Amil can only be proved to be true if Amils accept all of the following terms and convincingly satisfy these terms.

[Rich R]

There's no need to do that. It doesn't just mean one thing. It can be used figuratively or literally. We need to use discernment to determine which is which is any given verse.


It can mean that or it can be literal. You have to discern which is which. I don't determine that from Revelation 20 alone. My doctrine comes from other straightforward scripture that I use to help interpret Revelation 20. And other scripture does not allow for it to be talking about a literal thousand years after the return of Christ.


Obviously, I believe it started with Christ's resurrection because scripture teaches that is when He began to reign (Matthew 28:16-18, Ephesians 1:19-23, Colossians 1:12-13, Revelation 1:5-6). But, some of us Amils believe that Satan's little season has begun, so we would not say that we are still in the thousand years now.

I understand the Christ is reigning in heaven now. But that does not preclude his future reign over the earthly land God promised Abraham. Issac, and Jacob.

Without me saying at this point that the 1,000 years are literal or figurative, I do understand why amils must take it as figurative. The starting point is that the kingdom promised to Israel began at Jesus' resurrection. Obviously it's been over 2,000 years and counting since that event. Therefore the kingdom must be spiritual, the church must be Israel, there is no future inheritance for Israel, and the 1,000 years must be figurative.

If you've ever read Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged you may remember an injunction that runs as a sub-theme throughout the story, "Check your premise." Perhaps the spiritualizing of otherwise plain text is an unwarranted premise?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Have it your way.

In other words, you can't refute what I said. But, you're too stubborn to admit that you interpreted the verse wrongly.

 

[IndianaRob]

In other words, you can't refute what I said. But, you're too stubborn to admit that you interpreted the verse wrongly.

I don’t agree with you and you don’t agree with me so why bother going back and forth.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I understand the Christ is reigning in heaven now.

And in the hearts of those who are in the church? Paul wrote that He is the head over all things in the church (Ephesians 1:22). Agree? In that same verse he also said all things are now under Christ's feet. Agree?

But that does not preclude his future reign over the earthly land God promised Abraham. Issac, and Jacob.

Scripture teaches no such thing. Have you never read this:

Hebrews 11:8 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went. 9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise: 10 For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God. 11 Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised. 12 Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable. 13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. 14 For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country. 15 And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned. 16 But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.

Abraham, Isaac and Jacob came to understand that God had something better for them than the promised land. Why do you not understand that? Instead of looking for that, which they considered "a strange country", they instead began to "desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city" which is one "which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God". Why do your expectations not match those of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob themselves? Do you imagine that you somehow know better than them of what we should expect to inherit when Jesus comes?

Peter said in fulfillment of the promise of His second coming "look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness" (2 Peter 3:13). Do you somehow know better than Peter what we should be looking for in fulfillment of the promise of Christ's second coming?

Without me saying at this point that the 1,000 years are literal or figurative, I do understand why amils must take it as figurative. The starting point is that the kingdom promised to Israel began at Jesus' resurrection. Obviously it's been over 2,000 years and counting since that event. Therefore the kingdom must be spiritual, the church must be Israel, there is no future inheritance for Israel, and the 1,000 years must be figurative.

At least you understand that, so that's something, I guess.

If you've ever read Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged you may remember an injunction that runs as a sub-theme throughout the story, "Check your premise." Perhaps the spiritualizing of otherwise plain text is an unwarranted premise?

No, I've never read that and never will. What do you even mean by "the spiritualizing of otherwise plain text is an unwarranted premise"? Who are you to decide what text is supposedly plain or not? Are you the ultimate authority who decides that? I don't think so. Should we go into our study of any given text in the highly symbolic book of Revelation with the assumption that it's literal? Remember what I said about that being a horrible approach to interpreting scripture? It is. You should not make any assumptions one way or another about any given text in scripture, but you obviously do.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I don’t agree with you and you don’t agree with me so why bother going back and forth.

I was done talking to you and indicated as such and you replied to me again, anyway. So, ask yourself the same question. And, with this, I'm done wasting any more time talking to you because there's no need to refute things that only you believe, anyway. There's no point to it.

 

[IndianaRob]

I was done talking to you and indicated as such and you replied to me again, anyway. So, ask yourself the same question. And, with this, I'm done wasting any more time talking to you because there's no need to refute things that only you believe, anyway. There's no point to it.

