Featured Possible Ten Nation Kingdoms

<never mind> other things are more pressing upon me right now...

 

If you want some detailed eschatological pinpointing, look no further than the Confession of the 'Reformed' Baptists which fingers the "Pope of Rome" as "that antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ, and all that is called God; whom the Lord shall destroy with the brightness of his coming."

Or how about this howler from the Primitive Baptist schism: Elder Hassell's 'History' pp. 747,748 declares that "the mark of the Beast" is found wherever missionary societies, Sunday schools, theological seminaries, etc. prevail.

 

I notice you're not forthright in divulging which 'schism' of Baptist you belong to in your profile. I'm certain there are many 'howlers' that could be assigned to your 'schism' also.

 

Jerome

While the Pope was an antichrist....he is not the antichrist...that was most likely Nero.

Not all RB believe that part of the 1689 confession Jerome.

Kyred,Jerome was in a church that under went a biblical refornation.

[Personal attacks removed.]

 

The logical conclusion of Calvinism or Reformed is Presbyterianism, right?
Look at Jamieson, Faucett and Brown. Faucett was Church of England, but the other two were Presbyterian. They wrote their commentary in 1871. Here is what they have to say about Revelation 13:1 (at least part of it)

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/jamieson/jfb.xi.xxvii.xiv.html
Even these men are nowhere near the Preterist viewpoint. In fact their view points would fit in well with a dispensationalist.

 

Context determines definition.
"Kingdom," "Kingdom of God," Kingdom of Heaven," do not always mean the same thing. The context determines the meaning.
Jesus said to Pilate: "My kingdom is not of this world."
What was he speaking of? He wasn't speaking of the kingdom of God or the kingdom of heaven in the way that we usually think of them. He was speaking of "His Kingdom" in opposition to "Caesar's Kingdom," or the fact that his kingdom was a spiritual kingdom not a material kingdom.
"The Kingdom of God is within you," refers to salvation.
We all enter into the kingdom at the time of salvation.
There is a difference between the Kingdom of Heaven and the Kingdom of God, though at times they are interchangeable, depending on context. "The Kingdom of Heaven" is usually the term used for the Jews and used to refer to the Millennial Kingdom. This is also true of the word "kingdom" when used with a definite article "the kingdom", but again, not always, for the context determines the meaning.

Christ did not set up his kingdom or save the remnant of the Jews the first time he came. That is laughable. What evidence do you have?
Christ offered them the kingdom. They rejected both him and the kingdom, and they crucified him instead.

John 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
--That is not accepting the Messiah.
Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
--Condemnation, not acceptance, and this was on the Feast of Pentecost. There was no kingdom here. Of more than 100,000 present for this great feast at the Temple, more than 97,000 rejected that wonderful message that was accompanied with miraculous signs. No kingdom on earth. There were 3,000 that entered into the kingdom of God at salvation, but that is not the kingdom of heaven that the disciples asked about here:

Acts 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

Israel was not saved then; Israel is not saved now.
Someday "all Israel shall be saved."
But now:
The kingdom is universal peace on this earth. Where do you find that? Syria? Pakistan? Iran? Iraq? Somalia? Egypt?

And thus, by your own words, there is universal wickedness, not a universal kingdom of Christ. Christianity is in the very, very, small minority. Christians are persecuted more than any other "sect" on earth. Or, they are the most persecuted people on earth. True believers are a rarity. They make up a small minority.
The kingdom that reigns on this earth is ruled by the god of this world.
Ephesians 2:2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

That was your reply to my statement here:

There is true peace there with Christ "ruling with a rod of iron" isn't he?
When he comes he will rule the world; all the world, with a rod of iron.
When Christ comes all the saints will rule with Christ.

You must have blinders on. Where is Christ ruling with a rod of iron, and why isn't justice done? How many abortions are committed each day, Icon? Are the saints ruling with Christ right now? Do you equate persecution with reigning? Perhaps you need to be a missionary to Iraq, North Korea, Saudia Arabia, etc., "where Christ is ruling with a rod of iron."

