How does this fit the Millenium?

As for the sacrifices in Ezekiel, I have never heard of "memorial" sacrifices during the Millennium. Reinstitutionn of feasts like Tabernacles, yes, and reinstitution of sacrifices in the restored Temple, before the antichrist stops it, but never in the Millennium. I would think that that is another example of a conditional picture of the future if Israel had remeined faithful to God, and He had brought the Kingdom in through here as originally intended.
Where would preterists place this in their view, since all of this is supposed to be picturing the Church age, and the Temple was already destroyed by then? (Even if you say it was in the AD30-70 period, it was still illegitimate in God's eyes already. You never did tell us what exactly the 1000 years were in your view. Was that supposed to be that transitional 40 years or something?)

As for the Supper of God, I was also wondering what that was supposed to be in preterism. Is that symbolic, or is it something literal that Josephus has recorded, but not heard about that much?

 

Yes, they understood apocalyptic, figurative language that you insist must be taken as literal.

That is correct, though no one knows who wrote Hebrews. By the way, Luke wrote most of the NT if you go by volume.

The Messianic age is the church age. The Kingdom is the Church age. The New Covenant is the Church age. According to you when did the church begin?

That’s what a church is.
OT Hebrew- NT Greek.

Actually 1948. So the Jews returning to the land in unbelief is a fulfillment of prophecy?
And if it is a fulfillment then there was no way Christ could have returned before the year 1948. Imminency beliefs of everyone before that were invalid, correct?

Might want to check your bible. Paul quotes that text from Ezekiel in 2 Cor.

It is obvious if you come with no pre-supposition.

'Ez 37: 27 My tabernacle also shall be with them; and I will be their God,
and they shall be my people.'

Is he our God? Are we His people? Does He not tabernacle with us?

Eph 2:20 being built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets,
Christ Jesus himself being the chief corner stone;21 in whom each several
building, fitly framed together, groweth into a holy temple in the Lord;22 in
whom ye also are builded together for a habitation of God in the Spirit.'

We are His Temple where He dwells. Very clear.

Why do you ignore the sin offering? Does it destroy your view?

Jesus's blood is not sufficient in your view, because you have people turning back to sin offerings, not memorial offerings.

23 And the seven days of the feast he shall prepare a burnt-offering to
Jehovah, seven bullocks and seven rams without blemish daily the seven
days; and a he-goat daily for a sin-offering .

You just can't pretend its not there.

I can't wait to go back to the Old Covenant and get rid of this inferior New Covenant we now burden under.

This is what I have been encouraging you to do. But you take terms that OT and 1st century Jews understood one way and interpret them through your 21st century mind.

Are you Jewish by chance?

 

Whatever

 

If you take things out of context you can make them say whatever you wish. I tried explaining these verses to you before, but since you ignore mine how about the Reformers?

The 1599 Geneva Study Bible

585BC
Ez. 32:8 All the bright lights of heaven will I make dark over thee, and set g darkness upon thy land, saith the Lord GOD.

(g) By this manner of speech is meant the great sorrow that will be for the slaughter of the king and his people.

32:12 By the swords of the mighty will I cause thy multitude to fall, the terrible of the nations, all of them: and they shall lay waste the h pomp of Egypt, and all its multitude shall be destroyed.

(h) This came to pass in less than four years after this prophecy.

32:14 Then will I make i their waters deep, and cause their rivers to run like oil, saith the Lord GOD.

(i) That is, of the Chaldeans your enemies, who will quietly enjoy all your conveniences.

Jer.4:5 d Declare ye in Judah, and proclaim in Jerusalem; and say, Blow ye the trumpet in the land: cry, confirm, and say, Assemble yourselves, and let us go into the fortified cities.

(d) He warns them of the great dangers that will come on them by the Chaldeans, unless they repent and turn to the Lord.

4:7 The f lion is come up from his thicket, and the destroyer of the Gentiles is on his way; he is gone forth from his place to make thy land desolate; thy cities shall be laid waste, without an inhabitant.