Im fine with that. Peace brother.

 

[Douggg]

LOL. I showed how your logic doesn't work in relation to Daniel's 70 weeks. No response from you. Why not? And I asked you this with no response:

Is the following verse referring to a literal one hour?

Revelation 17:12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.

I'm putting your logic to the test and it's failing. If you really thought that the logic you were using was sound, then you wouldn't be such a coward and you would respond to what I'm saying here.

The issue is the thousand years in Revelation 20. Don't get side tracked.

The one thousand years in Revelation 20 is literal because the thousand years have a beginning and an ending.

Revelation 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,

When a judge in a criminal court system sentences a convicted felon to ten years in prison - are those ten years literal or figurative/metaphoric?

 

[covenantee]

But that does not preclude his future reign over the earthly land God promised Abraham. Issac, and Jacob.

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.

Once upon a time there was a father who, in his will, bequeathed his son 100 ounces of silver. He told his son of the bequest. Some time later, the father decided to update his will, and without telling his son, changed the bequest from 100 ounces of silver to 100 ounces of gold. Silver was valued at $30/ounce, and gold at $2000/ounce. Eventually, the father passed away, and the time for the reading of the will ensued. The bequest to the son of his 100 ounces of gold was read, whereupon he arose in fury, and accused his father of lying and not keeping his promise. He straightway marched down to the local coin shop and demanded that his gold be exchanged for silver. The shopkeeper willingly granted his demand.

Scripture promises 100 ounces of gold.

Dispensationalism demands 100 ounces of silver.

The choice is yours.

 

[Rich R]

And in the hearts of those who are in the church? Paul wrote that He is the head over all things in the church (Ephesians 1:22). Agree? In that same verse he also said all things are now under Christ's feet. Agree?

Of course. In none of my posts do I claim to be commenting on the entire Bible.

Scripture teaches no such thing. Have you never read this:

Hebrews 11:8 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went. 9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise: 10 For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God. 11 Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised. 12 Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable. 13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. 14 For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country. 15 And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned. 16 But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.

Does that really say that the country is IN heaven? Might it not be saying that the New Jerusalem will be coming down from heaven (as per Rev 21:2), and is thus heavenly in nature? The word "heavenly" in v 16 is in the genitive case. The basic usage of that case is to describe, not to locate.

Abraham, Isaac and Jacob came to understand that God had something better for them than the promised land.

Well, the Apostles that were with Jesus apparently didn't understand it the way you seem to. They fully expected Jesus to establish the kingdom on the earth when he returned to the earth. For that matter, neither did any Jew from Jacob to Jesus expect anything but a physical kingdom on the earth.

It is never wise to build a doctrine on one or two verses when there are scads of verses that say otherwise. In order to agree the the supposed meaning that Hebrews 11:16 says that the promised kingdom is (or will be) in heaven, amils are forced to change the plain meaning of hundreds of verses.

Now before you accuse me of assuming any given verse is literal, ask yourself if you're not assuming it is spititual.

Why do you not understand that? Instead of looking for that, which they considered "a strange country", they instead began to "desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city" which is one "which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God". Why do your expectations not match those of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob themselves? Do you imagine that you somehow know better than them of what we should expect to inherit when Jesus comes?

You may be wrong about what Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob expected. Do you really think that every Jew after them were really understood God to be saying they'd be floating around in heaven instead of planting vineyards? Again, you are ignoring innumerable clear verses in order to cling to 1 verse that can easily be made to align with the many clear verses.

Peter said in fulfillment of the promise of His second coming "look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness" (2 Peter 3:13). Do you somehow know better than Peter what we should be looking for in fulfillment of the promise of Christ's second coming?

Not sure where I suggested we should not be looking for a second coming. In fact, I've said over and over that the earthly kingdom promised to Israel will be established at JESUS' SECOND COMING. Sorry to yell, but I wanted to lay that whole idea to rest. I hope you get it now.

At least you understand that, so that's something, I guess.

Thanks for the bone!

No, I've never read that and never will. What do you even mean by "the spiritualizing of otherwise plain text is an unwarranted premise"? Who are you to decide what text is supposedly plain or not? Are you the ultimate authority who decides that?

OK. For the sake of argument, I'll admit I'm not the one to determine if any given text is plain sense of not. Who then would be?

