroyed first, then the animal life. Maybe this is symbolic language - as in Rev 19. The one thing it is not is a depiction of a glorious sin-subdued millennium full of joy and peace as you previous portrayed. There is no mention of the glorified saints reigning among these raveness cormorants and owls. There is again no mention of human survivors here. It is a scene of utter desolation. Where is Christ in this destruction? Whre is any mention of a thousand yrs. Where is the Gog/Magog war? This would seem to correlate with the symbolic language of Rev 19 that suggests the wicked will be totally and completely eaten up.

Isaiah 34:1-4, which says, “Come near, ye nations, to hear; and hearken, ye people: let the earth hear, and all that is therein; the world, and all things that come forth of it. For the indignation of the LORD is upon all nations, and his fury upon all their armies: he hath utterly destroyed them, he hath delivered them to the slaughter. Their slain also shall be cast out, and their stink shall come up out of their carcases, and the mountains shall be melted with their blood. And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll: and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig tree.”

This is the end! This reading raises another question: If "the indignation of the LORD is upon all nations, and his fury upon all their armies" and they are all "utterly destroyed" how so many survive and be ushered into a millennial earth to enjoy it with Jesus and the glorified saints? How can the armies that come against Jerusalem inherit the Premil millennium (as per their interpretation of Zech 14). The Premil position on Zech 14 creates more questions and conflicts than answers or correlations.

You again ignored all the apparent conflicts between your readings that I listed.

Verses 8-10 continues, “For it is the day of the LORD's vengeance, and the year of recompences for the controversy of Zion. And the streams thereof shall be turned into pitch, and the dust thereof into brimstone, and the land thereof shall become burning pitch. It shall not be quenched night nor day; the smoke thereof shall go up for ever: from generation to generation it shall lie waste; none shall pass through it for ever and ever.”

How can the billions of rebellious mortal inhabitants inherit this land when Isa 34 says "none shall pass through it for ever and ever”?

Revelation 6:12-14 also relates this final destruction described in Isaiah 34 to the appearance of the Lord at the Second Coming, where the wicked finally receive their reward. We learn, “And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood; And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind. And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places. And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?”

Durban, this narrative alludes to the exact same scene as that described in Isaiah 34. In near word-for-word language, this solemn passage depicts God’s final judgment on the world, and shows God’s final wrath upon both the elements and the wicked that are left behind at Christ’s appearing. Moreover, the rhetorical question at the end of the above narrative demands the evident answer – none! In fact, Isaiah 34 actually supplies the required answer to the concluding question in Revelation 6:14 “who shall be able to stand?” saying, “none shall pass through it for ever and ever.” Assuredly, the wicked will not in anyway survive the climactic Coming of Christ, this being expressly “the great day of his wrath.” In short, none of those left behind “shall be able to stand.” This is not simply a temporary condition involving partial destruction in order to facilitate the setting up of a sinful millennium, no; it is the final conflagration that destroys this current scene of time “for ever and ever.”

DurbanDude
Dec 15th 2008, 04:24 PM
The lion (Daniel 7:4) relates to the first kingdom and represents Babylon (Daniel 2:38b).

The bear (Daniel 7:5) relates to the second kingdom and represents Medo-Persia (Daniel 2:39).
The leopard (Daniel 7:6) relates to the third kingdom and represents Greece (Daniel 2:38b).
A dreadful and terrible strong Beast (Daniel 7:4) relates to the fourth kingdom and represents Rome (Daniel 2:38b).

Each empire came to an end and was followed by the other, albeit they died a gradual death, however, the Roman empire seems to come to a sudden end in this prophecy.


wpm , I felt this was a good answer , those 3 empires continued to exist after losing their full power to the next empire, so this is a satisfactory explanation.





A close study of this reading shows that it relates specifically to the Lord’s ascension. The question that emanates from here is: where, in this vision, does the son of man (Christ) go? Is it to the earth or is it to His Father? Of course the passage answers this for us; “the Son of man … came to the Ancient of days.”


I disagree with all this, still believing this to be referring to the second coming. I won't go into this now because it's off subject, hopefully we can discuss this another time on another thread.




I am a bit confused here. Your millennial passages are starting to say conflicting things. You have just attributed Zechariah 14:18-19 to a supposed future millennium yet Egypt inherits the land there, yet in Joel 3 that you also present, they are destroyed at Christ's Coming. Zechariah 14:18-19 has them coming up with all the other heathen nations to the feast of taberacles, saying, "And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles."

Joel 3 refers to the complete destruction that accompanies Christ’s Coming. At this climatic event, the wicked shall be destroyed in total and their land and all wickedness shall be dissolved. Joel 3:15-19 says, “The sun and the moon shall be darkened, and the stars shall withdraw their shining. The LORD also shall roar out of Zion, and utter his voice from Jerusalem; and the heavens and the earth shall shake: but the LORD will be the hope of his people, and the strength of the children of Israel. So shall ye know that I am the LORD your God dwelling in Zion, my holy mountain: then shall Jerusalem be holy, and there shall no strangers pass through her any more. And it shall come to pass in that day, that the mountains shall drop down new wine, and the hills shall flow with milk, and all the rivers of Judah shall flow with waters, and a fountain shall come forth of the house of the LORD, and shall water the valley of ****tim. Egypt shall be a desolation.”

In the Premillennial understanding of Zechariah 14:18-19, Egypt survives the Second Advent and is ushered into a future millennial kingdom. The new earth that arrives at Christ’s Coming, is suddenly saturated with numerous Gentile strangers. This is bizarre as the Bible says the new earth is for the righteous alone. You seem to change the destruction of Egypt at Christ’s Coming (Joel 3:19) into the preservation and reward of Egypt.

Joel 3:15-19 also confirms (in relation to Jerusalem) that “there shall no strangers pass through her any more” (Joel 3:17), yet when we view the detail of the Premil proof text – Ezekiel 40-47 and Zechariah 14 – we see they describe the opposite to this. These readings fill Jerusalem with countless strangers from throughout the nations.

It seems like the Old Testament passages Premillennialists present to support their position conflict with one another in every aspect. The term ‘the stranger[s]’ in the Old Testament always relates to the heathen or Gentile nations. They are the physically uncircumcised. Whilst Joel 3:15-19 prohibits the stranger entry onto the new earth, Premillennialists apply Zechariah 14:16 to the new earth, “And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.”

How can there be strangers dwelling in the land as described above, in a post Second Advent setting; when Joel 3 tells us that no strangers will pass through Jerusalem any more?

In the Premillennial paradigm, “every one” yes “every one” – “that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem” are ushered into the millennium. The fact that this evil coalition of nations is the very vehicle that is used to destroy “God’s people” yet the one that is rewarded by being ushered into the Prtemil millennium just doesn't add up. This rebellious band of mortal rebels (of all nations) populate the new earth after Christ’s Coming as a seeming reward for their assault upon Jerusalem.

In the Premillennial scheme they inherit the new earth, which other Scripture plainly states has been prepared for the righteous alone. Moreover, these wicked nations journey up to Jerusalem "from year to year to worship the King" despite being forbidden by many Scriptures

Ezekiel 47:22-23 also says, “And it shall come to pass, that ye shall divide it by lot for an inheritance unto you, and to the strangers that sojourn among you, which shall beget children among you: and they shall be unto you as born in the country among the children of Israel; they shall have inheritance with you among the tribes of Israel. And it shall come to pass, that in what tribe the stranger sojourneth, there shall ye give him his inheritance, saith the Lord GOD.”

Here we have strangers who are “born in the country among the children of Israel” on ‘the millennial earth’ receiving an inheritance. Yet Joel 3:17 declares, “there shall no strangers pass through her any more”

What is more, Premil qualifies the destruction that destroys all flesh in Rev 19 to the nations that come against Israel at the end. They argue that the total anihilation of all flesh described there isn't literally all flesh but only the flesh of all the beast's army that comes against Israel. Rev 19 shows the total destruction of this wicked army, whereas Zech 14 has the wholesale survival of this army and has those who come against Israel possessing the land. These are elementary conflicts.


You make so many various points on various subjects here , it is too much to answer. You are making a good point about Egypt but then dilute your point with so many disputable side issues that it would be impolite of me to even comment on any one of the issues because I really don't have the time to do them justice. Then this may give you the false impression that you have won a debate just because of your ability to go off subject and proliferate arguments rather than stay focussed.

DurbanDude
Dec 15th 2008, 04:36 PM
As for picking out one vague reference to birds feasting on the left-overs of the destruction as proof of the millennial blue-print, I see this as a very weak proof. In fact, Isaiah 34 is another climactic passage that supports the Amil position. Look at the countless general resurrection/judgment passages that Scripture presents, look at the many destructive passages that show no wicked surviving Christ's Coming (including incidently the one we are looking at). Look at the many passages that show this world is destroyed at Christ's Coming. You are quick to dismiss these yet hold to a vague passing reference to the birds feasting on the wicked at the end.


Once again a long post not sticking to the subject at hand. I can only conclude that you would rather move on than actually give an explanation for why all those verses indicate the earth survives.

I have always had answers to all questions presented and am not threatened in any way to answer any question. But I don't think this is fair that I spend all that time answering you when you won't answer me. Why don't you just give me an opinion on why you think those birds survive the second coming in those desolate regions. Why don't you just give me an answer about why the bible says prophesy will cease and where that fits into your beliefs. Why avoid these questions? There aren't too many, and it is possible to give a short answers straight to the point. Jesus often gave short wise answers to His detractors.

bennie
Dec 15th 2008, 05:26 PM
Most theologians believes Daniel 7 is speaking about four consecutive empires that would arise before the earthly ministry of Christ 2,000 years ago. The last – the Roman Empire – would in fact still be in existence at the time when Christ introduced the kingdom of God 2,000 years ago. In Daniel 7, Daniel describes these four kingdoms and their ultimate end. These kingdoms began in the day of Daniel with the Babylonian Empire, each being superseded by the next, although the first three died immediately but had their existence “prolonged for a season and time” before falling.

Daniel 7:11 says, “I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.”

The body of this beast is clearly not physical; it symbolically represents the Roman Empire (as a political system), therefore, when the passages indicates that “the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame,” it is describing the destruction of the Roman Empire.

The prophet (who was at the time of the prophecy looking forward to the destruction of all four kingdoms) then demonstrates what befell the first three kingdoms, in a kind of postscript, saying, “As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time” (Daniel 7:12).

In context, the “rest of the beasts” (or empires) were indeed prior to the Roman beast spoken of here. The writer is simply retrospectively alluding to the other three beasts (or empires).

The lion (Daniel 7:4) relates to the first kingdom and represents Babylon (Daniel 2:38b).
The bear (Daniel 7:5) relates to the second kingdom and represents Medo-Persia (Daniel 2:39).
The leopard (Daniel 7:6) relates to the third kingdom and represents Greece (Daniel 2:38b).
A dreadful and terrible strong Beast (Daniel 7:4) relates to the fourth kingdom and represents Rome (Daniel 2:38b).

Each empire came to an end and was followed by the other, albeit they died a gradual death, however, the Roman empire seems to come to a sudden end in this prophecy.

I therefore believe this reading simply relates to the individual destruction of each empire in their time - before Christ. Each was evidently destroyed then; however the Roman Empire was the only one to survive the ministry of Christ.

The dominion of the 3 other beasts was "taken away" many years before Christ. Whereas, the 4th empire – the Roman Empire – was in existence at the time when Christ walked this earth.

Daniel 7:13-14 says, “I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.”

When most people read this reference to the Son of Man coming with clouds they immediately assume that it relates to the Second Coming of the Lord. However, if they would carefully examine the wording of the passage and particularly the import of the reading, they would find that it makes absolutely no mention to Christ coming to earth in the clouds, but rather, it is speaking of Christ rising into the presence of His Father – the Ancient of Days – to receive His reward. The narrative expressly says, “the Son of man … came to the Ancient of days.” This glorious event occurred after the cross when He triumphantly entered into the portals of heaven in a cloud to sit at the right hand of majesty on high.

A close study of this reading shows that it relates specifically to the Lord’s ascension. The question that emanates from here is: where, in this vision, does the son of man (Christ) go? Is it to the earth or is it to His Father? Of course the passage answers this for us; “the Son of man … came to the Ancient of days.”






[quote=DurbanDude;1906371]

wpm , I felt this was a good answer , those 3 empires continued to exist after losing their full power to the next empire, so this is a satisfactory explanation.





I disagree with all this, still believing this to be referring to the second coming. I won't go into this now because it's off subject, hopefully we can discuss this another time on another thread.




You make so many various points on various subjects here , it is too much to answer. You are making a good point about Egypt but then dilute your point with so many disputable side issues that it would be impolite of me to even comment on any one of the issues because I really don't have the time to do them justice. Then this may give you the false impression that you have won a debate just because of your ability to go off subject and proliferate arguments rather than stay focussed.



hi gents.

dan7:1 In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon, Daniel had a dream, and visions passed through his mind as he was lying on his bed. He wrote down the substance of his dream.

2 Daniel said: "In my vision at night I looked, and there before me were the four winds of heaven churning up the great sea. 3 Four great beasts, each different from the others, came up out of the sea.
4 "The first was like a lion, and it had the wings of an eagle. I watched until its wings were torn off and it was lifted from the ground so that it stood on two feet like a man, and the heart of a man was given to it.
5 "And there before me was a second beast, which looked like a bear. It was raised up on one of its sides, and it had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth. It was told, 'Get up and eat your fill of flesh!'
6 "After that, I looked, and there before me was another beast, one that looked like a leopard. And on its back it had four wings like those of a bird. This beast had four heads, and it was given authority to rule.
7 "After that, in my vision at night I looked, and there before me was a fourth beast—terrifying and frightening and very powerful. It had large iron teeth; it crushed and devoured its victims and trampled underfoot whatever was left. It was different from all the former beasts, and it had ten horns.
8 "While I was thinking about the horns, there before me was another horn, a little one, which came up among them; and three of the first horns were uprooted before it. This horn had eyes like the eyes of a man and a mouth that spoke boastfully.
9 "As I looked,
"thrones were set in place,
and the Ancient of Days took his seat.
His clothing was as white as snow;
the hair of his head was white like wool.
His throne was flaming with fire,
and its wheels were all ablaze.
10 A river of fire was flowing,
coming out from before him.
Thousands upon thousands attended him;
ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him.
The court was seated,
and the books were opened.
11 "Then I continued to watch because of the boastful words the horn was speaking. I kept looking until the beast was slain and its body destroyed and thrown into the blazing fire. 12 (The other beasts had been stripped of their authority, but were allowed to live for a period of time.) 13 "In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

i dont want to derail the tread. I have been reading both of you views in regard to this. The fourth beast is proved by most scolars to be the roman empire, witch was in the past. Most people believe the little horn will boast at the end of the age( regardless if is are premill or amill)( correct me if i am wrong please) Jesus came before the ancient of days to receive dominion.

My question is: when did verse 9 and 10 happen. To be consistent, the cronological order can not be broken. it have to happen before Jesus Came before the ancient of days(the father)

bennie

wpm
Dec 15th 2008, 05:28 PM
wpm , I felt this was a good answer , those 3 empires continued to exist after losing their full power to the next empire, so this is a satisfactory explanation.





I disagree with all this, still believing this to be referring to the second coming. I won't go into this now because it's off subject, hopefully we can discuss this another time on another thread.




You make so many various points on various subjects here , it is too much to answer. You are making a good point about Egypt but then dilute your point with so many disputable side issues that it would be impolite of me to even comment on any one of the issues because I really don't have the time to do them justice. Then this may give you the false impression that you have won a debate just because of your ability to go off subject and proliferate arguments rather than stay focussed.



I don't think it is a win/lose situation. I have simply responded to the plethora of OT passages you threw out and assigned to a supposed future millennium. It was you that made these an issue not me. This thread was about the general judgment. Notwithstanding, I honestly don't believe you have proven your case in regard to any of them. In fact, you have merely just quoted a text without any proof that it relates to the millennium described in Rev 20. As I have said, I don't see any direct linkage in your quotes. The burden of proof is actually with you. The first principle of evidence is: he who alleges must prove.

wpm
Dec 15th 2008, 05:32 PM
Once again a long post not sticking to the subject at hand. I can only conclude that you would rather move on than actually give an explanation for why all those verses indicate the earth survives.

I have always had answers to all questions presented and am not threatened in any way to answer any question. But I don't think this is fair that I spend all that time answering you when you won't answer me. Why don't you just give me an opinion on why you think those birds survive the second coming in those desolate regions. Why don't you just give me an answer about why the bible says prophesy will cease and where that fits into your beliefs. Why avoid these questions? There aren't too many, and it is possible to give a short answers straight to the point. Jesus often gave short wise answers to His detractors.

Others can judge who is actually addressing these passages and who is skirting round them. Thanks for the discussion. :)

DurbanDude
Dec 15th 2008, 05:55 PM
"As I looked, [/B]
"thrones were set in place,
and the Ancient of Days took his seat.
His clothing was as white as snow;
the hair of his head was white like wool.
His throne was flaming with fire,
and its wheels were all ablaze.
10 A river of fire was flowing,
coming out from before him.
Thousands upon thousands attended him;
ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him.
The court was seated,
and the books were opened.
11 "Then I continued to watch because of the boastful words the horn was speaking. I kept looking until the beast was slain and its body destroyed and thrown into the blazing fire. 12 (The other beasts had been stripped of their authority, but were allowed to live for a period of time.) 13 "In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

i dont want to derail the tread. I have been reading both of you views in regard to this. The fourth beast is proved by most scolars to be the roman empire, witch was in the past. Most people believe the little horn will boast at the end of the age( regardless if is are premill or amill)( correct me if i am wrong please) Jesus came before the ancient of days to receive dominion.

My question is: when did verse 9 and 10 happen. To be consistent, the cronological order can not be broken. it have to happen before Jesus Came before the ancient of days(the father)

bennie

Hi Bennie,

I'm not sure where you are going with the question. Why don't you start a thread on Daniel 7, I would be interested in discussing this. I believe Daniel 7 is about the continuous increase of the fourth kingdom (Rome) right until the second coming. Verse 10 and 11 I believe are about the second coming.

DurbanDude
Dec 15th 2008, 05:59 PM
Others can judge who is actually addressing these passages and who is skirting round them. Thanks for the discussion. :)

Ok thanks :)

God bless

modanufu
Dec 16th 2008, 11:17 AM
Hi DurbanDude,


Yes it is a premill doctrine. remember we are Christians too!:idea:

We believe Jesus died and rose again and sits at the right hand of God , in authority. This authority will carry on through the ages. My view of the current church age matches your view point for point, with very few exceptions. It's only the following age that we disagree on. Jesus reigns now, we are the kingdom of God.

Sorry, I would like to have one thing clear. It would simplify our discussion if I knew what you exactly mean. My question is: is it really the throne of David the Lord is now seated upon in Heaven? Most premills would deny that. They would split it up into (1) the Lord now in Heaven at the right hand of God; (2) the Lord on the throne of David in Jerusalem in the coming millennium. You seem to have a different opinion, haven't you?

Kind regards,

Dik

DurbanDude
Dec 16th 2008, 12:46 PM
Hi DurbanDude,



Sorry, I would like to have one thing clear. It would simplify our discussion if I knew what you exactly mean. My question is: is it really the throne of David the Lord is now seated upon in Heaven? Most premills would deny that. They would split it up into (1) the Lord now in Heaven at the right hand of God; (2) the Lord on the throne of David in Jerusalem in the coming millennium. You seem to have a different opinion, haven't you?

Kind regards,

Dik

2:30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
2:31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.
2:32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
2:33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.
2:34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
2:35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool.
2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

The two highlighted areas make this all very clear. At Jesus' resurrection He sits on "David's throne" at the right hand of God, the throne of Israel. God is still subduing Jesus' enemies, this clearly was not yet fulfilled by Acts 2. Jesus will sit there at the right hand of God until God makes His foes His footstool. Note that even Psalm 110, which is being referred to here, says He will rule "in the midst of His enemies". This infers that the Messiah, the King of Israel does not fully dominate His enemies at first , but is nevertheless on the throne of Israel.

Like I keep saying , Jesus is on the throne now , and this will never end.
Hebrews
10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
10:13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.

John 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
3:22 Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.

This shows that He is currently in a position of authority. He is currently on the throne of Israel (this is David's throne). He is reigning in the midst of His enemies until they are all made His footstool.

modanufu
Dec 16th 2008, 05:07 PM
Hi DurbanDude,

You wrote:



This infers that the Messiah, the King of Israel does not fully dominate His enemies at first


That baffles me. Do you maintain that our Lord is now not fully Lord and Christ? Don't you give too much honour to his enemies?

Matthew 28:18 All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
1 Petr. 3:22 Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.

This being made a footstool only means that the time for glory has not yet come for his believers.

But His throne will never change nor will He leave it, because "at the right hand of the Father" is not a physical throne. It means His omnipotence. Sitting on the throne of David is nothing else than the omnipotence of our Lord.

Do you think He will leave Heaven to be a second David, a king on the throne in the little town of Jerusalem? I honestly cannot imagine such a thing. :confused

Kind regards,

Dik

wpm
Dec 16th 2008, 05:18 PM
2:30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
2:31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.
2:32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
2:33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.
2:34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
2:35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool.
2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

The two highlighted areas make this all very clear. At Jesus' resurrection He sits on "David's throne" at the right hand of God, the throne of Israel. God is still subduing Jesus' enemies, this clearly was not yet fulfilled by Acts 2. Jesus will sit there at the right hand of God until God makes His foes His footstool. Note that even Psalm 110, which is being referred to here, says He will rule "in the midst of His enemies". This infers that the Messiah, the King of Israel does not fully dominate His enemies at first , but is nevertheless on the throne of Israel.

Like I keep saying , Jesus is on the throne now , and this will never end.
Hebrews
10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
10:13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.

John 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
3:22 Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.

This shows that He is currently in a position of authority. He is currently on the throne of Israel (this is David's throne). He is reigning in the midst of His enemies until they are all made His footstool.



Christ reigns through His body in the midst of His enemies. Jesus said in Matthew 18:18-20, “if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”

DurbanDude
Dec 16th 2008, 05:41 PM
That baffles me. Do you maintain that our Lord is now not fully Lord and Christ? Don't you give too much honour to his enemies?


I didn't say that he can't , just that he doesn't, I completely acknowledge that Jesus is all-powerful, and has been ever since His ministry, even before the crucifixion. The sequence of events and the reference to Psalm 110 cannot be translated any other way. Your argument is with the bible here , not me.

2:34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
2:35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool.

The bible is 100% clear in many verses that being seated at the right hand of God STARTS at the resurrection of Christ.
Hebrews
10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
10:13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.

How would you interpret the order of events here.

1) resurrection
2) seated at the right hand of God
3) his enemies made a footstool

DurbanDude
Dec 16th 2008, 05:45 PM
Christ reigns through His body in the midst of His enemies. Jesus said in Matthew 18:18-20, “if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”

Amen! Agreed here , God is in full control , but has chosen to manifest His truth through His body , the Church.

wpm
Dec 16th 2008, 05:54 PM
I didn't say that he can't , just that he doesn't, I completely acknowledge that Jesus is all-powerful, and has been ever since His ministry, even before the crucifixion. The sequence of events and the reference to Psalm 110 cannot be translated any other way. Your argument is with the bible here , not me.

2:34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
2:35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool.

The bible is 100% clear in many verses that being seated at the right hand of God STARTS at the resurrection of Christ.
Hebrews
10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
10:13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.

How would you interpret the order of events here.

