Featured Who Populates the Millennial Kingdom?

The word "Rapture" is the term used to speak of the catching away. It derives directly from the Latin used to translate harpazo.

When I speak of the Rapture most know what is in view: the catching away.

Depends on which Kingdom you speak of. What Kingdom is in view here...


Luke 17:20-22 King James Version (KJV)

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:

21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

Here is an example or two of the Kingdom that is to come:

Luke 11:2 King James Version (KJV)

2 And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.


Mark 15:43 King James Version (KJV)

43 Joseph of Arimathaea, an honourable counsellor, which also waited for the kingdom of God, came, and went in boldly unto Pilate, and craved the body of Jesus.[/SIZE]


Matthew 8:11 King James Version (KJV)

11 And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.

The Church is a part of the Kingdom, but is not the Kingdom itself.

Your proof texts...


Matthew 16:18-19 King James Version (KJV)

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.


Colossians 1:13

King James Version (KJV)

13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:




...do not establish that the Church is the Kingdom of God/Heaven, nor does it deny the Millennial Kingdom.

We have been translated into that Kingdom through Christ, which is the Kingdom of Christ, which at this time is found, again...within us. This world cannot in any way, shape or form be confused as an existing Kingdom of God, though it will one day be delivered unto Him:

Revelation 11:15

And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.


God bless.

 

You do...what?

The Millennial Kingdom has it's beginning, not at the Cross, but at the end of the Tribulation:

Revelation 20

King James Version (KJV)

1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.

2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.


Your view would suggest the Millennial Kingdom has come and gone.


God bless.

 

There is a difference between Christ conquering sin and death on the Cross and this world being the Kingdom of God.

We still await the Return of Christ...


Titus 2:13

Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

So people are born into the Kingdom through procreation.

You want to stick with that?

I would agree: my case has quite a lot of Scripture we can look at.

However, it does make the case that at the end of the Tribulation Satan is bound for one thousand years, the rest of the dead are not raised for a thousand years, and that the Tribulation Martyrs reign with Christ for...one thousand years.

A thousand years is a thousand years...

It's just one point.

Care to show me in Revelation where both living and dead believers are resurrected and caught up?

Symbolism is used to describe realities. A dragon, for instance, used to refer to Satan, an entity Scripture makes abundantly clear is a reality.

While you may take the position that a thousand years is symbolic...it still refers to a period in which we see literal Saints who died in a literal Tribulation Period reigning with the Literal Christ.

Speaking of proverbs, perhaps you should see if it is possible to recollect the bathwater.




God bless.

 

Oh, so you too believe people are saved through heritage. Israel still believes that as well.

How about those that hold to the dispensational teachings of the Word of God?

There are in fact three resurrection found in Revelation, a point you have refused to address in the past. Are you willing to address it now?


God bless.

 

So explain how you are...

Even if we were in the Millennial Kingdom, to say that you, yourself, populating the Kingdom of God with your children suggests heritage salvation.

Since you do not view the Millennial Kingdom as a literal thousand year period (and you can correct me if you do), this is the only conclusion I can, myself, draw from your statement.

If you were being facetious, that is one thing, but if you seriously think this to be the case that is another.

So if I am misconstruing, I guess I am dependent on an elaboration of your intent.

Sorry, no, you cannot just as easily argue "There are in fact only 1 judgment found in John's gospel account, a point..."...

...at all.

Because I have not spoken concerning Judgment, or how many there are, that would broach an entirely new avenue of discussion.

Our friend, though, as well as a couple others, have ignored this issue, though he still feels free to interject insults into a thread.

So I will pose this question to you as well, "How many resurrections do we see in Revelation?" And this in light of the Book as a whole, so you can interpret in the light of that.

And once again, we see a false argument offered:

How many resurrections there are in Revelation hardly leaves one able to conclude the whole Bible is read through that lens.


In fact, the opposite is true, I (can't speak for Dispensationalists) read Revelation 20 based on all available relevant passages, and we must go out of Revelation 20 to do so. If I was guilty of what you suggest, then I would, like many, ignore the other resurrection passages and conclude there is only one, and that we know that because, after all...

...it is the first, isn't it?

So, I expect no answer from our Darby enthusiast, perhaps you would like to answer the question?


God bless.

 

I agree, and this is the thread. How many resurrections are actually in Revelation denies the view that there is only one.


God bless.

 

There are three resurrections listed in Revelation, that is just the fact.

And that does not include the resurrection that takes place at the Pre-Tribulation Rapture.

Everyone knows and acknowledges this.


God bless.

 

This is a little off point but glad to take a look at it, Tim. Just to clarify the focus of the OP, it is in large part directing attention to the final destruction of God's enemies who assemble under Satan. The primary point would be, based on the numerous teachings which show in regards to the Lord's Return that all unbelievers are destroyed, we have to have a physical population of believers at the end of the Tribulation in order for their to be a physical population of unbelievers at the end.

Of course, for the A-millennial believer, this isn't a point which is really relevant to their/your view. And believe it or not, I understand why this has been historically the primary position taken. I wish I could embrace it, really. So I don't despise you or other A-mils for their view, because I can see how this seems very reasonable.