I don't think so. Should we go into our study of any given text in the highly symbolic book of Revelation with the assumption that it's literal? Remember what I said about that being a horrible approach to interpreting scripture? It is. You should not make any assumptions one way or another about any given text in scripture, but you obviously do.

Who are you to decide that Revelation is highly symbolic? It sure sounds like you are making an assumption before cracking the book itself.

I don't mean to be disrespectful, but I can't help be see a certain amount hypocrisy in your posts to me. I in fact respect much of what you say.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The issue is the thousand years in Revelation 20. Don't get side tracked.

LOL. I'm on topic. You used your flawed man-made rule to try to prove that the thousand years must be literal because it has a beginning and an ending. So, I'm putting that rule to a test. And you're trying to avoid admitting that your man-made rule is flawed and should be discarded.

So, will you admit that your rule is flawed and should be discarded? If not, then let's put it to the test, shall we? I already talked about how it doesn't work with Daniel's 70 weeks, which most of us interpret as 490 years instead of 490 days.

How do you interpret this verse:

Revelation 17:12 Revelation 17:12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.

Can we use your man-made rule to conclude that the reference to "one hour" in this verse is a literal hour, as in 60 minutes? Or is your man-made rule flawed and we should discard it?

The one thousand years in Revelation 20 is literal because the thousands years have a beginning and an ending.

Revelaton 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,

When a judge in a criminal court system sentences a convicted felon to ten years in prison - are those ten years literal or figurative/metaphoric?

Here you are making that claim again. So, don't tell me I'm getting side tracked when I'm addressing your man-made rule that you use to determine that the thousand years is literal. You need to stop making claims like this without backing them up. If that man-made rule was legitimate, we should be able to apply it to any verse that refers to a time period, right? Well, can we? Can we apply it to Revelation 17:12 or not?

 

[Rich R]

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.

I've already shown that all the mentions of a New Covenant in the Gospels and Paul's letters refer back to the covenant God made with Israel in Jeremiah 31:31. Now I'm aware that verse 6 uses the words "Better Covenant" but it'd be hard to construe that it is something other the 2 "New Covenant" mentioned 2 times within the immediate context.

Anyway, why would you spiritualize hundreds of verses that plainly speak of a physical land on the earth so as to fit with one verse that maybe possibly could, with creative imagining, be squeezed into saying otherwise?

Once upon a time there was a father who, in his will, bequeathed his son 100 ounces of silver. He told his son of the bequest. Some time later, the father decided to update his will, and without telling his son, changed the bequest from 100 ounces of silver to 100 ounces of gold. Silver was valued at $30/ounce, and gold at $2000/ounce. Eventually, the father passed away, and the time for the reading of the will ensued. The bequest to the son of his 100 ounces of gold was read, whereupon he arose in fury, and accused his father of lying and not keeping his promise. He straightway marched down to the local coin shop and demanded that his gold be exchanged for silver. The shopkeeper willingly granted his demand.

Scripture promises 100 ounces of gold.

Dispensationalism demands 100 ounces of silver.

The choice is yours.

There is a third choice, the one more scriptural than your parable.

God promised Israel Gold. He promised the church Gold. The church has already received it, but Israel is still waiting. They'll get theirs when Jesus comes again and establishes the earthly kingdom which He affirmed hundreds of times to Israel in the Hebrew scriptures. A simplification, but in alignment with the scriptures nonetheless

 

[covenantee]

God promised Israel Gold. He promised the church Gold.

Explain how Israel's 100 ounces of silver is the same as the Church's 100 ounces of gold.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Does that really say the the country is IN heaven? Might it not be saying that the New Jerusalem will be coming down from heaven (as per Rev 21:2), and is thus heavenly in nature? The word "heavenly" in v 16 is in the genitive case. The basic usage of that case is to describe, not to locate.

Of course that's what it's saying. You apparently completely missed the point. The point is that it is the new Jerusalem and the new heavens and new earth that we should be looking for in fulfillment of God's promises and not a piece of land in Israel. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob came to understand this, so why don't you? Why are you still expecting to inherit a piece of land in Israel when that's not even what Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are expecting to inherit since they "desire a better country, that is, an heavenly"?

Well, the Apostles that were with Jesus apparently never heard about that. They fully expected Jesus to establish the kingdom on the earth when he returned to the earth.