1) resurrection
2) seated at the right hand of God
3) his enemies made a footstool




All things are under Christ's feet now. His enemies are currently being made His footstool. He reigns now over everything.

1 Corinthians 15:25-28 says, speaking of Christ’s current reign, “For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be hupotageé (Strong’s 5293) subdued (or subordinated) unto him (speaking of the Second Coming), then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.”

Whilst “all power” is now assuredly given unto Christ “in heaven and in earth” (Matthew 28:18) through His life, death and resurrection, and whilst through this victorious work, “he hath put all things under his feet” in a Sovereign manner, we have not yet seen the final subduing of wickedness. This assuredly comes at the Second Coming of the Lord. He is bringing everything to its final conclusion by Sovereignly ruling over mankind. Nothing happens without His permission. Satan or man cannot override the mind of Christ on the throne. What evil occurs, happens because the Lord in His infinite wisdom allows it.

There is nothing that is not under His control or influence. If it were otherwise then Satan or man would be sovereign. Christ is seeing His purposes being fulfilled. Every scheme of the devil and every act of the flesh is being turned for the good of God’s purposes and the good of His people.

The great Puritan writer John Flavel states on the subject in his book ‘The Fountain of Life’, “He [Christ] rules and orders the kingdom of Providence by supporting, permitting, restraining, limiting, protecting, punishing and rewarding those over whom He reigns providentially.”

Ephesians 1:20-23 confirms that God hath “raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.”

Here again we have the proof that God “hath put all things under his feet” now. He has been raised from the dead, He now sits enthroned “far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion.” Notwithstanding, whilst Christ is currently reigning over His enemies since the resurrection He has still to see their final put down.

DurbanDude
Dec 16th 2008, 06:07 PM
Do you think He will leave Heaven to be a second David, a king on the throne in the little town of Jerusalem? I honestly cannot imagine such a thing. :confused

Kind regards,

Dik


I thought that you amills have already acknowledged the many many verses that refer to the Messiah ruling from Jerusalem and Mount Zion. You interpret them symbolically, as either in reference to the church in the current age , or literally if you think the verses refer to the New Jerusalem, but both amills and premills agree that there are many references to Jesus reigning in Jerusalem. Obviously this is a matter of interpretation, but I am surprised that you act that you haven't heard of the concept. It has been the understanding of the Jewish people since ancient times, and a major part of OT and NT, all over the place.

God himself chose to dwell there , with His actual presence in the actual Holy of holies for hundreds of years , God already chose to live with man , right there in Jerusalem.

DurbanDude
Dec 16th 2008, 06:19 PM
All things are under Christ's feet now. His enemies are currently being made His footstool. He reigns now over everything.

1 Corinthians 15:25-28 says, speaking of Christ’s current reign, “For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be hupotageé (Strong’s 5293) subdued (or subordinated) unto him (speaking of the Second Coming), then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.”

Whilst “all power” is now assuredly given unto Christ “in heaven and in earth” (Matthew 28:18) through His life, death and resurrection, and whilst through this victorious work, “he hath put all things under his feet” in a Sovereign manner, we have not yet seen the final subduing of wickedness. This assuredly comes at the Second Coming of the Lord. He is bringing everything to its final conclusion by Sovereignly ruling over mankind. Nothing happens without His permission. Satan or man cannot override the mind of Christ on the throne. What evil occurs, happens because the Lord in His infinite wisdom allows it.

There is nothing that is not under His control or influence. If it were otherwise then Satan or man would be sovereign. Christ is seeing His purposes being fulfilled. Every scheme of the devil and every act of the flesh is being turned for the good of God’s purposes and the good of His people.

The great Puritan writer John Flavel states on the subject in his book ‘The Fountain of Life’, “He [Christ] rules and orders the kingdom of Providence by supporting, permitting, restraining, limiting, protecting, punishing and rewarding those over whom He reigns providentially.”

Ephesians 1:20-23 confirms that God hath “raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.”

Here again we have the proof that God “hath put all things under his feet” now. He has been raised from the dead, He now sits enthroned “far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion.” Notwithstanding, whilst Christ is currently reigning over His enemies since the resurrection He has still to see their final put down.

wpm, I actually agree with you 100% in all you say here. I just highlighted those areas to emphasize to modanufu that although Jesus has ALL authority , there is still work to do.

modanufu
Dec 17th 2008, 04:03 PM
Hi DurbanDude,

"wpm" has done the work for me answering beautifully about one of my remarks. As to the other one --



I thought that you amills have already acknowledged the many many verses that refer to the Messiah ruling from Jerusalem and Mount Zion. You interpret them symbolically, as either in reference to the church in the current age , or literally if you think the verses refer to the New Jerusalem, but both amills and premills agree that there are many references to Jesus reigning in Jerusalem.


Of course I know of all those OT places but we now live in NT times and I prefer to explain them as the NT does, the Lord ruling in Heaven for ever and taking us there at the Second Coming. I do not see any Messianic future for an earthly Jerusalem.

John 14:2-3 In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

Kind regards,

Dik

RevLogos
Dec 18th 2008, 05:59 AM
All things are under Christ's feet now. His enemies are currently being made His footstool. He reigns now over everything.

1 Corinthians 15:25-28 says, speaking of Christ’s current reign, “For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be hupotageé (Strong’s 5293) subdued (or subordinated) unto him (speaking of the Second Coming), then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.”

Whilst “all power” is now assuredly given unto Christ “in heaven and in earth” (Matthew 28:18) through His life, death and resurrection, and whilst through this victorious work, “he hath put all things under his feet” in a Sovereign manner, we have not yet seen the final subduing of wickedness. This assuredly comes at the Second Coming of the Lord. He is bringing everything to its final conclusion by Sovereignly ruling over mankind. Nothing happens without His permission. Satan or man cannot override the mind of Christ on the throne. What evil occurs, happens because the Lord in His infinite wisdom allows it.



I agree as well. But to understand what is happening, it also helps to read the verses just before this:

1Co 15:20 But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.
1Co 15:21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man.
1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
1Co 15:23 But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.
1Co 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.

Pay special attention to 23 and 24. This is, very explicitly, the order of things:

Each in his own turn:
1) Christ, the firstfruits. Christ is the first to die and be resurrected to eternal life. As Paul says in 15:20, Christ is the firstfruit. His resurrection comes first.
2) Then when he comes, those who belong to him. When Christ returns, the "second coming", those who belong to him will be resurrected.
3) Then, the end comes. Note very carefully. Paul does not say "then, the millennium comes", he says the end comes. Why? Because there is no millennium.
4) All dominion, authority and power is destroyed; Christ hands the throne over to God. Christ reigns now. Christ is on the throne of the kingdom of God. This is judgment, all enemies are vanquished. There is no judgment before this. There is none after.

Now we see that He reigns now, spiritually, and will continue until the end:

1Co 15:25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.

This calls for wisdom: The Apocalypse of John tells us the same thing.

wpm
Dec 18th 2008, 06:11 AM
wpm, I actually agree with you 100% in all you say here. I just highlighted those areas to emphasize to modanufu that although Jesus has ALL authority , there is still work to do.

It is good to have agreement. :)

DurbanDude
Dec 18th 2008, 06:36 AM
I agree as well. But to understand what is happening, it also helps to read the verses just before this:

1Co 15:20 But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.
1Co 15:21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man.
1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
1Co 15:23 But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.
1Co 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.

Pay special attention to 23 and 24. This is, very explicitly, the order of things:


Revolvr , instead of paying special attentionto verse 23 and verse 24, lets look at all those verses:

v20 - 33 AD (Jesus Resurrection)
v21- 4000+BC (death through a man- Adam); 2000 + AD (resurrection of the dead)
v22- 4000+ BC (Adam) 2000+AD (all made alive)
v23- 33 AD THEN (HUGE GAP) 2000+AD
v24 2000+AD THEN the end will come

If you want to make a point about the timing of these significant events in history , the only conclusion is that there are HUGE GAPS between them all.

Adam to Christ, Christ to second coming (resurrection), resurrection to the end, an order of four separate events , and we know that the first three are seperated by thousands of years, what does that say about the fourth event?

RevLogos
Dec 18th 2008, 01:57 PM
Revolvr , instead of paying special attentionto verse 23 and verse 24, lets look at all those verses:

v20 - 33 AD (Jesus Resurrection)
v21- 4000+BC (death through a man- Adam); 2000 + AD (resurrection of the dead)
v22- 4000+ BC (Adam) 2000+AD (all made alive)
v23- 33 AD THEN (HUGE GAP) 2000+AD
v24 2000+AD THEN the end will come

If you want to make a point about the timing of these significant events in history , the only conclusion is that there are HUGE GAPS between them all.

Adam to Christ, Christ to second coming (resurrection), resurrection to the end, an order of four separate events , and we know that the first three are seperated by thousands of years, what does that say about the fourth event?


1Co 15:23 But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.
1Co 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.

V 23 starts with "This is the order of things". That mean what Paul is about to tell us is the events and their order. Right?

Next, Christ is resurrected. Right?

Next he has a phrase. The purpose of this phrase is to tell us there is some time between the resurrection and the next event. It qualifies when the next event occurs by "when he comes". Yes, when he comes the next event will occur.

Then what happens? Those in Christ are resurrected, then the end with final judgment. There are no qualifiers stating these are separate events that occur after some other event. But that isn't the only problem. The millennium is a separate event itself that is left out. You think Paul is hiding this? You think Paul would fail to mention a reign on this earth? Apparently.



It requires Paul speak of two different judgments with two different groups being judged, and possibly two different criteria. (Three judgments if you are pre-trib too). It requires Paul speak of an earthly kingdom. That's huge! Why does Paul fail to tell us of this earthly kingdom?

None of that is there! None!

DurbanDude
Dec 19th 2008, 06:17 AM
1Co 15:23 But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.
1Co 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.

V 23 starts with "This is the order of things". That mean what Paul is about to tell us is the events and their order. Right?

Next, Christ is resurrected. Right?

Next he has a phrase. The purpose of this phrase is to tell us there is some time between the resurrection and the next event. It qualifies when the next event occurs by "when he comes". Yes, when he comes the next event will occur.

Then what happens? Those in Christ are resurrected, then the end with final judgment. There are no qualifiers stating these are separate events that occur after some other event. But that isn't the only problem. The millennium is a separate event itself that is left out. You think Paul is hiding this? You think Paul would fail to mention a reign on this earth? Apparently.



Revolvr, you should read these verses carefully , especially the word "then".

What happens when he comes? Those that belong to Jesus will also be resurrected.
What happens NEXT? The end will come.
The qualifier is the word THEN. It's previous use two verses earlier indicated a large time gap, therefore its next usage can be interpreted as a large time gap too.



It requires Paul speak of two different judgments with two different groups being judged, and possibly two different criteria. (Three judgments if you are pre-trib too). It requires Paul speak of an earthly kingdom. That's huge! Why does Paul fail to tell us of this earthly kingdom?

None of that is there! None!

In these verses there is no mention of the period of Adam to Noah. There is no mention of the period of Christ's ministry. There is no mention of the crucifixion , just the resurrection of Christ. There is no mention of the church. There is no mention of the period AFTER "the end". (The new earth). I don't get your point at all, these verses aren't even trying to mention all events of spiritual significance. These verses do not describe the amill interpretation of the church age , these events do not indicate anything about the church age overlapping the millenium. These verses are not speaking of even the one judgement of the amills.

I should start using the argument that whenever you use a verse to support your view it must state every aspect of the amill view in that particular verse. I would never do that , but maybe if I did you would start to see that an argument like that is making no significant point. It is fundamentally illogical to argue like that...

4 Major spiritual events are mentioned:

1)Adam's sin
2)Christs Coming THEN
3)Christ's second coming together with the resurrection THEN
4)The End

The first three are seperated by thousands of years.

The seperation of the last three events by the use of the word "then" gives us a sense of sequence, not a sense of duration.

Just the fact that event 2 and 3 are separated by the word "then", and yet we know are thousands of years apart, means we CANNOT make the assumption from this particular verse that the last two events separated by the word "then" are immediately consecutive. They most likely are also be separated by thousands of years.

Anyway, I've already repeated myself here, when my point was clear enough and logical enough in the previous post. If you don't get it or don't acknowledge my point, no use in us repeating ourselves.

I personally see no argument supporting the amill viewpoint in 1 Cor 15:20-24. I agree with the placing of the Davidic Kingdom at the resurrection and see this as part of the pre-mill viewpoint that Christ does reign from His resurrection onwards. The argument concerning the phrase "the last day" that amills use; I see as confirmation that the second coming is the great separation of the resurrected saints from the rest, and is therefore the last day of the age, and in no way contradicts the pre-mill view.

Raybob
Dec 19th 2008, 07:02 AM
Revolvr, you should read these verses carefully , especially the word "then".

What happens when he comes? Those that belong to Jesus will also be resurrected.
What happens NEXT? The end will come.
The qualifier is the word THEN. It's previous use two verses earlier indicated a large time gap, therefore its next usage can be interpreted as a large time gap too.
What translation are you using? The KJV and even the Greek have different wording.:

1Co 15:23-24 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. (24) Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.


In these verses there is no mention of the period of Adam to Noah. There is no mention of the period of Christ's ministry. There is no mention of the crucifixion , just the resurrection of Christ. There is no mention of the church.Who do you think "they that are Christ's at his coming" are if not the church?

There is no mention of the period AFTER "the end". (The new earth).Everyone already knew about that from Isaiah 65. Why does it need repeating when it's found in many other places in scriptue?



I should start using the argument that whenever you use a verse to support your view it must state every aspect of the amill view in that particular verse. I would never do that , but maybe if I did you would start to see that an argument like that is making no significant point. It is fundamentally illogical to argue like that...You would have a much harder time trying to prove pre-mill with every aspect in any one passage of scripture.

Raybob

DurbanDude
Dec 19th 2008, 07:50 AM
What translation are you using? The KJV and even the Greek have different wording.:

1Co 15:23-24 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. (24) Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.



I was using the translation that Revolvr quoted in an earlier post.

I was referring to the part that I have now highlighted in RED. This clearly indicates that those that are Christ's will be resurrected at His coming. THEN cometh the end.

The actual word translated as THEN in verse 24 is εἶτα in Greek, meaning next or after that which has a similar meaning as "afterward" as per verse 23. The word is used in enumerations, to mark a sequence. So no matter what translation you use, this is a sequence of events , and the wording does not indicate that the end is the same time as the second coming. The end is AFTER the second coming according to this verse.






Everyone already knew about that from Isaiah 65. Why does it need repeating when it's found in many other places in scriptue?


I noticed you missed my point here completely. My point was to require that there should be a lot of support for one's viewpoint in every verse is an illogical requirement. All of our views are supported elsewhere, the bible never tries to list every end-time event every time, we all know this.




You would have a much harder time trying to prove pre-mill with every aspect in any one passage of scripture.


I was just pointing out that it is illogical to argue in that way. To compare whose view would be better supported by an illogical argument is an illogical argument in itself.

wpm
Dec 19th 2008, 03:11 PM
Revolvr, you should read these verses carefully , especially the word "then".

What happens when he comes? Those that belong to Jesus will also be resurrected.
What happens NEXT? The end will come.
The qualifier is the word THEN. It's previous use two verses earlier indicated a large time gap, therefore its next usage can be interpreted as a large time gap too.


In these verses there is no mention of the period of Adam to Noah. There is no mention of the period of Christ's ministry. There is no mention of the crucifixion , just the resurrection of Christ. There is no mention of the church. There is no mention of the period AFTER "the end". (The new earth). I don't get your point at all, these verses aren't even trying to mention all events of spiritual significance. These verses do not describe the amill interpretation of the church age , these events do not indicate anything about the church age overlapping the millenium. These verses are not speaking of even the one judgement of the amills.

I should start using the argument that whenever you use a verse to support your view it must state every aspect of the amill view in that particular verse. I would never do that , but maybe if I did you would start to see that an argument like that is making no significant point. It is fundamentally illogical to argue like that...

4 Major spiritual events are mentioned:

1)Adam's sin
2)Christs Coming THEN
3)Christ's second coming together with the resurrection THEN
4)The End

The first three are seperated by thousands of years.

The seperation of the last three events by the use of the word "then" gives us a sense of sequence, not a sense of duration.

Just the fact that event 2 and 3 are separated by the word "then", and yet we know are thousands of years apart, means we CANNOT make the assumption from this particular verse that the last two events separated by the word "then" are immediately consecutive. They most likely are also be separated by thousands of years.

Anyway, I've already repeated myself here, when my point was clear enough and logical enough in the previous post. If you don't get it or don't acknowledge my point, no use in us repeating ourselves.

I personally see no argument supporting the amill viewpoint in 1 Cor 15:20-24. I agree with the placing of the Davidic Kingdom at the resurrection and see this as part of the pre-mill viewpoint that Christ does reign from His resurrection onwards. The argument concerning the phrase "the last day" that amills use; I see as confirmation that the second coming is the great separation of the resurrected saints from the rest, and is therefore the last day of the age, and in no way contradicts the pre-mill view.

The only problem is, there is no millennial kingdom mentioned here in-between the Coming of Christ and the end. This is a constant difficulty with your school of thought in my view. The inspired OT and NT writers didn't seem to recognise this supposed future golden age. To them the Coming of Christ was all-consummating. In my opinion, Paul the Apostle would obviously have inserted a future millennium here if it was there - but it is not in the text. Your argument re Adam and Christ to me is missing the application. This is not talking about past events as you claim, but a future reality. Every man will either be found when Jesus comes "in Adam" (those who only have one birth) or "in Christ" (those who have experienced the new birth). These are not simply past events as you are making it out but ongoing realities for all men. To be "in Adam" is simply to remain unsaved. To be "in Christ" is simply to say someone is saved.

Raybob
Dec 19th 2008, 04:27 PM
I was using the translation that Revolvr quoted in an earlier post.

I was referring to the part that I have now highlighted in RED. This clearly indicates that those that are Christ's will be resurrected at His coming. THEN cometh the end.

The actual word translated as THEN in verse 24 is εἶτα in Greek, meaning next or after that which has a similar meaning as "afterward" as per verse 23. The word is used in enumerations, to mark a sequence. So no matter what translation you use, this is a sequence of events , and the wording does not indicate that the end is the same time as the second coming. The end is AFTER the second coming according to this verse.

Amen. The next thing is THE END. The end is "when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power." That leaves no room for any time for Satan to surround any camp of the saints.

Raybob

RevLogos
Dec 20th 2008, 12:11 AM
The only problem is, there is no millennial kingdom mentioned here in-between the Coming of Christ and the end. This is a constant difficulty with your school of thought in my view. The inspired OT and NT writers didn't seem to recognise this supposed future golden age. To them the Coming of Christ was all-consummating. In my opinion, Paul the Apostle would obviously have inserted a future millennium here if it was there - but it is not in the text. Your argument re Adam and Christ to me is missing the application. This is not talking about past events as you claim, but a future reality. Every man will either be found when Jesus comes "in Adam" (those who only have one birth) or "in Christ" (those who have experienced the new birth). These are not simply past events as you are making it out but ongoing realities for all men. To be "in Adam" is simply to remain unsaved. To be "in Christ" is simply to say someone is saved.

The notion of a millennial reign of Christ on earth is huge. Really, it isn't something to be missed. Even if I accept, for the sake of argument, the possibility of a giant gap between the second coming and the end, we are still left with a giant gap. The Premil would have to explain why Paul left this out.

Is there some belief behind the belief in all this? Does the Premil view require progressive revelation? Seems that it does, but that is not what DD and the others argue. The argument is that just because it isn't mentioned anywhere in the Gospels or epistles, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

wpm
Dec 20th 2008, 02:57 AM
The notion of a millennial reign of Christ on earth is huge. Really, it isn't something to be missed. Even if I accept, for the sake of argument, the possibility of a giant gap between the second coming and the end, we are still left with a giant gap. The Premil would have to explain why Paul left this out.

Is there some belief behind the belief in all this? Does the Premil view require progressive revelation? Seems that it does, but that is not what DD and the others argue. The argument is that just because it isn't mentioned anywhere in the Gospels or epistles, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

If "progressive revelation" was the retort then it must surely evaporate when we consider the complete, full and absolute knowledge the Son of God possessed during His earthly ministry. He needed no further revelation or insight into what followed His return. He knew everything that there was to know, and created everything that was created. He talked and taught much during His life and we have some incredible detail about His return, yet there is not the slightest hint of a parenthesis period of 1,000 yrs or any long period in-between the Second Coming and the NHNE. Why did He not talk about this golden age of unprecedented glory? I still ask myself after 8 yrs of migrating from Premil: what is the point of it? Why would He bring the saints that have been rescued from this old wicked world and re-introduce them to it with all its sin, death, corruption, hatred and war?

Raybob
Dec 20th 2008, 03:13 AM
...I still ask myself after 8 yrs of migrating from Premil: what is the point of it? Why would He bring the saints that have been rescued from this old wicked world and re-introduce them to it with all its sin, death, corruption, hatred and war?

That was my final straw that let me go of pre-mill about 7 years ago. What would be the point? Then I thought of that old song, "When we've been there 10,000 years, we've only just begun."

Raybob

DurbanDude
Dec 20th 2008, 07:44 AM
Amen. The next thing is THE END. The end is "when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power." That leaves no room for any time for Satan to surround any camp of the saints.

Raybob

???? :hmm:

Raybob, I see the others have moved on to other arguments.

I already explained all this. The first 3 events are thousands of years apart. Then the fourth comes. Do your own maths. Rather just face it, in this particular set of verses there just is no amill argument. Just like the next thing described after the resurrection of Jesus, is the second coming, yet no mention is made that they are thousands of years apart, in the very same manner these verses describe the "end" coming AFTER the second coming.

DurbanDude
Dec 20th 2008, 08:17 AM
The notion of a millennial reign of Christ on earth is huge. Really, it isn't something to be missed. Even if I accept, for the sake of argument, the possibility of a giant gap between the second coming and the end, we are still left with a giant gap. The Premil would have to explain why Paul left this out.

Is there some belief behind the belief in all this? Does the Premil view require progressive revelation? Seems that it does, but that is not what DD and the others argue. The argument is that just because it isn't mentioned anywhere in the Gospels or epistles, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

The millenial reign is described in those various verses that amills don't seem to want to discuss , those verses mentioned in this very thread. They describe how AFTER the Messiah comes to Mount Zion to restore Israel, the earth will have many desolate regions, there will be a time of peace with no war, there will be survivors from the nations who will be ruled with an iron rod. Jerusalem will be especially blessed and have no sin. There are LITERALLY HUNDREDS of verses that describe this period and I have nearly BEGGED to get a decent discussion going that remains focussed on those verses without side issues. I also have had NO logical response from amills concerning MOST of the verses mentioned. I have started whole threads trying to get each verse discussed. Rather amills bring up other arguments instead of remaining focussed, EVERY time.

A future survival of earth after the coming of the Messiah to Jerusalem and to Mount Zion to restore all things is a clear and undeniable doctrine.

1) You have the right to interpret those verses as less literal and referring to the church age, but everyone who reads them can make up their own mind. I have read them and DEFINITELY see those verses as literal.

2) Your own interpretation has got to explain all these verses correctly and in their context and fit in with your own beliefs. I haven't seen any explanations that even fit in with amills own beliefs.

SOME of these verse are ............................:


Whole chapters of:
Zechariah 12,13
Zechariah 14
Joel 3
Zephaiah 1/2/3
Exekiel 38/39

Verse Rev 19:15

This is just a starting point, then there are many more verses to discuss that refer to there being some continuous survival in various places after the Messiah comes to rule in Jerusalem.

