Featured Who Populates the Millennial Kingdom?

So I am to assume you have moved on from where Cain got a wife?

Why would you assume that physical bodies which are suitable to an Heavenly existence will not function as they do now? Why would you assume they would?

And let me ask you this, do you have a problem scooping dung in the Eternal State, if such a duty is necessary? You are above this detail?

My guess would be that duties like these will likely be appointed to those who merit this dooty...


God bless.

 

Your welcome, but your response is a little long-winded there fella.

Just kidding, it's pretty short, and I hope you don't mind me addressing each point. I will try to be as brief as I can.

Just to say in advance, I look at "prophesy" to mean "the speaking forth of the Word of God," which can be a foretelling, or just some good old fashioned preaching.

So when I say Revelation is a Book of Prophecy, I am primarily referring to it as a Book which foretells the future events that will unfold some time after that day it was written.

In regards to "3 genres," I agree, as I have already stated...


Revelation 1:19

King James Version (KJV)

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


And overwhelmingly that which is foretold dominates this Book.

Certainly it was meant to be circulated, that is a given, seeing we are told of seven locales it was to be taken.

This completely ignores the fact that not only did Old Testament Prophets foretell future events, but we are told that John would write of things to come.

So we can't really do this.

Any assumption usually doesn't end well. I have established the reasons for my approach, and I have often considered the approach of my Amil brethren. I wish I could take that approach, really, but Scripture will not allow for it.

Well, the simple answer would be that we are doing what you just said was not a good idea...approaching with an assumption.

That's why we interpret each portion in it's context.

Prophecy is a matter of what was, what is, and what will be, often, and we can find application for what has not yet been fulfilled.

But take, for example, the seventh King: he hadn't come at the time of the writing. That is foretelling a future event, Tim.

When Christ spoke to the Churches, He wasn't talking about past events, He was speaking of them in that day. They were guilty of what He charged, and exhorted to overcome. I know many see the Seven Churches as a guideline through the Ages, but that makes little sense to me. The truth of the Body is that not only do most congregations have one of each, lol, I think we could see each condemnation as something that Christians might experience in their walk with the Lord. But, that doesn't mean that we overlook the Historical application. That is first and foremost, before anyone tries to read something into it. I can leave this simply as it is, epistles to seven literal churches of that day, and not miss anything the Lord has for me.

And not all of those churches still exist. They did at the time.

You say "Two Witnesses story." Do you also say the "Return of Christ story?"

The point being, you have decided this is a story rather than what we are told, that it is something John witnesses. I find it hard to see John witnessing history through the millennia.

I can understand your perspective, many have similar takes on who the Two Witnesses are. A few options are the Old and New Testament, Israel and the Church, and recently had a new one presented to me as "Christian Testimony." But how do these correlate to what actually happens? You say it seems obvious that it is the people of God, but I would suggest that the people of God have never, as a people, been given the power given to the Two Witnesses. That power has been given to Prophets, but, the Prophets stood out from the people of God in the Old Testament, and, like the Two Witnesses, often fell under persecution and sometimes put to death.

In regards to the two resurrection of Revelation 20, again you are taking the thousand years out of the text. Those two resurrections are divided by one thousand years, and no matter how long one tries to make that be, the fact remains that the Tribulation Martyrs and the "rest of the dead" are not...raised at the same time.

So even if the Two Witnesses' resurrection and rapture is made symbolic, you cannot reasonably deny there are two resurrections in Revelation 20.

And that's about as short as I could muster, Tim, hope that will do, lol.


God bless.

 

Perhaps, seeing you are Amil, it might be best if you clarify exactly what you mean by "spiritual," and state whether your meaning is figurative or literal.




God bless.

 

Hey thanks for the scoop on Darby. For some reason, I have always just pictured him as perhaps a contributor to an overall direction towards a Pre-Trib Rapture view, and was a little surprised at your description of the amount of material there is.

But I doubt I will actively seek out the material, lol.


God bless.

 

It's no problem, but you can see your response is longer than mine. There's a reason for that, lol. That's how discussion works, Tim, you say something, I respond, I say something, you respond. If you are not interested in discussion, why bother to step into a discussion in the first place. That is not really fair to those you post comments to. It establishes an "I have spoken" which is simply not how things are done in a discussion forum.

So I will separate every response, to make it easier. You can respond to any or none as you see fit.

And going to forego the usual "Continued..."

 

Tim...it's not an assumption.

An example of prophecy that we can make an assumption about, that is, that like past and present, as well as future events are in view, can be seen here:


Revelation 11:6

King James Version (KJV)

6 These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will.


Then we consider the usage from the entire Bible and place the contexts they are used in to understand a Biblical definition.

And while you feel that in view is a general description of humanity and it's history, that simply will not align with the events described.


Revelation 19:10

King James Version (KJV)

10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.


Now I ask you...what is the testimony of Christ?

Was His Coming a general condition of man, or a specific event in History?

What does he mean that testimony is the spirit of Prophecy? Spirit? Or spirit?

 

Because that is not how the Book is given to us. Your view creates something that is not typical of prophetic literature. No-one is ever confused about what is going to happen in the future.

Try this approach in the Old Testament. We would have to conclude that the people were ignorant that Prophecy was in view. But guess what, we again have internal Biblical verification of the veracity of the approach taken by Futurists.

Consider:


John 4:25-26

King James Version (KJV)

25 The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.

26 Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he.


Now where did this woman come to understand that one day the Messiah was coming?