(f) Meaning Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon,

4:11 At that time shall it be said to this people and to Jerusalem, A dry i wind of the high places in the wilderness toward the daughter of my people, not k to fan, nor to cleanse,

(i) The north wind by which he means Nebuchadnezzar.
(k) But to carry away both corn and chaff.

4:13 Behold, he shall come up as l clouds, and his chariots [shall be] as a whirlwind: his horses are swifter than eagles. m Woe to us! for we are laid waste.

(l) Meaning that Nebuchadnezzar would come as suddenly as a cloud that is carried with the wind.
(m) This is spoken in the person of all the people, who in their affliction would cry thus.

24:1 Behold, the LORD maketh the a earth empty, and maketh it waste, and turneth it upside down, and scattereth abroad its inhabitants.

(a) This prophecy is as a conclusion of that which has been threatened to the Jews and other nations from the 13th chapter and therefore by the earth he means those lands which were named before.

 

Cmon Eric, get with the program.

Where does it say anywhere the Kingdom was ever conditional.

1000, 100, 10 and multiples symbolize completion. 1000 doesn't represent a number as much as it does an idea or concept. "God owns the cattle on a thousand hills". Now does God own only 1000 or is it an expression meaning all?

Those in the A-Mill camp believe the church is in the "1000 year reign".
Full-Pret. says it was the time of 30AD-70AD.

Don't know this guys eschatological views but his definition fits:

Dr. Stephen Travis (1974)
"The idea of a thousand-year reign appears in the Bible only in Revelation 20. That is no reason for dismissing it, but it is a hint that the millennium is not to be regarded as a literal thousand-year reign on earth.. So how should we understand the passage about the millennium in Revelation 20:1-6? Certainly we should note there is no mention of a reign on earth. If the 'thrones' (verse 4) are anywhere, there are in heaven, like all the other thrones mentioned in Revelation (except for the thrones of Satan and of 'the beast'). It is better to understand this thousand-year reign not as some future literal, earthly reign, but as a symbol of the period between Christ's resurrection and final coming." (The Jesus Hope, Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1974, 89-90)

Philip Schaff (1877)
"Though millenialism was supressed by the early church, it was nevertheless from time to time revived by heretical sects." (Schaff's History, pg. 299 )

J.A.W. Neander (1837)
" Among the Jews the representation was growing that the messiah would reign 1000 years upon the earth. Such products of Jewish imagination passed over into Christianity. " (History of Christian Dogmas, Vol. I, pg. 248)

Justin Martyr (A.D.150)
CHAP. XI.--WHAT KINGDOM CHRISTIANS LOOK FOR.
"And when you hear that we look for a kingdom, you suppose, without making any inquiry, that we speak of a human kingdom; whereas we speak of that which is with God, as appears also from the confession of their faith made by those who are charged with being Christians, though they know that death is the punishment awarded to him who so confesses. For if we looked for a human kingdom, we should also deny our Christ, that we might not be slain; and we should strive to escape detection, that we might obtain what we expect. But since our thoughts are not fixed on the present, we are not concerned when men cut us off; since also death is a debt which must at all events be paid." (First Apology of Justin Martyr, ch. 11)

"Chiliasm found no favor with the best of the Apostolic Fathers... the support from the Apologists too, is extremely meager, only one from among their number can with reasonable fairness be claimed, (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, v. 25 - 36 ).

Definitely symbolic. Its a marriage supper, so who is getting married? I believe Christ put the House of Israel and the House of Judea back together and remarried Her. Matt 15:24 indicates He is bringing back the 10 tribes to join with the other 2, then He will marry her whom He divorced in Jer 3:9. This is also the putting together of the two sticks Ez. speaks of. Thus Christ marries His Church(the bride). This is a very rough draft of what I think it might mean. Remember where Jesus said anyone who invites Him in He will sup with. Perhaps this is the meaning. Haven't done a lot in this area.

Perhaps it is the same supper in verse 17 of Rev 19.??

 

Grasshopper,

I previously said, 'Part of your problem and that of other people who are 'covenant
theologians' is they look backward as Gentile Christians rather then
setting themselves in the crowd of Jewish people that the major
and minor prophets represented.'