So in my opinion there are MANY verses that shows that the earth or mortals survive the second coming, then there are other verses that refer to the complete new earth. So the doctrine of another period of physical Messianic reign on earth until the new earth is a clear and well supported doctrine.

wpm
Dec 20th 2008, 02:59 PM
???? :hmm:

Raybob, I see the others have moved on to other arguments.

I already explained all this. The first 3 events are thousands of years apart. Then the fourth comes. Do your own maths. Rather just face it, in this particular set of verses there just is no amill argument. Just like the next thing described after the resurrection of Jesus, is the second coming, yet no mention is made that they are thousands of years apart, in the very same manner these verses describe the "end" coming AFTER the second coming.

Durbandude, I actually addressed that. The issue is: there is no millennial kingdom mentioned here in-between the Coming of Christ and the end. I feel your argument re Adam and Christ is weak. This is not talking about past events as you claim, but a future reality. Every man will either be found when Jesus comes "in Adam" (those who only have one birth) or "in Christ" (those who have experienced the new birth). These are not simply past events as you are making it out but ongoing realities for all men. To be "in Adam" is simply to remain unsaved. To be "in Christ" is simply to say someone is saved.

DurbanDude
Dec 20th 2008, 03:10 PM
The only problem is, there is no millennial kingdom mentioned here in-between the Coming of Christ and the end. .

wpm , I was in no way trying to use 1 Cor 15:20-24 as a support for pre-millenialism. Revolvr initiated these verses for the purpose of using them as a support for amillenialism. I've explained my viewpoint, how these verses are not a support for amillenalism. If we are to deduce duration rather than just sequence from these verses then they would support pre-millenialism, but I am prepared to say that they are a sequence of 4 major events and leave it at that.

But to hear amills try to squeeze an amill proof text out of a verse like this is a bit baffling, and not too logical.

DurbanDude
Dec 20th 2008, 03:17 PM
Durbandude, I actually addressed that. The issue is: there is no millennial kingdom mentioned here in-between the Coming of Christ and the end. I feel your argument re Adam and Christ is weak. This is not talking about past events as you claim, but a future reality. Every man will either be found when Jesus comes "in Adam" (those who only have one birth) or "in Christ" (those who have experienced the new birth). These are not simply past events as you are making it out but ongoing realities for all men. To be "in Adam" is simply to remain unsaved. To be "in Christ" is simply to say someone is saved.
Explained above. Revolvr was using this as an amill proof text,I wasn't trying to use this as a premill proof text. There is no proof of immediacy between the second coming and the "end", therefore this is not an amill proof text.

wpm
Dec 20th 2008, 03:46 PM
Explained above. Revolvr was using this as an amill proof text,I wasn't trying to use this as a premill proof text. There is no proof of immediacy between the second coming and the "end", therefore this is not an amill proof text.

A straight-forward reading of this passage shows a climactic Coming of Christ. The Coming of the Lord, described in this reading, is here located at “the end.” In fact, the whole tenure of the passage is distinctly pointing to a climactic time in history when God separates righteousness and wickedness forever. It is the occasion approaching when Christ finally presents “up the kingdom to God” and will have, as He promised, “put down all rule and all authority and power.” Simultaneously, the glorification of the kingdom of God sees the destruction of the kingdom of darkness. It is the end-game for Satan and the conclusion of his evil efforts to obstruct the plan of God for mankind. Wickedness has finally and eternally been abolished.

wpm
Dec 20th 2008, 04:02 PM
The millenial reign is described in those various verses that amills don't seem to want to discuss , those verses mentioned in this very thread. They describe how AFTER the Messiah comes to Mount Zion to restore Israel, the earth will have many desolate regions, there will be a time of peace with no war, there will be survivors from the nations who will be ruled with an iron rod. Jerusalem will be especially blessed and have no sin. There are LITERALLY HUNDREDS of verses that describe this period and I have nearly BEGGED to get a decent discussion going that remains focussed on those verses without side issues. I also have had NO logical response from amills concerning MOST of the verses mentioned. I have started whole threads trying to get each verse discussed. Rather amills bring up other arguments instead of remaining focussed, EVERY time.

A future survival of earth after the coming of the Messiah to Jerusalem and to Mount Zion to restore all things is a clear and undeniable doctrine.

1) You have the right to interpret those verses as less literal and referring to the church age, but everyone who reads them can make up their own mind. I have read them and DEFINITELY see those verses as literal.

2) Your own interpretation has got to explain all these verses correctly and in their context and fit in with your own beliefs. I haven't seen any explanations that even fit in with amills own beliefs.

SOME of these verse are ............................:


Whole chapters of:
Zechariah 12,13
Zechariah 14
Joel 3
Zephaiah 1/2/3
Exekiel 38/39

Verse Rev 19:15

This is just a starting point, then there are many more verses to discuss that refer to there being some continuous survival in various places after the Messiah comes to rule in Jerusalem.

So in my opinion there are MANY verses that shows that the earth or mortals survive the second coming, then there are other verses that refer to the complete new earth. So the doctrine of another period of physical Messianic reign on earth until the new earth is a clear and well supported doctrine.

I don't see how these texts correlate to produce a Premil understanding. In fact when you compare these Premil proof-texts they seem to be saying conflicting things. Let us look at some of the apparent conflicts.

Premil argues that Megiddo is the actual meeting place for the beast's army before the final attack upon Jerusalem. They identify this war as the beast's attack on physical Jerusalem. There are several reasons why I reject this proposal.

1. There is no mention of Megiddo in Rev 19, as Premils suggest.
2. There are only 2 peoples in this world - saved and lost. The saved belong to the Lord's army the wicked belong to the beast's.

After “the marriage of the Lamb” (Revelation 19:7), which is the glorification of the saints of all time (including the dead in Christ and the live in Christ), the saints return as an army (following Christ) to destroy the wicked.

John sees “heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True … And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean” (11-14).

3. The beast's army is totally destroyed in Rev 19. There are no wicked to inherit the millennium, as Premil contends. They are wiped. Everyone left behind will be completely consumed; the birds of heaven filling themselves with “the flesh of all men.” Significantly, the suffix “both free and bond, both small and great” is added in order to fully impress the enormity and all-inclusive nature of this feast.

Christ is seen pouring out His wrath without mixture upon the nations as He smites them in His fury with “a sharp sword” that comes “out of his mouth.” He destroys them by the very utterance[s] of His mouth. He then “treadeth (or tramples) the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.”

The two words interpreted “fierceness” and “wrath” here are thumos and orge which are regularly employed in the New Testament to mean ‘fierceness, indignation, wrath, indignation and vengeance’. The word orge carries the additional meaning of ‘violent passion’. Clearly the Lord is not happy with those left behind. Like those left behind in Noah’s day and Sodom they face an awful end, as they receive the reward of their rejection of Christ.

The picture being portrayed here is that of the grapes being crushed by the vineyard worker making wine. The reference to “the winepress” is symbolic language denoting the fate of the wicked when Christ appears – that is why it is called “the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.” The Christ-rejecter misses the catching away, and is consequently trampled underfoot like grapes being crushed in a winepress. The grapes are the disobedient of all nations.

How can these rebels possibly escape such a furious end? True judgment and righteousness has now arrived in the form of Christ and the glorified saints. Like every other Second Coming passage, this is climactic language describing the final end of rebellious man.

4. Zechariah shows the armies of the wicked/beast surviving. This is where I believe your view hits problems. In fact I feel proof-texts conflict with each other.

A Premil understanding of Zechariah 14:18-19 has the heathen nations coming to the feast of tabernacles after the Second Coming, saying, "And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles."

I feel Premil hits another difficulty in locating Zechariah 14:18-19 at the Second Advent - because Egypt survives the Second Advent in the Premil paradigm and is ushered into a future millennial kingdom. However, Joel 3 refers to the complete destruction that accompanies Christ’s Coming.

Premillennialism overlooks the detail contained within Joel 3:15-19 that proves the Second Advent is all-consummating, saying, “The sun and the moon shall be darkened, and the stars shall withdraw their shining. The LORD also shall roar out of Zion, and utter his voice from Jerusalem; and the heavens and the earth shall shake:but the LORD will be the hope of his people, and the strength of the children of Israel. So shall ye know that I am the LORD your God dwelling in Zion, my holy mountain: then shall Jerusalem be holy, and there shall no strangers pass through her any more. And it shall come to pass in that day, that the mountains shall drop down new wine, and the hills shall flow with milk, and all the rivers of Judah shall flow with waters, and a fountain shall come forth of the house of the LORD, and shall water the valley of ****tim. Egypt shall be a desolation.”

Joel 3 shows the destruction of Egypt at the Coming of Christ.

5. With a Premil interpretation and location of Zech 14, the armies that assault Israel would be rewarded for their attack on Jerusalem by being ushered unto the new earth.

Joel 3:29 tells us that at the 2nd Coming, Egypt is destroyed. How can they escape the winepress of the wrath of Almighty God when Christ returned in flaming vengeance?

RevLogos
Dec 20th 2008, 06:08 PM
Whole chapters of:
Zechariah 12,13
Zechariah 14
Joel 3
Zephaiah 1/2/3
Exekiel 38/39

Verse Rev 19:15



Well, I think we're making a little progress here. At least the Premil view acknowledges there is nothing in the Gospels or epistles that supports the Premil view. The argument is a negative one: scripture does not disprove it.

Rev 19:15 says Jesus rules and vanquishes all enemies. It doesn't say He reigns from a throne in Jerusalem on earth. Neither does Rev 20 for that matter.

Premil has a very Jewish interpretation of OT prophesy.

1Co 2:6 We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing.
1Co 2:7 No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began.
1Co 2:8 None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

The mystery Paul speaks of is just that. The Jews were looking for an earthly reign. As a result, they could not see Jesus for who He was. The rulers of that age didn't understand it. As a result they crucified their savior.

In the end-times, a new ruler will appear. A ruler who promises a new world order, a New Age of peace and prosperity. Will this be Jesus? Or is it the False Prophet?

In the temptation in the desert, Satan offers Jesus an earthly kingdom.

Mat 4:8 Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor.
Mat 4:9 "All this I will give you," he said, "if you will bow down and worship me."

Jesus rejects this! He says in Mat 4:10 "Away from me, Satan! For it is written: 'Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.'"

DurbanDude
Dec 20th 2008, 10:12 PM
A straight-forward reading of this passage shows a climactic Coming of Christ. The Coming of the Lord, described in this reading, is here located at “the end.”.

No wpm,

The coming of Christ in 1 Cor 15:20-24 is located BEFORE the end with a straightforward reading of this passage. There is 100% clarity on this, both in English and in Greek.

wpm
Dec 20th 2008, 10:49 PM
There is 100% clarity on this, both in English and in Greek.

I agree with this statement. 1 Corinthians 15:22-24 tells us that “all rule and all authority and power” are finally “put down” or katargeésee or abolished at the “Coming” or parousia of the Lord, which is confirmed as “the end.” The kingdom of God is finally and eternally presented “up,” whereas the kingdom of darkness is finally and eternally “put down.” It is this all-consummating last day that ushers in the end (or completion) of all things.

DurbanDude
Dec 20th 2008, 11:30 PM
I don't see how these texts correlate to produce a Premil understanding. In fact when you compare these Premil proof-texts they seem to be saying conflicting things. Let us look at some of the apparent conflicts.

Premil argues that Megiddo is the actual meeting place for the beast's army before the final attack upon Jerusalem. They identify this war as the beast's attack on physical Jerusalem. There are several reasons why I reject this proposal.

1. There is no mention of Megiddo in Rev 19, as Premils suggest.
2. There are only 2 peoples in this world - saved and lost. The saved belong to the Lord's army the wicked belong to the beast's.

After “the marriage of the Lamb” (Revelation 19:7), which is the glorification of the saints of all time (including the dead in Christ and the live in Christ), the saints return as an army (following Christ) to destroy the wicked.

John sees “heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True … And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean” (11-14).

3. The beast's army is totally destroyed in Rev 19. There are no wicked to inherit the millennium, as Premil contends. They are wiped. Everyone left behind will be completely consumed; the birds of heaven filling themselves with “the flesh of all men.” Significantly, the suffix “both free and bond, both small and great” is added in order to fully impress the enormity and all-inclusive nature of this feast.


My answer to your point No.1) :
The placename of the final battle before the second coming isn't central to premill beliefs. I don't understand what point you are trying to make here. Rev 16:10-21 which mentions Armageddon can be associated with the second coming, I am sure you would agree that this is also a second coming passage that can be associated with Rev 19, what is your opinion on this? Do you associate the Armageddon war and the war of Rev 19 with the second coming?

2) Agreed that all the saved are part of the Lord's army. Not all pre-mills would agree here, but I do. As for all the unsaved being part of the beast's army,I have never even heard of this. all nations send an army to Israel, but all individuals do not go there. The bible is clear , one will be harvesting , they will be getting married etc etc and that day will surprise them all. Except for the great war in Israel, life will be carrying on as usual.

3)This is where you misunderstand premill beliefs, and I have explained this to you before. The entire earth's population IS NOT in Israel for the war. The entire beast's army IS destroyed, the survivors on earth are NOT part of the beast's army. The phrase , the flesh of all men., in its context applies ONLY to all the different types of men gathered in Israel for that war. There is no contradiction here. And as you are aware, premills have various views on who survives into the millenium, my particular view is that there are unsaved mortals who survive.



Christ is seen pouring out His wrath without mixture upon the nations as He smites them in His fury with “a sharp sword” that comes “out of his mouth.” He destroys them by the very utterance[s] of His mouth. He then “treadeth (or tramples) the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.”


There is nothing in all you say to indicate a complete destruction of mankind. There is an earthquake, mountains removed, worldwide destruction, but a few survivors, this is biblical. You listed your opinions on how you feel no-one can survive God's angry wrath, but I need bible verses, not opinion. I feel the destruction will be world-wide, and very intense, but there will be a few survivors.

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.

Zech 14:16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.14:17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain. 14:18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles..



4. Zechariah shows the armies of the wicked/beast surviving. This is where I believe your view hits problems. In fact I feel proof-texts conflict with each other.

A Premil understanding of Zechariah 14:18-19 has the heathen nations coming to the feast of tabernacles after the Second Coming, saying, "And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles."

I feel Premil hits another difficulty in locating Zechariah 14:18-19 at the Second Advent - because Egypt survives the Second Advent in the Premil paradigm and is ushered into a future millennial kingdom. However, Joel 3 refers to the complete destruction that accompanies Christ’s Coming.



Joel 3 shows the destruction of Egypt at the Coming of Christ.


I believe at the second coming , most of earth will be desolate. The descriptions of the day of wrath are pretty clear on the world-wide destruction. Imagine every mountain laid low. At the second coming the bible speaks of how few the survivors are, and yet later speaks of how there will be nations throughout the earth. Regions originally desolate are be re-populated, this is no contradiction , but obvious.

Both passages you quoted are actually contradictions to the amill viewpoint and not contradictions to the premill viewpoint.

Zech
14:8 And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.14:9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.

THEN:
14:16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles. 14:17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.14:18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.

These passages show that when the Lord reigns from Jerusalem there will be surviving "heathen" nations (not Israel). They will have consequences if they do not worship the Lord, they will be living under a rule of discipline.

A) this does not fit in with an amill view of this current age , where the church is Israel , and the rest of the nations do not worship the Lord at all. How would many of the heathen nations in this current age be worshipping the Lord at the feast of tabernacles? I would like to hear an amills interpretation of these verses as referring to the current church age.

B) this does not fit into an amill view of the new earth, because the new earth does not have any "heathen" there, because all are spiritually of Israel.

I really would like to know how Zech 14 fits ANY amill age, BC, church age, or new earth. But then you must explain the existence of the heathen nations who worship the Lord or have no rain.

How do you explain how places like ****tim, Egypt and Edom still exist after the Lord reigns in Jerusalem?
Joel 3:17 So shall ye know that I am the LORD your God dwelling in Zion, my holy mountain: then shall Jerusalem be holy, and there shall no strangers pass through her any more.3:18 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the mountains shall drop down new wine, and the hills shall flow with milk, and all the rivers of Judah shall flow with waters, and a fountain shall come forth out of the house of the LORD, and shall water the valley of ****tim.
3:19 Egypt shall be a desolation, and Edom shall be a desolate wilderness, for the violence against the children of Judah, because they have shed innocent blood in their land.





5. With a Premil interpretation and location of Zech 14, the armies that assault Israel would be rewarded for their attack on Jerusalem by being ushered unto the new earth.


No , the premill view is that these armies are destroyed. My view is that the survivors are from elsewhere around the world.

wpm
Dec 21st 2008, 12:42 AM
My answer to your point No.1) :
The placename of the final battle before the second coming isn't central to premill beliefs. I don't understand what point you are trying to make here. Rev 16:10-21 which mentions Armageddon can be associated with the second coming, I am sure you would agree that this is also a second coming passage that can be associated with Rev 19, what is your opinion on this? Do you associate the Armageddon war and the war of Rev 19 with the second coming?

2) Agreed. Not all pre-mills would agree here, but I do.

3)This is where you misunderstand premill beliefs, and I have explained this to you before. The entire earth's population IS NOT in Israel for the war. The entire beast's army IS destroyed, the survivors on earth are NOT part of the beast's army. The phrase , the flesh of all men., in its context applies ONLY to all the different types of men gathered in Israel for that war. There is no contradiction here. And as you are aware, premills have various views on who survives into the millenium, my particular view is that there are unsaved mortals who survive.



There is nothing in all you say to indicate a complete destruction of mankind. There is an earthquake, mountains removed, worldwide destruction, but a few survivors, this is biblical. You listed your opinions on how you feel no-one can survive God's angry wrath, but I need bible verses, not opinion. I feel the destruction will be world-wide, and very intense, but there will be a few survivors.

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.

Zech 14:16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.14:17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain. 14:18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles..



I believe at the second coming , most of earth will be desolate. The descriptions of the day of wrath are pretty clear on the world-wide destruction. Imagine every mountain laid low. At the second coming the bible speaks of how few the survivors are, and yet later speaks of how there will be nations throughout the earth. Regions originally desolate are be re-populated, this is no contradiction , but obvious.

Both passages you quoted are actually contradictions to the amill viewpoint and not contradictions to the premill viewpoint.

Zech
14:8 And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.14:9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.

THEN:
14:16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles. 14:17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.14:18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.

These passages show that when the Lord reigns from Jerusalem there will be surviving "heathen" nations (not Israel). They will have consequences if they do not worship the Lord, they will be living under a rule of discipline.

A) this does not fit in with an amill view of this current age , where the church is Israel , and the rest of the nations do not worship the Lord at all. How would many of the heathen nations in this current age be worshipping the Lord at the feast of tabernacles? I would like to hear an amills interpretation of these verses as referring to the current church age.

B) this does not fit into an amill view of the new earth, because the new earth does not have any "heathen" there, because all are spiritually of Israel.

I really would like to know how Zech 14 fits ANY amill age, BC, church age, or new earth. But then you must explain the existence of the heathen nations who worship the Lord or have no rain.

How do you explain how places like ****tim, Egypt and Edom still exist after the Lord reigns in Jerusalem?
Joel 3:17 So shall ye know that I am the LORD your God dwelling in Zion, my holy mountain: then shall Jerusalem be holy, and there shall no strangers pass through her any more.3:18 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the mountains shall drop down new wine, and the hills shall flow with milk, and all the rivers of Judah shall flow with waters, and a fountain shall come forth out of the house of the LORD, and shall water the valley of ****tim.
3:19 Egypt shall be a desolation, and Edom shall be a desolate wilderness, for the violence against the children of Judah, because they have shed innocent blood in their land.





No , the premill view is that these armies are destroyed. My view is that the survivors are from elsewhere around the world.

If one is either of the beast's army or the Lord's army, then we agree that the beast's army are totally destroyed. Where is one single survivor in Revelation 19? They are none. The wicked are destroyed in Revelation 19 like they are in every other end-time reading. This contradicts Zechariah 14 that has the beast's army being ushered into the millennial age (those who came against Jerusalem). By the way, Revelation 16 doesn’t mention that there is a battle at Megiddo, simply that this is where the enemy gathers. Amils take this as symbolic language for the great end-time conflict between good and evil. Don't forget Revelation is a highly symbolic book that employs many physical Old Testament symbols and places to impress many different spiritual New Testament truths.

Joel 3 (as I have showed), Zephaniah 1:2-18 and Zephaniah 3:8-9 are Second Coming readings but they show all the wicked dead also - just like Rev 19.

Zephaniah 1:2-18 says, “I will utterly consume all things from off the land, saith the LORD. I will consume man and beast; I will consume the fowls of the heaven, and the fishes of the sea, and the stumblingblocks with the wicked; and I will cut off man from off the land, saith the LORD. I will also stretch out mine hand upon Judah, and upon all the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and I will cut off the remnant of Baal from this place, and the name of the Chemarims with the priests; And them that worship the host of heaven upon the housetops; and them that worship and that swear by the LORD, and that swear by Malcham; And them that are turned back from the LORD; and those that have not sought the LORD, nor inquired for him. Hold thy peace at the presence of the Lord GOD: for the day of the LORD is at hand: for the LORD hath prepared a sacrifice, he hath bid his guests. And it shall come to pass in the day of the LORD's sacrifice, that I will punish the princes, and the king's children, and all such as are clothed with strange apparel.
9 In the same day also will I punish all those that leap on the threshold, which fill their masters' houses with violence and deceit. And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD, that there shall be the noise of a cry from the fish gate, and an howling from the second, and a great crashing from the hills. Howl, ye inhabitants of Maktesh, for all the merchant people are cut down; all they that bear silver are cut off. And it shall come to pass at that time, that I will search Jerusalem with candles, and punish the men that are settled on their lees: that say in their heart, The LORD will not do good, neither will he do evil. Therefore their goods shall become a booty, and their houses a desolation: they shall also build houses, but not inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, but not drink the wine thereof. The great day of the LORD is near, it is near, and hasteth greatly, even the voice of the day of the LORD: the mighty man shall cry there bitterly. That day is a day of wrath, a day of trouble and distress, a day of wasteness and desolation, a day of darkness and gloominess, a day of clouds and thick darkness, A day of the trumpet and alarm against the fenced cities, and against the high towers. And I will bring distress upon men, that they shall walk like blind men, because they have sinned against the LORD: and their blood shall be poured out as dust, and their flesh as the dung. Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them in the day of the LORD's wrath; but the whole land shall be devoured by the fire of his jealousy: for he shall make even a speedy riddance of all them that dwell in the land.”

Zephaniah 3:8-9 states: “wait ye upon me, saith the LORD, until the day that I rise up to the prey: for my determination is to gather the nations, that I may assemble the kingdoms, to pour upon them mine indignation, even all my fierce anger: for all the earth shall be devoured with the fire of my jealousy. For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the LORD, to serve him with one consent.”

Again, you haven't reconciled the conflict of Egypt's obliteration in Joel 3 and the resurrection and entry into your millennial kingdom in Zech 14. Remember these are the Premil proof-texts and they can't even correlate. This is not even talking about the many other passages in Scripture that show a complete destruction of the wicked at the end.

Who are these millennial inheritors and what qualifies them to inherit the kingdom age in their sinful state and in their corruptible bodies? Please answer this.

DurbanDude
Dec 21st 2008, 01:12 AM
Well, I think we're making a little progress here. At least the Premil view acknowledges there is nothing in the Gospels or epistles that supports the Premil view. The argument is a negative one: scripture does not disprove it.

