Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so a 1000 yr reign on this earth is false

[CadyandZoe]

Thousand years means a long indeterminate period of time. Only God knows the ending of that time.
Thousand cattle on a thousand hills means a whole lot of cattle too
It signifies a very large number.
10 thousands of His saints, means also a very large number, not just ten thousand.

Okay, but what if there is an occasion when the Bible wants to speak literally of a thousand things, cattle, or years? On what basis do we decide when the number is figurative?

 

[CadyandZoe]

You are basically saying that all Amills believe Revelation 11:15 is already fulfilled and that is absolutely not true! I certainly do not believe that. Only partial preterist Amills believe that. Don't lump all Amills together like this. That is completely disingenuous and not fair to non-preterist Amills like me.

Isn’t that somewhat beside the main argument? The Amillennial perspective typically asserts that Christ will not inaugurate a tangible, earthly reign prior to the emergence of the New Heavens and the New Earth. However, Revelation 11:15 distinctly proclaims that the dominion of the world will ultimately transform into the kingdom of the Lord and His Christ before the New Heavens and New Earth have been established.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Lest I come and strike the earth with a curse.”

How can that be? If God destroys the Old earth with fire to bring about the New earth, then how can it be struck with a curse? The timing is off.

 

[Doug]

Paul writing to gentiles wrote that Abraham is our father, according to faith

Romans 4:16
Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all

so what does that mean to you

 

[CadyandZoe]

How does that say that His kingdom will be "of this world"?

You make a valid point. The text indeed doesn't state or suggest that his kingdom will be located on earth. However, in the Lord's Prayer, which uses future tense, there is a petition to the Father to manifest His will on earth just as it is in heaven. This request emphasizes a desire for His name to be honored and sanctified among the nations, all while the Jewish people residing in Israel observe this unfolding reality. For future details, refer to Ezekiel chapter 36, where he describes the process in detail.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

[Jer 31:31 KJV] 31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

If one thinks Jesus shed his blood for the new covenant then one could think this was fulfilled and applies to them

If one THINKS that Jesus shed His blood for the new covenant?

I KNOW He did.

Hebrews 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. 7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

Do you understand that when this refers to "that first covenant" it's referring to the old covenant, which makes the second covenant the new covenant? Look at what the following says about the new (second) covenant.

Hebrews 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. 10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

This says God took away the first, which refers to the old covenant, to establish the second, which is the new covenant. How did He do that? By way of "the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.".

So, yes, of course He shed His blood for the house of Israel and the house of Judah in fulfillment of the new covenant.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Exactly, no point to whacking the wicked to pieces with iron rebar rods during a 'millennial reign'. He deals with all the wicked in flaming fiery vengeance, on the Day of Judgment. I am not pre-mill, those who are have to answer for their own selves what they believe in.
Reigning in power over them He wages war, rods are just another name for a deadly weapon.

The prophecy about ruling with a rod of iron is based on an image of pots being broken. The pots represent kings and judges who rule over the nations. Since the nations are his inheritance, Jesus will rule over the people, but first, he will defeat and subdue their rulers.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

God forgave them based on the blood of Christ which would be shed

[Heb 8:8, 10 KJV] 8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: ... 10 For this [is] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

This is the only use of new covenant in KJV and its for future Israel

How can you think it's for future Israel when verses 6 and 7 says that it WAS ESTABLISHED on better promises than the first, old covenant, which means it has been in effect for a long time already?

Hebrews 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. 7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

Since you think that the new covenant is not yet in effect, does that mean you think the old covenant is still in effect?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The prophecy about ruling with a rod of iron is based on an image of pots being broken. The pots represent kings and judges who rule over the nations. Since the nations are his inheritance, Jesus will rule over the people, but first, he will defeat and subdue their rulers.

Is that what the following says? That He will only defeat their rulers?

Revelation 19:17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun, who cried in a loud voice to all the birds flying in midair, “Come, gather together for the great supper of God, 18 so that you may eat the flesh of kings, generals, and the mighty, of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, great and small.”

 

[CadyandZoe]

If you read it a little bit slower you might see what it is actually saying

Paul confirms:

1 Corinthians 15:25-26: “For he must reign (present, active infinitive), till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.”

Here he shows that Christ is reigning now. It is written in the present, active infinitive sense. How long does he reign? He confirms: “till he hath put all enemies under his feet.” Again, this couldn’t be clearer! Every last enemy will be subjugated and subdued at the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. The last enemy is identified as death!

You skipped over a critical passage.

1 Corinthians 15:20-24 But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming, then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet.

The end does not precede the time when Jesus hands all authority over to the Father, and this transfer of power doesn't precede his ruling until he has put all his enemies under his feet.

Order:

1. Christ raised from the dead
2. His followers raised from the dead
3. Christ rules over the nations, putting all his enemies under his feet
4. Christ hands over the kingdom to his Father.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The original poster put forth the argument that the kingdom of Christ is not situated on this earth. However, it seems contradictory to this claim because if Christ's followers are living on earth and He governs them, it follows that His kingdom must indeed be present on earth at this very moment.