You said, 'Yes, they understood apocalyptic, figurative language that you insist must be
taken as literal.'

Ray is saying, 'Now tell me that when the Hebrews after hearing Isaiah speak of his words in chapter 7:14 & 9:6 thought of the prophecy in a 'figurative language' or view. All religious Jewish women after that lived with the hope that they might bear the Messiah. This is how you brethren get off track.'

You said, 'The Messianic age is the church age. The Kingdom is the Church age. The New Covenant is the Church age. According to you when did the church begin?

Ray is saying, 'Probably fifty days after Christ's resurrection, called Pentecost, which I am told means fiftieth; and yet Jesus took the thief on the Cross to Paradise and then on to Heaven. Possibly when the vail was rent in twain.

The church age is distinct from the Millenium. I already dealt with that in Ephesians 3:10 which you did not respond to in your post. The church age is 'the fellowship of the mystery.' [3:3 & 9] The Millenium is future to our day. [Revelation 20]

Ray is saying, 'I think the term 'church' is mentioned only once in the O.T. if I remember correctly. In the N.T. it is referred to mega times. It is God's prerogative to rule over people in unique dispensations, in various ways. For example: Abrahamic Covenant, the age of Law, the age of grace through His church, and in the future earthly Millenimum after His Second Coming.

You said, 'That's what a church is. OT Hebrew- NT Greek.

Ray is saying, 'Tell us now that there is no difference from Law and Grace. [John 1:17]

Ray said before: 'This has no overlay with N.T. theology. Ezekiel is speaking of the
coming together of the future, to his time, the nation of Israel.
Most of us have lived to see this prophecy fulfilled in 1947. I believe
this was the year that they became a nation again.'

Grasshopper said, 'Actually 1948.'

'Right. I had it written in my study Bible but could not find 1948.'

You said, ' . . . the Jews returning to the land in unbelief is a fulfillment of prophecy?'

Ray is saying, 'Yes, this is documented in Ezekiel 37:21 and in many other passages. As you probably know there are many Russian Jews who are returning to their homeland of Israel.'

I think Grasshopper also said this. 'And if it is a fulfillment then there was no way Christ could have returned before the year 1948. Imminency beliefs of everyone before that were invalid, correct?'

Right. Jesus re-entry into our realm is yet future.

You said, 'By you saying this 'Paul quotes it as a fulfillment in II COR 6:16 And
what agreement hath a temple of God with idols? for we are a
temple of the living God; even as God said, I will dwell in them, and
walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people,'
you are as lost as that 'goose in a hurricane.'


Might want to check your bible. Paul quotes that text from Ezekiel in 2 Cor.

quote:

What you said below is not any where near to to exegeting the
Scripture.

You said, 'Again fulfilled in the New Covenant.


It is obvious if you come with no pre-supposition.

'Ez 37: 27 My tabernacle also shall be with them; and I will be their God,
and they shall be my people.'

Is he our God? Are we His people? Does He not tabernacle with us?

Eph 2:20 being built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets,
Christ Jesus himself being the chief corner stone;21 in whom each several
building, fitly framed together, groweth into a holy temple in the Lord;22 in
whom ye also are builded together for a habitation of God in the Spirit.'

We are His Temple where He dwells. Very clear.'

Ray is saying, 'There is a vast difference between the Holy Spirit indwelling all Christians, than that of the Lord dwelling among His people as so often promised in the O.T. The reason there is no Ark of the Covenant in the latter chapters of Ezekiel is because Jesus will really be in Jerusalem sitting on His earthly throne as also prophecied in Zechariah chapter fourteen. It is my understanding that Christ will oversee the building of His Millennial Temple. The Temple that the antichrist will desecrate [Daniel 12:11 & II Thessalonians 2:4]will be built before Christ's Millennial Temple. [Ezekiel chapters 40-48].

Ray said before: 'Ray is saying, 'Yes the 'animal sacrifices' will be a memorial to the
Lord's past history in the affairs of human being, in this case, for
the most part Jewish people.' We look back to the Last Supper/
the beginning of the Holy Communion as a memorial also. Get
used to it; it's coming, if you love Jesus.'

