millinial questions

[Ed Edwards]

//Let's hear it for the physical/literal Millennial Messanic Kingdom -- acoming to an earth near you just a tad more than 7 years from now.

YEA for JESUS!//

Other people said this in 1100.
I said this in 1952. I said it in 2008.
If I live to be 100 years old AND THE LORD TARRIES, I'll say this in 2043.

All it says is THE LORD WILL COME SOON.

The mention of this again by the party quoted above will constitute harrasment against me according to the laws of the State of OKlahoma.
I have not, will not ever say a specific hour, day, week, fortnight, month, year, decade, century, millennium, etc. I will however, always believe in the emminacy of the Lord's coming to get me out of this mess.

 

[skypair]

To claim you know when the end will be, goes against everything the Lord taught. It is heretic. (IMO)

Focus, Bobby. The RAPTURE is imminent! Therefore, the 2nd coming could be in 7 years.

BTW, you claim that Christ already came and raptured the church. That, sir, is the offense you accuse Ed of committing COMMITTED BY YOU!

skypair

 

[skypair]

BBob,

Wow, TWO posts and a new page and you still can't look up the verses I cite and see if you are preaching ERROR!

Bob, are you not afraid of being "turned over to Satan that you may learn not to blaspheme" like Hymenaeus, 1Tim 1:20??? Are you not afraid that what you are saying will "eat as doth a canker" (2Tim 2:17) because you have "erred saying that the resurrection already past; and overthrow the faith of some?"

Bob -- WAKE UP!! You are the "man of God" here! We ought not judge you, but you ought to judge yourself to know whether you are of the faith.

"In a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour." 2Tim 2:20 Bob, please consider which you are. raying:

skypair

 

[Brother Bob]

//Let's hear it for the physical/literal Millennial Messanic Kingdom -- acoming to an earth near you just a tad more than 7 years from now. (You first said, in 7 years from NOW, of a bit more).

YEA for JESUS!//

Other people said this in 1100. (several people have said it, but they were all heretics).
I said this in 1952. I said it in 2008.
If I live to be 100 years old AND THE LORD TARRIES, I'll say this in 2043.

All it says is THE LORD WILL COME SOON. (In 7 years from NOW, or a bit more.)

The mention of this again by the party quoted above will constitute harrasment against me according to the laws of the State of OKlahoma.
I have not, will not ever say a specific hour, day, week, fortnight, month, year, decade, century, millennium, etc. I will however, always believe in the emminacy of the Lord's coming to get me out of this mess.

I don't blame you, I would try to get out of it too, but you said, in 7 years from NOW, or a bit more.

I am still waiting for you and the others to give scripture where Jesus will reign ON EARTH, for this thousand years.

I am still waiting for you and others to give scripture where in this thousand year reign, there will be both soul and body.

BBob,

 

[Ed Edwards]

// I don't blame you, I would try to get out of it too, but you said, in 7 years from NOW, or a bit more.//

Obviously you will cut me no slack. I'm tired of playing your damned if you do & damned if you don't game. I'll let people who can read put you down.

There is no possible way that the Millennial Messianic Kingdom will start in less than 7 years from NOW, today, this current time. However, anytime (and NOBODY on earth knows it) after that, the Millennial Messianic Kingdom could start. It will be on earth.

For me to prove it from the scripture you would have to understand the logic of this:

-----------------------------
Matthew 24:13 (KJV1873):

But he that shall endure unto
the end, the same shall be saved.

This statement is true:
IF he endures to the end;
THEN he shall be saved.

Logic Dictates that this statement is
also correct because the first one was:

If he is not saved;
Then He did not endure to the end.

There are two statements that come from
this that are independent of the first
statement (I didn't say they were true or
false); I leave it up to the reader to
prove one of them true from the Bible.
If one is true, both are true [by the rules
of Logic] ):

IF he endures NOT to the end;
THEN he shall NOT be saved.

IF he is saved;
THEN he endures to the end.

Matthew 24:13 does NOT support the
truth of these last two propositions.
Some people think it does, but they
are wrong.

-------------------------------
An example where the second set of propositions
are not true, even though the original set
of propositions is true.

First set of propositions (True)
If you smoke; then you will die prematurly.
If you die NOT prematurely; then you
then you did NOT smoke.