I believe there is not much written about the period of the Messianic kingdom on earth in the epistles because the spiritual kingdom of God is more important. Our destiny, good or bad, is sealed at the second coming. I agree with amills on this. This is not a completely standard pre-mill belief, but is my own belief.

There are a few references in the gospels to this period:

Jews were waiting for the Messiah , who was known as the "son of man". When the "son of man" came he was expected to establish Israel and Jerusalem as his throne over all the earth. This is when the kingdom of God was expected.

When Jesus was asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God should come, He strangely gives them two answers, the first answer was explaining how the kingdom of God is a spiritual kingdom , it is "inside you". Then he gives an additional answer to His disciples. Jesus was talking to Jews here about the future predicted kingdom of God. These Jews had a full understanding of the coming of the "son of man" and He was explaining to them that even though they would be in the spiritual kingdom of God, they would still "desire the days of the son of man" at the very visible second coming.


Luke 17:20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
17:22 And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it.
17:23 And they shall say to you, See here; or, see there: go not after them, nor follow them.
17:24 For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day.
17:25 But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation.

Jesus spoke of a future reward for the disciples for humility and obedience, when there would be a kingdom and the disciples would judge the twelve tribes:
Luke 22:29 And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me;
22:30 That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.




Rev 19:15 says Jesus rules and vanquishes all enemies. It doesn't say He reigns from a throne in Jerusalem on earth. Neither does Rev 20 for that matter.


No , Rev 19 says Jesus strikes the natios and then rules them with a rod of iron. Why would a rod of iron be needed to rule the nations after the second coming, unless these were ungodly survivors? What is your view on the rod of iron? And why are these nations, the same nations that are struck first? Why are these nations that He strikes not part of the armies of heaven, if they will still be ruled over after the second coming?

I read a long explanation in another thread where it was claimed that these nations to be ruled over after the second coming is an incorrect translation, and it actually means that these nations are immediately destroyed, but this was not convincing.

19:14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
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.
19:16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.




1Co 2:6 We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing.
1Co 2:7 No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began.
1Co 2:8 None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

The mystery Paul speaks of is just that. The Jews were looking for an earthly reign. As a result, they could not see Jesus for who He was. The rulers of that age didn't understand it. As a result they crucified their savior.


Agreed. The Jews did not understand the spiritual significance of Jesus. They did not recognise Him as the Messiah, because they thought the Messiah would come immediately with a dramatic start to a physical reign in Jerusalem. I believe they did not recognise the times, but as predicted by Joel , they will eventually recognise their Messiah, and in response Jesus will fulfil those prophecies about an earthly Messianic rule.




In the end-times, a new ruler will appear. A ruler who promises a new world order, a New Age of peace and prosperity. Will this be Jesus? Or is it the False Prophet?


Neither , this is the "antichrist" supported by the false prophet.

DurbanDude
Dec 21st 2008, 01:26 AM
If one is either of the beast's army or the Lord's army, then we agree that the beast's army are totally destroyed. Where is one single survivor in Revelation 19? They are none. The wicked are destroyed in Revelation 19 like they are in every other end-time reading. .

Rev 19 says Jesus strikes the natios and then rules them with a rod of iron. Why would a rod of iron be needed to rule the nations after the second coming, unless these were ungodly survivors? What is your view on the rod of iron? And why are these nations, the same nations that are struck first? Why are these nations that He strikes not part of the armies of heaven, if they will still be ruled over after the second coming?

I read a long explanation in another thread where it was claimed that these nations to be ruled over after the second coming is an incorrect translation, and it actually means that these nations are immediately destroyed, but this was not convincing.

19:14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
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.
19:16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

I believe that we will be part of the armies that follow Jesus, and those nations that Jesus strikes , Jesus will also rule over.

Maybe you have some symbolic explanation for this, but a literal explanation is pretty clear here.

wpm
Dec 21st 2008, 01:54 AM
[/font]

Rev 19 says Jesus strikes the natios and then rules them with a rod of iron. Why would a rod of iron be needed to rule the nations after the second coming, unless these were ungodly survivors? What is your view on the rod of iron? And why are these nations, the same nations that are struck first? Why are these nations that He strikes not part of the armies of heaven, if they will still be ruled over after the second coming?

I read a long explanation in another thread where it was claimed that these nations to be ruled over after the second coming is an incorrect translation, and it actually means that these nations are immediately destroyed, but this was not convincing.

19:14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
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.
19:16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

I believe that we will be part of the armies that follow Jesus, and those nations that Jesus strikes , Jesus will also rule over.

Maybe you have some symbolic explanation for this, but a literal explanation is pretty clear here.

First is Christ going to spend the whole 1,000 yrs smiting nations?

Second, the word "rule" is simply shepherd here. Revelation 19:15-16 says, “And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall poimaino (or) rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS” (11-16).

John makes four references to this word in the most shepherdly passage in the New Testament – John 10:11-15. There, Jesus says, “I am the good poimeen (shepherd): the good poimeen (shepherd) giveth his life for the sheep. But he that is an hireling, and not the poimeen (shepherd), whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep. The hireling fleeth, because he is an hireling, and careth not for the sheep. I am the good poimeen (shepherd), and know my sheep, and am known of mine. As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep.”

The word is used here to describe the way that Christ tenderly shepherds His sheep and how He faithfully protects them from the enemy. This interpretation puts a deeper meaning on our prime text under study when we see the shepherding emphasis of the passage.

Third, the rod of iron comes from the Greek word rhabdos meaning a sceptre, a staff or a rod. It can also describe a stick, a wand, a cudgel, a cane or a baton. It is often used to describe a sceptre of royalty which is sign of power and sovereignty. When Jesus appears as King of kings and Lord of lords to exercise righteous judgment upon the nations the rebellious nations will finally be under the rule and sceptre (rod of iron) of Jesus. Satan will be stripped of his kingdoms and men will be brought to account for their lives. Christ will then smite the rebellious, striking them down with the rod of His power. Hebrews 1:8 records, “unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.”

John is making a reference to Psalms 2; and borrowing language from there to show that the wicked will be destroyed by the rod of iron. In actual fact, he is directly referring to Psalms 2:9-12, which declares, “Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth. Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way”

The wording of this passage is clear and climactic. There is no protracted survival of the wicked remotely suggested in it, but rather the decisive destruction of these rebels forever; they are broken in pieces as God hands out His final righteous judgement. When a pot is broken with an iron rod it is destroyed, not subjugated. It's state changes completely and it does not continue in its prior state. When therefore the wicked are “broken,” “dashed to pieces,” “cut off,” and “the wicked shall be no more” at the Second Coming, this is not an exercise in rulership, subjugation, or discipline; but rather their total obliteration; thus, the meaning of the analogy of the rod and the pottery. The vivid picture painted is of the potter destroying an unwanted useless vessel.

DurbanDude
Dec 21st 2008, 02:06 AM
. This contradicts Zechariah 14 that has the beast's army being ushered into the millennial age (those who came against Jerusalem).

wpm, remember that I keep telling you that each nation has armies in Israel , but that does not mean that every person from every nation is participating in the war Israel. :) I realise I gave the wrong impression earlier because I didn't read your post clearly , sorry about that , have edited that post and this post now. There are survivors of the earthquake all over the earth, but no survivors of the beast's army in Israel.

Beasts Army:
14:12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth

Survivors:
14:16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles
All nations had representative armies in Israel, but not everyone went to fight there. Our knowledge of the second coming confirms this ,one will be harvesting , they will be getting married, carrying on as usual etc.



Joel 3 (as I have showed), Zephaniah 1:2-18 and Zephaniah 3:8-9 are Second Coming readings but they show all the wicked dead also - just like Rev 19.

Zephaniah 1:2-18 says, “I will utterly consume all things from off the land, saith the LORD. I will consume man and beast; I will consume the fowls of the heaven, and the fishes of the sea, and the stumblingblocks with the wicked; and I will cut off man from off the land, saith the LORD. I will also stretch out mine hand upon Judah, and upon all the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and I will cut off the remnant of Baal from this place, and the name of the Chemarims with the priests; And them that worship the host of heaven upon the housetops; and them that worship and that swear by the LORD, and that swear by Malcham; And them that are turned back from the LORD; and those that have not sought the LORD, nor inquired for him. Hold thy peace at the presence of the Lord GOD: for the day of the LORD is at hand: for the LORD hath prepared a sacrifice, he hath bid his guests. And it shall come to pass in the day of the LORD's sacrifice, that I will punish the princes, and the king's children, and all such as are clothed with strange apparel.
9 In the same day also will I punish all those that leap on the threshold, which fill their masters' houses with violence and deceit. And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD, that there shall be the noise of a cry from the fish gate, and an howling from the second, and a great crashing from the hills. Howl, ye inhabitants of Maktesh, for all the merchant people are cut down; all they that bear silver are cut off. And it shall come to pass at that time, that I will search Jerusalem with candles, and punish the men that are settled on their lees: that say in their heart, The LORD will not do good, neither will he do evil. Therefore their goods shall become a booty, and their houses a desolation: they shall also build houses, but not inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, but not drink the wine thereof. The great day of the LORD is near, it is near, and hasteth greatly, even the voice of the day of the LORD: the mighty man shall cry there bitterly. That day is a day of wrath, a day of trouble and distress, a day of wasteness and desolation, a day of darkness and gloominess, a day of clouds and thick darkness, A day of the trumpet and alarm against the fenced cities, and against the high towers. And I will bring distress upon men, that they shall walk like blind men, because they have sinned against the LORD: and their blood shall be poured out as dust, and their flesh as the dung. Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them in the day of the LORD's wrath; but the whole land shall be devoured by the fire of his jealousy: for he shall make even a speedy riddance of all them that dwell in the land.”


Not the whole earth , just certain land. Other lands survive:

2:5 Woe unto the inhabitants of the sea coast, the nation of the Cherethites! the word of the LORD is against you; O Canaan, the land of the Philistines, I will even destroy thee, that there shall be no inhabitant.
2:6 And the sea coast shall be dwellings and cottages for shepherds, and folds for flocks.
2:7 And the coast shall be for the remnant of the house of Judah; they shall feed thereupon: in the houses of Ashkelon shall they lie down in the evening: for the LORD their God shall visit them, and turn away their captivity.
2:8 I have heard the reproach of Moab, and the revilings of the children of Ammon, whereby they have reproached my people, and magnified themselves against their border
.2:9 Therefore as I live, saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, Surely Moab shall be as Sodom, and the children of Ammon as Gomorrah, even the breeding of nettles, and saltpits, and a perpetual desolation: the residue of my people shall spoil them, and the remnant of my people shall possess them.

Definitely the whole earth is not destroyed, certain remnants survive and possess certain lands.





Zephaniah 3:8-9 states: “wait ye upon me, saith the LORD, until the day that I rise up to the prey: for my determination is to gather the nations, that I may assemble the kingdoms, to pour upon them mine indignation, even all my fierce anger: for all the earth shall be devoured with the fire of my jealousy. For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the LORD, to serve him with one consent.”


3:8 Therefore wait ye upon me, saith the LORD, until the day that I rise up to the prey: for my determination is to gather the nations, that I may assemble the kingdoms, to pour upon them mine indignation, even all my fierce anger: for all the earth shall be devoured with the fire of my jealousy.
3:9 For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the LORD, to serve him with one consent.
3:10 From beyond the rivers of Ethiopia my suppliants, even the daughter of my dispersed, shall bring mine offering

3:19 Behold, at that time I will undo all that afflict thee: and I will save her that halteth, and gather her that was driven out; and I will get them praise and fame in every land where they have been put to shame.

You didn't quote the whole passage. The earth is devoured, eaten up, made desolate, but certain regions continue to exist.




Again, you haven't reconciled the conflict of Egypt's obliteration in Joel 3 and the resurrection and entry into your millennial kingdom in Zech 14.

I did explain how most of the earth will be desolate at first,and then re-populated. This explains why Egypt is desolate at first and then is blessed.


Who are these millennial inheritors and what qualifies them to inherit the kingdom age in their sinful state and in their corruptible bodies? Please answer this

I don't speak for all pre-mills here , I believe them to be the survivors of the catastrophic worldwide earthquake at the second coming.


I would still like to know how the amills interpret Zechariah 12/13 and Zechariah 14 and Ezekiel 38/39 and Rev 19:15

wpm
Dec 21st 2008, 02:29 AM
wpm, remember that I keep telling you that each nation has armies in Israel , but that does not mean that every person from every nation is participating in the war Israel. :) There are survivors of the earthquake all over the earth, but no survivors of the beast's army in Israel.

Beasts Army:
14:12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth

Survivors:
14:16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles
All nations had representative armies in Israel, but not everyone went to fight there. Our knowledge of the second coming confirms this ,one will be harvesting , they will be getting married, carrying on as usual etc.



[FONT=Arial]Not the whole earth , just certain land. Other lands survive:

2:5 Woe unto the inhabitants of the sea coast, the nation of the Cherethites! the word of the LORD is against you; O Canaan, the land of the Philistines, I will even destroy thee, that there shall be no inhabitant.
[SIZE=4]2:6 And the sea coast shall be dwellings and cottages for shepherds, and folds for flocks.
2:7 And the coast shall be for the remnant of the house of Judah; they shall feed thereupon: in the houses of Ashkelon shall they lie down in the evening: for the LORD their God shall visit them, and turn away their captivity.
2:8 I have heard the reproach of Moab, and the revilings of the children of Ammon, whereby they have reproached my people, and magnified themselves against their border
.2:9 Therefore as I live, saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, Surely Moab shall be as Sodom, and the children of Ammon as Gomorrah, even the breeding of nettles, and saltpits, and a perpetual desolation: the residue of my people shall spoil them, and the remnant of my people shall possess them.

[COLOR=black]Definitely the whole earth is not destroyed, certain remnants survive and possess certain lands.





3:8 Therefore wait ye upon me, saith the LORD, until the day that I rise up to the prey: for my determination is to gather the nations, that I may assemble the kingdoms, to pour upon them mine indignation, even all my fierce anger: for all the earth shall be devoured with the fire of my jealousy.
3:9 For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the LORD, to serve him with one consent.
3:10 From beyond the rivers of Ethiopia my suppliants, even the daughter of my dispersed, shall bring mine offering

3:19 Behold, at that time I will undo all that afflict thee: and I will save her that halteth, and gather her that was driven out; and I will get them praise and fame in every land where they have been put to shame.

You didn't quote the whole passage. The earth is devoured, eaten up, made desolate, but certain regions continue to exist.





I did explain how most of the earth will be desolate at first,and then re-populated. This explains why Egypt is desolate at first and then is blessed.



I don't speak for all pre-mills here , I believe them to be the survivors of the catastrophic worldwide earthquake at the second coming.


I would still like to know how the amills interpret Zechariah 12/13 and Zechariah 14 and Ezekiel 38/39 and Rev 19:15

I see an unfortunate pattern that Premils must employ and which is frustrating to engage with. When Scriptures are shown to contradict the Premil paradigm then the issue under discussion is limited and qualified to fit the Premil paradigm. Premil plainly doesn't see men split into two camps - as Amil does. It sees men split into three (saved, lost and another group). This is problematic to me and very concerning to most Amils. The question is, what actually qualifies these millennial inheritors to inherit the millennial earth? To me the answer is, one must be a participant in the attack upon Jerusalem.

Are there any believers excluded from the armies that Jesus brings with Him from heaven at His return?

How do you interpret Ezekiel 40-47? I asked you this quite a while ago, with out response.

RevLogos
Dec 21st 2008, 02:30 AM
No , Rev 19 says Jesus strikes the natios and then rules them with a rod of iron. Why would a rod of iron be needed to rule the nations after the second coming, unless these were ungodly survivors? What is your view on the rod of iron? And why are these nations, the same nations that are struck first? Why are these nations that He strikes not part of the armies of heaven, if they will still be ruled over after the second coming?


You seem to focus on the iron rod a lot. What do you think it is. An iron rod? Or is it symbolic of something?

The iron rod is nothing more than a scepter. The phrase simply means he rules as a king. The NIV uses the word scepter. It’s something a king or royalty would carry. It symbolizes His sovereignty.

Rev 19:15 Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. "He will rule them with an iron scepter." He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty.

The Greek word used is: rhabdo

From the base of G4474; a stick or wand (as a cudgel, a cane or a baton of royalty): - rod, sceptre, staff.

DurbanDude
Dec 21st 2008, 02:40 AM
First is Christ going to spend the whole 1,000 yrs smiting nations?

No, he will strike them at the second coming, then he SHALL rule them for 1000 years:


[QUOTE]
Second, the word "rule" is simply shepherd here. Revelation 19:15-16 says, “And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall poimaino (or) rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS” (11-16).


Agreed , Jesus will shepherd them with an iron rod instead of the normal wooden shepherd's crook.





Christ will then smite the rebellious, striking them down with the rod of His power. Hebrews 1:8 records, “unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.”


You describe the rod of iron well, but your conclusion is very strange. You actually seem to be saying that Jesus will gently shepherd the nations (ruling them) with immediate destruction.

This makes as little sense as the first time I read you say this. I prefer the more simple literal explanation of Jesus first striking the nations on the DOTL, and then shepherding the nations and yet disciplining them as well, after the second coming, as per Zechariah 14.

DurbanDude
Dec 21st 2008, 02:44 AM
You seem to focus on the iron rod a lot. What do you think it is. An iron rod? Or is it symbolic of something?

The iron rod is nothing more than a scepter. The phrase simply means he rules as a king. The NIV uses the word scepter. It’s something a king or royalty would carry. It symbolizes His sovereignty.

Rev 19:15 Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. "He will rule them with an iron scepter." He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty.

The Greek word used is: rhabdo

From the base of G4474; a stick or wand (as a cudgel, a cane or a baton of royalty): - rod, sceptre, staff.

So do you agree that after Jesus comes with His army, He rules over nations or destroys nations? Do you believe the English translation is incorrect ,and the word should be "destroys" them with an iron rod? Or do you believe there will be some ruling going on after the second coming?

RevLogos
Dec 21st 2008, 03:00 AM
I really would like to know how Zech 14 fits ANY amill age, BC, church age, or new earth. But then you must explain the existence of the heathen nations who worship the Lord or have no rain.



Does the Premil view hold that there will be animal sacrifices in the Millennium? If Zech 14 represents life in the millennium, then:

Zec 14:21 Every cooking pot in Jerusalem and Judah will become holy in the sight of the LORD who rules over all, so that all who offer sacrifices may come and use some of them to boil their sacrifices in them. On that day there will no longer be a Canaanite in the house of the LORD who rules over all.

This is the practice of boiling animal sin sacrifices. The practice is discussed a bit in Eze 46:20-24 and 1 Sam 2:13.

DurbanDude
Dec 21st 2008, 03:06 AM
I see an unfortunate pattern that Premils must employ and which is frustrating to engage with. When Scriptures are shown to contradict the Premil paradigm then the issue under discussion is limited and qualified to fit the Premil paradigm

I don't understand you here.:hmm: I'm trying to answer your questions clearly, but often don't get clear answers,just new directions of attack. I must assume that I've answered most of your questions well because we move onto new topics very rapidly.


Premil plainly doesn't see men split into two camps - as Amil does. It sees men split into three (saved, lost and another group). This is problematic to me and very concerning to most Amils

I understand this, and frankly I agree with you. There are only two camps and they are separated at the second coming.

.
The question is, what actually qualifies these millennial inheritors to inherit the millennial earth? .
I don't believe there is a qualification. Most pre-mills would disagree with me saying there should be a qualification. That qualification either being Christian tribulation survivors or those that treated Christians well. I personally see a nearly random nature of life and death in the current world, with occasional specific judgments but most of the time there is random death. When Jesus comes there will be the resurrection of the saints, all those saved from all time will live forever with Jesus.

A few random unsaved will survive, a number of physical Jews among them. These are not the true Israel , these are not part of the kingdom of God, true Israel is those believers that believed with faith, these will be resurrected. Those mortals left on the earth will believe only because they see, not as us saved who believe even though we do not see. Faith is being sure of what you hope for and certain of what you do not see.

The mortals that survive have no real advantage over those that don't, because although they will experience a blessed earth , they will never be part of the true kingdom, and their true hearts will all be revealed at judgment day. They will receive their eternal destiny.





Are there any believers excluded from the armies that Jesus brings with Him from heaven at His return?


Other premills would disagree with me, but I believe no believers are excluded.


How do you interpret Ezekiel 40-47? I asked you this quite a while ago, with out response

No clue! sorry. This is one set of chapters that I won't be tackling for a long time. I suspect its the period of earthly rule of Christ , but have no real idea at all.

DurbanDude
Dec 21st 2008, 03:15 AM
Does the Premil view hold that there will be animal sacrifices in the Millennium? If Zech 14 represents life in the millennium, then:

Zec 14:21 Every cooking pot in Jerusalem and Judah will become holy in the sight of the LORD who rules over all, so that all who offer sacrifices may come and use some of them to boil their sacrifices in them. On that day there will no longer be a Canaanite in the house of the LORD who rules over all.

This is the practice of boiling animal sin sacrifices. The practice is discussed a bit in Eze 46:20-24 and 1 Sam 2:13.

It seems like there is some sort of sacrifice. Animals are not mentioned though. Obviously these would not be sacrifices for sin because Jesus did away with sin sacrifices , but it appears there are other types of sacrifices. By the way , what do you think? Do you interpret these sacrifices as somehow happening in a symbolic way in the current age? How do you interpret all those verse in Zechariah 14 about the heathen nations worshipping the Lord at the feast of tabernacles and getting no rain if they don't go? How does this all fit into the Amill paradigm?

RevLogos
Dec 21st 2008, 03:24 AM
So do you agree that after Jesus comes with His army, He rules over nations or destroys nations? Do you believe the English translation is incorrect ,and the word should be "destroys" them with an iron rod? Or do you believe there will be some ruling going on after the second coming?

When John uses the phrase "He will rule them with an iron scepter" he is paraphrasing Psa 2:9. (Thats why its usually in quotes.)

Psa 2:9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.

In fact in Rev 2:27, his first use of the phrase, he uses all of 2:9:

Rev 2:27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.

This all means that as sovereign authority He will destroy His enemies.

RevLogos
Dec 21st 2008, 03:29 AM
It seems like there is some sort of sacrifice. Animals are not mentioned though. Obviously these would not be sacrifices for sin because Jesus did away with sin sacrifices , but it appears there are other types of sacrifices. By the way , what do you think? Do you interpret these sacrifices as somehow happening in a symbolic way in the current age? How do you interpret all those verse in Zechariah 14 about the heathen nations worshipping the Lord at the feast of tabernacles and getting no rain if they don't go? How does this all fit into the Amill paradigm?

Animals were boiled as a sacrifice for sin. Thats what this is. If he were speaking of grain sacrifices, it would be baked, and the ovens would be cleansed.

So why are we sacrificing animals for sin in the millennium? You tell me if this could be symbolic of something.

DurbanDude
Dec 21st 2008, 03:46 AM
Animals were boiled as a sacrifice for sin. Thats what this is. If he were speaking of grain sacrifices, it would be baked, and the ovens would be cleansed.

So why are we sacrificing animals for sin in the millennium? You tell me if this could be symbolic of something.

Revovlr, I'm not so sure about what you are saying here. I would like you to show me some verses that show that boiled sacrifices can only involve animals and can only be for sin.

Even if you could just quote some verses about boiled sacrifices i would appreciate it, then I could look into this myself.