In the Millennium God will re-institute, as a memorial of His only sacrifice for human sin. In Ezekiel three different offerings are mentioned in the same verse. [42:13] It will be the Lord's Providence in the Millennium to do this as Divine worship of Him, as we look back to His perfect sacrifice on the Cross. None of us, presently feel wrong in looking back at the Cross and having a memorial of His atoning death, which is the Service of Holy Communion in the elements of bread/His body; and wine/His blood.'

You said, 'Why do you ignore the sin offering? Does it destroy your view?'

Ray is saying, 'I cannot cover every topic that you might wonder what I believe about it; believe me I did not overlook or ignore this offering. This 'sin offering' has no atoning benefit, but it will remind us throughout eternity of His faultless atonement shed on the Cross of Calvary.

As I said before, 'It will be a memorial of how Jehovah dealt with the Israelite
people in distant past generations. Christ blood is the only reality
that can cleanse anyone's sins. There is no other way than to trust
in Jesus as Savior. There is but one plan for Jews and Gentiles and
it is to have faith in the Lord.'

You said, 'Jesus's blood is not sufficient in your view, because you have people turning
back to sin offerings, not memorial offerings.'

Ray is saying, 'I have made it most clear, God is my witness, that even the 'sin offering' will be a remembrance and a memorial of His inferior plan during the times of Abraham and Moses. [Hebrews 8:6] The O.T. people of God were saved by the same faith in the Lord that we value, and God saw them through the blood of Christ, even under the former covenant.'

Ray is saying, 'I know you are 'toying with me' by what you have said below.'

Here were your words. I can't wait to go back to the Old Covenant and get rid of this inferior New Covenant we now burden under.'

Ray is saying, 'Hebrews 8:6 speaks of the N.T. being the superior covenant, and also that there is no one covenant theory, as covenant theologians pretend is in Scripture.'

Ray said before, 'Now you are beginning to understand what Ezekiel is saying to his
assembly several centuries ago. Remember to look at things
through Jewish eyes.'

You said, 'This is what I have been encouraging you to do. But you take terms that OT
and 1st century Jews understood one way and interpret them through your
21st century mind.'

'No. I am saying that the prophets wrote distinctive words down for a reason, as in Micah 5:2. Jesus never ruled over an earthly Kingdom, but He will right after the Second Coming of Christ. That is why Micah said, that Jesus will one day ' . . . be Ruler in Israel. Do you have a problem with Christ ruling over the earth [Zechariah 14:9] for 1,000 years? [Revelation 20:2,3,4,5,6, and 7] After five times one would think that God was re-emphasizing the reality of His plan for the ages, by way of His earthly Kingdom in Jerusalem. [Zechariah 14:4 & 16]

You said, 'Are you Jewish by chance?'

No I am not Jewish. My forefathers came here from France. As I side-bar I hate that France and Russia did not support us in the Iraqi conflict. I am only Jewish in the sense that all Christians are 'the Israel of God.' [Galatians 6:16] We are princes with the Lord; we are princesses as we live before Him.

 

I don't know what else you want me to say. I showed you those verses are speaking of past events, yet you want to make them future. Re-read my post using the Reformers commentary on those passages. Read Is. 13, where God uses similiar language to describe how the Medes destroyed Babylon. You cannot take those scriptures and use them to describe the future when they are speaking of past events.

 

That aspect of the Kingdom; in which Israel would have accepted the Messiah, and the first covenant have been the one for that Kingdom. But They rejected the MEssiah, so all of that changed. The whole purpose of that was GOd writing the lesson in histiry that man needed regeneration first, before a Kingdom. With sin finally atoned for and put away for good, those offerings would no longer be needed.
Still, what is it in your view, since you do not believe sacrifices are to be practiced in the church kingdom?

One thing that occurred to me as I was reading through the passage today, was that Satan was taken and cast into the bottomless pit at the beginning of the period, and it is not until the end that he is released to deceive again, and leads people to attack the city. Yet, all of the deception and wars, etc. from the Olivet prophecy and first four seals you said occured in this period also. Even if Revelation was written in AD64, then this period was still portrayed as future then.