Second set of propositions (False)

If you do not smoke; then you will not die prematurely
[it is false, you could die from a fall while
cleaning your gutters]

If you die prematurely; then you smoked.
[perchane you die prematurely cause
you got lung cancer from polution]

-----------------------------

 

[Brother Bob]

// I don't blame you, I would try to get out of it too, but you said, in 7 years from NOW, or a bit more.//

Obviously you will cut me no slack. I'm tired of playing your damned if you do & damned if you don't game. I'll let people who can read put you down.

There is no possible way that the Millennial Messianic Kingdom will start in less than 7 years from NOW, today, this current time. However, anytime (and NOBODY on earth knows it) after that, the Millennial Messianic Kingdom could start. It will be on earth.

For me to prove it from the scripture you would have to understand the logic of this:

-----------------------------
Matthew 24:13 (KJV1873):

But he that shall endure unto
the end, the same shall be saved.

This statement is true:
IF he endures to the end;
THEN he shall be saved.

Logic Dictates that this statement is
also correct because the first one was:

If he is not saved;
Then He did not endure to the end.

There are two statements that come from
this that are independent of the first
statement (I didn't say they were true or
false); I leave it up to the reader to
prove one of them true from the Bible.
If one is true, both are true [by the rules
of Logic] ):

IF he endures NOT to the end;
THEN he shall NOT be saved.

IF he is saved;
THEN he endures to the end.

Matthew 24:13 does NOT support the
truth of these last two propositions.
Some people think it does, but they
are wrong.

-------------------------------
An example where the second set of propositions
are not true, even though the original set
of propositions is true.

First set of propositions (True)
If you smoke; then you will die prematurly.
If you die NOT prematurely; then you
then you did NOT smoke.

Second set of propositions (False)

If you do not smoke; then you will not die prematurely
[it is false, you could die from a fall while
cleaning your gutters]

If you die prematurely; then you smoked.
[perchane you die prematurely cause
you got lung cancer from polution]

-----------------------------

Ok Ed, I will cut you some slack.

BBob,

 

[EdSutton]

menageriekeeper][/font]It's been a long time since I've studied any of this so (match the questions to the same colored part of the quote please):

I really thought that our glorified bodies didn't appear until after the last battle with Satan.

No, the dead in Christ will rise first and those who remain will be caught up to meet them in the air and that is when we get 'our' glorified bodies, at the rapture. The rest get it 'after' the 1000 year reign of Chrst just before the Great White throne Judgment.

1 Thes 4:15 For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep
1 Thes 4:16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of {the} archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.
1 Thes 4: 17 Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord.

Here we see the dead rise to meet the living to meet the Lord in the air. This isn't the Second coming of Christ because that is specific to Christ being upon the earth. This is Christ calling up His Church to Himself, which when He does come He brings them (us) with Him. We see in 1 Cor what Pauls states happens at the 'rising up' or 'snatching away' (rapture).

1Cr 15:51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
1Cr 15:52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
1Cr 15:53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal [must] put on immortality.

I understand about the idea of some surviving the Trib and sort of know where the scripture for this is located, but, where do find that there will be no death or disease on earth during the Millinial Kingdom? Especially death as the end battle with Satan will certainly destroyed those he has decieved, right? (not right?)

Actaully (sic), you are right. I merged the two together in mind some how..??. In the Mil Riegn, a person of 100 years of age that 'dies' will be considered as a youth comparitively. Life will be extended as seen here:

Isaiah 65:20-23 "There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed. And they shall build houses, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and eat the fruit of them. They shall not build, and another inhabit; they shall not plant, and another eat: for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands. They shall not labour in vain, nor bring forth for trouble; for they are the seed of the blessed of the LORD, and their offspring with them.

The no death part is 'after' the Great White Throne Judgment. Good Call! :thumbs:

These humans left on earth, why do you believe they will all be believers? Is there scripture that supports this?

That will be all that will be left on the earth after Christ destroys the rebellious who come to do battle against Him at His second coming. I LOVE the way scripture discribes that event. He FIRST grabs AC and false Prophet and throws them both 'alive' into the Lake of Fire (this was the beginning of the battle ) and then He slays the remnant with the sword of His mouth (the word of His mouth) Rev 19:20-21 ... Kings (leaders), nations (the people), so it is better descibed as the world will try to dethrone Christ at His coming but they will all be laid low.