You haven't yet told me your set of beliefs regarding Zechariah 14 , about how those heathen nations that worship the Lord fit into the amill paradigm. If you haven't yet developed an answer you can just tell me, I'm not shy to say I don't understand Ezekiel 40 onwards.

wpm
Dec 21st 2008, 03:58 AM
[quote]

No, he will strike them at the second coming, then he SHALL rule them for 1000 years:




Agreed , Jesus will shepherd them with an iron rod instead of the normal wooden shepherd's crook.





You describe the rod of iron well, but your conclusion is very strange. You actually seem to be saying that Jesus will gently shepherd the nations (ruling them) with immediate destruction.

This makes as little sense as the first time I read you say this. I prefer the more simple literal explanation of Jesus first striking the nations on the DOTL, and then shepherding the nations and yet disciplining them as well, after the second coming, as per Zechariah 14.

The reading is a picture of the final separation, which occurs at the end of the world. Here Christ undertakes the separation of the nations as a shepherd divides the flock. What is more, it shows the end of all rebellion and the wicked. The unrighteous are finally and eternally crushed. The fowls are seen to eat the flesh of all men, both small and great at this climactic Coming. If this is correct then that would rule out the idea that mortals who miss the rescue of the saints from the earth will somehow survive the Coming of the Lord. In turn, it would negate the idea of mortal humans entering a future millennium; consequently it would eliminate the possibility of an uprising of the wicked 1,000 years after the Coming of the Lord. This, in turn, would do away with the idea of a 1000 year period between Christ's Second Coming and the Final Judgment.

The original in this passage confirms that “he should pataxee ta ethnee kai autous poimanei autous or “smite the nations, and shepherd them with a rod of iron.” This reading closely mirrors that of Matthew 25:31-33, 41, where Christ is also describing the great separation which occurs at His Second Coming, saying, “When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be panta ta ethnee kai aforisei autous (or) ‘gathered all nations: and he shall separate them’ one from another, as a poimeen (or) shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats” (vv 31-32).

He continues, “And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world…Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels…And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal” (33-34, 41, 46).

1. There is finality to Christ’s Coming.
2. Both the sheep and the goats are judged before the same judge and the same throne at the same time.
3. The righteous and wicked are finally and eternally separated.

The scene pictured in Revelation 19 is exactly the same as that in Matthew 25. It is that of a shepherd with a rod dividing for all time two co-existing yet completely diverse types of kind. The Shepherd here is Christ, the sheep and the goats that he divides are the righteous and the wicked, the event is the Second Coming of Christ and the judgment, and separation, that accompanies it are final, irreversible and eternal.

The sheep will eternally enjoy the presence of the Shepherd, free from the presence of the goats forever, whilst the goats will endure eternal wrath. Christ (the great shepherd) is coming in His wrath at the end of this age to deal with the wicked, thus the significance of the rod of iron. He is a jealous Shepherd who is finally coming to destroy those that have persecuted His sheep throughout time. The shepherding is clearly associated with the final separation.

wpm
Dec 21st 2008, 04:03 AM
It seems like there is some sort of sacrifice. Animals are not mentioned though. Obviously these would not be sacrifices for sin because Jesus did away with sin sacrifices , but it appears there are other types of sacrifices. By the way , what do you think? Do you interpret these sacrifices as somehow happening in a symbolic way in the current age? How do you interpret all those verse in Zechariah 14 about the heathen nations worshipping the Lord at the feast of tabernacles and getting no rain if they don't go? How does this all fit into the Amill paradigm?

Zechariah 14:17 says, "And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain. And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles. This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles."

The Feast of the Tabernacles was a shadow of things to come until the Lord appeared. It is closely intertwined with the sin sacrifices. When Christ made His once-all-sufficient sacrifice He did away with these imperfect shadows. Leviticus 23:34-38 says,“Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, The fifteenth day of this seventh month shall be the feast of tabernacles for seven days unto the LORD.On the first day shall be an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein. Seven days ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD: on the eighth day shall be an holy convocation unto you; and ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD: it is a solemn assembly; and ye shall do no servile work therein. These are the feasts of the LORD, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, to offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD, a burnt offering, and a meat offering, a sacrifice, and drink offerings, every thing upon his day: beside the sabbaths of the LORD, and beside your gifts, and beside all your vows, and beside all your freewill offerings, which ye give unto the LORD.

Why would Jesus reintroduce these old covenant rituals and animal sacrifices when Jesus was the last sacrifice?

DurbanDude
Dec 21st 2008, 04:04 AM
When John uses the phrase "He will rule them with an iron scepter" he is paraphrasing Psa 2:9. (Thats why its usually in quotes.)

Psa 2:9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.

In fact in Rev 2:27, his first use of the phrase, he uses all of 2:9:

Rev 2:27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.

This all means that as sovereign authority He will destroy His enemies.


The word "rule" is poimainō in Greek. As wpm pointed out,this means to shepherd , to feed and to take care of. This negates a destruction only interpretation. Destruction with caring and rebuilding would make more sense.

RevLogos
Dec 21st 2008, 04:14 AM
Revovlr, I'm not so sure about what you are saying here. I would like you to show me some verses that show that boiled sacrifices can only involve animals and can only be for sin.

Even if you could just quote some verses about boiled sacrifices i would appreciate it, then I could look into this myself.



Zechariah is obviously talking about sin offerings that are boiled. Zechariah refers to the boiling pots being holy. This was a critical practice. In Leviticus (below) it talks about the practice and pays most attention to the vessels in which the meat is boiled. If the pots are clay, they must be broken. But if they are bronze pots they can be scoured clean.

Zec 14:21 Every pot in Jerusalem and Judah will be holy to the LORD Almighty, and all who come to sacrifice will take some of the pots and cook in them. And on that day there will no longer be a Canaanite in the house of the LORD Almighty.

What Zechariah is saying is that in the millennium every pot is holy and all who come to make a sin sacrifice can use these pots. Zechariah doesn’t go into a great amount of detail here because anyone reading it, that being a Jew of the time, would know exactly what he is talking about.

Lev 6:24 The LORD said to Moses,
Lev 6:25 "Say to Aaron and his sons: 'These are the regulations for the sin offering: The sin offering is to be slaughtered before the LORD in the place the burnt offering is slaughtered; it is most holy.
Lev 6:26 The priest who offers it shall eat it; it is to be eaten in a holy place, in the courtyard of the Tent of Meeting.
Lev 6:27 Whatever touches any of the flesh will become holy, and if any of the blood is spattered on a garment, you must wash it in a holy place.
Lev 6:28 The clay pot the meat is cooked in must be broken; but if it is cooked in a bronze pot, the pot is to be scoured and rinsed with water.
Lev 6:29 Any male in a priest's family may eat it; it is most holy.
Lev 6:30 But any sin offering whose blood is brought into the Tent of Meeting to make atonement in the Holy Place must not be eaten; it must be burned.

I’m not all that well versed in ancient sacrificial practices; I don’t know what kind of animal it will be, or how we get them.

DurbanDude
Dec 21st 2008, 04:14 AM
[The reading is a picture of the final separation, which occurs at the end of the world. Here Christ undertakes the separation of the nations as a shepherd divides the flock. What is more, it shows the end of all rebellion and the wicked. The unrighteous are finally and eternally crushed. The fowls are seen to eat the flesh of all men, both small and great at this climactic Coming. If this is correct then that would rule out the idea that mortals who miss the rescue of the saints from the earth will somehow survive the Coming of the Lord. In turn, it would negate the idea of mortal humans entering a future millennium; consequently it would eliminate the possibility of an uprising of the wicked 1,000 years after the Coming of the Lord. This, in turn, would do away with the idea of a 1000 year period between Christ's Second Coming and the Final Judgment.

The original in this passage confirms that “he should pataxee ta ethnee kai autous poimanei autous or “smite the nations, and shepherd them with a rod of iron.” This reading closely mirrors that of Matthew 25:31-33, 41, where Christ is also describing the great separation which occurs at His Second Coming, saying, “When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be panta ta ethnee kai aforisei autous (or) ‘gathered all nations: and he shall separate them’ one from another, as a poimeen (or) shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats” (vv 31-32).

He continues, “And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world…Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels…And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal” (33-34, 41, 46).

1. There is finality to Christ’s Coming.
2. Both the sheep and the goats are judged before the same judge and the same throne at the same time.
3. The righteous and wicked are finally and eternally separated.

The scene pictured in Revelation 19 is exactly the same as that in Matthew 25. It is that of a shepherd with a rod dividing for all time two co-existing yet completely diverse types of kind. The Shepherd here is Christ, the sheep and the goats that he divides are the righteous and the wicked, the event is the Second Coming of Christ and the judgment, and separation, that accompanies it are final, irreversible and eternal.

The sheep will eternally enjoy the presence of the Shepherd, free from the presence of the goats forever, whilst the goats will endure eternal wrath. Christ (the great shepherd) is coming in His wrath at the end of this age to deal with the wicked, thus the significance of the rod of iron. He is a jealous Shepherd who is finally coming to destroy those that have persecuted His sheep throughout time. The shepherding is clearly associated with the final separation.

Your long interpretation just seems to highlight the fact that your explanation just does not fit in with specifically the wording of Rev 19:14,15:

19:14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
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.

The separation had already occurred here , the armies in heaven are already with Jesus. It is the nations that are struck (smite) that are ruled over.

To say that the shepherding is somehow referring to the true sheep or the separation of the true sheep is misinterpreting this. Clearly the SAME group that is ruled over , is ruled over with the rod of iron.

Careful shepherding by use of destruction makes no sense.

DurbanDude
Dec 21st 2008, 04:25 AM
Zechariah is obviously talking about sin offerings that are boiled. Zechariah refers to the boiling pots being holy. This was a critical practice. In Leviticus (below) it talks about the practice and pays most attention to the vessels in which the meat is boiled. If the pots are clay, they must be broken. But if they are bronze pots they can be scoured clean.

Zec 14:21 Every pot in Jerusalem and Judah will be holy to the LORD Almighty, and all who come to sacrifice will take some of the pots and cook in them. And on that day there will no longer be a Canaanite in the house of the LORD Almighty.

What Zechariah is saying is that in the millennium every pot is holy and all who come to make a sin sacrifice can use these pots. Zechariah doesn’t go into a great amount of detail here because anyone reading it, that being a Jew of the time, would know exactly what he is talking about.

Lev 6:24 The LORD said to Moses,
Lev 6:25 "Say to Aaron and his sons: 'These are the regulations for the sin offering: The sin offering is to be slaughtered before the LORD in the place the burnt offering is slaughtered; it is most holy.
Lev 6:26 The priest who offers it shall eat it; it is to be eaten in a holy place, in the courtyard of the Tent of Meeting.
Lev 6:27 Whatever touches any of the flesh will become holy, and if any of the blood is spattered on a garment, you must wash it in a holy place.
Lev 6:28 The clay pot the meat is cooked in must be broken; but if it is cooked in a bronze pot, the pot is to be scoured and rinsed with water.
Lev 6:29 Any male in a priest's family may eat it; it is most holy.
Lev 6:30 But any sin offering whose blood is brought into the Tent of Meeting to make atonement in the Holy Place must not be eaten; it must be burned.

I’m not all that well versed in ancient sacrificial practices; I don’t know what kind of animal it will be, or how we get them.

I find this fascinating , this makes Zechariah 14 all the more interesting to interpret, how do you interpret Zechariah 14, especially the part about the heathen nations worshipping the Lord? How does this fit into your paradigm?

RevLogos
Dec 21st 2008, 04:34 AM
I'm not shy to say I don't understand Ezekiel 40 onwards.

We usually don't spend a lot of time in the latter Ezekiel chapters because they are mostly rules for priests and regular people concerning worship and sacrifice.

Eze 46:20 Then said he unto me, This is the place where the priests shall boil the trespass offering and the sin offering, where they shall bake the meat offering; that they bear them not out into the utter court, to sanctify the people.
Eze 46:21 Then he brought me forth into the utter court, and caused me to pass by the four corners of the court; and, behold, in every corner of the court there was a court.
Eze 46:22 In the four corners of the court there were courts joined of forty cubits long and thirty broad: these four corners were of one measure.
Eze 46:23 And there was a row of building round about in them, round about them four, and it was made with boiling places under the rows round about.
Eze 46:24 Then said he unto me, These are the places of them that boil, where the ministers of the house shall boil the sacrifice of the people.

wpm
Dec 22nd 2008, 05:31 AM
I don't believe there is a qualification. Most pre-mills would disagree with me saying there should be a qualification. That qualification either being Christian tribulation survivors or those that treated Christians well. I personally see a nearly random nature of life and death in the current world, with occasional specific judgments but most of the time there is random death. When Jesus comes there will be the resurrection of the saints, all those saved from all time will live forever with Jesus.

So you have three or four groups of humans: (1) saved, (2) unsaved, (3) unsaved that treat God's people well and (4) unsaved "Christian tribulation survivors"?

Why are your "Christian tribulation survivors" not caught up at Christ's return?


A few random unsaved will survive, a number of physical Jews among them. These are not the true Israel , these are not part of the kingdom of God, true Israel is those believers that believed with faith, these will be resurrected. Those mortals left on the earth will believe only because they see, not as us saved who believe even though we do not see. Faith is being sure of what you hope for and certain of what you do not see.

So did so many people get saved and exercise faith like we do during Christ's earthly ministry?


The mortals that survive have no real advantage over those that don't, because although they will experience a blessed earth , they will never be part of the true kingdom, and their true hearts will all be revealed at judgment day. They will receive their eternal destiny.


I suspect its the period of earthly rule of Christ , but have no real idea at all.

So what is the purpose in these reprobate millennial inhabiters engaging in the feast of tabernacles and the enjoining sin sacrifices that Premils place in a supposed future millennium?

DurbanDude
Dec 22nd 2008, 06:47 AM
So you have three or four groups of humans: (1) saved, (2) unsaved, (3) unsaved that treat God's people well and (4) unsaved "Christian tribulation survivors"?

Why are your "Christian tribulation survivors" not caught up at Christ's return?


wpm, please read my posts properly. I was just showing some of the OTHER pre-mill beliefs, logically you should ask this question to those that believe that way, not to me. I am not representative of all pre-mill beliefs , only my own.

DurbanDude
Dec 22nd 2008, 06:53 AM
So did so many people get saved and exercise faith like we do during Christ's earthly ministry?

Yes, they had to believe that Jesus was their Messiah and Jesus was God. Both these beliefs required a lot of faith , because Jesus did not seem to be the Messiah they expected, and Jesus was born of a woman and was mortal and did not openly display all His powers. Jesus was disappointed in their lack of faith because they saw His miracles and yet still did not recognise who HE was.



So what is the purpose in these reprobate millennial inhabiters engaging in the feast of tabernacles and the enjoining sin sacrifices that Premils place in a supposed future millennium?

I don't question God's purposes , let's rather keep this discussion to what the bible says than analyse God's purposes.

Could you rather tell me how you interpret Zechariah 14 , who do you believe the heathen are that worship God annually at the feast of tabernacles, how does that fit into your amill paradigm. I am sure readers of this thread would be amused at how many times just this one question has been avoided by amills on this very thread. Don't you yourself believe there are reprobate millennial inhabiters engaging in the feast of tabernacles in this current age? Or how do you explain this?

We have got around to discussing Rev 19, which I felt was tackled directly and we both put forward our views, so I believe we are making some progress at going through these verses.

DurbanDude
Dec 22nd 2008, 07:10 AM
We usually don't spend a lot of time in the latter Ezekiel chapters because they are mostly rules for priests and regular people concerning worship and sacrifice.

Ok, I see this.

Can you still answer my question about Zechariah 14. You have disputed my view, but what is your view? How do explain the heathen that go annually to the feast of tabernacles to worship the Lord? And get disciplined if they don't go? How does that fit into the amill paradigm?

wpm
Dec 22nd 2008, 02:59 PM
wpm, please read my posts properly. I was just showing some of the OTHER pre-mill beliefs, logically you should ask this question to those that believe that way, not to me. I am not representative of all pre-mill beliefs , only my own.

But you are creating subgroups among the wicked. God doesn't make such a division in the NT. One is either saved or lost. Was this not the way it was in Noah's day and in Sodom?


Yes, they had to believe that Jesus was their Messiah and Jesus was God. Both these beliefs required a lot of faith , because Jesus did not seem to be the Messiah they expected, and Jesus was born of a woman and was mortal and did not openly display all His powers. Jesus was disappointed in their lack of faith because they saw His miracles and yet still did not recognise who HE was.

I don't question God's purposes , let's rather keep this discussion to what the bible says than analyse God's purposes.

It is you that presents Zecharaiah 14 as a solid proof-text. You mention it in many of your posts as evidence. So it is reasonable for you to explain this first. Also, you were actually asked first. I would be happy to address it from an Amil point-of-view but the burden of proof must lie with you as it is you that is making it an issue. No one is saying you question the purposes of God, what we are trying to determine is what are you suggesting is the purposes of God? What are these sacrifices in your millennium?

From what I can see, Zech 14, like Rev 19 & 20, Isa 2, Ezek 37-48, Joel 3 and Zeph 1-3 create more questions about the Premil paradigm than answers. It seems to me that these readings are in conflict with one another in important elementary details. This is in contrast with the Amil proof-texts that are clear, in agreement and climactic.

I am not avoiding it as you allege, but am waiting for you to explain how animal sacrifices and the OT priesthood can be resurrected after the Coming of Christ. This is an issue that you must explain. From my viewpoint we believe there will be no death, sin or unsaved on the post-Second-Coming-earth.

RevLogos
Dec 22nd 2008, 03:42 PM
From what I can see, Zech 14, like Rev 19 & 20, Isa 2, Ezek 37-48, Joel 3 and Zeph 1-3 create more questions about the Premil paradigm than answers. It seems to me that these readings are in conflict with one another in important elementary details. This is in contrast with the Amil proof-texts that are clear, in agreement and climactic.


We are very curious to see what the Premil position is on animal sacrifices for sin in the new millennial age. I agree it needs to be explained before we can go much further in our understanding, since Premil specifically uses Zech 14 as proof-text.

Also, within the same verse, I would like to know who the Caanatites are today, and why we cannot have Canaanite’s in the house of the Lord.

And besides, we don’t want to give up our Amil secrets too easily. OK just kidding about that. There might be this view from Premils that Amils just shrug everything off as symbolic. That’s not the case. Personally I find all of the OT apocalyptic writings extraordinarily complex, but beautifully rich in meaning. Understanding when symbolism and style of writing is used to convey important meanings is not trivial nor arbitrary. WPM is way ahead of me in this, but I have already seen a depth of meaning I never saw when I looked with Premil eyes. It will take me years of study before this tapestry of the Lord unfolds before me. Something I look forward to greatly.

DurbanDude
Dec 22nd 2008, 07:25 PM
But you are creating subgroups among the wicked. God doesn't make such a division in the NT. One is either saved or lost. Was this not the way it was in Noah's day and in Sodom?
.

I agree, saved or lost.



It is you that presents Zecharaiah 14 as a solid proof-text. You mention it in many of your posts as evidence. So it is reasonable for you to explain this first. Also, you were actually asked first. I would be happy to address it from an Amil point-of-view but the burden of proof must lie with you as it is you that is making it an issue. No one is saying you question the purposes of God, what we are trying to determine is what are you suggesting is the purposes of God? What are these sacrifices in your millennium?


I've asked about 6 times in this thread for an amill explanation of Zechariah 14 , and I did ask first.


There is a principle that it is easier to criticise than to solve a problem. I don't see Zechariah as a problem to be solved , it is simple to interpret it from a premill perspective and I have never dodged an issue and will not dodge this issue. You however have not explained yet how the heathen of Zechariah 14 who worship God fit into your amill paradigm, or how the sacrifices of Zech 14 fit into the amill paradigm. You criticise and yet offer no alternative view at all.

Zech 14:21 Yea, every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holiness unto the LORD of hosts: and all they that sacrifice shall come and take of them, and seethe therein: and in that day there shall be no more the Canaanite in the house of the LORD of hosts.

You are correct that there are sacrifices in my version of the millenium, shouldn't there be any sacrifices? Jesus put an end to sacrifices for sin , do you know any verse that states that ALL sacrifices of any sort have stopped forever since the crucifixion? This verse says nothing about animals either , it wasn't me me that chose to associate this verse with other verses about animal sacrifices. If you can't show me a verse that excludes all types of sacrifices forever after the crucifixion then you have no point at all. I was wanting to hear your view on these sacrifices and where they fit in and thought we could approach that topic conversationally.





From what I can see, Zech 14, like Rev 19 & 20, Isa 2, Ezek 37-48, Joel 3 and Zeph 1-3 create more questions about the Premil paradigm than answers. It seems to me that these readings are in conflict with one another in important elementary details. This is in contrast with the Amil proof-texts that are clear, in agreement and climactic.


? :hmm:

I found your explanation on the actual wording of Rev 19:15 very unfocussed and not convincing at all, and the logic quite interesting.:hmm:

I answered all your questions on Zech 14 , and Joel and Zephaniah without any question mark left , and left a string of unanswered questions for you guys. Rev 19 is the only chapter we have discussed properly so far , and I explained every supposed contradiction. We have had a lot of focus on the last verse of Zech 14 , yet I still haven't heard your viewpoint on Zech 14:21.


I am not avoiding it as you allege, but am waiting for you to explain how animal sacrifices and the OT priesthood can be resurrected after the Coming of Christ. This is an issue that you must explain. From my viewpoint we believe there will be no death, sin or unsaved on the post-Second-Coming-earth

Zechariah 14 says these sacrifices happen, but does not mention animals at all, you haven't mentioned anything about priesthood yet, is this a new argument? I don't see a problem with sacrifices , waiting to see what the problem is here.

Zechariah 14 contradicts the amill viewpoint because it mentions heathen nations that worship the Lord when the Lord reigns on this earth and this does not fit into any amill paradigm. The amill view is that we are currently in the millenium under the rule of Christ and we as Christians are Israel. For Zech 14 to be interpreted symbolically as the current church age makes no sense because there are heathens worshipping the Lord. The descriptions also fit in better with the second coming , than the first coming. Yet many amills associate Zech 14 with the first coming and not the second coming.

14:8 And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.
14:9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.
14:10 All the land shall be turned as a plain from Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem: and it shall be lifted up, and inhabited in her place, from Benjamin's gate unto the place of the first gate, unto the corner gate, and from the tower of Hananeel unto the king's winepresses.
14:11 And men shall dwell in it, and there shall be no more utter destruction; but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited.
14:12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.
14:13 And it shall come to pass in that day, that a great tumult from the LORD shall be among them; and they shall lay hold every one on the hand of his neighbour, and his hand shall rise up against the hand of his neighbour.
14:14 And Judah also shall fight at Jerusalem; and the wealth of all the heathen round about shall be gathered together, gold, and silver, and apparel, in great abundance.
14:15 And so shall be the plague of the horse, of the mule, of the camel, and of the ass, and of all the beasts that shall be in these tents, as this plague.
14:16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.
14:17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.
14:18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.


The bible speaks for itself.

DurbanDude
Dec 22nd 2008, 07:49 PM
We are very curious to see what the Premil position is on animal sacrifices for sin in the new millennial age. I agree it needs to be explained before we can go much further in our understanding, since Premil specifically uses Zech 14 as proof-text.

Also, within the same verse, I would like to know who the Caanatites are today, and why we cannot have Canaanite’s in the house of the Lord.