Prophecy.

She says to Christ...


John 4:19

King James Version (KJV)

19 The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet.


What does she mean?

So this approach is quite in conflict with how Scripture has always been given, and always interpreted. What we have to conclude is that God, in Revelation only, gave His Word and will to men differently than He did before. If you want to take that approach, it doesn't make me think less of you. Many do. But at least take into consideration that the consistency of Prophecy is seen in what only falls under a futurist header.

Doesn't mean you have to accept it, but, at the very least it can help you understand the futurist better.

We wouldn't look at the woman at the well as a hyper-literalist, right?

 

The Old Testament is infrequent in Prophecy?

Not going to debate about that, because if you do not see Revelation as Prophecy in large part and view it as general analogy, no point in trying to debate what in the Old Testament is Prophecy and what is not. I will say on this point that the Law itself was filled with prophecy. An example would be the sacrifices, which present a picture prophecy of Christ. The Writer of Hebrews speaks of the Holy of Holies of the Tabernacle as a figure, same word translated parable, and the Parables of Christ themselves foretell events.

As far my view discouraging, or not encouraging, that is a statement that is simply not true. The tribulation of the Tribulation is no more undesirable than the tribulation we go through every day, but, the bad stuff...isn't for believers of this Age.

There is nothing in Revelation that could possibly discourage believers, because those who do come to believe still make out better dying in Christ than they do going into a Christ-less Eternity.

So your reasoning depends on equally had interpretation of The Rapture, which, by the way, is the whole point of this thread. So while I'm at it, I wouldn't mind knowing what it is you think about the catching away of the Church, and where you place that on an eschatological timeline.

 

Right, and they are right, and we wrong, lol.

Okay, you got me there, guess I need to convert...



So tell me, the devastation prophesied in the Old Testament, they were not foretelling future events?

For example:


Isaiah 28

King James Version (KJV)

28 Woe to the crown of pride, to the drunkards of Ephraim, whose glorious beauty is a fading flower, which are on the head of the fat valleys of them that are overcome with wine!

2 Behold, the Lord hath a mighty and strong one, which as a tempest of hail and a destroying storm, as a flood of mighty waters overflowing, shall cast down to the earth with the hand.

3 The crown of pride, the drunkards of Ephraim, shall be trodden under feet:

4 And the glorious beauty, which is on the head of the fat valley, shall be a fading flower, and as the hasty fruit before the summer; which when he that looketh upon it seeth, while it is yet in his hand he eateth it up.


How about this:

Zechariah 14

King James Version (KJV)

14 Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.

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.

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.

5 And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the Lord my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.


Do you see these as simply history unfolding, or specific events foretold?

The prophecy of Messiah itself is enough to settle the issue, in my view, for I doubt seriously anyone would try to use an approach such as you are describing with that Prophecy.

 

I leave it in the same genre Prophecy has always been in, Prophecy.

Not sure why you charge me with making one up.

Read it again:


Revelation 1:19

King James Version (KJV)

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

You do agree that Revelation is the result of John writing the things he had seen, the which were, and the things which shall be hereafter, don't you?

And even taking into consideration that the "shortly" here...

Revelation 1

King James Version (KJV)

1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

...means that the events would take place soon rather than "quickly," we still have to admit...

...they hadn't happened yet.

Kind of like the argument that no matter how one defines one thousand years, they still can't deny that these resurrections do not take place at the same time, which demands two resurrection events, not one.

 

Could you give me Scripture that supports your "Genre of Apocalypse?"

Could you show me Biblical examples that visions are not about future events, but we can see in the text it is symbolic?

As far as the Two Witnesses go, you see them as visions? They are not literal men, but men are used to tell a story? Could you give me another example of that in either Old or New Testament? This interests me greatly.

 

So the Prophecy of Christ Coming to die for the penalty of sin is just an ideal? You know it's not. And that's the point, you create an entirely new way to interpret Prophecy.

Do you also view the Flood from an Idealist view? Creation?

As far as a viable ethic, Revelation serves the same purpose all Prophecy has served, it both warns and exhorts, and despite your view that one cannot be encouraged from a futuristic view, the Book sums up how most of feel:



Revelation 22:20

King James Version (KJV)

20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.


But, if one's eschatology fails in understanding other issues, the comfort written in this Book for believers will be lost on them.

Because of your approach, you cannot even see two clear resurrections in Revelation 20. Again, no matter how one interprets one thousand years, they cannot remove the division between those two events from the texts.

 

It's not really going to do you any good to quote others, Tim, I am not interested in what others believe, but what you believe, and the Basis for that belief.

It is true, you have entirely avoided the primary point which I asked you to address.

I don't define resurrection, Scripture does, and that is simply not something that those familiar with Scripture really disagree about.

Resurrection is resurrection, and in the fullest eschatological sense, the eternal body is the culmination of resurrection for both believers and unbelievers.

As far as not responding any more, I would remind you I had really only one simple question, and what follows is not necessarily a product of my response, but rather, a product of your endorsement of your approach.

And I have to say, this...

...is a little disturbing to me.

Just not sure why (1) you would think that it's okay what we want something to mean is a valid approach, (2) why you would then charge me with defining Biblical terms, or (3) how you can redefine an understanding of Prophecy when most will acknowledge that Prophecy is first and foremost speaking about foretelling of events in Scripture.

If someone asks me or you, Tim, "Are there still Prophets today," what would your response be?

Thanks for the response.


God bless.