Rev 16:14 For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, [which] go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.

There are others but this seems good unless you would like more.

Still, why does God bother with this? If He's here why can't Christ just declare them to be of "reprobate mind" upon their rejection of Him and execute them without having to involve Satan at all?

The same could be said of now. Why does God allow us to continue or even allow the reprobate to be born?

I believe the reason falls back to 'mans responsiblity' although many scholars and theologians have varying opinions as to the 'why' question. Just like the in Garden when everything was perfect/innocent Adam and Eve still were accountable to believe and follow God therefore an option must be available. It will be much the same at that time, with the exception of mans excuse - "If we would have known what would have happened we wouldn't have done it" Though I don't know fully why God does it this way, I can see God throughout history removing all of mans excuses when that final Judgment day comes.
ex. (1) If we had only one rule we would not have sinned against you. (Thus we have Adam's situation).
(2) If you would have let us live according to our conscience we would have followed you in faith, after all we are all good at heart (and Noah's).
(3) If you would have given us rules to follow, we would know fully what you required and woud not faulter in our faith but be diligent to up hold them (Moses).
(4) If you would have given us guides to let us know when we were not walking correctly since we tend to wander, they could help us be faithful (Judges and Prophets).
(5) If you would just be merciful and save us through your grace by faith via a Gospel message, we would most certainly run to you. (Christ and Church).
(6) If you ruled physically over us and you yourself corrected us and brought peace and joy to the world like in the beginning, with all that we know now from history and of sin, there is no question not one alive would rebel but stand in faith. (Mil Reign of Christ)

(7) the Judgment by which no excuse can be offered on behalf of mankind.

I like PrmtvBptst1832's answer best.

And, generally speaking, EdSutton likes Allan's answer best, not that I necessarily agree with every bit of minutiae in it.

One likes one 'answer'; one likes another 'answer'.

Same difference, no? Each one of us has some opinion.

Ed

 

[Brother Bob]

One likes one 'answer'; one likes another 'answer'.

Same difference, right? Each one of us has some opinion.

Ed

Yes, that is why we have the debates......

 

[EdSutton]

Bro Allan,

You posted:Zec 14:8 ¶ And it shall be in that day, [that] living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.
Zec 14:9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one

When do you think this was fulfilled? This happened when Jesus hung, bled, and died on the cross on Calvary's hill. You can wait for the earthly kingdom all you want, as for me, when He shouts, I will answer, and I will go UP and forever be with Him in Heaven.

Willis

PS this will be my last post on this subject, because I admit, that this is something I haven't studied as much as some, but I do believe this has already happened. I don't want to get into any agruments because if we are saved, the outcome is good either way it happens, do you agre, Bro Allan. Just because I disagree, I disagree in love. May God bless you and your family!!

__________________

convicted1, may I say, I appreciate the humility you have shown here.

Let me, now, suggest you read Revelation. Don't worry that you do not understand it all. I'm certain I do not understand it all, and would guess that I have invested far more time in that book than any on this thread, primarily due to circumstance. I have been through it under five different pastors, in its entirety; actually taught through it one time in SS, sat through it with another teacher, in the same manner, and every pastor, the teacher, and I (not to mention the lesson writers in the SS books.) had some slightly different takes on most parts of the book. (We use the Bible book series in SS, where every book is covered once in every nine year cycle.) And I had a three-hour college class on Daniel/Revelation in Bible college, plus was the primary Grad assistant for the same class some three years later. And I would guess that I still have as many questions that are not answered, to my full satisfaction, as anyone. But I have received innumerable blessings from this.

Revelation is the one book and only in the Bible, to my knowledge, that has a specific promise of blessings for those who read it. (Rev. 1:3)

Happy reading and happy blessings!

Ed

 

[EdSutton]

Yes, that is why we have the debates......

I enjoy the debates, and do not especially mind when one does not agree with me, or vice versa.

However, I am annoyed when one post factual and historical errors, and am extremly annoyed by two particular 'pejorative slam-lines' - one that continues to appear here, namely thie first one, and another I saw that I will quote, as well. (One does not have to agree with some other's theology, but still does not have to resort to these tactics, IMO, even if they do so unwittingly.)