And besides, we don’t want to give up our Amil secrets too easily. OK just kidding about that. There might be this view from Premils that Amils just shrug everything off as symbolic. That’s not the case. Personally I find all of the OT apocalyptic writings extraordinarily complex, but beautifully rich in meaning. Understanding when symbolism and style of writing is used to convey important meanings is not trivial nor arbitrary. WPM is way ahead of me in this, but I have already seen a depth of meaning I never saw when I looked with Premil eyes. It will take me years of study before this tapestry of the Lord unfolds before me. Something I look forward to greatly.

The way you are describing it makes the amill view sound very complex. I take it that you don't yet know how to explain Zech14 from an amill viewpoint. No worries mate, I don't understand a lot of things too, we are all still learning.

wpm
Dec 22nd 2008, 07:52 PM
I agree, saved or lost.


What happens to the righteous when He appears? What happens to the wicked when He appears? The righteous are seen in Matthew 25:31-45 to “inherit the kingdom” and “life eternal” whereas the goats are cast “into everlasting fire” and receive “everlasting punishment” (Matthew 25:46).


I've asked about 6 times in this thread for an amill explanation of Zechariah 14 , and I did ask first.
There is a principle that it is easier to criticise than to solve a problem. I don't see Zechariah as a problem to be solved , it is simple to interpret it from a premill perspective and I have never dodged an issue and will not dodge this issue. You however have not explained yet how the heathen of Zechariah 14 who worship God fit into your amill paradigm, or how the sacrifices of Zech 14 fit into the amill paradigm. You criticise and yet offer no alternative view at all.

Zech 14:21 Yea, every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holiness unto the LORD of hosts: and all they that sacrifice shall come and take of them, and seethe therein: and in that day there shall be no more the Canaanite in the house of the LORD of hosts.

You are correct that there are sacrifices in my version of the millenium, shouldn't there be any sacrifices? Jesus put an end to sacrifices for sin , do you know any verse that states that ALL sacrifices of any sort have stopped forever since the crucifixion? This verse says nothing about animals either , it wasn't me me that chose to associate this verse with other verses about animal sacrifices. If you can't show me a verse that excludes all types of sacrifices forever after the crucifixion then you have no point at all. I was wanting to hear your view on these sacrifices and where they fit in and thought we could approach that topic conversationally.





? :hmm:

I found your explanation on the actual wording of Rev 19:15 very unfocussed and not convincing at all, and the logic quite interesting.:hmm:

I answered all your questions on Zech 14 , and Joel and Zephaniah without any question mark left , and left a string of unanswered questions from you guys. Rev 19 is the only chapter we have discussed properly so far , and I explained every supposed contradiction. We have had a lot of focus on the last verse of Zech 14 , yet I still haven't heard your viewpoint on Zech 14:21.



Zechariah 14 says these sacrifices happen, but does not mention animals at all, you haven't mentioned anything about priesthood yet, is this a new argument? I don't see a problem with sacrifices , waiting to see what the problem is here.

Zechariah 14 contradicts the amill viewpoint because it mentions heathen nations that worship the Lord when the Lord reigns on this earth and this does not fit into any amill paradigm. The amill view is that we are currently in the millenium under the rule of Christ and we as Christians are Israel. For Zech 14 to be interpreted symbolically as the current church age makes no sense because there are heathens worshipping the Lord. The descriptions also fit in better with the second coming , than the first coming. Yet many amills associate Zech 14 with the first coming and not the second coming.

14:8 And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.
14:9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.
14:10 All the land shall be turned as a plain from Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem: and it shall be lifted up, and inhabited in her place, from Benjamin's gate unto the place of the first gate, unto the corner gate, and from the tower of Hananeel unto the king's winepresses.
14:11 And men shall dwell in it, and there shall be no more utter destruction; but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited.
14:12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.
14:13 And it shall come to pass in that day, that a great tumult from the LORD shall be among them; and they shall lay hold every one on the hand of his neighbour, and his hand shall rise up against the hand of his neighbour.
14:14 And Judah also shall fight at Jerusalem; and the wealth of all the heathen round about shall be gathered together, gold, and silver, and apparel, in great abundance.
14:15 And so shall be the plague of the horse, of the mule, of the camel, and of the ass, and of all the beasts that shall be in these tents, as this plague.
14:16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.
14:17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.
14:18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.


The bible speaks for itself.




From what I can see, we have another Premil proof-text (Zechariah 14) that is littered with difficulties, contradictions and anomalies. As I have said, these supposed proof-texts create more questions about the Premil paradigm than answers. Once again you have not shown any correlation whatsoever between a Premil proof-text and Revelation 20. I can only assume from your silence that there is none.

Millennial Sacrifies

Why would the "heathen" need physical bowls to sacrifice in the house of God in a future millennium? What possible purpose is there for these vessels? What NT passage or 'millennial passage' would you consider corroborates your view of this? Do you realise that "the feast of tabernacles" is inextricably linked to the Judaic animal sacrifice system in Scripture? There is complete silence of this (if taken literally) in the NT era and in the final age to come.

Leviticus 23:34-38 describes the linkage between the feast of tabernacles and the ceremonial sacrifices:“Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, The fifteenth day of this seventh month shall be the feast of tabernacles for seven days unto the LORD.On the first day shall be an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein. Seven days ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD: on the eighth day shall be an holy convocation unto you; and ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD: it is a solemn assembly; and ye shall do no servile work therein. These are the feasts of the LORD, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations,to offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD, a burnt offering, and a meat offering, a sacrifice, and drink offerings, every thing upon his day.”

The sacrifices that accompanied the feast of tabernacles in the Old Testament required pots and basins that were suitably sanctified for holy use in the temple. These utensils were part of the old covenant ceremonial accoutrements. Exodus 38:3 tells us that Bezaleel, who was a divinely-inspired mechanic and master workman who built the tabernacle, “made all the vessels of the altar, the pots, and the shovels, and the basons, and the fleshhooks, and the firepans: all the vessels thereof made he of brass.”

Leviticus 6:24-30 tells us: “And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto Aaron and to his sons, saying, This is the law of the sin offering: In the place where the burnt offering is killed shall the sin offering be killed before the LORD: it is most holy. The priest that offereth it for sin shall eat it: in the holy place shall it be eaten, in the court of the tabernacle of the congregation. Whatsoever shall touch the flesh thereof shall be holy: and when there is sprinkled of the blood thereof upon any garment, thou shalt wash that whereon it was sprinkled in the holy place. But the earthen vessel wherein it is sodden shall be broken: and if it be sodden in a brasen pot, it shall be both scoured, and rinsed in water. All the males among the priests shall eat thereof: it is most holy. And no sin offering, whereof any of the blood is brought into the tabernacle of the congregation to reconcile withal in the holy place, shall be eaten: it shall be burnt in the fire.”

Zechariah tells us that the boiling pots were holy. He is plainly referring to their old covenant ceremonial purpose in temple worship. There the priest would boil the trespass offering and the sin offering in specially prepared vessels. This was an important aspect of the Judaic sacrificial system. In Leviticus, we see reference to the containers in which the meat was boiled. We also learn that if the vessels had been defiled in any the clay pots were to be broken, and if they were bronze pots they were to be scoured clean. Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament tells us: “It was possible to prevent this desecration in the case of copper vessels by a thorough cleansing; but not so with earthen vessels, which absorb the fat, so that it cannot be removed by washing.”

Ezekiel 46:20-24 shows their usage under the old arrangement, saying, “Then said he unto me, This is the place where the priests shall boil the trespass offering and the sin offering, where they shall bake the meat offering; that they bear them not out into the utter court, to sanctify the people. Then he brought me forth into the utter court, and caused me to pass by the four corners of the court; and, behold, in every corner of the court there was a court. In the four corners of the court there were courts joined of forty cubits long and thirty broad: these four corners were of one measure. And there was a row of building round about in them, round about them four, and it was made with boiling places under the rows round about. Then said he unto me, These are the places of them that boil, where the ministers of the house shall boil the sacrifice of the people.”

DurbanDude
Dec 23rd 2008, 03:23 AM
What happens to the righteous when He appears? What happens to the wicked when He appears? The righteous are seen in Matthew 25:31-45 to “inherit the kingdom” and “life eternal” whereas the goats are cast “into everlasting fire” and receive “everlasting punishment” (Matthew 25:46).



From what I can see, we have another Premil proof-text (Zechariah 14) that is littered with difficulties, contradictions and anomalies. As I have said, these supposed proof-texts create more questions about the Premil paradigm than answers. Once again you have not shown any correlation whatsoever between a Premil proof-text and Revelation 20. I can only assume from your silence that there is none.


I haven't seen even one anomaly. You had quite a long post, yet failed to prove that the sacrifices of Zechariah 14 are all sin related. As I read about the Feast of Tabernacles , one of the significant aspects of this feast is that most of the sacrifices were freewill offerings and not sacrifices for sin. This was a harvest feast, a feast of celebration and giving, and freewill offerings. These freewill offerings took the form of sacrifices and were not sin related. there were other feasts that focussed more on sin. This was a feast more representative of the harvest , celebrations quite appropriate for a renewed earth after the second coming. Only the priests could partake of the boiled sacrifice, priesthood meaning the saints.



Once again you have not shown any correlation whatsoever between a Premil proof-text and Revelation 20.

All these verses that I use as proof texts correlate directly with Rev 20 by showing that a post-second coming world is on this earth before a new earth, and has mortals. Anyone can see this link.

If I can show that after the second coming this earth continues to exist, the premill view on Rev 20 wins and the amill view loses. And I have shown this in Zechariah 14 and you have failed to give your interpretation of Zechariah 14, and you have failed to disprove my interpretation of Zechariah 14.

I personally don't like the focus on the millenium in this debate, and the connected focus on Rev 20. In my eyes this is a second coming renewed earth or second coming new earth debate. So you could call me a RenEarth and you a NewEarth and then possibly you will be less distracted by other issues. In my eyes , the millenium as per Rev 20 is a side issue, what will happen to the current earth after the second coming is the main issue of this debate.


I can only assume from your silence that there is none

In light of your silence on your own interpretation of Zechariah 14, can you see the humour in your comment?

I am really looking forward to debating your view on this chapter , as Revolvr and yourself have debated my view with me , hopefully you can have the courtesy to do this? And then we can move onto other verses.

wpm
Dec 23rd 2008, 04:25 AM
I haven't seen even one anomaly. You had quite a long post, yet failed to prove that the sacrifices of Zechariah 14 are all sin related. As I read about the Feast of Tabernacles , one of the significant aspects of this feast is that most of the sacrifices were freewill offerings and not sacrifices for sin. This was a harvest feast, a feast of celebration and giving, and freewill offerings. These freewill offerings took the form of sacrifices and were not sin related. there were other feasts that focussed more on sin. This was a feast more representative of the harvest , celebrations quite appropriate for a renewed earth after the second coming. Only the priests could partake of the boiled sacrifice, priesthood meaning the saints.

How do you dismiss the biblical linkage I presented between the feast of tabernacles and the animal sacrifices? You quickly divert round this as if there is not the slightest connection. However, it is scriptural outlined. How can we fairly ascertain the significance of this feast by divorcing it from something that was integral to its very existence? I know that you are keen to avoid the obvious conclusion that you must re-start the Judaic animal sacrifice system in your future millennium, but that is the clear conclusion of your locating of it on the future earth (from a literalist point of view). It is obvious that you need to explain this.

The ‘feast of tabernacles’ or ‘feast of booths’ or ‘feast of ingatherings’, also known as ‘Sukkoth’ or ‘the festival of the harvest’ was one of the annual pilgrimage festivals in Jerusalem. Jews travelled from all over the nation of Israel to keep the feast. It was an autumn festival celebrating the abundance of God’s blessings in connection with the autumn harvest. It was also a memorial of the Exodus, when the Israelites wandered in the wilderness, living in tabernacles, or tents, en route to the Promised Land.

It is believed that no less than 189 animals were sacrificed to God – more, significantly, than at any other festival in Israel's calendar. Numbers 29:12-39 records: “And on the fifteenth day of the seventh month ye shall have an holy convocation; ye shall do no servile work, and ye shall keep a feast unto the LORD seven days:And ye shall offer a burnt offering, a sacrifice made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the LORD; thirteen young bullocks, two rams, and fourteen lambs of the first year; they shall be without blemish: And their meat offering shall be of flour mingled with oil, three tenth deals unto every bullock of the thirteen bullocks, two tenth deals to each ram of the two rams, And a several tenth deal to each lamb of the fourteen lambs: And one kid of the goats for a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, his meat offering, and his drink offering. And on the second day ye shall offer twelve young bullocks, two rams, fourteen lambs of the first year without spot: And their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullocks, for the rams, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one kid of the goats for a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, and the meat offering thereof, and their drink offerings. And on the third day eleven bullocks, two rams, fourteen lambs of the first year without blemish; And their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullocks, for the rams, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one goat for a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, and his meat offering, and his drink offering. And on the fourth day ten bullocks, two rams, and fourteen lambs of the first year without blemish: Their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullocks, for the rams, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one kid of the goats for a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, his meat offering, and his drink offering. And on the fifth day nine bullocks, two rams, and fourteen lambs of the first year without spot: And their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullocks, for the rams, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one goat for a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, and his meat offering, and his drink offering. And on the sixth day eight bullocks, two rams, and fourteen lambs of the first year without blemish: And their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullocks, for the rams, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one goat for a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, his meat offering, and his drink offering. And on the seventh day seven bullocks, two rams, and fourteen lambs of the first year without blemish: And their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullocks, for the rams, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one goat for a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, his meat offering, and his drink offering. On the eighth day ye shall have a solemn assembly: ye shall do no servile work therein: But ye shall offer a burnt offering, a sacrifice made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the LORD: one bullock, one ram, seven lambs of the first year without blemish: Their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullock, for the ram, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one goat for a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, and his meat offering, and his drink offering.These things ye shall do unto the LORD in your set feasts, beside your vows, and your freewill offerings, for your burnt offerings, and for your meat offerings, and for your drink offerings, and for your peace offerings.”

Keil & Delitzsch scholarly Commentary confirms: “the feast of Tabernacles, the special regulations for the celebration of which are contained in Leviticus 23:34-36 and 39-43, was distinguished above all the other feasts of the year by the great number of burnt-offerings, which raised it into the greatest festival of joy. On the seven feast-days, the first of which was to be celebrated with sabbatical rest and a holy meeting, there were to be offered, in addition to the daily burnt-offering, every day a he-goat for a sin-offering, and seventy oxen in all for a burnt-offering during the seven days, as well as every day two rams and fourteen yearling lambs, with the requisite meat-offerings and drink-offerings. Whilst, therefore, the number of rams and lambs was double the number offered at the Passover and feast of Pentecost, the number of oxen was fivefold; for, instead of fourteen, there were seventy offered during the seven days.”

It concludes: “This multiplication of the oxen was distributed in such a way, that instead of there being ten offered every day, there were thirteen on the first day, twelve on the second, and so on, deducting one every day, so that on the seventh day there were exactly seven offered; the arrangement being probably made for the purpose of securing the holy number seven for this last day, and indicating at the same time, through the gradual diminution in the number of sacrificial oxen, the gradual decrease in the festal character of the seven festal days. The reason for this multiplication in the number of burnt-offerings is to be sought for in the nature of the feast itself. Their living in booths had already visibly represented to the people the defence and blessing of their God; and the foliage of these booths pointed out the glorious advantages of the inheritance received from the Lord.”

Is this what you anticipate will be resurrected in the Premil millennium?

wpm
Dec 23rd 2008, 04:40 AM
All these verses that I use as proof texts correlate directly with Rev 20 by showing that a post-second coming world is on this earth before a new earth, and has mortals. Anyone can see this link.

If I can show that after the second coming this earth continues to exist, the premill view on Rev 20 wins and the amill view loses. And I have shown this in Zechariah 14 and you have failed to give your interpretation of Zechariah 14, and you have failed to disprove my interpretation of Zechariah 14.

I personally don't like the focus on the millenium in this debate, and the connected focus on Rev 20. In my eyes this is a second coming renewed earth or second coming new earth debate. So you could call me a RenEarth and you a NewEarth and then possibly you will be less distracted by other issues. In my eyes , the millenium as per Rev 20 is a side issue, what will happen to the current earth after the second coming is the main issue of this debate.

Actually, we both agree on a regenerated earth. This is what the new earth is. So believing on the survival of this current earth "after the second coming" albeit in a regenerated state wins no argument. ;)

It is on what type of regenerated earth we are looking at. Premil make it little different from this earth, with the awful blight of sin, death, rebellion, sorrow, sickness and corruption continuing unabated. Amils believe it will be totally perfected as of fire and will be restored to the pre-fall state.



In light of your silence on your own interpretation of Zechariah 14, can you see the humour in your comment?

I am really looking forward to debating your view on this chapter , as Revolvr and yourself have debated my view with me , hopefully you can have the courtesy to do this? And then we can move onto other verses.


I will address this after I have ascertained your literalist interpretation of the feast and the accompanying sacrifices.

DurbanDude
Dec 23rd 2008, 06:52 AM
How do you dismiss the biblical linkage I presented between the feast of tabernacles and the animal sacrifices? You quickly divert round this as if there is not the slightest connection. However, it is scriptural outlined. How can we fairly ascertain the significance of this feast by divorcing it from something that was integral to its very existence? I know that you are keen to avoid the obvious conclusion that you must re-start the Judaic animal sacrifice system in your future millennium, but that is the clear conclusion of your locating of it on the future earth (from a literalist point of view). It is obvious that you need to explain this.

The ‘feast of tabernacles’ or ‘feast of booths’ or ‘feast of ingatherings’, also known as ‘Sukkoth’ or ‘the festival of the harvest’ was one of the annual pilgrimage festivals in Jerusalem. Jews travelled from all over the nation of Israel to keep the feast. It was an autumn festival celebrating the abundance of God’s blessings in connection with the autumn harvest. It was also a memorial of the Exodus, when the Israelites wandered in the wilderness, living in tabernacles, or tents, en route to the Promised Land.

It is believed that no less than 189 animals were sacrificed to God – more, significantly, than at any other festival in Israel's calendar. Numbers 29:12-39 records: “And on the fifteenth day of the seventh month ye shall have an holy convocation; ye shall do no servile work, and ye shall keep a feast unto the LORD seven days:And ye shall offer a burnt offering, a sacrifice made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the LORD; thirteen young bullocks, two rams, and fourteen lambs of the first year; they shall be without blemish: And their meat offering shall be of flour mingled with oil, three tenth deals unto every bullock of the thirteen bullocks, two tenth deals to each ram of the two rams, And a several tenth deal to each lamb of the fourteen lambs: And one kid of the goats for a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, his meat offering, and his drink offering. And on the second day ye shall offer twelve young bullocks, two rams, fourteen lambs of the first year without spot: And their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullocks, for the rams, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one kid of the goats for a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, and the meat offering thereof, and their drink offerings. And on the third day eleven bullocks, two rams, fourteen lambs of the first year without blemish; And their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullocks, for the rams, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one goat for a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, and his meat offering, and his drink offering. And on the fourth day ten bullocks, two rams, and fourteen lambs of the first year without blemish: Their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullocks, for the rams, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one kid of the goats for a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, his meat offering, and his drink offering. And on the fifth day nine bullocks, two rams, and fourteen lambs of the first year without spot: And their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullocks, for the rams, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner:And one goat for a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, and his meat offering, and his drink offering. And on the sixth day eight bullocks, two rams, and fourteen lambs of the first year without blemish: And their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullocks, for the rams, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one goat for a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, his meat offering, and his drink offering. And on the seventh day seven bullocks, two rams, and fourteen lambs of the first year without blemish: And their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullocks, for the rams, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one goat for a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, his meat offering, and his drink offering. On the eighth day ye shall have a solemn assembly: ye shall do no servile work therein: But ye shall offer a burnt offering, a sacrifice made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the LORD: one bullock, one ram, seven lambs of the first year without blemish: Their meat offering and their drink offerings for the bullock, for the ram, and for the lambs, shall be according to their number, after the manner: And one goat for a sin offering; beside the continual burnt offering, and his meat offering, and his drink offering.These things ye shall do unto the LORD in your set feasts, beside your vows, and your freewill offerings, for your burnt offerings, and for your meat offerings, and for your drink offerings, and for your peace offerings.”

Keil & Delitzsch scholarly Commentary confirms: “the feast of Tabernacles, the special regulations for the celebration of which are contained in Leviticus 23:34-36 and 39-43, was distinguished above all the other feasts of the year by the great number of burnt-offerings, which raised it into the greatest festival of joy. On the seven feast-days, the first of which was to be celebrated with sabbatical rest and a holy meeting, there were to be offered, in addition to the daily burnt-offering, every day a he-goat for a sin-offering, and seventy oxen in all for a burnt-offering during the seven days, as well as every day two rams and fourteen yearling lambs, with the requisite meat-offerings and drink-offerings. Whilst, therefore, the number of rams and lambs was double the number offered at the Passover and feast of Pentecost, the number of oxen was fivefold; for, instead of fourteen, there were seventy offered during the seven days.”



As I said before, there is no biblical problem with further sacrifices in a Messianic age on earth. The amazing thing about the feast of tabernacles is that there are HARDLY ANY sacrifices for sin, as your post definitely confirms. Due to the fact that Jesus was the last sin offering , obviously this small aspect of the sacrificial goat will fall away. I cannot say how the rest of the feast will be run , the bible just does not give us enough detail. I'm not sure if it will just be a celebration with just harvest-time sacrifices , like wheat or barley, or if there will be animal sacrifices.I'm not sure if the pots that obviously represent priesthood and purity will be boiled in symbolic remembrance of Jesus' sacrifice, or if they will hold harvest products or animal sacrifices. One thing I am sure of is that the ceremony will not be identical as it was in the OT because of the fulfilment of much of its original symbolism.

14:19 This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.
14:20 In that day shall there be upon the bells of the horses, HOLINESS UNTO THE LORD; and the pots in the LORD's house shall be like the bowls before the altar.
14:21 Yea, every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holiness unto the LORD of hosts: and all they that sacrifice shall come and take of them, and seethe therein: and in that day there shall be no more the Canaanite in the house of the LORD of hosts.

DurbanDude
Dec 23rd 2008, 07:17 AM
Actually, we both agree on a regenerated earth. This is what the new earth is. So believing on the survival of this current earth "after the second coming" albeit in a regenerated state wins no argument. ;).

WOW! I never thought I would hear an amill agree on a regenerated earth. :pp

Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

There are some verses that speak of the complete destruction and passing away of the first earth. The premill position explains how some verses talk of this current earth being regenerated when Jesus comes, and how some verses speak of a total new earth, occurring 1000 years later. Do you interpret Rev 21:1 as referring to only a regenerated earth?

If so , then this is a new take on amillenialism I have never heard before.:hmm:

wpm
Dec 23rd 2008, 02:41 PM
WOW! I never thought I would hear an amill agree on a regenerated earth. :pp

Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

There are some verses that speak of the complete destruction and passing away of the first earth. The premill position explains how some verses talk of this current earth being regenerated when Jesus comes, and how some verses speak of a total new earth, occurring 1000 years later. Do you interpret Rev 21:1 as referring to only a regenerated earth?

If so , then this is a new take on amillenialism I have never heard before.:hmm:

Scripture tells us that we are coming back to earth, but I believe it will be a regenerated earth (Malachi 4:1-3, I Corinthians 15:50, 2 Peter 3). It will be an earth totally purged of all corruption. What I do believe fervently is that the new heavens and a new earth (in whatever form God chooses) will appear at the Coming of Christ. It will involve (at very least) the burning up of the crust of our current earth. This current earth will be totally changed/regenerated - making it a new curse-free earth. The earth will be restored to its previous pristine condition. These passages would sway me towards the position that this earth will remain for ever - only in a new condition.

