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

WPM said:

Regardless of how you dress it up, the text forbids your doctrine. This is another evidence (of countless) of how Premil butchers the Word of God to say the opposite to what it says, in order to sustain its false teaching.

This is another reason for Premils to abandon Premil. There is so much Scripture that exposes it.

The text couldn't be clearer: "of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne [referring to Psalms 132:12]; he seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ."

Click to expand...

I agree. Premills refuse to look at scripture honestly and objectively. That text is very explicit and straightforward. Only doctrinal bias can prevent someone from seeing what Peter was saying there.

CadyandZoe said:

My comments are restricted to the Passage at hand, quoted by the poster. He quoted 1 Corinthians 15 as proof that Christ's return is coterminous with the end. He imagines that the Second Advent marks a climactic end of history, after which believers will experience a New Heaven and Earth.

In opposition to his assertion, the passage from 1 Corinthians conveys a fundamentally different message.

Click to expand...

No, it absolutely does not.

CadyandZoe said:

The Apostle Paul articulates that during the Second Advent, there will be a significant period in which Christ is tasked with overcoming his adversaries and reigning supreme over the nations. This reign is a crucial phase that precedes the ultimate handing over of the kingdom to God the Father. It is only after this transfer of authority that the end of all things will truly arrive.

Click to expand...

Christ has been reigning since His resurrection (Matt 28:18, Eph 1:19-22). Nowhere does Paul say otherwise.

CadyandZoe said:

It is not unreasonable to conclude that the defeat of death marks the end of the age. The last enemy is death. Therefore, I conclude that the subjugation of the rest of Christ's enemies takes place during this age.

Click to expand...

So, is your answer to my question that you believe the end of the age comes 1,000+ years after Christ's return? If so, is it your understanding that in the Olivet Discourse the disciples asked Jesus 3 different questions about 3 different things?

Matthew 24:3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”

Do you think the disciples were asking for the sign of Christ's coming and separately asking for the sign of the end of the age?

ewq1938 said:

Yes.

Mat 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

G1242
d?a??´??
diathe¯ke¯
dee-ath-ay'-kay
From G1303; properly a disposition, that is, (specifically) a contract (especially a devisory will): - covenant, testament.

Heb 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

G1242
d?a??´??
diathe¯ke¯
dee-ath-ay'-kay
From G1303; properly a disposition, that is, (specifically) a contract (especially a devisory will): - covenant, testament.

Same exact word and meaning. A Testament is exactly the same as a Covenant.

Heb_9:15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

Heb 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.


1. Heb 9:15 Jesus "is the mediator of the new testament"
2. Heb 12:24 "Jesus the mediator of the new covenant"

Click to expand...

Very good.

Spiritual Israelite said:

No, it absolutely does not.


Christ has been reigning since His resurrection (Matt 28:18, Eph 1:19-22). Nowhere does Paul say otherwise.


So, is your answer to my question that you believe the end of the age comes 1,000+ years after Christ's return? If so, is it your understanding that in the Olivet Discourse the disciples asked Jesus 3 different questions about 3 different things?

Matthew 24:3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”

Do you think the disciples were asking for the sign of Christ's coming and separately asking for the sign of the end of the age?

Click to expand...

How can there be a prolonged period of time after the last or final day? How can there be a prolonged period of time after time (or chronos) shall be no longer? How can there be an age in-between this age and the age to come when Scripture only recognizes a 2-age framework?

WPM said:

The text couldn't be clearer: "of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne [referring to Psalms 132:12]; he seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ."

Sorry for bursting your bubble, but, this doesn't allow for any Premil tampering. It is watertight. It is irrefutable, as your inability to refute it proves.

Click to expand...

