Featured The Millennium: What's the Point?

Nothing you've produced here places Christ physically on earth. Admit, you cannot pinpoint the passage in Revelation where Christ physically returns and sets foot on terra firma.

 

I thought it was pretty clear

I like to take scripture as a whole...The testimony of Christ is the spirit of prophecy


Acts 1:6-7, 11-12 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.
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.
Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath day's journey.

 

What's clear is that you cannot pinpoint the passage in Revelation where Christ physically returns and sets foot on terra firma.

Absolutely. Hodges second rule of interpretation: "Scripture cannot contradict scripture".

It was a carnal question on their part, similar to what was asked here:

20 And being asked by the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God cometh, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Lu 17

What's your focus here, 'the seeing'?:

28 Verily I say unto you, there are some of them that stand here, who shall in no wise taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. Mt 16

Is your focus 'coming out of the clouds'? To the high priest at His trial:

64 Jesus said unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Henceforth ye shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven. Mt 26

At His next coming:

...Christ`s, at his coming. Then cometh the end, when he shall deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have abolished all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all his enemies under his feet. 1 Cor 15:23-25

When He returns, at the resurrection, the kingdom has been already and He has reigned already, all of which is not visible to the mortal eye.





:

 

What evidence do you have to prove your unbelief of Revelation? Why is it that the nature of God and the prophesies he gave suddenly changed with the last book. How is it that John can't be trusted in the literal sense, but Isaiah can. What then of Daniel are some of his prophesies literal and some symbolic? What basis do you have to make the distinction.

 

So if the Saints are in Jerusalem and Christ said He is ruling and reigning WITH Them (After He has already descended out of Heaven and came to earth), you wouldn't figure He is with them physically? Where is the disconnect here?

 

True, and it is going to happen.

 

"In that day will I raise up the TABERNACLE OF DAVID that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old: That they may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen, which are called by My Name, saith the LORD that doeth this. Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that the plowman shall overtake the reaper, and the treader of grapes him that soweth seed; and the mountains shall drop sweet wine, and all the hills shall melt. And I will bring again the captivity of my people of Israel, and they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them. And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the LORD thy God" (Amos 9:11-15)

 

"And DAVID My servant shall be KING over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in My judgments, and observe My statutes, and do them. And they shall dwell IN THE LAND that I have given unto Jacob My servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and My servant DAVID shall be their PRINCE for ever" (Ezekiel 37:24-25)

 

"Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto DAVID a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice IN THE EARTH. In His days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is His Name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS" (Jeremiah 23:5-6).

 

Who has argued that a literal Millennium is the re-establish the law?

 

I liken Christ's Absolute Rule and Reign sorta like our Salvation...they both are sure and realized even now, however, the fulfillment of its realization happens in stages.

Saved from the Penalty of Sin, Saved from the Power of Sin, Saved from the Presence of Sin.
Which would be Justification, Sanctification, and Lastly, Glorification.

But since we are not glorified with Christ, Does anyone Doubt the Promise of our Salvation?
Of course not.

Similarly, Christ Has been Given all power an Authority. And the Full realization of that Will be when we are in New Jerusalem with Him. The Millennial Reign is a stage in which This reality is revealed.

 

Some of this stuff just defies logic. Even an unbeliever could read Revelation and understand that the chronological nature of events precludes us from being in the millennium right now. There are quotes that put Christ on Earth during the millennium in this thread, you just don't want to accept it at face value. I'm not a bible scholar, but I can read and understand English.

 

There is also a contradiction with amillennialism in that it requires a literal understanding of a things like past covenants but an allegorical understanding of the future.

I asked who has argued that the millennial kingdom is to re-establish the law.

 

What is assumed by opponents of a literal Millennium is that the re-establishment of elements of the Mosaic covenant means that the expectation is the same, it is not.

"The kingdom expectation is based on the Abrahamic covenant, the Davidic Covenant, and the Palastinic Covenant, but is in no way based on the Mosaic Covenant. It is insisted that the covenants will be fulfilled in the kingdom age. This does not, however, link the Mosaic Covenant with the Kingdom necessarily. It is therefore fallacious to reason that because one believes in the fulfillment of the determinative covenants he must also believe in the restoration of the Mosaic order, which was a conditional covenant, non-determinative and non-eschatological in intent, but rather to govern the life of the people in their relation to God in the old economy."

Pentecost, J. Dwight "Things To come; A study in Biblical Eschatology"; Zondervan (Grand Rapids Mich; 1958; pg.518)

 

Good Catch, Revmitchell. As i was answering questions and positing one's of my own, i didn't even realize that Aaron was implying i/we thought that the Mosaic Law was to be reestablished. I'll have to reread the thread, but not once did i say the Law would be reestablished. Pentecost put it very succinctly, which Covenant Theology adherence can agree on the fulfilling of these things. Hopefully they see the totality of it all being both in a Physical Kingdom Set up on Earth as well as His eternal Kingdom with New Jerusalem.

 

It's as if you've never actually read revelation. To be one of these new fangled millennials you seem to have no knowledge of the book that reveals it. I'm just some guy who grew up in a cult and read the bible and did some studies.

Get out of your comfort zone and do some real study.