It was all considered spiritual by most, until around the seventeenth Century.

Seventeenth - nineteenth centuries - gradually revived earthly millennium view.

Majority of theological community (Post-millennial and Amillennial) has regarded

Dispensationalism as a modernist aberrational (disorder of the mind) interpretation.

I realize this is a posted quote from another source. However, it is, at best, a conclusion, and the last sentence which is mainly in red, is nothing more than a pejorative statement, by that author, attempting to bloster his own ideas, and hence the continued citing of it is not necessary! BTW, part of that quote, that does not appear above, has historical errors in it, as well.

Look at how many never studied enough! This is only small part of them.

Again, a conclusion, at best, and the pejorative language is entirely unnecessary and uncalled for! Incidentally, I pasted them in exactly the font and coloring they appeared.

Ed

 

[Brother Bob]

I enjoy the debates, and do not especially mind when one does not agree with me, or vice versa.

However, I am annoyed when one post factual and historical errors, and am extremly annoyed by two particular 'pejorative slam-lines' - one that continues to appear here, namely thie first one, and another I saw that I will quote, as well. (One does not have to agree with some other's theology, but still does not have to resort to these tactics, IMO, even if they do so unwittingly.)I realize this is a posted quote from another source. However, it is, at best, a conclusion, and the last sentence which is mainly in red, is nothing more than a pejorative statement, by that author, attempting to bloster his own ideas, and hence the continued citing of it is not necessary! BTW, part of that quote, that does not appear above, has historical errors in it, as well.Again, a conclusion, at best, and the pejorative language is entirely unnecessary and uncalled for! Incidentally, I pasted them in exactly the font and coloring they appeared.

Ed

What you fail to realize is that many of us think you have the wrong understanding of history and scripture. As you said, we are both entitled to our own opinion.

Just because someone on here says they took a 3 hour college course and have studied, does not mean the rest of us have not had college courses and have studied for many years on the exact same subject, you claim to have such knowledge in.

I for one, believe a lot of your understanding that you have put forth, have came from the last 2 to 3 hundred years, for your understanding of Rev, and the understanding put forth in the 1-3 centuries, differ quite a bit from what you say the scripture means.

Everybody and his brother has an eschatology about the end times, and we have to all go with what we feel God give us as an understanding. I certainly am not going to put the understand of some man, above what I feel the Lord give me.

He that lacketh understanding, let him ask of God.

Paul= I never learned it of man and neither was I taught it, but it came from God.

I honestly believe with everything in me, that you and others have a misunderstanding of end times.

You say you are annoyed, well that includes the rest of us also. The long list you gave convicted1, of how you have studied, so that makes you the ultimate authority on the Rev, is hogwash.

Ed Sutton; actually taught through it one time in SS, sat through it with another teacher, in the same manner, and every pastor, the teacher, and I (not to mention the lesson writers in the SS books.)

Does (SS), stand for "Sunday School"???

BBob,

 

[EdSutton]

What you fail to realize is that many of us think you have the wrong understanding of history and scripture. As you said, we are both entitled to our own opinion.

Just because someone on here says they took a 3 hour college course and have studied, does not mean the rest of us have not had college courses and have studied for many years on the exact same subject, you claim to have such knowledge in.

I for one, believe a lot of your understanding that you have put forth, have came from the last 2 to 3 hundred years, for your understanding of Rev, and the understanding put forth in the 1-3 centuries, differ quite a bit from what you say the scripture means.

Everybody and his brother has an eschatology about the end times, and we have to all go with what we feel God give us as an understanding. I certainly am not going to put the understand of some man, above what I feel the Lord give me.

He that lacketh understanding, let him ask of God.

Paul= I never learned it of man and neither was I taught it, but it came from God.

I honestly believe with everything in me, that you and others have a misunderstanding of end times.

You say you are annoyed, well that includes the rest of us also. The long list you gave convicted1, of how you have studied, so that makes you the ultimate authority on the Rev, is hogwash.

Does (SS), stand for "Sunday School"???

BBob,

Nothing wrong with believing I and others have a misunderstanding of the end times. There are at least six to eight major ideas on eschatology. Obviously, since they differ, not all are correct. In fact, none of them may be, but obviously all cannot be correct.