You fail at English. The text simply says that David knew God would raise Christ to sit on his throne ( an earthly throne that was never ruling in heaven) and that he foresaw the resurrection that would accomplish this. It said nothing about some imaginary throne of David located in heaven. David's throne is well documented and we know precisely where he reigned/

WPM said:

We see Stephen addressing Isaiah 66:1, whilst preaching on the subject of the tabernacle in Acts 7:44-50, saying, “Our fathers had the tabernacle of witness in the wilderness, as he had appointed, speaking unto Moses, that he should make it according to the fashion that he had seen. Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus into the possession of the Gentiles, whom God drave out before the face of our fathers, unto the days of David; Who found favour before God, and desired to find a tabernacle for the God of Jacob. But Solomon built him an house. Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet, Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house will ye build me? saith the Lord: or what is the place of my rest? Hath not my hand made all these things? Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it. When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth. But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God” (Acts 7:47-56).

Here, Stephen’s natural eyes were supernaturally opened to view the Lord’s current kingly reign over His enemies upon the heavenly throne from the right hand of majesty on high. Thus confirming, once again, the present reality of Christ’s glorious reign in glory – heaven being His throne and earth being His footstool.

Stephen was thus able to testify to the marvelous kingly fulfilment of our two prophetic Old Testament prophecies. Confirming, once again, the present reality of Christ’s glorious reign over His enemies in glory – heaven being His throne and earth being His footstool.

Stephen lost his life for identifying the Old Testament “tabernacle of witness” with Christ and the conversion of the Gentiles. He then goes on to explain that God’s tabernacle today is not physical but spiritual (v 48) and then quotes Isaiah 66:1 to show the enormity of Christ’s rule today having sat down at the right hand of majesty on high (vv 49, 55-56). Stephen showed that God’s temple today is not physical, but spiritual. Also, the Messianic reign is shown to be heavenly and not earthly: “Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool.” Plainly, earth is not the location of God’s throne – heaven is. Albeit, earth is the place of His footstool not anywhere else. Do Premils not see this? This reading confirms that this reign is active an ongoing since the resurrection/ascension. Stephen was seeing this kingly rule in this current intra-Advent period.

Click to expand...

What Steven saw was Christ sitting at the right hand of the Father as He reigned on HIS throne

WPM said:

In the Old Testament passage of Isaiah 22:21-25 we see a typical reference to the authority and governance of Christ with the key of David over the house of David. It reads: “And I will clothe him with thy robe, and strengthen him with thy girdle, and I will commit thy government into his hand: and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah. And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open. And I will fasten him as a nail in a sure place; and he shall be for a glorious throne to his father's house. And they shall hang upon him all the glory of his father's house, the offspring and the issue, all vessels of small quantity, from the vessels of cups, even to all the vessels of flagons. In that day, saith the LORD of hosts, shall the nail that is fastened in the sure place be removed, and be cut down, and fall; and the burden that was upon it shall be cut off: for the LORD hath spoken it.”

Click to expand...

A clear reference to David's throne that Christ will occupy in the millenium

WPM said:

The seizing of the key of David is closely connected with the governance of the house of Israel. The New Testament makes it clear that Christ now holds that key/authority. He now is Israel’s king. He glorious holds his earthly fore-father David’s throne. What country to the mindset of many literalists today, it is a spiritual row over a spiritual house. It also embraces Gentiles!

Click to expand...

The key of David is not the same thing as the throne. You left out this part:
Isa 22:20 And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah:
Eliakim was given the key of David but not the throne.

WPM said:

Christ is shown in the New Testament to be the fulfilment to all these Messianic prophecies. What is more, He is shown to be currently exercising Davidic key/authority upon high over David’s house. John says in Revelation 3:7, “These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath (present active particle) the key (or authority) of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth.”

This passage reinforces the fact that Christ is exercising His Davidic kingship over mankind now. The Old Testament kings were mere types of the one true King. He didn’t come to replicate the imperfect shadow and type, He came to introduce the true and eternal kingship of Israel.

Click to expand...

I have show that the key of David is not the same as the throne. Jesus does not currently occupy the throne of David. He sits down with the Father on the Father's throne:
Rv 3:21
To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

WPM said:

The text couldn't be clearer: "of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne [referring to Psalms 132:12]; he seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ."

