Seventy Weeks Prophecy, no Gap, but a Solid Promise

[The Biblicist]

8 But forget not this one thing, beloved, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 2 Pet 3

You are ignoring the context. 1 Pet. 3:8 is an explanation of 2 Pet. 3:3-4 and "his promise" of coming quickly.

3 ¶ Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming?


You are simply choosing to ignore contextual factors in order to defend a false view, which is really a half-truth. One half of the truth is the near fulfillment in A.D. 70 but the other half-truth is a visible personal coming of Christ who touches down on planet earth. Your theory is based only one ONE HALF of the truth without the other half and thus a PERVERSION of the WHOLE truth.

Again, this doesn't change anything. Equating the transfiguration of chap 17 with Christ coming into His kingdom is an old lame dispy take on it.

Again, your agenda does not correspond with the WHOLE truth. This was indeed, "his coming" as Peter explicitly tells you that:

16 ¶ For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

Again, your HALF truth fails. They did indeed see him coming in his kingdom on the mount of transfiguration or did Peter lie?

And you say I'M pitting scripture against scripture?

1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show unto his servants, even the things which must shortly come to pass: and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John;
3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of the prophecy, and keep the things that are written therein: for the time is at hand.
7 Behold, he cometh with the clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they that pierced him; and all the tribes of the earth shall mourn over him. Even so, Amen. Rev 1

There's not a doubt in my mind the passage in Mt 26 is synonymous with this one, and that it indeed shortly came to pass as stated.

You need your mind "renewed" by God's complete Word on this matter! You are simply wrong! Every eye did not see his coming in judgement upon Jerusalem in A.D. 70 (Rev. 1:7). His foot did not come down on the Mount of Olives or was the Mount of olives split. There was no battle in the valley of Armageddon that He destroyed. The false prophet and beast were not cast into gehenna then. You really got to really get into self-delusion to believe these passages were finalized in A.D. 70!!!!

Did Jesus come in judgement upon Jersualem in A.D. 70? Yes, but no different than God coming in judgement upon Jerusalem by Nebuchaddnezar or upon Babylone by God by Cyrus! Did Christ return as described in Matthew 24:30-31; 1 Thes. 4:13-17; 2 Thes. 2:2-9; Rev. 19:12-19? ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Do you not understand that His coming of 70 AD was this one?:

40 When therefore the lord of the vineyard shall come, what will he do unto those husbandmen?
41 They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those miserable men, and will let out the vineyard unto other husbandmen, who shall render him the fruits in their seasons.
42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, The same was made the head of the corner; This was from the Lord, And it is marvelous in our eyes?
43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken away from you, and shall be given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
44 And he that falleth on this stone shall be broken to pieces: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will scatter him as dust.
45 And when the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them. Mt 21

Do you understand that A.D. 70 was merely a near fulfillment of the future final fulfillment of His coming? No you don't, you are oblivious to that fact. So, I don't deny that He came in judgement UPON JERUSALEM in A.D. 70 but the coming in Matthew 24:29-31; 25:31-46; 1 Thes. 4:13-17; 2 Thes. 2:2-9; Rev. 19-20 is judgement UPON THE WHOLE WORLD with "every eye" of the WHOLE WORLD seeing Christ in the clouds visibly coming to earth and setting his foot down on earth and claiming His rule over ALL THE KINGDOMS OF THIS WORLD.

If you can't see this, it is because you have embraced only ONE HALF of the truth and thus have completely distorted perverted view of the second advent.

 

[kyredneck]

You are ignoring the context. 1 Pet. 3:8 is an explanation of 2 Pet. 3:3-4 and "his promise" of coming quickly.

And you have 'added to' the context.

Again, there's nothing here that disputes His imminent return.

You are simply choosing to ignore contextual factors .....

No, don't talk to me about ignoring scriptures to defend a false view. You totally ignore plain scripture in order to defend your carnal views. You insist on a kingdom that can be seen with the eye and touched with the hand.