Yes, that is contradictory and I disagree with that, but I wasn't talking about that part of his argument. While that may be part of his argument, the main thing he is arguing is that Christ will not rule on this earth for a thousand years after He comes again.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You skipped over a critical passage.

1 Corinthians 15:20-24 But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming, then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet.

The end does not precede the time when Jesus hands all authority over to the Father, and this transfer of power doesn't precede his ruling until he has put all his enemies under his feet.

Order:

1. Christ raised from the dead
2. His followers raised from the dead
3. Christ rules over the nations, putting all his enemies under his feet
4. Christ hands over the kingdom to his Father.

You skip over many critical passages such as the ones that say He is reigning now over all things (Matthew 28:18, Ephesians 1:19-22). So, your order is incorrect. It is this instead:

1. Christ raised from the dead
2. Christ rules over the nations, putting all his enemies under his feet
3. His followers raised from the dead
4. Christ hands over the kingdom to his Father.

When do you believe that the end of the age will come in relation to Christ's return?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Isn’t that somewhat beside the main argument? The Amillennial perspective typically asserts that Christ will not inaugurate a tangible, earthly reign prior to the emergence of the New Heavens and the New Earth. However, Revelation 11:15 distinctly proclaims that the dominion of the world will ultimately transform into the kingdom of the Lord and His Christ before the New Heavens and New Earth have been established.

No, it's not at all beside the argument that was being made. Read what he said again.

But you will only misinterpret - change the meaning - of Biblical scripture to ensure scripture complies with your Preterist Amil theology so it's useless anyway because according to you and all other Amillennialists Christ will never inherit the nations as His Kingdom because He "already has" (even though He said His Kingdom is not now of this world), and according to you the kingdoms of this world will never become the Kingdoms of Christ because they "already are".

Non-preterist Amills do NOT say that Revelation 11:15 is already fulfilled as this liar tried to claim. We believe that Jesus will return at the seventh trumpet in the future and He will then "put down all rule and all authority and power" in the world and then hand the kingdom over to the Father (1 Corinthians 15:23-24).

 

[CadyandZoe]

It's also worth pointing out that the Greek words translated as "first resurrection" in Revelation 20, which are "protos" (first) and "anastasis" (resurrection) are only used together in one other verse in scripture.

Acts 26:23 That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise ("protos anastasis") from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.

So, my view, and I think yours as well, is that the first resurrection in Revelation 20 specifically refers to Christ's resurrection and the way in which people have part in the first resurrection is to spiritually have part in Christ's resurrection which occurs by way of being spiritually "risen with him" after previously being dead in our sins, as passages like Colossians 2:12-13 talk about.

In Revelation 20: the first resurrection isn't a spiritual resurrection it is a physical resurrection since martyrs are given life and thrones are set up.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

In Revelation 20: the first resurrection isn't a spiritual resurrection it is a physical resurrection since martyrs are given life and thrones are set up.

How about specifically addressing the points I made in that post instead of just sharing your opinion that I already know?

 

[CadyandZoe]

Notice here that this is all related to "the last days". Scripture says the last days is the time period between the first coming and the second coming of Christ, so why do you try to apply this passage to a time after His return?

Don't confuse the last days with the Last Day. The two are not the same thing.

Isaiah 2:2
Now it will come about that
In the last days
The mountain of the house of the Lord
Will be established as the chief of the mountains,
And will be raised above the hills;
And all the nations will stream to it.

The above passage directly contradicts the Amillennial position.
1. A chief of the mountains implies subject mountains.
2. Raising a mountain above hills implies that hills exist.
3. Since the nations stream to the mountain of the Lord, then the nations exist as separate entities.

Isaiah employs the literary device of parallelism to draw a vivid comparison between mountains and nations. In this metaphorical landscape, the tallest mountain symbolizes the nation endowed with the highest authority, standing majestically above all others. Surrounding this lofty peak are the hills, representing national authorities that exist in a subordinate relationship to this supreme power. It is to the great mountain, the pinnacle of governance, that the nations turn, seeking guidance and wisdom in their endeavors.

This hierarchy remains valid only as long as the first earth and the first heaven persist in their existence.

 

[CadyandZoe]

I say the Old Covenant has been broken and all the promises are fulfilled in Christ, and voided also for any other fulfilment, outside of Christ's New Covenant established in His blood.

God's promise to the nation of Israel has not yet come to pass, though it has been established in Christ.

10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 11 None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them. 12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins [b]and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.”

This aspect of the New Covenant has not yet come to pass. As of yet, they don't all know him, from the least of them to the greatest.

 

[CadyandZoe]

True. Because in the Kingdom of God/Heaven in Christ's New Will and Testament, the old testament promises have been removed, and replaced with promises in and to Christ and those who are in Christ.

2 Corinthians 1:20; Galatians 3:16,29; Hebrews 8:6,13; Hebrews 9:15-17; Hebrews 10:9

So you should update your list of recipients and promises.

A promise is a promise.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Yes, His elect redeemed, not Christ hating Jews.

Believing Jews don't cease to be Jews. That's Paul's point.

 

[covenantee]

A promise is a promise.

Better promises are better promises.