Sorry for bursting your bubble, but, this doesn't allow for any Premil tampering. It is watertight. It is irrefutable, as your inability to refute it proves.

Click to expand...

You imagine an interpretation and force it into the text. The text just means that David foresaw the messiah resurrected and sitting on his throne. Since we know the exact extent of David's throne, which doesn't include a heavenly kingdom, we know this is a future reference to the millenial reign. A future kingdom that we (despite your insistence it is now) We are not to know the time of. This is what is irrefutable.

Ac 1:7 It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

Hate to bust your bubble but this means your position that the kingdom is now...as an imaginary contrivance!

<MIC DROP>

covenantee said:

Amen brother.

Click to expand...

What is this...Big Dog and me too?

WPM said:

No. There is no division in the body after the First Advent. The message is to the redeemed irrespective of race. Your apparteite theology runs contrary to the teaching of the NT.

Click to expand...

I see you haven't studied the passage. Peter addresses his letter to the Jewish diaspora, being the Apostle to the Jews as Paul has said.

WPM said:

Once again you ignore a lengthy post, and a wealth of evidence, that forbids your teaching and respond with a mistaken evasive response. I refer you back. You sidestep a solid of rebuttal.

This is the normal Premil mode of engagement.

Click to expand...

I didn't ignore your post. I simply recognized it as a repeat of the same post from other discussions on the same subject that I already answered and rejected.

covenantee said:

God's promise to the House of Jacob and the House of Israel was fulfilled at Calvary.

Click to expand...

This isn't true. Jesus said that their houses would be left desolate as a judgment against them (Matthew 23). The promise God made to their houses is a future hope for Israel.

covenantee said:

It has all come to pass.

Click to expand...

Some of it has come to pass. I reminded you about 1948, when God brought Israel back to the land to reestablish the nation of Israel. But Israel remains as the dead body surrounded by vultures, waiting for the fulfillment of Ezekiel 37:1-14.

covenantee said:

All who have believed Him and received Him since Calvary know Him. That is why Hebrews 8:11 is enclosed within the past and present tense verses of Hebrews 8:6 and Hebrews 8:13.

Click to expand...

Of course, why repeat a point that I conceded? Why not look at the Jeremiah passage objectively? The text in bold below has not been fulfilled.

When was it ever said that teaching about the Lord would cease because everyone already knew him?

covenantee said:

1 Peter 2:5,9 are the Church, comprised of both Jews and Gentiles.

Click to expand...

That is an error. Peter's letter is addressed to churches in Asia, whose congregations are comprised of Jacob's descendants living outside the country.

The Greek term underlying the word "aliens" is diaspora. These are the remnants of the original Ten Tribes who found homes in Asia and Europe, living among these nations as "aliens", people who maintain their culture and ethnicity. Peter, being the Apostle to the Jews, has reached out to his kinsmen of the flesh who obey Jesus Christ.

Spiritual Israelite said:

Peter said that David prophesied that God told him that He will RAISE UP Christ to sit on his (David's) throne and said he was prophesying about Jesus being RAISED UP from the dead.

Click to expand...

You are blending two distinct yet interconnected concepts. God made a profound promise to David, assuring him that his son would not remain in the grave to endure the decay that follows death. This promise held significant implications, as it also meant that Jesus would ultimately take his place on David's throne, fulfilling a divine plan that intertwines resurrection and royal lineage.

But Peter never meant to say that Jesus's resurrection was the sum and substance of his sitting on David's throne. Jesus didn't sit on David's throne after he was resurrected. He sat next to the Father's throne, at his right hand. When Jesus returns, he will sit on David's throne.

Spiritual Israelite said:

It doesn't refer to their bodies coming to life, it refers to their souls living and reigning with Christ because they had part in His resurrection.

Click to expand...

I see no Biblical evidence to support your contention that a soul can be killed. Jesus encourages both the public and his disciples when he remarked, "I say to you, My friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that have no more that they can do."