 

[The Biblicist]

And you have 'added to' the context.

Again, there's nothing here that disputes His imminent return.

Quite obvious you don't care a thing about proper interpretation of scripture. No sense discussing this with you.

No, don't talk to me about ignoring scriptures to defend a false view. You totally ignore plain scripture in order to defend your carnal views. You insist on a kingdom that can be seen with the eye and touched with the hand.

Matthew 13 is not a carnal view of the Kingdom. The kingdom of God on earth right now has a visible professing realm, but its true "seed" are universal and invisible to the human eye as the king reigns in the hearts of true believers. However, there is a kingdom to come and we are called to pray "thy kingdom come" and it comes with the King who also is coming.

Your denial of a visible personal yet future coming of Jesus Christ where he actually makes contact with earth, IMHO is outright heresy.

 

[kyredneck]

.... No sense discussing this with you.

Cool. Good. I don't appreciate your groundless smears anyway.

Your denial of a visible personal yet future coming of Jesus Christ where he actually makes contact with earth, IMHO is outright heresy.

...and that's what I'm talking about.

 

[PreachTony]

Matthew 13 is not a carnal view of the Kingdom. The kingdom of God on earth right now has a visible professing realm, but its true "seed" are universal and invisible to the human eye as the king reigns in the hearts of true believers.

In John 18:36, Jesus plainly states that His kingdom is "not of this world."

However, there is a kingdom to come and we are called to pray "thy kingdom come" and it comes with the King who also is coming.

Just out of curiosity, are you advocating that we rotely repeat the Lord's prayer from Matthew 6? Because in that very same chapter Jesus admonishes the people to not use vain repetitions nor should they pray openly in an effort to seek the praise of men.*

I view the Lord's prayer thusly: Jesus said that we should pray "after this manner." I take that to mean His prayer was an example to us of what a prayer should be. It was humble, and it sought no praise from men. We don't have to repeat verbatim the prayer of Matthew 6, but we should seek to pray in the same Spirit as Jesus prayed.

*I once had a man try to tell me that we should never pray in public because of that scripture. When I tried to tell him that Jesus meant we shouldn't be seeking the admiration of others because of our prayer, he accused me of not literally interpreting scripture and told me my opinion was worthless to him. Lovely man of God, he was...

Your denial of a visible personal yet future coming of Jesus Christ where he actually makes contact with earth, IMHO is outright heresy.

Biblicist - in your study, does Jesus "make contact with earth" before or after the resurrection? If it is before, then please point to scripture that states such. If it is after, then how do square such theology with the statement in 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 "For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord." (emphasis added)

How are we "in the air" and "ever with the Lord" if He is making contact with earth?

 

[kyredneck]

...Do you understand that A.D. 70 was merely a near fulfillment of the future final fulfillment of His coming? .....

Can you build on that, show it to be so, from scripture? That the violence that accompanied the putting away of the old covenant was 'merely a near fulfillment of the future fulfillment'? Briefly, please. And without the nasty smears, please.

To me it's quite plain from the context that this was to occur ONLY with 'that generation':

21 for then shall be great tribulation, such as hath not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, nor ever shall be.
34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all these things be accomplished Mt 24

 

[kyredneck]

....and every eye shall see him, and they that pierced him... Rev 1:7

Tell my why that cannot be rendered this way Bib (without the nasty smears please):

....and every eye shall see him, EVEN they that pierced him... Rev 1:7

 

[kyredneck]

...It is utter nonsense to insert a 2000 year plus gap in Daniel’s 70th week just to support Draby’s-pre-trib-dispensational doctrine.

....and these same gap theorists will go into convulsions over the idea of a gap between Gen 1:1 & 1:2.

 

[kyredneck]

The mystery of the Church, the Body of Christ was revealed unto Paul.
Col 1:26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now[/B] is made manifest to his saints:

Your insistence on 490 contiguous years brings you to 40 AD. The Temple stood in Jerusalem for an additional 30 years. There is nothing historically significant in 40 AD.