Also, the first person you quoted said:

Rev.5:10

I meant the feast of the birds. That is what is called "the supper of God", as distinguished from "the marriage supper of the Lamb". Were birds symbolic too?

 

For the 100th time its apocalytic language, ITS NOT TO BE TAKEN LITERALLY ! Why can't you understand that? You don't have to agree, but at least you should after all this time understand that I consider it apocalyptic in nature.

Next, try putting things in the proper context. You can't just start in the middle of a chapter and assume it is future. Bible Study actually takes a little work and research. Any one can be a Jack Van Impe and just throw verses around.

Consider similar language in Is. 13 that I'm sure you also think is literal and future:

Isaiah 13

1 The burden of Babylon , which Isaiah the son of Amoz did see.

This is a prophecy concerning Babylon

9 Behold, the day of Jehovah cometh, cruel, with wrath and fierce anger; to make the land a desolation, and to destroy the sinners thereof out of it.
10 For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light; the sun shall be darkened in its going forth, and the moon shall not cause its light to shine.

Did this literally happen NO! It's speaking of the fall of a kingdom.

11 And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity: and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible.

Did God "punish the world" in your literalist view? NO! The Babylonian world? YES!


12 I will make a man more rare than fine gold , even a man than the pure gold of Ophir.
13 Therefore I will make the heavens to tremble , and the earth shall be shaken out of its place, in the wrath of Jehovah of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger.

Did the Heavens tremble? Not literally but figuratively they did, because the heavens and earth refer to their kingdom world, rule and order.

17 Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them, who shall not regard silver, and as for gold, they shall not delight in it.

Here it tells you who God will use to accomplish His will. THE MEDES! Not some future anti-christ.
Unless of course you believe the MEDES will exist again,which at this point would not suprise me.

I don't have time to do my study let alone all yours as well. Let me just say there is a reason the Reformers understood this to be past HISTORY.

Perhaps since you don't consider the Reformers credible I'll try Matthew Henry:
How about we set the context instead of running to the end, OK?

Ezekiel 321 And it came to pass in the twelfth year, in the twelfth month, in the first day of the month, that the word of Jehovah came unto me, saying,
2 Son of man, take up a lamentation over Pharaoh king of Egypt, and say unto him, Thou wast likened unto a young lion of the nations: yet art thou as a monster in the seas; and thou didst break forth with thy rivers, and troubledst the waters with thy feet, and fouledst their rivers.

Is that not self explanatory?

Ezekiel 32
Still we are upon the destruction of Pharaoh and Egypt, which is wonderfully enlarged upon, and with a great deal of emphasis. When we read so very much of Egypt’s ruin, no less than six several prophecies at divers times delivered concerning it, we are ready to think, Surely there is some special reason for it. And, I. Perhaps it may look as far back as the book of Genesis, where we find (15:14) that God determined to judge Egypt for oppressing his people; and, though that was in part fulfilled in the plagues of Egypt and the drowning of Pharaoh, yet, in this destruction, here foretold, those old scores were reckoned for, and that was to have its full accomplishment.


Isaiah 24
Some think (and very probably) that it is a prophecy of the great havoc that Sennacherib and his Assyrian army should now shortly make of many of the nations in that part of the world. 2. Others make it to point at the like devastations which, about 100 years afterwards, Nebuchadnezzar and his armies should make in the same countries, going from one kingdom to another, not only to conquer them, but to ruin them and lay them waste; for that was the method which those eastern nations took in their wars. The promises that are mixed with the threatenings are intended for the support and comfort of the people of God in those very calamitous times.