There are several passages that would suggest the continuation of this earth in some form.

Ecclesiastes 1:4 says, "the earth abideth forever."

Psalm 78:69 says, "the earth which he hath established forever."

Psalm 93:1b says, "The world also is established, that it cannot be moved."

Psalm 96:10 says, “the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved.”

Psalm 104:5 says, "Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed forever."

Psalm 148:4-6 says, “Praise him, ye heavens of heavens, and ye waters that be above the heavens. Let them praise the name of the LORD: for he commanded, and they were created. He hath also stablished them for ever and ever.”

I believe the view that this earth will be renewed is the only possibility that fulfils both sides of this expectation. We cannot ignore the two truths, we must simply reconcile them with our finite minds.

Every vestige of the fall is removed when Christ comes – never to arise again. A new earth will come-forth that is totally renewed and eternally free of corruption. When man fell all creation fell with him, when man is glorified, all of creation will be glorified with him. Creation is delivered from the curse by the fiery conflagration that regenerates this current earth and renews it to the state it was before the fall - free from, sin, wickedness, the wicked, death and wars (the awful plagues that continue to blight the Premil millennium).

Whether this world remains as a burning cinder for all eternity and a brand new earth is created or whether this current earth continues in a perfect regenerated state could be debated. The one thing I am sure of that it will be perfect and incorrupt and no corruption can ever again blight it.

wpm
Dec 23rd 2008, 02:54 PM
As I said before, there is no biblical problem with further sacrifices in a Messianic age on earth. The amazing thing about the feast of tabernacles is that there are HARDLY ANY sacrifices for sin, as your post definitely confirms. Due to the fact that Jesus was the last sin offering , obviously this small aspect of the sacrificial goat will fall away. I cannot say how the rest of the feast will be run , the bible just does not give us enough detail. I'm not sure if it will just be a celebration with just harvest-time sacrifices , like wheat or barley, or if there will be animal sacrifices.I'm not sure if the pots that obviously represent priesthood and purity will be boiled in symbolic remembrance of Jesus' sacrifice, or if they will hold harvest products or animal sacrifices. One thing I am sure of is that the ceremony will not be identical as it was in the OT because of the fulfilment of much of its original symbolism.

14:19 This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.
14:20 In that day shall there be upon the bells of the horses, HOLINESS UNTO THE LORD; and the pots in the LORD's house shall be like the bowls before the altar.
14:21 Yea, every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holiness unto the LORD of hosts: and all they that sacrifice shall come and take of them, and seethe therein: and in that day there shall be no more the Canaanite in the house of the LORD of hosts.

Amils reject the idea that the old covenant will be resurrected on the post-Second Coming earth in any shape or form. They see it as being totally abolished in Christ. When He came in His earthly ministry these things remained but the cross fulfilled them and superseded them. Why would Christ need all this Judaic ritual as a memorial or in remembrance of Him? Will the nail prints in His hands and feet not be a satisfactory remembrance?

I don't want to be unfair to you but I feel you are cherry-picking the elements of the feast of tabernacles you feel would be acceptable to you on the new earth and then placing them there instead of taking the package including the reference to "sacrifices” in Zechariah 14. Of course you haven't give us your thoughts on Ezekiel 40-47 yet. It will be interested to see where you place that and how you explain that. The vast majority of Premils place that on the millennial earth.

wpm
Dec 23rd 2008, 03:04 PM
As I said before, there is no biblical problem with further sacrifices in a Messianic age on earth. The amazing thing about the feast of tabernacles is that there are HARDLY ANY sacrifices for sin, as your post definitely confirms. Due to the fact that Jesus was the last sin offering , obviously this small aspect of the sacrificial goat will fall away. I cannot say how the rest of the feast will be run , the bible just does not give us enough detail. I'm not sure if it will just be a celebration with just harvest-time sacrifices , like wheat or barley, or if there will be animal sacrifices.I'm not sure if the pots that obviously represent priesthood and purity will be boiled in symbolic remembrance of Jesus' sacrifice, or if they will hold harvest products or animal sacrifices. One thing I am sure of is that the ceremony will not be identical as it was in the OT because of the fulfilment of much of its original symbolism.

14:19 This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.
14:20 In that day shall there be upon the bells of the horses, HOLINESS UNTO THE LORD; and the pots in the LORD's house shall be like the bowls before the altar.
14:21 Yea, every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holiness unto the LORD of hosts: and all they that sacrifice shall come and take of them, and seethe therein: and in that day there shall be no more the Canaanite in the house of the LORD of hosts.

Who do you feel will perform these ordinances?

Colossians 2:14 plainly declares, speaking of these OT ordinances, “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.”

Q. When did/will the "blotting out the handwriting of ordinances" occur?

A. Christ "took it out of the way" by "nailing it to his cross.”

These ordinances embraced the old covenant civil, ceremonial or ecclesiastical law. They were finished at the cross.

When Christ made that final sacrifice for sin He satisfied all God’s holy demands for sin and uncleanness and thus Christ became the final propitiation and substitution for the sinner. Ephesians 2:15 also says, “Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances.”

Jesus did away with any need or reliance upon the outward keeping of the old covenant religious system. The cross fulfilled forever God’s demand for a perfect once-for-all sacrifice.

Colossians 2:20-22 sums up the biblical position today: “Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle not; Which all are to perish with the using) after the commandments and doctrines of men?”

Those who argue for a return to the old system fail to see that it has been rendered obsolete through the cross.

RevLogos
Dec 23rd 2008, 04:37 PM
DurbanDude,

I was I have to admit, a bit stunned to find that you believe we will be engaging in sacrifices again in this New Age. That seems counter to everything I know about Jesus and the kingdom of God. Is this part of the mainstream Premil belief?

Regarding the Feast of the Tabernacles, lets take a close look (NIV):

Zec 14:16 Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the LORD Almighty, and to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.
Zec 14:17 If any of the peoples of the earth do not go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD Almighty, they will have no rain.
Zec 14:18 If the Egyptian people do not go up and take part, they will have no rain. The LORD will bring on them the plague he inflicts on the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.

Zech 14:16 and 18 are saying much the same thing. I think we could agree that in 16, the "survivors from the nations that attacked Jerusalem" are Gentile nations.

So the first question is, are these Gentile believers in Christ? Or are they still pagan? It seems very un-Jesus-like, for God to force people, under threat of famine, to take part in feasts they have no knowledge of and no desire to do.

The Feast of the Tabernacles is a time of remembrance of when the Jews were wandering the desert. It is also known as the Feast of the Booths (or Sukkot) because of how the Jews were living. As I understand it, for 7 days in autumn Jews would come to the temple and live temporarily in these booths, just as they did in the wilderness. Thus this feast celebrates part of history unique to the Jews.

Being unique to the Jews and their history in the wilderness, why would God command Gentiles to celebrate this feast? Even believers in Christ? Does it make sense that Gentiles would celebrate this Feast? It doesn't to me. I imagine the Jews of the day would also have been scratching their head at this one.

So why would Zechariah say this? Paul gives us a hint

Col 2:16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.
Col 2:17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.

Paul is saying these Feasts are a type, or shadow, of things that were to come. The reality is in Christ. The Jews of the day would never have understood this. So, taken literally, these verses make no sense to either Jews or Christians. Therefore there must be something behind the events that has meaning. With Paul's words we can go back to Zechariah and see something completely different. But to do so requires we abandon a literal interpretation of the event itself and look for meaning behind the words.

Thus the Premils seem left with the very ugly notion of restarting sacrifices. Both the Premils and the Jews are left with the unexplainable notion of Gentiles engaging in uniquely Jewish Feasts.

The reality is in Christ.

John146
Dec 23rd 2008, 04:53 PM
There is nothing in all you say to indicate a complete destruction of mankind. There is an earthquake, mountains removed, worldwide destruction, but a few survivors, this is biblical. You listed your opinions on how you feel no-one can survive God's angry wrath, but I need bible verses, not opinion. I feel the destruction will be world-wide, and very intense, but there will be a few survivors.

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.

Zech 14:16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.14:17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain. 14:18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles..



I believe at the second coming , most of earth will be desolate. The descriptions of the day of wrath are pretty clear on the world-wide destruction. Imagine every mountain laid low. At the second coming the bible speaks of how few the survivors are, and yet later speaks of how there will be nations throughout the earth. Regions originally desolate are be re-populated, this is no contradiction , but obvious.

Both passages you quoted are actually contradictions to the amill viewpoint and not contradictions to the premill viewpoint.

Zech
14:8 And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.14:9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.

THEN:
14:16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles. 14:17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.14:18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.

These passages show that when the Lord reigns from Jerusalem there will be surviving "heathen" nations (not Israel). They will have consequences if they do not worship the Lord, they will be living under a rule of discipline.

A) this does not fit in with an amill view of this current age , where the church is Israel , and the rest of the nations do not worship the Lord at all. How would many of the heathen nations in this current age be worshipping the Lord at the feast of tabernacles? I would like to hear an amills interpretation of these verses as referring to the current church age.

B) this does not fit into an amill view of the new earth, because the new earth does not have any "heathen" there, because all are spiritually of Israel.

I really would like to know how Zech 14 fits ANY amill age, BC, church age, or new earth. But then you must explain the existence of the heathen nations who worship the Lord or have no rain.

How do you explain how places like ****tim, Egypt and Edom still exist after the Lord reigns in Jerusalem?
Joel 3:17 So shall ye know that I am the LORD your God dwelling in Zion, my holy mountain: then shall Jerusalem be holy, and there shall no strangers pass through her any more.3:18 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the mountains shall drop down new wine, and the hills shall flow with milk, and all the rivers of Judah shall flow with waters, and a fountain shall come forth out of the house of the LORD, and shall water the valley of ****tim.
3:19 Egypt shall be a desolation, and Edom shall be a desolate wilderness, for the violence against the children of Judah, because they have shed innocent blood in their land.How do you reconcile Zechariah 14:18 with Joel 3:19? Joel 3 says Egypt will be a desolation and Zech 14 says that it still exists.

DurbanDude
Dec 24th 2008, 10:34 AM
How do you reconcile Zechariah 14:18 with Joel 3:19? Joel 3 says Egypt will be a desolation and Zech 14 says that it still exists.[/color][/font][/size][/color][/font][/color][/font][/size]

I covered this question twice in this thread. I believe most of the world will be desolate from the earthquake and god's wrath at the second coming. The earth will be decimated and have very little population.

Then the millenial earth is re-generated and re-populated and then these previously desolated regions become populated again.

DurbanDude
Dec 24th 2008, 10:52 AM
So the first question is, are these Gentile believers in Christ? Or are they still pagan? It seems very un-Jesus-like, for God to force people, under threat of famine, to take part in feasts they have no knowledge of and no desire to do.

I only believe that God is going to do this because this is exactly what these verses are actually saying. The verses are clear, and speak for themselves, your debate here is with the bible,this is what the bible says will happen in Zechariah 14. Maybe you have an alternative viewpoint or another bible translation that words this differently?

The bible is clear who they are, they are heathen. This means they are not of Israel. You and I are both clear that Israel means the true church of God. They are not of the true church of God,and yet the bible says they are here on earth and are those left of all the nations after the attack on Jerusalem, when the Lord reigns on earth. This is all very clear to me, because Zechariah is so clear.


Thus the Premils seem left with the very ugly notion of restarting sacrifices. Both the Premils and the Jews are left with the unexplainable notion of Gentiles engaging in uniquely Jewish Feasts.

The reality is in Christ.

These feasts, or the notion of them restarting, are not ugly to me. I would actually love to participate, not as a religious requirement as in the OT, but as per the nature of the feast , an offering of appreciation.

wpm
Dec 24th 2008, 03:24 PM
I covered this question twice in this thread. I believe most of the world will be desolate from the earthquake and god's wrath at the second coming. The earth will be decimated and have very little population.

Then the millenial earth is re-generated and re-populated and then these previously desolated regions become populated again.

What do you mean regenerated?

How is it regenerated?

From what I can see you are intimating 3 earths, this one, the millennial earth (new earth 1) and the new earth (new earth 2) .

DurbanDude
Dec 24th 2008, 04:22 PM
What do you mean regenerated?

How is it regenerated?

From what I can see you are intimating 3 earths, this one, the millennial earth (new earth 1) and the new earth (new earth 2) .

It is regenerated because the descriptions at the second coming involve massive changes to the earth, every mountain laid low , huge parts of the earth made desolate and detroyed. Very few survivors anywhere. Whole regions are burnt up and in many areas there are no survivors at all. Then the Lord reigns from Jerusalem and restores nations and blesses nations and the earth becomes a blessed and habitable place.

Then there are other verses that speak of this earth passing away, and a new earth.

So yes , I am intimating this earth, then this earth transformed ,then a new earth.

John146
Dec 24th 2008, 04:55 PM
I covered this question twice in this thread. I believe most of the world will be desolate from the earthquake and god's wrath at the second coming. The earth will be decimated and have very little population.

Then the millennial earth is re-generated and re-populated and then these previously desolated regions become populated again.Sorry, but I find that to be highly implausible. Where is the scripture that speaks of this supposed re-population of the earth following the second coming?

Also, what would it be exactly about those who survive that makes it so that they are allowed to survive while everyone else does not? Are they just the lucky ones?

wpm
Dec 24th 2008, 06:28 PM
It is regenerated because the descriptions at the second coming involve massive changes to the earth, every mountain laid low , huge parts of the earth made desolate and detroyed. Very few survivors anywhere. Whole regions are burnt up and in many areas there are no survivors at all. Then the Lord reigns from Jerusalem and restores nations and blesses nations and the earth becomes a blessed and habitable place.

Then there are other verses that speak of this earth passing away, and a new earth.

So yes , I am intimating this earth, then this earth transformed ,then a new earth.

So what happens with your millennial earth? Is it also burnt up or does Christ just evaporate it?

DurbanDude
Dec 25th 2008, 03:08 PM
Sorry, but I find that to be highly implausible. Where is the scripture that speaks of this supposed re-population of the earth following the second coming?

Also, what would it be exactly about those who survive that makes it so that they are allowed to survive while everyone else does not? Are they just the lucky ones?

There are numerous verse that refer to the survival of nations here on earth at the second coming. If you have been following this thread then you will see that I have tried very hard to get a discussion going with regard to these verses because they are so clear to me that there will be survivors here. My own view is not consistent with other premills , I believe that life and death , disease and health, disability and wholeness are very random on this earth because of the sinful nature of mankind. God uses these for His purpose and can bring His purposes and fairness into a random and unfair and evil world , but it is random.

So I personally believe that at the second coming , all the saints of all time will be resurrected to be with Jesus forever. There will be some random mortal survivors, just like a lot of survivors of some disaster on earth are quite randomly lucky to survive, and this is often not related to spiritual blessing.

God is more concerned with eternal destiny, so the fact that some humans whose destiny is the lake of fire will last a little longer than others on this earth does not shift the luck in their favour in the big picture.

I believe the only verses amills can use as proof-texts are those that show a COMPLETE destruction of all the lives of all the ungodly on this earth.As far as I know there are only two such verses that are easily explained, as opposed to MANY verses that show the survival of the ungodly at the second coming.

wpm
Dec 25th 2008, 03:11 PM
there are numerous verse that refer to the survival of nations here on earth at the second coming. If you have been following this thread then you will see that I have tried very hard to get a discussion going with regard to these verses because they are so clear to me that there will be survivors here. My own view is not consistent with other premills , I believe that life and death , disease and health, disability and wholeness are very random on this earth because of the sinful nature of mankind. God uses these for His purpose and can bring His purposes and fairness into a random and unfair and evil world , but it is random.

So I personally believe that at the second coming , all the saints of all time will be resurrected to be with Jesus forever. There will be some random mortal survivors, just like a lot of survivors of some disaster on earth are quite randomly lucky to survive, and this is often not related to spiritual blessing.

God is more concerned with eternal destiny, so the fact that some humans whose destiny is the lake of fire will last a little longer than others on this earth does not shift the luck in their favour in the big picture.

I believe the only verses amills can use as an proof-texts are those that show a COMPLETE destruction of all the lives of all the ungodly on thius earth.As faras I know there are only two such verses that are easily explained, as opposed to MANY verses that show the survival of the ungodly at the second coming.

Could you briefly give me a line on who the sheep are and who the goats are? I am still unsure whether you view these as nations or that they are mortals that inhabit the milllennial earth. So:

(1) Who exactly are the sheep at this judgment?
(2) Who exactly are the goats at this judgment?

DurbanDude
Dec 25th 2008, 03:16 PM
So what happens with your millennial earth? Is it also burnt up or does Christ just evaporate it?


21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

It will pass away,and there will be a new earth.

DurbanDude
Dec 25th 2008, 03:21 PM
Could you briefly give me a line on who the sheep are and who the goats are? I am still unsure whether you view these as nations or that they are mortals that inhabit the milllennial earth. So:

(1) Who exactly are the sheep at this judgment?
(2) Who exactly are the goats at this judgment?


1) Sheep are the saints who are resurrected and live with Christ forever
2) Goats are those whose destiny is the lake of fire, they are the mortal survivors, the heathen , and the unsaved dead. There is a great separation at the second coming. The nations are under the rule of the iron rod. The resurrected reign with Christ , they are not under the iron rod rule of Jesus over the nations, because they reign with Him.

DurbanDude
Dec 25th 2008, 04:08 PM
Sorry, but I find that to be highly implausible. Where is the scripture that speaks of this supposed re-population of the earth following the second coming?

Also, what would it be exactly about those who survive that makes it so that they are allowed to survive while everyone else does not? Are they just the lucky ones?

The following verses speak of an age when prophesy has ceased. This cannot be the church age , because during the church age ,during Paul's own ministry there were prophets and prophecies. Yet in the age described below there are mortals (the parents thrust him through) and parents and their children, and some sin. The context of Zechariah 12/13 is the Lord intervening in a military attack on Jerusalem and establishing a fountain of purity.

Zech 13:1 In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness.
13:2 And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD of hosts, that I will cut off the names of the idols out of the land, and they shall no more be remembered: and also I will cause the prophets and the unclean spirit to pass out of the land.
13:3 And it shall come to pass, that when any shall yet prophesy, then his father and his mother that begat him shall say unto him, Thou shalt not live; for thou speakest lies in the name of the LORD: and his father and his mother that begat him shall thrust him through when he prophesieth.


This verse refers to the heathen (those who are not part of spiritual Israel). The context is the Lord intervening in a military attack on Jerusalem and being king of all the earth and there being living waters from Jerusalem:
14:16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.
14:17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.
14:18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles
We see a strange age here when heathen nations exist, and are under a discipline where they have to go to the feast of tabernacles every year. I have not yet heard an amill explanation of this age mentioned here. Some hint that it refers to the current church age, and yet do not explain how the heathen nations (those not of true Israel) worship God.

I had a discussion with wpm about the following verse , and found the amill conclusion to be very illogical. This verse is
19:14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
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.

I feel all three of these verses are best explained by the survival of nations after the second coming. By implication these nations are not the resurrected saints because the resurrected saints have eternal life and reign with Christ right from the second coming. We both know this from other verses in the bible. These nations need discipline, are heathen , occasionally falsely prophesy , and individuals can be killed. I have a few more to discuss once we are finished discussing these three verses.

If you are willing to discuss these 3 verses, also kindly give me your alternative interpretation of how you feel these verses fit into your amill paradigm instead of just debating my view without giving alternatives.

wpm
Dec 25th 2008, 04:25 PM
1) Sheep are the saints who are resurrected and live with Christ forever
2) Goats are those whose destiny is the lake of fire, they are the mortal survivors, the heathen , and the unsaved dead. There is a great separation at the second coming. The nations are under the rule of the iron rod. The resurrected reign with Christ , they are not under the iron rod rule of Jesus over the nations, because they reign with Him.

So all the sheep are glorified and enter the millennial earth perfected? Am I right that there is no one else saved after the sheep/goat separation? Does the heathen that are placed on the left hand enter the millennial earth? If so, do they do so in their mortal bodies? Do all of them or some of them inhabit the millennial earth or go to hell? If not all, what determines who will enter the millennial earth or not?

wpm
Dec 25th 2008, 04:26 PM
21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

It will pass away,and there will be a new earth.

Is it regenerated or just vanished?

DurbanDude
Dec 25th 2008, 04:36 PM
Is it regenerated or just vanished?

In the light of those verses that you have quoted about the current earth never passing away, I am starting to re-look at this , and don't want to commit myself either way. Thanks for showing me those verses, they have to be considered as well and I take time to develop a proper bible-based view. At the moment I am actually considering a partially regenerated earth at the second coming, because I believe many verses show this. Then possibly a full regeneration of this earth into a new earth at the end of the millenium.



There are several passages that would suggest the continuation of this earth in some form.

Ecclesiastes 1:4 says, "the earth abideth forever."

Psalm 78:69 says, "the earth which he hath established forever."

Psalm 93:1b says, "The world also is established, that it cannot be moved."

Psalm 96:10 says, “the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved.”

Psalm 104:5 says, "Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed forever."

Psalm 148:4-6 says, “Praise him, ye heavens of heavens, and ye waters that be above the heavens. Let them praise the name of the LORD: for he commanded, and they were created. He hath also stablished them for ever and ever.”

DurbanDude
Dec 25th 2008, 04:55 PM
So all the sheep are glorified and enter the millennial earth perfected? Am I right that there is no one else saved after the sheep/goat separation? Does the heathen that are placed on the left hand enter the millennial earth? If so, do they do so in their mortal bodies? Do all of them or some of them inhabit the millennial earth or go to hell? If not all, what determines who will enter the millennial earth or not?

wpm, you have asked these questions before and I answered them in this very thread. :o

As I've said before , the separation of the sheep and goats is parable showing destiny and not timing, just as the parable of the five lazy virgins only knocking on the door of the marriage after the bridegroom has arrived is about destiny and not timing.

wpm
Dec 25th 2008, 05:05 PM
wpm, you have asked these questions before and I answered them in this very thread. :o

As I've said before , the separation of the sheep and goats is parable showing destiny and not timing, just as the parable of the five lazy virgins only knocking on the door of the marriage after the bridegroom has arrived is about destiny and not timing.

I would like answers to these as I am still unsure where you stand on these. With us interacting back and forward I feel this would be helpful to my understanding of your position. I would appreciate clarification.

DurbanDude
Dec 26th 2008, 05:54 AM
I would like answers to these as I am still unsure where you stand on these. With us interacting back and forward I feel this would be helpful to my understanding of your position. I would appreciate clarification.

wpm , you said you would answer my question about the heathen of Zech 14 when I answered you about Zech 14:21. I did answer that question as best I can. And I have answered these questions as well, anyone who reads this thread can see that I have given you clarity on these questions. Now you are asking me to repeat answers when you still haven't answered me on my questions. I really believe it lacks courtesy to have one-sided questioning and no answers. If you are still looking into Zech 14 then I don't mind if you avoid answering , but if you do have a set of beliefs about this chapter please could you just answer them. I would also like the opportunity to look into your beliefs and see if they fit your own paradigm.

wpm
Dec 26th 2008, 04:47 PM
wpm , you said you would answer my question about the heathen of Zech 14 when I answered you about Zech 14:21. I did answer that question as best I can. And I have answered these questions as well, anyone who reads this thread can see that I have given you clarity on these questions. Now you are asking me to repeat answers when you still haven't answered me on my questions. I really believe it lacks courtesy to have one-sided questioning and no answers. If you are still looking into Zech 14 then I don't mind if you avoid answering , but if you do have a set of beliefs about this chapter please could you just answer them. I would also like the opportunity to look into your beliefs and see if they fit your own paradigm.