50 And Jesus cried again with a loud voice, and yielded up his spirit.
51 And behold, the veil of the temple was rent in two from the top to the bottom.... Mt 27

I'm no prophet as some of you dispies apparently believe yourselves to be, but I've a feeling this event is very significant in His grand scheme of things.

 

[The Biblicist]

In John 18:36, Jesus plainly states that His kingdom is "not of this world."

His kingdom is not "of" this world but it is certainly IN this world or have you not read all the kingdom parables????

just out of curiosity, are you advocating that we rotely repeat the Lord's prayer from Matthew 6? Because in that very same chapter Jesus admonishes the people to not use vain repetitions nor should they pray openly in an effort to seek the praise of men.*

Where did you get that idea from anything I said? Let me ask you a question. Do you think Jesus gave them an example of false doctrine in the model prayer???

Biblicist - in your study, does Jesus "make contact with earth" before or after the resurrection? If it is before, then please point to scripture that states such. If it is after, then how do square such theology with the statement in 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 "For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord." (emphasis added)

How are we "in the air" and "ever with the Lord" if He is making contact with earth?

He touches down on the mount of olives AFTER the resurrection and AFTER meeting in the air and we shall ever be with the Lord.

The silliness of your questions can be turned around on you. For example, are we forever with the Lord before or after the resurrection? If before, then why does it state we will be with the Lord after the dead are raised up and who then are those coming with him? If after, then are saints at death with the Lord now? Yes, those are silly questions just as your questions were silly.

 

[PreachTony]

His kingdom is not "of" this world but it is certainly IN this world or have you not read all the kingdom parables????

I have read the parables. However, the verse quoted in my original post was not from a parable. Jesus was actually answering Pilate when He was questioned about being the King of the Jews. I was just saying...

Where did you get that idea from anything I said? Let me ask you a question. Do you think Jesus gave them an example of false doctrine in the model prayer???

Where did I get the idea? You stated that we should pray "thy kingdom come," which is a rote part of the Lord's prayer in Matthew 6. I was just seeking clarification. I'm curious how you think I was saying that Jesus was giving an example of false doctrine.

He touches down on the mount of olives AFTER the resurrection and AFTER meeting in the air and we shall ever be with the Lord.

Consider me one of the great unwashed here, Biblicist, and actually provide some scripture to back up your point, please. I just want to see if we're looking at a literal interpretation of the scripture or if we're picking and choosing when to spiritualize scripture to fit a chosen theology and eschatology.

The silliness of your questions can be turned around on you. For example, are we forever with the Lord before or after the resurrection? If before, then why does it state we will be with the Lord after the dead are raised up and who then are those coming with him? If after, then are saints at death with the Lord now? Yes, those are silly questions just as your questions were silly.

You know, I wish I could just write off other people as "silly" because I didn't like their point of view. Must be a nice view you have in the ivory tower.

 

[The Biblicist]

....and every eye shall see him, and they that pierced him... Rev 1:7

Tell my why that cannot be rendered this way Bib (without the nasty smears please):

....and every eye shall see him, EVEN they that pierced him... Rev 1:7

First, why don't you quote the whole text?

Rev. 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

Moreover, notice the timing of the context where this statement is quoted by John:

Zechariah 12:9 ¶ And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.
10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

This is not the time of the destruction of Jerusalem by God but the time of intervention to save Jerusalem by God at the end of the age when he visible comes and delivers Jerusalem by coming down on the Mount of Olives:

This is the preceding context:

Zech 12:2 Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem.
3 And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.

This is the context of that passage after it:

Zech. 13:3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.

Again, this is not the time when God destroys Jerusalem but the time God defends and delivers Jerusalem and this is THE COMING John opens the book of Revelation in anticipation of THAT COMING and THAT BATTLE against all nations as described in Revelation 19. Hence, Revelation 19 did not occur in A.D. 70 as the battle in A.D. 70 was nations coming against Jerusalem and Israel as God destruction of Jerusalem, but the anticipation of Revelation 1:7 is the deliverance of Jerusalem from all nations that come against and that is the coming in Revelation 19:

Rev. 19:18 That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.
19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.