Are you somehow not aware that they were mistaken about some things before the day of Pentecost came and the Holy Spirit taught them things that they previously did not understand?

It is never wise to build a doctrine on one or two verses when there are scads of verses that say otherwise. In order to agree the the supposed meaning that Hebrews 11:16 says that the promised kingdom is (or will be) in heaven, amils are forced to change the plain meaning of hundreds of verses.

LOL. You have to be kidding me here. Yes, so let's just completely ignore Hebrews 11:8-16 then since it doesn't agree with your doctrine? Unbelievable. You don't allow the NT to interpret the OT prophecies for you. Your supposed "scads of verses that say otherwise" are no doubt verses that you misinterpret and that you can't confirm with NT scripture.

Now before you accuse me of assuming any given verse is literal, ask yourself if you're not assuming it is spititual.

Of course not. Why would I do that? I have told you multiple times now that we should not assume anything one way or another when interpreting any given verse. Do you think I'm just making that up and don't really believe that?

You may be wrong about what Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob expected.

That they desired a better, heavenly country is not debatable. It says so in Hebrews 11:16. Abraham was in the promised land and considered it a strange country. He later realized that God had something better in mind for him and those who have faith like him, which includes us (Galatians 3:26-29).

Do you really think that every Jew after them were really understood God to be saying they'd be floating around in heaven instead of planting vineyards?

Why did you go and say something like this BEFORE finding out my understanding of the heavenly country they desire? It's heavenly in nature and will be on the new earth for eternity. Abraham and his seed (Christ and those who belong to Christ - Gal 3:16,29) will inherit the entire new earth.

Again, you are ignoring innumerable clear verses in order to cling to 1 verse that can easily be made to align with the many clear verses.

LOL. Nonsense. These empty claims do nothing to support your doctrine. Why don't you give me a few of these supposed clear verses that you think support your doctrine and let's discuss them. I'm getting kind of tired of your opinions with no scriptural support to back them up.

Not sure where I suggested we should not be looking for a second coming.

Not sure where I suggested that you suggested such a thing. I'm sure I did not. Please read what I say more carefully.

In fact, I've said over and over that the earthly kingdom promised to Israel will be established at JESUS' SECOND COMING. Sorry to yell, but I wanted to lay that whole idea to rest. I hope you get it now.

Where did I say otherwise? What's the name of the straw man you're arguing with here? What I'm saying is that you are not looking for the same thing in fulfillment of the promise of His second coming as Peter said we should be which is the eternal "new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness" (2 Peter 3:13). Instead of that, you are looking for a temporal earthly kingdom in fulfillment of the promise of His second coming. I say we should agree with what Peter said we should be looking or in fulfillment of the promise of His second coming instead of what you are looking for in fulfillment of that.

OK. For the sake of argument, I'll admit I'm not the one to determine if any given text is plain sense of not. Who then would be?

The Holy Spirit. Read 1 Corithians 2:9-16.

Who are you to decide that Revelation is highly symbolic?

No one. It's not up to me. We all need to rely on the Holy Spirit to reveal to us whether any given verse is literal, symbolic or some other type of text. This is the point I've made from the beginning, but you just don't get it.

It sure sounds like you are making an assumption before cracking the book itself.

Nonsense. Absolutely false. But, I certainly don't base my doctrine mainly on text within a highly symbolic book like Revelation. I base my doctrine primarily on literal, straightforward scriptures like those that say Jesus is reigning now (Matthew 28:16-18, Ephesians 1:19-23, Col 1:12-13) and that all of the dead will be raised in the same hour (John 5:28-29) and that all people are judged at the same time (Matt 13:36-43, Matt 13:47-50, Matt 25:31-46) and so on.

I don't mean to be disrespectful, but I can't help be see a certain amount hypocrisy in your posts to me.

You are seeing wrong. I mean what I say when I say that we should not take any bias and make no assumptions when interpreting any given verse or passage. If you don't want to believe me about that, that's not my problem. I can't control what you think, obviously.

I in fact respect much of what you say.

Hmmm. Do you really? You have a funny way of showing it. You say I and other amils "are forced to change the plain meaning of hundreds of verses" and you say I am "ignoring innumerable clear verses in order to cling to 1 verse that can easily be made to align with the many clear verses.". If that's respect, then I don't want to know how you are when you disrespect someone.