Pitting scripture against scripture and trying to make sense of it by allegorizing it just confuses it all the more. Christ is not Israel. Jacob is Israel. Christ came through Israel. The Church is not Israel. Christianity is not Israel. Replacement Theology (if that is what you believe) is a heresy. First there was Israel. Then the Church replaced Israel. (not true). Taken to its logical extreme, Islam believes that it will replace Christianity. Do you believe that also?
Paul wrote of three different and separate identities: the Gentiles, the Church, and Israel. The churches were composed of Jewish believers and Gentile believers, who in the local church were one in Christ. Outside the church, there still exists Israel.

Hmmm. I have always believed that God is in heaven, and always has been in the capacity of judicial judgment. How again is this a reason for an early date for Revelation?

The Second Coming, remember?

If they mourn over him, it is not in judgment.

But this isn't the OT.

And this is going to date the book how?

No, that is not true:

Matthew 27:25 Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.
--"Our children" means generations, even including today's generations. The Jews of today are responsible as their forefathers are. But then so are you. We all are. It is our sin collectively that put Christ on the cross.

Matthew 26:64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
--Concerning such Scriptures, think about them.
First, Caiaphas denied the deity of Christ, who He was; that he truly was the Messiah, and as a result had him crucified. What is quoted above was said to the leader of the Sanhedrin, a man steeped in unbelief.

Second, he will see Christ sitting on the right hand of power. He will bow to him as Lord of lords, and confess to him that he is King of kings.

Third, Caiaphas was alive after the resurrection of Christ, and it is possible that he may have seen Christ, or that Christ may have appeared to him. To have seen the resurrected Christ would be the same as seeing Christ in power and in his glory--his glorified body.

None of the above are reasons for an early date of the book.

 

DHK.....look at this confusing mess...

This is why dispensationalism is a failed system.....wrongly dividing the word of truth.This fragments and divides what God has joined together.

 

DHK

quoting phil3 with understanding is not allergorizing.

Scripture says differently
The Lord hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name.

2 And he hath made my mouth like a sharp sword; in the shadow of his hand hath he hid me, and made me a polished shaft; in his quiver hath he hid me;

3 And said unto me, Thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified.

Jesus is the True Israel...and us In Him......I went over this with you several times;
6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:

7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.


It is two different words ....sperma and tecnon......The Israel of God are the tecnon

 

Yes...right on schedule...

10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?

11 And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.

This goes on until the white throne judgement.

1 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:

33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:

36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.

37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?

38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?

39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?

40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

 

DHK, Iconoclast is in agreement with preterist Kenneth Gentry who believes all of the prophecies in Revelation have been fulfilled. Crazy i know, but this is what they believe. He (gentry) writes in Four Views on the book of Revelation Zondervan 1998 pg 83 first paragraph “Christ bound Satan for a well defined world. purpose: ““to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore””. Next paragraph “ Thus Christ bound Satan with the result that his deceptive power over the nations is fading as the gospel advances into all the world.”

There are two very obvious problems, (many more actually) one general the other specific. The specific problem is that the way Gentry word his statements makes it seem that Christ binds Satan but his evil influence doesn’t stop immediately. The fact is after almost 2000 years, even to the casual observer his evil influence still have quite a bit of punch left to it. The general problem is that the kingdom that John describes in Revelation, the one Gentry (and icon) thinks we are in now living in comes after a series of God ordained judgments over the entire world (Jew and Gentile). The general tone of events in Revelation indicate that before Christ returns to rule over the peoples of the earth things will get worse and worse not better as icon believes. History does not record anything remotely close to the judgments that John describes and for 1900 years even the most beloved reformed/covenant/presbyterian Christians have missed that we are in this Kingdom.

Icon thinks he is ruling and reigning with Christ right now. This is of course idiotic and unbiblical but a good question to ask if we are ruling and reigning with Jesus how soon after being washed in the blood and under what circumstances does the believer start reigning? What conditions have to be met? How do we exercise our authority over the earth? Can we be saved and not reign? If we appeared before the either the judgment seat of Christ or the Great White Throne, why don’t we remember this event? On and on it goes.