Only a blind man can fail to see this is a coming to battle the kings of the earth who are gathered against Jerusalem and that Christ is coming not to destroy Jerusalem but to destroy those gathered against Jerusalem just as Zechariah predicted and just as John anticipated in Rev. 1:7.

Finally "every eye shall see him" because the angels of heaven promised that he would return EXACTLY as He left, visibly and personally out of heaven to earth - Acts 1:11

Acts 1:11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

This is so obvious to anyone who does not have an agenda to defend!

 

[DHK]

Just answer the question:

Do you believe in a literal physical future return of the Lord Jesus Christ?

What I gather from the rest of the conversation that followed this post and your refusal to give a straightforward yes or no answer, is that you do not believe in a literal future return of Chriist, one of the historic orthodox Christian doctrines down throughout all ages.

Even those as far back as Enoch, whom Jude quotes, believed it:

[FONT=&quot]Jude 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,[/FONT]
--Just 7 generations from Adam and he was sure of it.

Jude asserts that Christ is coming with 10,000's of his saints.
When did that happen and how? Where are those saints now, and who are they?

 

[asterisktom]

First, why don't you quote the whole text?

Rev. 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

This could be better rendered "all tribes of the land", (πασαι αι φυλαι της γης) the land being Israel.

 

[asterisktom]

Jude asserts that Christ is coming with 10,000's of his saints.
When did that happen and how? Where are those saints now, and who are they?

What Jude asserts is "ηλθεν κυριος εν αγιαις μυριασιν αυτου" which, I think you know, can also refer to angels. In fact this should be the favored interpretation since it is similar to other verses.

At the very least it is not the "gotcha" verse that you seem to think.

 

[The Biblicist]

I have read the parables. However, the verse quoted in my original post was not from a parable. Jesus was actually answering Pilate when He was questioned about being the King of the Jews. I was just saying...

His kingdom is IN this world but not OF this world! Don't you understand the difference? Jesus was not contradicting that before Pilate. It is your interpretation of those words that provide for an imagined contradiction. We are IN the world but not OF the world also. Don't you understand the difference? His kingdom is IN the world just as his people are IN the world but neither are OF the world.

Where did I get the idea? You stated that we should pray "thy kingdom come," which is a rote part of the Lord's prayer in Matthew 6. I was just seeking clarification. I'm curious how you think I was saying that Jesus was giving an example of false doctrine.

Who said Jesus commanded to pray this by rote??? However, are you suggesting that there is not one single aspect of this prayer we cannot pray exactly as given? He said pray "thy kingdom come"! Is he misleading his own disciples to pray for something that is false? If the totality of His kingdom was never to be IN this world then he is guilty of teaching them false doctrine. Do you think we should never use the words "Our Father who art in heaven" in our prayers or would that be "rote" praying and therefore wrong? Do you think we should never ask in our prayers "give us our daily bread" or "deliever us from evil" or "forgive us" are all these things doctrinally in error? Get my point? He said "they kingdom COME" and if that were not a truth to pray for then neither is any other statement he made in that prayer.

I never stated at any time that this prayer was given to us to pray over and over in rote fashion. I was speaking about the doctrinal content of the prayer. In this prayer there are many doctrines (teachings) and they are ALL consistent with scripture. It is consistent with Scripture to pray "thy kingdom COME." If not, then Jesus is guilty of false doctrine BY EXAMPLE as this prayer was given as a MODEL or EXAMPLE of the right content of true prayers, even though we are not to simply parrot that prayer.

Consider me one of the great unwashed here, Biblicist, and actually provide some scripture to back up your point, please. I just want to see if we're looking at a literal interpretation of the scripture or if we're picking and choosing when to spiritualize scripture to fit a chosen theology and eschatology.