 

[Rich R]

Explain how Israel's 100 ounces of silver is the same as the Church's 100 ounces of gold.

I didn't say anything about anybody getting silver.

I'd think if any explanation is warranted it'd be you explaining where God gave Israel silver. At least I think that's what you intimated. To be honest, I'm not sure exactly what your point was with that parable.

 

[covenantee]

I didn't say anything about anybody getting silver.

I'd think if any explanation is warranted it'd be you explaining where God gave Israel silver. At least I think that's what you intimated. To be honest, I'm not sure exactly what your point was with that parable.

Explain how Israel's earth (silver) is as good as the Church's heaven (gold).

 

[Rich R]

Of course that's what it's saying. You apparently completely missed the point. The point is that it is the new Jerusalem and the new heavens and new earth that we should be looking for in fulfillment of God's promises and not a piece of land in Israel.

Might it not be that the piece of land is on the new earth? I think it just might be the case!

Abraham, Isaac and Jacob came to understand this, so why don't you? Why are you still expecting to inherit a piece of land in Israel when that's not even what Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are expecting to inherit since they "desire a better country, that is, an heavenly"?

I have nothing to say other than "heavenly" is in the genitive case. I explained that the basic meaning of that case is descriptive not location.

Are you somehow not aware that they were mistaken about some things before the day of Pentecost came and the Holy Spirit taught them things that they previously did not understand?

Yeah, but I don't see where Peter, Stephen, or Paul said anything about Israel losing their inheritance. In fact I think Paul made his thinking clear on the matter in Romans 11.

LOL. You have to be kidding me here. Yes, so let's just completely ignore Hebrews 11:8-16 then since it doesn't agree with your doctrine? Unbelievable. You don't allow the NT to interpret the OT prophecies for you. Your supposed "scads of verses that say otherwise" are no doubt verses that you misinterpret and that you can't confirm with NT scripture.

Are you reading my posts without preconceived ideas? There are no less than 150 verses that promised a physical land for Israel that you are ignoring. Nonetheless. they are really there. They are written at an 8th grade reading level, so not hard to read. They've been there for thousands of years. Furthermore there is nothing in the Gospels or Paul's letters that contradict them. It's you that changes the 150 clear verse so as to align with what you think Hebrews says. Of course, what you think Hebrew says contradicts the 150 clear verse in the OT.

In simple terms, can you explain why the mention of the "New Covenant" in Hebrews can not refer to the "New Covenant" mentioned Jeremiah 31:31? I've given my take on that many times and have yet to get a cogent rebuttal. All I get are LOLs. That wont' convince me of anything. I need substance if I'm to change my doctrine.

Of course not. Why would I do that? I have told you multiple times now that we should not assume anything one way or another when interpreting any given verse. Do you think I'm just making that up and don't really believe that?

And I've told you multiple times that I read a verse and THEN decide literal or figurative?

That they desired a better, heavenly country is not debatable. It says so in Hebrews 11:16. Abraham was in the promised land and considered it a strange country. He later realized that God had something better in mind for him and those who have faith like him, which includes us (Galatians 3:26-29).

Why did you go and say something like this BEFORE finding out my understanding of the heavenly country they desire? It's heavenly in nature and will be on the new earth for eternity. Abraham and his seed (Christ and those who belong to Christ - Gal 3:16,29) will inherit the entire new earth.

So let me get this straight. You are saying that Israel will receive the promised kingdom on the earth when Jesus returns. Is that right? That's kind of a game changer.

 

[Rich R]

LOL. Nonsense. These empty claims do nothing to support your doctrine. Why don't you give me a few of these supposed clear verses that you think support your doctrine and let's discuss them.

I tried to quote 150+ verses, but we're only allowed 10,000 characters. Still this should be enough to start with,


Gen 12:7,

And the LORD appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there builded he an altar unto the LORD, who appeared unto him.

Gen 13:15,

For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever.

Gen 13:17,

Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it; for I will give it unto thee.

Gen 15:18,

In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:

Gen 17:8,

And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.

Gen 24:7,

The LORD God of heaven, which took me from my father's house, and from the land of my kindred, and which spake unto me, and that sware unto me, saying, Unto thy seed will I give this land; he shall send his angel before thee, and thou shalt take a wife unto my son from thence.