Spiritual Israelite said:

So, is your answer to my question that you believe the end of the age comes 1,000+ years after Christ's return?

Click to expand...

Yes, isn't it obvious? You speak of Christ ruling over his spiritual subjects and so you should. But don't ignore Paul's word that Christ will rule over the nations after he returns, defeating his enemies.

Spiritual Israelite said:

If so, is it your understanding that in the Olivet Discourse the disciples asked Jesus 3 different questions about 3 different things?

Matthew 24:3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”

Do you think the disciples were asking for the sign of Christ's coming and separately asking for the sign of the end of the age?

Click to expand...

The disciples approached Jesus burdened with a series of misconceptions regarding what the future held for them and their world. In the context of the Olivet Discourse, Jesus took the opportunity to gently correct their misunderstandings, carefully unraveling the tangled web of their beliefs. To truly grasp the weight of their inquiry, we must immerse ourselves in their perspective as individuals living in the first century, during a time when Jesus walked among them. Their questions were shaped by the cultural and historical context of their lives, filled with hopes and fears that colored their expectations of what was to come.

Modern Christians often grapple with the question of when Jesus will make his promised return to Earth. However, the original disciples had a different focus; they were eager to understand when Jesus would ascend to his rightful position as the king of Israel. In this context, the term "coming" carried significant weight, referring primarily to his illustrious entry into Jerusalem, where he would be acknowledged, crowned, and set to reign over both Israel and the world.

The disciples envisioned a powerful Messiah who would vanquish the oppressive Romans and liberate their land from foreign rule. They yearned for a triumphant moment when Jesus would publicly showcase his authority. The anticipation of his entrance was steeped in rich symbolism and tradition, particularly his approach to the Temple through the grand door on the East—this route formed an integral part of the majestic spectacle associated with his Triumphal Parade, marking a pivotal moment in the establishment of his kingdom.

The shocking announcement that the temple would face complete demolition served as Jesus’s initial words in his effort to correct the misconceptions held by his followers about his imminent rise to power. This revelation was a jarring departure from the expectations many had harbored. Traditionally, the grand "sign" of his arrival as a king would involve a majestic entrance, marked by his riding into the city on a powerful war horse and making a striking entrance through the revered east gate of the temple.

In light of this unexpected news, his disciples were filled with confusion and concern, questioning what a celebrated arrival could possibly look like without the temple looming as a symbol of their faith and identity. In their minds, the presence of the temple was essential to his "coming," as it heralded an end to the prolonged period of foreign occupation that had plagued Israel throughout its history. The temple was not merely a building; it was a cornerstone of their hopes for liberation and a new age of glory.

Jesus was going to suffer and die. The temple would be destroyed. And there would be a great delay between his leaving and his return. All is not lost, however, because eventually, the Lord will restore the fortunes of Israel, and Jesus will finally enter Jerusalem as her triumphant king.

Scott Downey said:

What I get from you is since you believe Peter was only for the Jews, then Peter is not authoritative for gentile believers, and you can just ignore anything he spoke or wrote as none of it applies to gentiles. Don't bother reading, or believing any of it applies to you. I suppose that explains why you ignore the Day of the Lord references to an earthly and heavenly destruction as that is only for jews. And then also the same with Hebrews. Logically or you are inconsistent, for you the New Covenant is only for Jews and not gentiles.

Click to expand...

It seems like your conclusion doesn't quite align with what I expressed, taking my statements further than I intended.

Peter is writing specifically to a community of Christians who are also the descendants of Jacob, and who find themselves living in exile away from their homeland. This dual identity shapes his messages and provides a unique context. When Peter speaks to them about Christian beliefs and practices, we should wholeheartedly embrace and apply those teachings in our own lives. However, we must exercise caution; when he addresses topics that resonate specifically with the experiences and challenges faced by the diaspora, we should avoid wrongly interpreting his words as directly relevant to our own situations. Understanding this distinction allows us to appreciate the nuances in his communication and respond appropriately to both the universal and specific messages he conveys.