 

It makes me think that some of them never watch the news or have never been out of America?
Have you heard of Malalah, that Muslim girl who was shot in the head by the Taliban in Pakistan because she dared to promote the education of girls in Pakistan. She is a Muslim.
But Christians are persecuted in the same way on a daily basis. Not long before that a fourteen year old girl, who was illiterate and had a learning disability--this time a Christian, was accused under the blasphemy law of Pakistan. "If any person should defame the name of Mohammed in any way he should suffer the death penalty." That would include such "blasphemous" acts as burning the Koran. And that is what a local Muslim cleric accused her of doing. But it eventually came out that the Muslim cleric burned the Koran himself, and then put the burned pages in her bag, and framed her.
She is illiterate, and wouldn't be able to tell the Koran from the Bible or any other book. Having a learning disability at the age of fourteen didn't make her a likely candidate for this crime either. Nevertheless, before they found out who the real culprit was, an angry mob of 3,000 zealous Muslims attacked the Christian community where she lived and destroyed the church, homes, tore up Bibles, and injured many of the villagers.
Now, I ask: "Is that 'reigning' with Christ?

 

thomas15 DHK,

Thomas/DHK.....good call.I like much of what Ken Gentry offers biblically.
like here:
http://freebooks.entrewave.com/freebooks/docs/a_pdfs/kghs.pdf
I also enjoyed David Chiltons Days of Vengeance.
http://archive.org/details/DaysOfVengeance-DavidChilton

Jonathan Edwards -History of Redemption-

.

far from crazy....this has been believed in the church,

:thumbsup: Thomas how do you explain this language from rom 16-
19 For your obedience is come abroad unto all men. I am glad therefore on your behalf: but yet I would have you wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil.

20 And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.

this is not a problem for the post mill view, and for most amillenials.

Revelation is written as a comfort to the persecuted church.That Jesus is reigning right now,and speaking from heaven is a great comfort to Christians.

In your view if Jesus is not reigning...what is He doing?

You and some Amill brothers see it getting worse.....I used to think that was the teaching....but I am between post and optimistic amill right now....


QUOTE] History does not record anything remotely close to the judgments that John describes[/QUOTE]

I think Chiltons book makes a good case of how the first 18 chapters were done by 70 ad. I have not seen anyone refute or offer much better....

This is not true at all. I know because I have read them saying otherwise

I am Thomas:
Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

No....you denial is idiotic and offers no bible whatsoever...
19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,

20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,

21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:

22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,

23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

We reign right at regeneration and conversion.Thomas...if you understand the biblical teaching of UNION with Christ.....when He died,we died. As He was raised we are raised....we reign IN HIM,

Remember when Jesus said to Saul....what do you persecute me?

We obey Mt 28....make disciplies....we do not "christianize" the unsaved world, we preach the gospel of the Kingdom reign of Christ to them....them\n the Kingdom grows as soul after soul gets saved.

?

No....not possible.

These judgements have not happened yet,,,do not mix the partial preterist with full preterist.

until you study it out.

 

And all of this is predicated on the guess, the unsubstantiated idea, that Revelation was written in 70 A.D. or before, for which there is absolutely no proof. If the honest truth here is admitted, that Revelation was written in the 90's your entire belief system falls apart.

 

DHK,

If the late date was correct...it would be problematic...but not fatal.This is a valid objection.That John mentions measuring the "temple" leads me to believe it was still standing.

 

If Revelation was written after AD 70, preterism absolutely comes crashing, the late date according to Gentry (and many others) is “absolutely” fatal to the system.

When I approach the scriptures to determine if Jesus of Nazareth is the Savior predicted by the Hebrew prophets, I find that Jesus meets all the requirements. A good example of how literal Jesus fulfills those predictions is found in Matthew Ch 2 where Herod asks the unbelieving Magi where the Christ child would be found. The Magi checked the Hebrew Scriptures and correctly noted Bethlehem of Judaea.

In Matthew 5:18 Jesus tells us to again check the Hebrew scriptures "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished” Jesus again tells us in Matthew ch 24 That when you see all the things spoken then know that the end of the age is here. Paul tells us the same in 2nd Thess ch 2 not to be deceived, what to look for.

Preterism doesn’t even pretend to find detailed fulfillment of the Scriptures with respect to Jesus returning to receive His to Himself. Basically it (preterism) looks for a verse to back up a claim and runs with it. DHK is correct, context determines meaning. Random copy and paste of verses does not make the case for preterism. A dispy like me can paste endless verses backing up the claims of dispensationalism, in fact I don’t know of any foe of dispensationalism who claims that we don’t get our theology from the Bible; the actual charge against us is that we don’t use correct Reformed/Covenant/Presbyterian methods of interpretation.