I am sorry that you won't clarify these simple points and reasonable queries.

You know I was waiting for your explanation on Zecharaiah 14, as I made the initial request. The reason is, in my experience, this is the No. 2 Premil proof text, yet (I feel) Premils struggle as much with this difficult passage as Amils. Anyway, I answered your previous query to QD:

http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1918848&postcount=282 (http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1918848&postcount=282)

DurbanDude
Dec 27th 2008, 06:23 AM
Hi wpm , I pasted your answer into this thread, for ease of reference:


Zechariah 14 describes the global worship of God and identifies it specifically with one of the Jewish feasts the feast of tabernacles. Because Zechariah’s audience was exclusively Old Testament Jews, he tries to depict the impending New Testament era/economy in terms that would be easily understood by the listener/reader. Whilst the detail described in Zechariah 14 was presented in terms of the law (which his reader could fully relate to), it doesn’t in any way suggest a return to the law; rather, the detail has new covenant realities today. The prophecy wasn’t intended to be a scrupulous literal account of the new economy but rather a general overview of this new arrangement. When the Old Testament prophets described an improved economy, they described it in terms that made sense to the old covenant Israelites to whom they were writing. Thus, it is logical that a future state would be described in old covenant terms, even though these terms would not be an exact outline of the approaching condition.

The idea that Zechariah is predicting a return to old covenant worship is preposterous and is dismissed by numerous New Testament Scripture. Christ abolished imperfect ordinance 2,000 years ago. The old system of sacrifices (types) ended at Calvary when Christ became the final sacrifice – forever. Why would God restore animal sacrifices when He sent His Son to make one final all-sufficient sacrifice for sin? It is wrong to place greater weight on a symbolic Old Testament prophecy than to the repeated clear, simple and literal teaching of the New-Testament revelation. After all, it is the complete revelation of God’s truth.



Thanks for giving me this reply about Zechariah 14. I prefer a literal interpretation and feel it fits a lot better, and prefer literal interpretations unless a certain passage is so obviously symbolic. Nevertheless you have the right to interpret passages symbolically because the bible is such a symbolic book.

HOWEVER , your symbolic interpretation has to be consistent with your own beliefs. When I enter the amill mindset and read Zechariah 14 , the part that I find inconsistent and unable to fit the church age is as follows:


14:16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.
14:17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.
14:18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.

I have 2 problems with the above verses being a symbolic representation of the church age after the first coming:


1) If Zechariah is symbolic of the FIRST COMING of Jesus- why does it refer to those from the nations that are "left". If Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection were a "spiritual war", this reference to those that are left worshipping the Lord doesn't make sense, even symbolically.

2) Why are the heathen (those not of spiritual Israel , those outside the church) expected to worship at the feast of tabernacles during the church age?

DurbanDude
Dec 27th 2008, 06:58 AM
So all the sheep are glorified and enter the millennial earth perfected? Am I right that there is no one else saved after the sheep/goat separation? Does the heathen that are placed on the left hand enter the millennial earth? If so, do they do so in their mortal bodies? Do all of them or some of them inhabit the millennial earth or go to hell? If not all, what determines who will enter the millennial earth or not?
You already know my beliefs about Matthew 25 and you already know my beliefs about what happens at the second coming but I will repeat both to you:

Matthew 25 has a parable about the sheep and the goats, and has 2 other parables. As I have said before this is a parable, parables teach spiritual principles. Matt25 is more of a spiritual principle of the destiny of the two groups and an urgency to stay prepared than any specific timing of the 3 parables. If you start analysing timing instead of just getting a spiritual principle then the parable of the 10 virgins indicates that the 5 lazy virgins are kept seperate but try to get into the kingdom AFTER the bridegroom arrives but can't, yet the parable of the sheep and goats says they are in the lake of fire immediately.

1)What happens is very simple, when Jesus comes ALL the saints are resurrected and rule from Jerusalem with the Lord. There is no war and little sin thatis dealt with immediately. Jerusalem is blessed and no sin occurs there.

2)Some of the unsaved survive as mortals and then live and die in a better renewed environment under the disciplined rule of Christ. They can still receive blessing and curses depending on their behaviour. Some of them will be Jewish (but not of true Israel -this is the true church of both Jews and non-Jews) and have especially blessed mortal lives. They will believe because they have seen the Lord (all eyes will see Him), but are not saved because they did not have true faith. When they are resurrected at the resurrection of the unrighteous they will all be cast into the lake of fire.

3)The rest of the unsaved will die at the second coming and will join all the unsaved dead of all the ages. They will be resurrected at the resurrection of the unrighteous and be cast into the lake of fire with all those mortals who lived during the millenium.

wpm
Dec 27th 2008, 03:44 PM
Hi wpm , I pasted your answer into this thread, for ease of reference:


Thanks for giving me this reply about Zechariah 14. I prefer a literal interpretation and feel it fits a lot better, and prefer literal interpretations unless a certain passage is so obviously symbolic. Nevertheless you have the right to interpret passages symbolically because the bible is such a symbolic book.

HOWEVER , your symbolic interpretation has to be consistent with your own beliefs. When I enter the amill mindset and read Zechariah 14 , the part that I find inconsistent and unable to fit the church age is as follows:


14:16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.
14:17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.
14:18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the LORD will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.

I have 2 problems with the above verses being a symbolic representation of the church age after the first coming:


1) If Zechariah is symbolic of the FIRST COMING of Jesus- why does it refer to those from the nations that are "left". If Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection were a "spiritual war", this reference to those that are left worshipping the Lord doesn't make sense, even symbolically.

2) Why are the heathen (those not of spiritual Israel , those outside the church) expected to worship at the feast of tabernacles during the church age?




Remember this was written around 500 yrs before Christ. This prophecy was made within the confines of the old covenant set-up. Natural Jerusalem was still the centre of global worship to the King of Glory. Israel still represented the totality of God’s relationship with mankind, Judah being the choice tribe. Zachariah was looking forward into the future and articulating the promise of salvation to the nations (something that never before happened). The Gentile nations still hadn't begun to embrace the truth. This would not happen in any significant way until Cornelius’ house. At the time of writing, the idea of the New Testament Church would have been totally inconceivable to the Jewish mind. The different revelations of this future period were therefore done in Old Testament language and with an old covenant understanding.

1 Corinthians 13:9-12 tells us of today, “For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.”

Zechariah 14 was given with the veiled understanding that the old covenant prophets possessed.

I know most Bible students acknowledge that the Old Testament Jews and the New Testament Jews struggled with the idea that the Gentiles would be brought into a similar relationship with the Jew. To them the Gospel stopped at Israel’s borders. Look at the only Gentile city, town or village that repented in the old covenant period - Nineveh. Jonah didn’t in any way want to bring the truth to it. This was anathema to the Jew. Even the Jewish early Church battled with the same. Peter was given a hard time for making his move towards the Gentiles.

The Pharisees and their followers had a mistaken hyper-literalist attitude to the Old Testament prophecies, which caused them to miss the spiritual nature of the kingdom that God intended. They anticipated a physical earthly temporal earthly Jewish kingdom instead of viewing the kingdom as spiritual, heavenly and eternal. The Pharisees looked for a Messiah who would set up a physical authoritarian reign over the whole earth. They looked for a restored kingdom in Israel that would rule over the Gentile nations with a rod of iron. I feel a lot of their confusion emanted from taking passages like this one hyper-literally, when they were in fact meant to be a spiritual picture of the change that would happen through the Gospel.

wpm
Dec 27th 2008, 04:06 PM
You already know my beliefs about Matthew 25 and you already know my beliefs about what happens at the second coming but I will repeat both to you:

Matthew 25 has a parable about the sheep and the goats, and has 2 other parables. As I have said before this is a parable, parables teach spiritual principles. Matt25 is more of a spiritual principle of the destiny of the two groups and an urgency to stay prepared than any specific timing of the 3 parables. If you start analysing timing instead of just getting a spiritual principle then the parable of the 10 virgins indicates that the 5 lazy virgins are kept seperate but try to get into the kingdom AFTER the bridegroom arrives but can't, yet the parable of the sheep and goats says they are in the lake of fire immediately.

1)What happens is very simple, when Jesus comes ALL the saints are resurrected and rule from Jerusalem with the Lord. There is no war and little sin thatis dealt with immediately. Jerusalem is blessed and no sin occurs there.

2)Some of the unsaved survive as mortals and then live and die in a better renewed environment under the disciplined rule of Christ. They can still receive blessing and curses depending on their behaviour. Some of them will be Jewish (but not of true Israel -this is the true church of both Jews and non-Jews) and have especially blessed mortal lives. They will believe because they have seen the Lord (all eyes will see Him), but are not saved because they did not have true faith. When they are resurrected at the resurrection of the unrighteous they will all be cast into the lake of fire.

3)The rest of the unsaved will die at the second coming and will join all the unsaved dead of all the ages. They will be resurrected at the resurrection of the unrighteous and be cast into the lake of fire with all those mortals who lived during the millenium.

Are you saying that the sheep/goat judgment is not an actual judgment of the righteous and the wicked that occurs at the Second Advent?
If it is at the Second Advent are you saying some of the goats are immediately destroyed and some survive?
Does anyone survive the fiery destruction which occurs at the end of the millennium?

RevLogos
Dec 27th 2008, 04:15 PM
I started a separate thread "Understanding Zechariah 14".

DurbanDude
Dec 27th 2008, 09:43 PM
Are you saying that the sheep/goat judgment is not an actual judgment of the righteous and the wicked that occurs at the Second Advent?


I am saying that it is representative of the separation at the Second advent, which is a judgement. It is also a description of the final destiny of the goats.


Does anyone survive the fiery destruction which occurs at the end of the millennium?

Only the resurrected saints survive this. I believe everyone else is ungodly and will be destroyed

DurbanDude
Dec 27th 2008, 09:47 PM
Remember this was written around 500 yrs before Christ. This prophecy was made within the confines of the old covenant set-up. Natural Jerusalem was still the centre of global worship to the King of Glory. Israel still represented the totality of God’s relationship with mankind, Judah being the choice tribe. Zachariah was looking forward into the future and articulating the promise of salvation to the nations (something that never before happened). The Gentile nations still hadn't begun to embrace the truth. This would not happen in any significant way until Cornelius’ house. At the time of writing, the idea of the New Testament Church would have been totally inconceivable to the Jewish mind. The different revelations of this future period were therefore done in Old Testament language and with an old covenant understanding.

1 Corinthians 13:9-12 tells us of today, “For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.”

Zechariah 14 was given with the veiled understanding that the old covenant prophets possessed.

I know most Bible students acknowledge that the Old Testament Jews and the New Testament Jews struggled with the idea that the Gentiles would be brought into a similar relationship with the Jew. To them the Gospel stopped at Israel’s borders. Look at the only Gentile city, town or village that repented in the old covenant period - Nineveh. Jonah didn’t in any way want to bring the truth to it. This was anathema to the Jew. Even the Jewish early Church battled with the same. Peter was given a hard time for making his move towards the Gentiles.

The Pharisees and their followers had a mistaken hyper-literalist attitude to the Old Testament prophecies, which caused them to miss the spiritual nature of the kingdom that God intended. They anticipated a physical earthly temporal earthly Jewish kingdom instead of viewing the kingdom as spiritual, heavenly and eternal. The Pharisees looked for a Messiah who would set up a physical authoritarian reign over the whole earth. They looked for a restored kingdom in Israel that would rule over the Gentile nations with a rod of iron. I feel a lot of their confusion emanted from taking passages like this one hyper-literally, when they were in fact meant to be a spiritual picture of the change that would happen through the Gospel.

You still didn't answer my two questions:

1) If Zechariah 14 is symbolic of the FIRST COMING of Jesus- why does it refer to those from the nations that are "left". If Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection were a "spiritual war", this reference to those that are left worshipping the Lord doesn't make sense, even symbolically.

2) Why are the heathen (those not of spiritual Israel , those outside the church) expected to worship at the feast of tabernacles during the church age?

wpm
Dec 27th 2008, 09:58 PM
I am saying that it is representative of the separation at the Second advent, which is a judgement. It is also a description of the final destiny of the goats.



Only the resurrected saints survive this. I believe everyone else is ungodly and will be destroyed

Is there a 2nd rapture to take the saints off the earth before it is destroyed?

DurbanDude
Dec 27th 2008, 10:07 PM
Is there a 2nd rapture to take the saints off the earth before it is destroyed?

I wouldn't like to use the term "rapture" because of its many connotations and association with the resurrection. I believe there is little said about that exact moment. All I know is that we will be with the Lord forever right from the second coming, through the millenium and then after the millenium in the New Jerusalem.

wpm
Dec 27th 2008, 10:07 PM
You still didn't answer my two questions:

1) If Zechariah 14 is symbolic of the FIRST COMING of Jesus- why does it refer to those from the nations that are "left". If Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection were a "spiritual war", this reference to those that are left worshipping the Lord doesn't make sense, even symbolically.

2) Why are the heathen (those not of spiritual Israel , those outside the church) expected to worship at the feast of tabernacles during the church age?

All men in this age are called to come to Christ. That is the Gospel message. At the time Zecharaiah prophesied this the Gentiles were all heathen. Acts 17:30-31 says, “And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.”

This passage speaks of a period of “ignorance” in history when these deluded Gentiles where blinded to their need of salvation which “God winked at.” This period was plainly before the cross when the Gospel was overwhelmingly restricted to the population of natural Israel. This time of “ignorance” had now disappeared when Paul preached this message (nearly 2,000 years ago); a new economy had been introduced which saw the Gospel message go out to all the nations and “now” required “all men every where to repent.” The message of repentance has now been widened out to encompass a once totally paganised world in order that “all men everywhere” throughout “the world” would receive the same good news of salvation that natural Israel solely received as a nation, prior to the Cross. The original confirms, “the times of this ignorance God hupereido (or) winked at (or) overlooked (or) didn’t punish.” The book of Acts sees the turning of the tide and the preaching forth of this broad non-racial trans-national Gospel – a Gospel that required “all men every where to repent.”

The nations were all against Christ and Jerusalem before the Gospel expanse. Zecharaiah 14 was explaining that God would ultimately destroy every foe of the Church, however, those among the nations who yielded to Him would be saved. There was/are 2 different responses from the Gentiles.

wpm
Dec 27th 2008, 11:08 PM
I wouldn't like to use the term "rapture" because of its many connotations and association with the resurrection. I believe there is little said about that exact moment. All I know is that we will be with the Lord forever right from the second coming, through the millenium and then after the millenium in the New Jerusalem.

When the millennial earth is destroyed what happens to the righteous? Surely they can't pass away with the earth? Are they caught up in a second catching away?

John146
Dec 30th 2008, 06:53 PM
So I personally believe that at the second coming , all the saints of all time will be resurrected to be with Jesus forever. There will be some random mortal survivors, just like a lot of survivors of some disaster on earth are quite randomly lucky to survive, and this is often not related to spiritual blessing.So, you do believe that some will just randomly luckily survive. Again, I find that highly implausible. Especially in light of 2 Peter 3:10-12 which suggests the entire earth will be burned up. Also, do these lucky survivors not fit into the description of who is destroyed when Christ comes given in 2 Thess 1:7-10? Are they not among those who do not know God or obey the gospel? That's why I asked the question. What is it that allows some who do not know God or obey the gospel to survive despite what 2 Thess 1:7-8 says? Turns out it's just random luck. Huh. :hmm:


I believe the only verses amills can use as proof-texts are those that show a COMPLETE destruction of all the lives of all the ungodly on this earth.As far as I know there are only two such verses that are easily explained, as opposed to MANY verses that show the survival of the ungodly at the second coming.Of those many verses, how many actually specifically mention the second coming of Christ? The verses amils use to show no survivors clearly refer to the second coming specifically (Luke 17:26-30, 2 Thess 1:7-10, 1 Thess 4:13-5:6, 2 Peter 3:3-13, Rev 19:15-21, etc.) while the verses premils use do not and instead only assume that they relate to the second coming because they cannot see how those verses could have already been fulfilled or how they could relate to the new earth after the thousand years.

DurbanDude
Dec 31st 2008, 10:07 AM
Of those many verses, how many actually specifically mention the second coming of Christ? The verses amils use to show no survivors clearly refer to the second coming specifically (Luke 17:26-30, 2 Thess 1:7-10, 1 Thess 4:13-5:6, 2 Peter 3:3-13, Rev 19:15-21, etc.) while the verses premils use do not and instead only assume that they relate to the second coming because they cannot see how those verses could have already been fulfilled or how they could relate to the new earth after the thousand years.

Let's discuss the verses I mentioned already in a post specifically to you, and you can tell me what age you feel these verse should fit into. Then I can show you how they fit best into a post second coming age because they cannot fit any other age. The context of many verses that show the survival of earth atthe second coming is clear. These verses involve the day of the Lord, or the events common to the second coming, and the Lord reigning on earth with rivers of life flowing from Jerusalem.

There are about 20 verses that show the survival of earth, but we can start with the 3 that I was hoping to debate specifically with you.


BTW Luke 17 does not specifically say that all will be destroyed , there are comparisons but the Second coming is also compared to Sodom and Gomorrah , which involved complete destruction on localised regions. 2 Thess 1 just refers to the unbelievers never experiencing the presence of the Lord, they will experience wrath and destruction but it does not say that everyone will die. This is often assumed just because of the intense nature of the day of the Lord , but everyone will be shut out from God's presence according to 2 Thess 1. As for 1 Thess 4/5 there is nothing there to indicate complete annihilation of every human and the whole earth. Rev 19:15 which you quoted specifically speaks of the survival of the nations and is therefore a premill proof verse. The only amill prooftext left is 2 Peter 3, which can also be explained. In light of the 20 or more verses that speak of the survival of this earth, and the amill avoidance of discussing them , the balance is extremely in the pre-mill favour.

DurbanDude
Dec 31st 2008, 10:39 AM
So, you do believe that some will just randomly luckily survive. Again, I find that highly implausible. Especially in light of 2 Peter 3:10-12 which suggests the entire earth will be burned up. Also, do these lucky survivors not fit into the description of who is destroyed when Christ comes given in 2 Thess 1:7-10? Are they not among those who do not know God or obey the gospel? That's why I asked the question. What is it that allows some who do not know God or obey the gospel to survive despite what 2 Thess 1:7-8 says? Turns out it's just random luck. Huh. :hmm:
.

Yes, this is what I believe. They will not get eternal life though. Some unsaved die at an early age, maybe a car accident that wasn't even their fault. Others live a lot longer and have wealth and many children. This is all insignificant to God, who cares about eternal destiny based on His grace. So if some of the ungodly end up with long and relatively blessed lives as survivors, this is just a brief moment compared to eternity.

2 Thess 1:7-8 says:

1:7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
1:8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
1:9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

1)The Lord Jesus is revealed in flaming fire
2) He takes vengeance, remember at the second coming every mountain is laid low, all run and hide in caves, all cities are destroyed. Any survivors will be missing all their possessions and many of their family members. Just because the word "vengeance" is used, we should not assume universal death is meant, because then we would be making doctrine from assumption.
3)They will be punished with destruction from His presence, even these survivors will never know the presence of the Lord and the glory of His power like we know God. They will not be part of the true church and the true kingdom of God, and therefore will not have God living inside them as we do.

2 Thessalonians is not an amill proof text at all, just a confirmation of my premill view that the day of the Lord will be a day of intense destructrion, and a day of judgment for the ungodly and relief for the righteous. All the ungodly will experience that destruction, whether its their lives, or just their possessions, or their families. They will never have a second chance at salvation, this is my belief. Imagine a survivor of the tsunami saying that he did not experience the destruction of the tsunami just beacuse he survives. His family is dead, his house washed away, his home town is laid low, his possessions lost. Even though he is a survivor he has felt the full wrath of the destruction of the tsunami, and personally experienced that destruction. It's the same on the day of the Lord, all will experience the destruction, but some will live through it.

third hero
Dec 31st 2008, 11:05 AM
All men in this age are called to come to Christ. That is the Gospel message. At the time Zecharaiah prophesied this the Gentiles were all heathen. Acts 17:30-31 says, “And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.”

This passage speaks of a period of “ignorance” in history when these deluded Gentiles where blinded to their need of salvation which “God winked at.” This period was plainly before the cross when the Gospel was overwhelmingly restricted to the population of natural Israel. This time of “ignorance” had now disappeared when Paul preached this message (nearly 2,000 years ago); a new economy had been introduced which saw the Gospel message go out to all the nations and “now” required “all men every where to repent.” The message of repentance has now been widened out to encompass a once totally paganised world in order that “all men everywhere” throughout “the world” would receive the same good news of salvation that natural Israel solely received as a nation, prior to the Cross. The original confirms, “the times of this ignorance God hupereido (or) winked at (or) overlooked (or) didn’t punish.” The book of Acts sees the turning of the tide and the preaching forth of this broad non-racial trans-national Gospel – a Gospel that required “all men every where to repent.”

The nations were all against Christ and Jerusalem before the Gospel expanse. Zecharaiah 14 was explaining that God would ultimately destroy every foe of the Church, however, those among the nations who yielded to Him would be saved. There was/are 2 different responses from the Gentiles.

Just to clarify something here.

When Zechariah 14:16-20 states that the heathen nations are to go up yearly to Jerusalem to worship the King of Kings during the Feasts of Tabernacles, the actual meaning of those verses are not what they say they are.

And so, the Lord will never have anyone go up yearly to Jerusalem during the Feasts of Tabernacles?

And certainly, there will be no punishment for the nations that refuse to obey the Lord, right?

And, when verses 16-17 says,

And it shall come to pass, [that] every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles. And it shall be, [that] whoso will not come up of [all] the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain,

...The Lord knows not to honor that ver batim.

Just looking for clarity.

DurbanDude
Dec 31st 2008, 11:46 AM
All men in this age are called to come to Christ. That is the Gospel message. At the time Zecharaiah prophesied this the Gentiles were all heathen. Acts 17:30-31 says, “And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.”

This passage speaks of a period of “ignorance” in history when these deluded Gentiles where blinded to their need of salvation which “God winked at.” This period was plainly before the cross when the Gospel was overwhelmingly restricted to the population of natural Israel. This time of “ignorance” had now disappeared when Paul preached this message (nearly 2,000 years ago); a new economy had been introduced which saw the Gospel message go out to all the nations and “now” required “all men every where to repent.” The message of repentance has now been widened out to encompass a once totally paganised world in order that “all men everywhere” throughout “the world” would receive the same good news of salvation that natural Israel solely received as a nation, prior to the Cross. The original confirms, “the times of this ignorance God hupereido (or) winked at (or) overlooked (or) didn’t punish.” The book of Acts sees the turning of the tide and the preaching forth of this broad non-racial trans-national Gospel – a Gospel that required “all men every where to repent.”

The nations were all against Christ and Jerusalem before the Gospel expanse. Zecharaiah 14 was explaining that God would ultimately destroy every foe of the Church, however, those among the nations who yielded to Him would be saved. There was/are 2 different responses from the Gentiles.

I believe consistency should be required with symbolism. You cannot be saying that when Israel and Jerusalem are mentioned they represent the church, and then when the heathen nations are mentioned, they also represent the church. You seem to be saying that the heathen that do worship the Lord are the church, but then you are saying that the same group that doesn't worship the Lord are the ungodly and therefore do not receive spiritual blessing. For a supposedly symbolic passage the symbolism appears inconsistent the way you have described it.