Zechariah 13:3-4

You know, I wish I could just write off other people as "silly" because I didn't like their point of view. Must be a nice view you have in the ivory tower.

I answered your questions specifically. First, he comes WITH THE DEPARTED SAINTS (their spirits) into the clouds of this earthly atmosphere. Second, their dead bodies are reunited with these departed spirits. Third, the living are translated to "meet him in the air" or where he is being described as being "in the clouds". Fourth, this reunion with Christ in the earthly atmosphere of all the resurrected and glorified saints will never be separated, but that does not mean Christ does not then come down to earth. Coming down to earth does not violate that promise at all. If you think it does, why? Sorry if I offended you by using the term "silly" as I took your statement as somewhat as a pretentious argument.

 

[The Biblicist]

This could be better rendered "all tribes of the land", (πασαι αι φυλαι της γης) the land being Israel.

Who says it can be better rendered as such? The context from which it is taken does not support such an interpretation. Indeed, the immediate context from which Revelation 1:7 is taken from demands exactly the translation found in the KJV. In the context of Zechariah 12-13 it is the NATIONS OF THE EARTH coming up against Jerusalem and Christ is coming to fight them to defend Jerusalem. Notice the very text preceding the quotation from Zechariah:

Zechariah 12:9 ¶ And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.
10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.



This is the preceding context:

Zech 12:2 Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem.
3 And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.

This is the context of that passage after it:

Zech. 13:3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.

So, contextually your interpretation is absolutely groundless.

Furthermore, there is no linguistic grounds for your interpetation in the New Testament (as far as usage).

1. Whenever φυλαι is modified by της γης in the New Testament it is NEVER ONCE applied to Israel. Whenever it is applied to Israel it ALWAYS has some other modifer than της γης.

Ac 3:25 Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.

Re 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

Re 7:9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;

Re 11:9 And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves.

Re 13:7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.



2. So both linguistically (as far as New Testament usage) and contextually your position is simply forced and false. So in no sense can your translation be regarded as "better rendered"!

 

[PreachTony]

His kingdom is IN this world but not OF this world! Don't you understand the difference? Jesus was not contradicting that before Pilate. It is your interpretation of those words that provide for an imagined contradiction. We are IN the world but not OF the world also. Don't you understand the difference? His kingdom is IN the world just as his people are IN the world but neither are OF the world.

I do understand the difference. Please read on to see where I am coming from in terms of interpretation.

Who said Jesus commanded to pray this by rote??? However, are you suggesting that there is not one single aspect of this prayer we cannot pray exactly as given? He said pray "thy kingdom come"! Is he misleading his own disciples to pray for something that is false? If the totality of His kingdom was never to be IN this world then he is guilty of teaching them false doctrine. Do you think we should never use the words "Our Father who art in heaven" in our prayers or would that be "rote" praying and therefore wrong? Do you think we should never ask in our prayers "give us our daily bread" or "deliever us from evil" or "forgive us" are all these things doctrinally in error? Get my point? He said "they kingdom COME" and if that were not a truth to pray for then neither is any other statement he made in that prayer.

I never stated at any time that this prayer was given to us to pray over and over in rote fashion. I was speaking about the doctrinal content of the prayer. In this prayer there are many doctrines (teachings) and they are ALL consistent with scripture. It is consistent with Scripture to pray "thy kingdom COME." If not, then Jesus is guilty of false doctrine BY EXAMPLE as this prayer was given as a MODEL or EXAMPLE of the right content of true prayers, even though we are not to simply parrot that prayer.

I'm not saying that we cannot pray the prayer as He did, although I know some people who actually believe Jesus meant us to pray that exact prayer, word for word.

I know for a fact that Jesus would not lead the disciples or anyone else into false doctrine. The issue between the disparate camps here is when/how His kingdom comes? Is it indeed an earthly kingdom set up in Jerusalem or is it in fact a spiritual kingdom established within the heart of His followers?