But...and you knew that was coming, lol.

When we do look at the Parables, and Prophecy, we see a general consistency which pictures Christ returning, and what takes place when He does. You ask how both wheat and tares can appear, and Scripture provides that answer, and it is not a matter pf procreation but a matter of sowing. Christ sews the Word of God, Satan sows the tares.

So my objection to heritage as a source is from the perspective of a premillennial, though I do, and did understand, and wasn't intending it to be that you literally thought your children were saved by being born from you, lol. Just being facetious.

Understood.

But, we again look at this from the premillennial perspective, which perspective is denied by the Amil view primarily on a non literal, or spiritual, or symbolic rendering of the thousand years in Revelation 20. I am sure you are more than familiar with the arguments presented, one being that this leaves a number of prophecies unfulfilled. For example, the Old Testament provided promise of a period when animals and man, and animals and animals would no longer be at enmity with each other. Another would be that long life is promised in this Kingdom, which cannot be interpreted to refer to the Eternal State, because all believers will be in glorified form, aging no longer an issue.

So the Amil perspective becomes moot to the topic of the OP for the most part. I can understand viewing this current Age as containing the Kingdom, for that is true, the Kingdom of Christ is established with members living in this world. However, there are a number of reasons why I have to reject that position, and again, I am sure you are more than familiar with most of the arguments involved.

I do to, but, we see a time when the kingdoms of this world become the Kingdom of our Lord, and we, premillennials, see a literal application. That is when Christ rules with a rod of iron. There will be unbelievers in the Millennial Kingdom, but not at the beginning.

For example:

Matthew 13:47-48King James Version (KJV)

47 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind:

48 Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away.


We see the same imagery in Matthew 25 in regards to the Sheep and Goat Judgment.

And I will pause there, and separate this from the resurrections of Revelation.


Continued...

 

Be glad to.

The first is the resurrection and rapture of the Two Witnesses:


Revelation 11:11-12

King James Version (KJV)

11 And after three days and an half the spirit of life from God entered into them, and they stood upon their feet; and great fear fell upon them which saw them.

12 And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them.


I am aware of the popular view that the Two Witnesses are not literal men, but representative of something other than men. Many suggestions are made, one example being the Old and New Testament, and recently another member suggested Christian Testimony. Of course we would look at Zechariah 4:12-14 due to the terminology, and I agree with that, because I believe both have in view the Two Offices referred to in Zechariah...the High Priest and the King.

But that doesn't mean I don't see these as two literal man, though they represent those Two Offices. In debating a Progressive Dispensationalist (which is just another way to say "Covert Amil," lol), I did a post listing quite a few reasons why these had to be literal men, but for now, I will just mention a few.

First, a bodily death is in view.

Second, we are hard pressed to see the Word of God, or Christian Testimony...taken out of the World.

Lastly, we have a clear picture of bodily resurrection and rapture. They are caught up to Heaven, and the only logical conclusion I think we can draw is that these are two men who die, and as it is written, raised again.

That is the first resurrection of Revelation, not to be confused with the First Resurrection, which is the second listed:


Revelation 20:4-5

King James Version (KJV)

4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.


It is often thought that "first" (protos, I have provided a link if you are interested, see usage) is a reference to sequence, however, a quick study of the word will show that it can also refer to rank. Here, it is actually the second resurrection listed in Revelation. If we wanted to state which Resurrection is first in sequence, that would be the Lord's own Resurrection, for which cause He is called the Firstfruits from the Dead and the Firstborn from among the dead.

Our third reference to resurrection is found in the same place...


Revelation 20:4-5

King James Version (KJV)

4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

So despite whether we view this as a literal thousand years or symbolic, we cannot deny that this period separates when the Tribulation Martyrs are raised and when the rest of the dead (presumably the lost, though it could be debated that there will be those from among the just raised at that time as well, i.e., those who die during the Millennial Kingdom) are raised.

So there you have it, three resurrections that occur in Revelation.

And not one of them could be said to resemble Paul's teaching concerning the resurrection and Rapture of the Church. It cannot be at the time of the Two Witnesses, because only two men are given. It cannot be the resurrection of the Tribulation Martyrs, because we see no mention of the dead in Christ being raised (and I no an argument from silence might seem to be the case, but, the text is not silent, it states precisely who is raised and distinguishes them from the "rest of the dead"); it might be said that it occurs at the final resurrection, but, this too falls short because again, the Rapture specifically includes all members of the Body of Christ, both living and dead.

That's not surprising, lol, most threads get derailed and a variety of other issues take the place of the focus of the OP.

Hope that helps, Tim, though again this is a discussion that is sweetest among premillennials. The primary debate with A-millennials is why there is no literal thousand years.

But that can be a lot of fun, as well as edifying as well. It is always good to be challenged, and sometimes our best apologetics arise from those debates.

I am pretty familiar with most views, including the A-millennial view. While I will not likely take a look at the link, I will take a quick gander at Revelation 2:1-10. If there is something of note in the teaching, feel free to share that, as I said, I don't have a problem looking at these issues.


God bless.