Jeremiah 4
It should seem that the first two verses of this chapter might better have been joined to the close of the foregoing chapter, for they are directed to Israel, the ten tribes, by way of reply to their compliance with God’s call, directing and encouraging them to hold their resolution (v. 1, 2). The rest of the chapter concerns Judah and Jerusalem. I. They are called to repent and reform (v. 3, 4). II. They are warned of the advance of Nebuchadnezzar and his forces against them, and are told that it is for their sins, from which they are again exhorted to wash themselves (v. 5–18). III. To affect them the more with the greatness of the desolation that was coming, the prophet does himself bitterly lament it, and sympathize with his people in the calamities it brought upon them, and the plunge it brought them to, representing it as a reduction of the world to its first chaos (v. 19–31).
(v. 20), breach upon breach, one sad calamity, like Job’s messengers, treading upon the heels of another. The death of Josiah breaks the ice, and plucks up the flood-gates; within three months after that his son and successor Jehoahaz is deposed by the king of Egypt; within two or three years after Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem and took it, and thenceforward he was continually making descents upon the land of Judah with his armies during the reigns of Jehoiakim, Jeconiah, and Zedekiah, till about nineteen years after he completed their ruin in the destruction of Jerusalem: but suddenly were their tents spoiled and their curtains in a moment. Though the cities held out for some time, the country was laid waste at the very first. The shepherds and all that lived in tents were plundered immediately; they and their effects fell into the enemies’ hands; therefore we find the Rechabites, who dwelt in tents, upon the first coming of the army of the Chaldees into the land retiring to Jerusalem, Jer. 35:11. The inhabitants of the villages soon ceased: Suddenly were the tents spoiled. The plain men that dwelt in tents were first made a prey of.
The earth is without form, and void (v. 23), as it was Gen. 1:2. It is Tohu and Bohu, the words there used, as far as the land of Judea goes. It is confusion and emptiness, stripped of all its beauty, void of all its wealth, and, compared with what it was, every thing out of place and out of shape. To a worse chaos than this will the earth be reduced at the end of time, when it, and all the works that are therein, shall be burnt up. [2.] The heavens too are without light, as the earth is without fruits. This alludes to the darkness that was upon the face of the deep (Gen. 1:2), and represents God’s displeasure against them, as the eclipse of the sun did at our Saviour’s death. It was not only the earth that failed them, but heaven also frowned upon them; and with their trouble they had darkness, for they could not see through their troubles. The smoke of their houses and cities which the enemy burnt, and the dust which their army raised in its march, even darkened the sun, so that the heavens had no light. Or it may be taken figuratively: The earth (that is, the common people) was impoverished and in confusion; and the heavens (that is, the princes and rulers) had no light, no wisdom in themselves, nor were any comfort to the people, nor a guide to them. Comp. Mt. 24:29. [3.] The mountains trembled, and the hills moved lightly, v. 24. So formidable were the appearances of God against his people, as in the days of old they had been for them, that the mountains skipped like rams and the little hills like lambs, Ps. 114:4. The everlasting mountains seemed to be scattered, Hab. 3:6. The mountains on which they had worshipped their idols, the mountains over which they had looked for succours, all trembled, as if they had been conscious of the people’s guilt. The mountains, those among them that seemed to the highest and strongest, and of the firmest resolution, trembled at the approach of the Chaldean army. The hills moved lightly, as being eased of the burden of a sinful nation, Isa. 1:24. [4.] Not the earth only, but the air, was dispeopled, and left uninhabited (v. 25): I beheld the cities, the countries that used to be populous, and, lo, there was no man to be seen; all the inhabitants were either killed, or fled, or taken captives, such a ruining depopulating thing is sin: nay, even the birds of the heavens, that used to fly about and sing among the branches, had now fled away, and were no more to be seen or heard. The land of Judah had now become like the lake of Sodom, over which (they say) no bird flies; see Deu. 29:23. The enemies shall make such havoc of the country that they shall not so much as leave a bird alive in it. [5.] Both the ground and the houses shall be laid waste (v. 26): Lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, being deserted by the inhabitants that should cultivate it, and then soon overgrown with thorns and briers, or being trodden down by the destroying army of the enemy. The cities also and their gates and walls are broken down and levelled with the ground. Those that look no further than second causes impute it to the policy and fury of the invaders; but the prophet, who looks to the first cause, says that it is at the presence of the Lord, at his face (that is, the anger of his countenance), even by his fierce anger, that this was done. Even angry men cannot do us any real hurt, unless God be angry with us. If our ways please him, all is well. [6.] The meaning of all this is that the nation shall be entirely ruined, and every part of it shall share in the destruction; neither town nor country shall escape. First, Not the country, for the whole land shall be desolate, corn land and pasture land, both common and enclosed, it shall be laid waste (v. 27); the conquerors will have occasion for it all. Secondly, Not the men, for (v. 29) the whole city shall flee, all the inhabitants of the town shall quit their habitations by consent, for fear of the horsemen and bowmen. Rather than lie exposed to their fury, they shall go into the thickets, where they are in danger of being torn by briers, nay, to be torn in pieces by wild beasts; and they shall climb up upon the rocks, where their lodging will be hard and cold, and the precipice dangerous. Let us not be over-fond of our houses and cities; for the time may come when rocks and thickets may be preferable, and chosen rather. This shall be the common case, for every city shall be forsaken, and not a man shall be left that dares dwell therein. Both government and trade shall be at an end, and all civil societies and incorporations dissolved. It is a very dismal idea which this gives of the approaching desolation; but in the midst of all these threatenings comes in one comfortable word.