If you actually read what I posted, you might have noted that I merely said I had spent a lot of time in Revelation, and was certain I did not understand all of it. I certainly do not claim to know everything, but I do (or at least should) know a few things, after being in the ministry for more than 40 years. And I do not believe I ever claimed to be any authority, by any stretch (unlike a couple of posters not on this thread, in the past), and in fact, aside from quoting some verses, noting a progression, did not even get into the book of Revelation, very much.

Yes, I did encourage convicted1 to read Revelation, and get the blessing it promises. I did not offer one suggestion of how he or she should take any of it. (See, Brother Bob, I do not know if that poster is even a male or female, for that doesnot matter, to me, at all.)

And yes, SS was my shorthand for Sunday School.

The same Bible that says "let one ask of God", also say "Study to show yourself approved", as well. It is not a case of one or the other, nor have I come close to suggesting that.

FTR, I came to most of the basic outline I now hold, over 40 years ago and, to my recollection, before I ever even heard any of the names of John Nelson Darby, Clarence Larkin, Lewis Sperry Chafer, H. A. Ironside, or C. I. Scofield. The one possibility that might not be correct, here, is that of Scofield, for someone may have said they had a "Scofield" Bible, but I do not remember it, if so.

Ed

 

[Brother Bob]

Nothing wrong with believing I and others have a misunderstanding of the end times. There are at least six to eight major ideas on eschatology. Obviously, since they differ, not all are correct. In fact, none of them may be, but obviously all cannot be correct.

If you actually read what I posted, you might have noted that I merely said I had spent a lot of time in Revelation, and was certain I did not understand all of it. I certainly do not claim to know everything, but I do (or at least should) know a few things, after being in the ministry for more than 40 years. And I do not believe I ever claimed to be any authority, by any stretch (unlike a couple of posters not on this thread, in the past), and in fact, aside from quoting some verses, noting a progression, did not even get into the book of Revelation, very much.

And yes, SS was my shorthand for Sunday School.

The same Bible that says "let one ask of God", also say "Study to show yourself approved", as well. It is not a case of one or the other, nor have I come close to suggesting that.

FTR, I came to most of the basic outline I now hold, over 40 years ago and, to my recollection, before I ever even heard any of the names of John Nelson Darby, Clarence Larkin, Lewis Sperry Chafer, H. A. Ironside, or C. I. Scofield. The one possibility that might not be correct, here, is that of Scofield, for someone may have said they had a "Scofield" Bible, but I do not remember it, if so.

Ed

I also, came to what I believe many years ago and did not know these people you listed, nor did I even know there had been a constant debate over the MK, since even before the 1st century.

Let me conclude by saying, we do agree on where our salvation comes from. We do agree on living a Christian life. We do agree on whether we live or whether we die, let it be in the Lord. We also agree that God's children are "one", even though we only see through a glass darkly now. So, let me say that I pray that God will bless both the Eds in this discussion, skypair, allan and all the rest that have had an input into this debate. If I have hurt anyone, please forgive me. My desire is to live with my Lord someday. May God Bless and keep you and your families and church.

BBob,

 

[Ed Edwards]

//What you fail to realize is that many of us think you have the wrong understanding of history and scripture. As you said, we are both entitled to our own opinion.//

And I guess i'm darn well welcome to all three of my opinions.

Ed: //Show me six opinions and I'll show you five Baptists //

 

[Ed Edwards]

...

Let me conclude by saying, we do agree on where our salvation comes from. We do agree on living a Christian life. We do agree on whether we live or whether we die, let it be in the Lord. We also agree that God's children are "one", even though we only see through a glass darkly now. So, let me say that I pray that God will bless both the Eds in this discussion, skypair, allan and all the rest that have had an input into this debate. If I have hurt anyone, please forgive me. My desire is to live with my Lord someday. May God Bless and keep you and your families and church.

...

Amen, Brother Brother Bob -- Preach it :thumbs:

Ed's rule of thumb: Go by the scriptures you understand and don't worry to much about the scriptures that you don't understand.

The part about edifying & uplifting one another are clear; the eschatological parts less clear.

Ed's Definition: 'EDify' - to make like 'Ed'