By the way, Rev 5:10 (like history in general) is no friend of the preterist but that is a story for a different day.

 

What does the Scripture say?

Revelation 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,
Revelation 1:17 And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last:
Revelation 1:19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;
--Everything that John writes here, especially from chapter four onward, is in heaven. It is a heavenly scene where John is being shown around by an angel. At two different points he is so overwhelmed by what he sees that he bows down to the angel and begins to worship, but is sharply rebuked. What is seen is a heavenly Temple, nothing to do with the earth whatsoever. Everything there are heavenly scenes.

John MacArthur is a solid a Calvinist as I have ever known. What does he say about the date of this book, and what are his reasons? Let me quote from his "Bible Commentary."

 

In post #33 Icon implies that it is not possible for a saved person to not reign with Christ. Nowhere in the Bible does it state a proof of salvation is claiming to reign. It would be interesting to see some quotes from some of the greats of the faith who claimed to be reigning with Christ while still in the sinful bodies currently inhabit. In my opinion, if we are in the kingdom that the preterist think we are in, anytime we shed a tear we would be guilty of sin because the Bibles states no more tears, no more death no more pain Rev 21:4.

 

From JFB-
Jamieson, Fausset and Brown (1871)
"The following arguments favor an earlier date, namely, under Nero: (1) EUSEBIUS [Demonstration of the Gospel] unites in the same sentence John's banishment with the stoning of James and the beheading of Paul, which were under Nero. (2) CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA'S story of the robber reclaimed by John, after he had pursued, and with difficulty overtaken him, accords better with John then being a younger man than under Domitian, when he was one hundred years old. Arethas, in the sixth century, applies the sixth seal to the destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70), adding that the Apocalypse was written before that event. So the Syriac version states he was banished by Nero the Cæsar. Laodicea was overthrown by an earthquake (A.D. 60) but was immediately rebuilt, so that its being called "rich and increased with goods" is not incompatible with this book having been written under the Neronian persecution (A.D. 64). But the possible allusions to it in Heb 10:37; compare Re 1:4,8 4:8 22:12; Heb 11:10; compare Re 21:14; Heb 12:22,23; compare Re 14:1; Heb 8:1,2; compare Re 11:19 15:5 21:3; Heb 4:12; compare Re 1:16 2:12,16 19:13,15; Heb 4:9; compare Re 20:1-15; also 1Pe 1:7,13 4:13, with Re 1:1; 1Pe 2:9 with Re 5:10; 2Ti 4:8, with Re 2:26,27 3:21 11:18; Eph 6:12, with Re 12:7-12; Php 4:3, with Re 3:5 13:8,17:8 20:12,15; Col 1:18, with Re 1:5; 1Co 15:52, with Re 10:7 11:15-18, make a date before the destruction of Laodicea possible. Cerinthus is stated to have died before John; as then he borrowed much in his Pseudo-Apocalypse from John's, it is likely the latter was at an earlier date than Domitian's reign. See TILLOCH'S Introduction to Apocalypse. But the Pauline benediction (Re 1:4) implies it was written after Paul's death under Nero." (introduction to Revelation)



"[the temple still standing in Revelation 11:1 is] unmistakable proof that Revelation was written before 70 A.D." (The Time is at Hand, p. 68).

"The Revelation was written to a persecuted church about to face the most tremendous onslaught it had ever known. It would be absurd (not to say cruel) for John to write a letter to persons in such circumstances which not only ignores their difficulties, but reveals numerous details about events supposed to transpire hundreds of years in the future during a seven year tribulation period at the end of the church age." (The Time is at Hand, p. 49)

"It is to remain unsealed because 'the time is at hand.' That is, its prophecies are about to be fulfilled. The events which it predicts do not pertain to the far distant future, but they are soon to happen. The message is for this generation, not for some future one." (The Time is at Hand, p. 51)

 

I have JFB as well. It is always good to quote the entire quote.
The first part of his intro says this:

They even admit that the best authorities among the Fathers believe that John was exiled under the reign of Domitian. It is only their personal opinion that he was not, as you quoted.
Remember that their commentary was written in 1871. The year now is 2013. Their commentary is 142 years old. There has been a lot of research done since then. Not only do the majority of ECF believe Revelation was dated in the 90's but the majority of conservative Bible scholars. I just gave you what MacArthur said, and all of his references.