Will there be a "millenium" in which Jesus physically rules this earth?

[SovereignGrace]

Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding the key of the abyss and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold of the dragon, the serpent of old, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years; and he threw him into the abyss, and shut it and sealed it over him, so that he would not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand years were completed; after these things he must be released for a short time.[Revelation 20:1-3]

In this passage we see an angel with a key, chain, a dragon(Satan is not a literal dragon, neither a dragon with 7 heads and 10 horns as depicted in Revelation 12:3{oh and a woman clothed with the sun, the moon under her feet and wearing a crown with 12 stars on it…talk about taking that literally}), being thrown into the abyss. This is depicting Satan being bound, but not to be taken as literally depicted. Then the 1,000 years is to be taken literal? Take about an inconsistent hermeneutic.

What about this 1,000?

Know therefore that the Lord your God, He is God, the faithful God, who keeps His covenant and His lovingkindness to a thousandth generation with those who love Him and keep His commandments;[Deuteronomy 7:9]

If taken literally, and a biblical generation is 40 years, then we are looking at another ~34,000-35,000 years. Blows that immanency doctrine out of the water.

 

[Iconoclast]

No thanks. You have already shown how you approach handling the Bible. I have no interest in continuing to discuss the Bible with peeople who handle it the way that you and others think is right.

You have no interest because you cannot do it without doing the exact thing you are suggesting we do.
There are many such passages that not one of you can answer with your method of interpretation.
You cannot handle Rev.6, Mt.24, Joel2. without possible contradictions and you know it.
All of you want to write it off as spiritualizing the texts however it is rather a literal interpretation based on using scripture to interpret scripture.
If God uses figurative language in a certain way, who are we to use it differently.
Now, that being said, it is possible to wrongly supply some of the figures of speech . That does need to be examined and challenged for sure.
Amos 9, is interpreted by the Apostles as the church....yet in Amos 9:11 it speaks of the tabernacle of David being rebuilt.
We could study it together or you and others can avoid it and hide like an ostrich putting its head in the sand.

 

[Iconoclast]

Jesus Christ already started his reign in the heavens and will start his earthly rule during the One Thousand Year Reign after the Great Tribulation.

Where does it say He reigns physically on the earth, as He is reigning from Heaven right now. What suggests the change?

 

[Iconoclast]

So, where do you think He will be, especially in light of the previous verses I posted earlier?

Hebrews 12:says He speaks from Heaven,He reigns from Heaven from the Throne.rev4-5.

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

You have no interest because you cannot do it without doing the exact thing you are suggesting we do.
There are many such passages that not one of you can answer with your method of interpretation.
You cannot handle Rev.6, Mt.24, Joel2. without possible contradictions and you know it.
All of you want to write it off as spiritualizing the texts however it is rather a literal interpretation based on using scripture to interpret scripture.
If God uses figurative language in a certain way, who are we to use it differently.
Now, that being said, it is possible to wrongly supply some of the figures of speech . That does need to be examined and challenged for sure.
Amos 9, is interpreted by the Apostles as the church....yet in Amos 9:11 it speaks of the tabernacle of David being rebuilt.
We could study it together or you and others can avoid it and hide like an ostrich putting its head in the sand.

Right. You are the one who claims to believe the Bible yet holds that it is a "topological" abusrdity for the glorified Christ to land on the Mount of Olives and cause it to split. There is zero basis in Scripture to hold that position, which shows that your approach is not biblical.

 

[Iconoclast]

Right. You are the one who claims to believe the Bible yet holds that it is a "topological" abusrdity for the glorified Christ to land on the Mount of Olives and cause it to split. There is zero basis in Scripture to hold that position, which shows that your approach is not biblical.

Sma,
I have no problem if your view was 100% correct. God is doing whatever He has purposed to do.
If He wants to literal split mountains He will.
I held the view you hold now for years.
The issue is should we search out every possibility first ,to make sure we come to truth.
If you have truth,SMA, it will hold up.Whatever view is true should be able to withstand cross examination.

 

[canadyjd]

"To interpret the passage literalistically, with all the topographical . . . absurdities this creates"

These are words befitting an unbeliever who denies the omnipotence of the true and living God, but they hardly manifest the sentiments of a believer who knows his Bible. There are no "absurdities" to holding that the glorified Christ will return to land with His feet on the Mount of Olives and cause the mountain to split in half when He does so. If anyone denies that He could or would do that, he has a bigger problem . . .

Are you questioning the salvation of iconoclast? I agree with him. Are you questioning my salvation?

peace to you

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

Are you questioning the salvation of iconoclast? I agree with him. Are you questioning my salvation?

peace to you

Anyone who holds that it is absurd to believe that the glorified Christ could or would land with His feet on the Mount of Olives and cause it to split in half holds a view that is a lot closer to unbelievers who deny the omnipotence of God than it is to those who believe what the Bible reveals about the omnipotence of the true and living God.

 

[canadyjd]

Anyone who holds that it is absurd to believe that the glorified Christ could or would land with His feet on the Mount of Olives and cause it to split in half holds a view that is a lot closer to unbelievers who deny the omnipotence of God than it is to those who believe what the Bible reveals about the omnipotence of the true and living God.