Do you need more? Shall I paste the entire commentary over here?Do you reject not only the Reformers but also Matthew Henry? Do I need to find others to convince you? This took be about 10 minutes. The information is out there if you want to really learn.

 

Grasshopper,

You said, 'Let me just say there is a reason the Reformers understood this to be past HISTORY.'

Ray is saying, 'The reason why some the Protestant Reformers believed that eschatology was in the past is because the barnacles of Roman Catholicism still remained in their hearts. Augustine had taught the above named church and they were not able at that point in their faith journey to figure it all out correctly. Only God caused them to believe in justification by faith, but praise God Luther did have some spiritual depth.

We have access to more Biblical tools and know infinitely more than those sad monks. Open your eyes to the facts. You have swallowed much of Roman Catholic theology even believing that we are now in the kingdom of God which will continue until that big one time Judgment Day. Correct me if I misunderstand your theory.

 

Grasshopper,

'Do you reject not only the Reformers but also Matthew Henry?'

Ray is saying, Dr. Matthew Henry has a lot of good exegesis but when he gets into end times events, he is lost both in the O.T. and the New. He is like that Canadian goose lost in tornado alley. It is not worthy of the paper it is written on. Trash! He takes all the truth out of the Book of Ezekiel and other major prophets and turns it into untruth.

If you want to read the man of God with the answers get Dr. J. Dwight Pentecost's book, "Things to Come" published by Zondervan Publishing House. I think he is better than Dr. Ryrie or Walvoord. And then there is also little old me.

 

Dwight Pentecost
"the prophecies regarding David’s reign in the millennium are not literally understood; they speak of Christ(Things to Come: A study Biblical Eschatology [Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan/Academie, (1958) 1964], p. 498).

 

The two blind men who immediately received their sight called Jesus 'the son of David.' [Matthew 20:30] Also, 21:9 & 15 and so on.

As I said before much of the Old and New Testaments was written from a Jewish perspective. II Timothy 2:8 says, ' . . . Jesus Christ of the seed of David . . . '

Throughout most of Israelite history there has been a king on the throne of David. Example: Jeremiah 22:2.

There are references in Ezekiel 37:24 & 25 . . . also to consider.

In Hosea 3:4-5 suggests strongly that for many years Israel will be without a king. Probably from the Fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. until 1948 Israel has been without a king, and even now the leader of their nation is not spoken of as a king. 'In the latter says' of human history during Christ's Millenimum Jesus will reign as King over the entire world in His theocracy. [Zechariah 14:9] This will be after the Great Tribulation and the Second Coming.

Some people believe that David of old, will along with all Christians return from Heaven in Christ's Second Coming. [Revelation 19:11 & 14] They believe David will become one of the great leaders in Christ's Millennial program for human history. But, I most definitely believe that Jesus will sit on the throne of his father David as clearly spoken about in Luke 1:30-33. Also: Zechariah 14:16-17. After the Millenimum and after a period of time we will move into eternity of which the 1,000 years is but one phase.