The prayer of the Lord in Matthew 6 is beautiful, and wonderful. I'm not denying it nor its power. I'm just saying that I've always viewed prayer as a personal, intimate conversation with the Lord. If you are lead to pray the Lord's prayer rotely, then go for it. God bless you. If not, then pray as you are lead.

I fear we've gotten into a much deeper kerfuffle than was required over this. I'm sorry for the confusion. (Though I'm not sorry that I got to use the word "kerfuffle.")

Zechariah 13:3-4

Thank you.

I answered your questions specifically. First, he comes WITH THE DEPARTED SAINTS (their spirits) into the clouds of this earthly atmosphere. Second, their dead bodies are reunited with these departed spirits. Third, the living are translated to "meet him in the air" or where he is being described as being "in the clouds". Fourth, this reunion with Christ in the earthly atmosphere of all the resurrected and glorified saints will never be separated, but that does not mean Christ does not then come down to earth. Coming down to earth does not violate that promise at all. If you think it does, why? Sorry if I offended you by using the term "silly" as I took your statement as somewhat as a pretentious argument.

I meant no pretentiousness by it, Biblicist, and I thank you for the apology. I have a tendency to get brunt and blunt when debating theology. For some background on myself, I'm a mostly eclectic amil. I try my best to interpret the scripture as I feel God is leading me to interpret it. For that reason, I have no problem with 3 preachers using the same scripture and preaching 3 different messages. The Word is potent enough to offer us differing degrees of satisfaction in our current situations. I have no problem with spiritualization of scripture, as I see a degree of spiritualization as necessary to glean from the scripture the information we need for our present situations.

I see 1 Thess 4 as stating that we will meet the Lord in the air, and so shall we ever be with Him there, as we leave behind a world that 2 Peter 3 tells us "shall melt with fervent heat."

 

[The Biblicist]

What Jude asserts is "ηλθεν κυριος εν αγιαις μυριασιν αυτου" which, I think you know, can also refer to angels. In fact this should be the favored interpretation since it is similar to other verses.

At the very least it is not the "gotcha" verse that you seem to think.

Are "angels" going to be "gathered" from the east and west or are they the ones gathering the saints (Mt. 24:31)???? Are "angels" going to be rejoined with their resurrected bodies, as those He brings "with him" are reunited with dead bodies on earth (1 Thes. 4:13-17)??

Nobody denies that "angels" will come with him, but to deny that the term "saints" does not refer to departed human spirits now in heaven who unquestionably come with him and for whom He comes is just absurd.

 

[The Biblicist]

The issue between the disparate camps here is when/how His kingdom comes? Is it indeed an earthly kingdom set up in Jerusalem or is it in fact a spiritual kingdom established within the heart of His followers?

Do you believe anyone but a true child of God can really pray such a prayer? Why would a true child of God pray for something to come that already has come for them????? This is not a prayer for lost people to pray. If the kingdom was nothing more than spiritual and here and now, such a person would be praying in vain, as they are already in that kingdom or they could not pray this prayer. The kingdom to "come" is yet something future.

I see 1 Thess 4 as stating that we will meet the Lord in the air, and so shall we ever be with Him there, as we leave behind a world that 2 Peter 3 tells us "shall melt with fervent heat."

Surely you can't be serious? Are you telling me that is all you see in 1 Thes. 4? Just being forever with the Lord? Don't you believe in the resurrection of your own body? Look at the contextual reason for Paul considering this topic (1 Thes. 4:13). Surely, you are not suggesting that the precise order he gives is simply to be spiritualized into nothing but we will be with the Lord forever??? Are not the departed spirits of saints now in heaven? Are you suggesting that they are left in heaven and not brought back "with him"? Are you suggesting that the living will be glorified before the departed will be resurrected? Are you suggesting we will not be caught up to where he is said to be located "in the clouds" "in the air"????? Surely you can't be serious that there is nothing more than we will always be with him, as the text explains precisely how that promise is made effectual, and to spiritualize it away is to deny that any practical explanation for how that will occur.