Jesus said let your yes be yes and your no be no. Speak plainly.

Yes or no. Are you questioning our salvation?

peace to you

 

[robycop3]

Hebrews 12:says He speaks from Heaven,He reigns from Heaven from the Throne.rev4-5.

But during the millenium, He will have returned to this world. Nothing says He will leave it once more.

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

Jesus said let your yes be yes and your no be no. Speak plainly.

Yes or no. Are you questioning our salvation?

peace to you

I am challenging you to examine yourself soberly based on what you affirm about God to be absurd. You will have to decide for yourself what that means about your standing before God.

 

[canadyjd]

Right. You are the one who claims to believe the Bible yet holds that it is a "topological" abusrdity for the glorified Christ to land on the Mount of Olives and cause it to split. There is zero basis in Scripture to hold that position, which shows that your approach is not biblical.

Jesus said in Matthew 5:17 that He came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets.

Do you believe the words of Jesus? Did He fail in His stated purpose of fulfilling the Law and the Prophets?

peace to you

 

[robycop3]

Dispensation means distribution. They went to the dispensary for medicine, etc.

Whatever you wanna call it, it's plain that God has chosen to be worshipped in different manners, according to what He had revealed to man in a given time.

 

[canadyjd]

I am challenging you to examine yourself soberly based on what you affirm about God to be absurd. You will have to decide for yourself what that means about your standing before God.

Thank you for your genuine concern for my salvation based on my disagreement with you over doctrine.

I soberly examine myself and my beliefs daily, so you can sleep well knowing I’m certain God Holy Spirit testifies with my spirit that I am a child of God.

Does that satisfy your concerns over my salvation?

I believe the commentators use of “absurd” was reference to a giant Jesus, tall enough to straddle a valley, (thousands of feet tall!).

While nothing is impossible with God, that seems obviously symbolic, not literal.

peace to you

 

[Iconoclast]

Are you questioning the salvation of iconoclast? I agree with him. Are you questioning my salvation?

peace to you

I went through a similar thought process.I was taught this one view was true.If anyone questioned it, they were a suspect, like a JW.denying the trinity...
I do not take it personal,in fact that reaction.is a healthy sign of life and perhaps a desire to find and defend truth.
It has taken time to reexamine the verses. First step is to lay out what each view is,and how could a person possibly believe it.

 

[robycop3]

Prove from the gospels Jesus preached a millennium. You need to twist Revelation from its context, adding to the word of God, to claim it.

Jesus didn't preach it during His ministry; He revealed it in the Revelation.

Remember, it's called "The Revelation of Jesus Christ" in Rev. 1:1. In it, He revealed many things He hadn't revealed in His ministry, & the millenium was one of them.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Jesus didn't preach it during His ministry; He revealed it in the Revelation.

Remember, it's called "The Revelation of Jesus Christ" in Rev. 1:1. In it, He revealed many things He hadn't revealed in His ministry, & the millenium was one of them.

Yet it also says God will be faithful to the thousandth generation. Seeing that a biblical generation = 40 years(iirc) then we are looking at another 34,000-35,000 years to reach that generation. If true, that immanency doctrine was just dealt a death blow.

 

[canadyjd]

I went through a similar thought process.I was taught this one view was true.If anyone questioned it, they were a suspect, like a JW.denying the trinity...
I do not take it personal,in fact that reaction.is a healthy sign of life and perhaps a desire to find and defend truth.
It has taken time to reexamine the verses. First step is to lay out what each view is,and how could a person possibly believe it.

Thanks. I admit to being personally offended when someone questions my salvation based on such non-essential doctrine that has many interpretations. My goal, I hope, is to bring the person to understand its inappropriate to bring such accusations into discussions among brethren.

I was like that once, thinking since God Holy Spirit indwells all believers, we should agree on all things. And, of course, since God Holy Spirit reveal such to me as truth, surely everyone else got the same message. Such arrogance destroys unity among brethren.

It’s humbling to realize something you held as God given truth for many years is not biblical.. In the end, I swallow my pride and commit myself to understanding scripture in context, wherever it takes me, and changing my mind where necessary.

Thanks again. I enjoy reading your posts, even when I don’t comment.

peace to you

 

[robycop3]

Yet it also says God will be faithful to the thousandth generation. Seeing that a biblical generation = 40 years(iirc) then we are looking at another 34,000-35,000 years to reach that generation. If true, that immanency doctrine was just dealt a death blow.

I think that's kind of a rhetorical statement, which means God will be faithful to ALL generations, however many that may be.

Imminency? When either the beast comes to power, or the Jews build a new temple in Jerusalem, we should "look up, for our redemption draws near".

 

[SovereignGrace]

I think that's kind of a rhetorical statement, which means God will be faithful to ALL generations, however many that may be.

Imminency? When either the beast comes to power, or the Jews build a new temple in Jerusalem, we should "look up, for our redemption draws near".

So, a thousand doesn’t mean a thousand, right?