Gen 26:2,

And the LORD appeared unto him, and said, Go not down into Egypt; dwell in the land which I shall tell thee of:

Gen 26:3,

Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee; for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these countries, and I will perform the oath which I sware unto Abraham thy father;

Gen 26:2,

And the LORD appeared unto him, and said, Go not down into Egypt; dwell in the land which I shall tell thee of:

Gen 26:3,

Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee; for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these countries, and I will perform the oath which I sware unto Abraham thy father;

Gen 28:13,

And, behold, the LORD stood above it, and said, I [am] the LORD God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac: the land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed;

Gen 35:12 And the land which I gave Abraham and Isaac, to thee I will give it, and to thy seed after thee will I give the land.

Gen 48:4,

And said unto me, Behold, I will make thee fruitful, and multiply thee, and I will make of thee a multitude of people; and will give this land to thy seed after thee [for] an everlasting possession.

Gen 50:24,

And Joseph said unto his brethren, I die: and God will surely visit you, and bring you out of this land unto the land which he sware to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.

Exod 6:4,

And I have also established my covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan, the land of their pilgrimage, wherein they were strangers.

Exod 12:25,

And it shall come to pass, when ye be come to the land which the LORD will give you, according as he hath promised, that ye shall keep this service.

Exod 13:5,

And it shall be when the LORD shall bring thee into the land of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, which he sware unto thy fathers to give thee, a land flowing with milk and honey, that thou shalt keep this service in this month.

Exod 13:11,

And it shall be when the LORD shall bring thee into the land of the Canaanites, as he sware unto thee and to thy fathers, and shall give it thee,

Exod 20:12,

Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.

Exod 23:30,

By little and little I will drive them out from before thee, until thou be increased, and inherit the land.

Exod 32:13,

Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to whom thou swarest by thine own self, and saidst unto them, I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have spoken of will I give unto your seed, and they shall inherit [it] for ever.

Exod 33:1,

And the LORD said unto Moses, Depart, [and] go up hence, thou and the people which thou hast brought up out of the land of Egypt, unto the land which I sware unto Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, saying, Unto thy seed will I give it:

Lev 14:34,

When ye be come into the land of Canaan, which I give to you for a possession, and I put the plague of leprosy in a house of the land of your possession;

Lev 23:10,

Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye be come into the land which I give unto you, and shall reap the harvest thereof, then ye shall bring a sheaf of the firstfruits of your harvest unto the priest:

Lev 25:2,

Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye come into the land which I give you, then shall the land keep a sabbath unto the LORD.

Lev 25:24,

And in all the land of your possession ye shall grant a redemption for the land.

Lev 25:38,

I [am] the LORD your God, which brought you forth out of the land of Egypt, to give you the land of Canaan, [and] to be your God.

Lev 26:42,

Then will I remember my covenant with Jacob, and also my covenant with Isaac, and also my covenant with Abraham will I remember; and I will remember the land.

Num 11:12,

Have I conceived all this people? have I begotten them, that thou shouldest say unto me, Carry them in thy bosom, as a nursing father beareth the sucking child, unto the land which thou swarest unto their fathers?

Num 14:8,

If the LORD delight in us, then he will bring us into this land, and give it us; a land which floweth with milk and honey.

Num 14:16,

Because the LORD was not able to bring this people into the land which he sware unto them, therefore he hath slain them in the wilderness.

Num 14:23,

Surely they shall not see the land which I sware unto their fathers, neither shall any of them that provoked me see it:

Num 14:24,

But my servant Caleb, because he had another spirit with him, and hath followed me fully, him will I bring into the land whereinto he went; and his seed shall possess it.

Num 14:30,

Doubtless ye shall not come into the land, [concerning] which I sware to make you dwell therein, save Caleb the son of Jephunneh, and Joshua the son of Nun.

Num 20:12,

And the LORD spake unto Moses and Aaron, Because ye believed me not, to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this congregation into the land which I have given them.

Num 20:24,

Aaron shall be gathered unto his people: for he shall not enter into the land which I have given unto the children of Israel, because ye rebelled against my word at the water of Meribah.

Num 26:53,

Unto these the land shall be divided for an inheritance according to the number of names.

Num 27:12,

And the LORD said unto Moses, Get thee up into this mount Abarim, and see the land which I have given unto the children of Israel.

Num 32:7,

And wherefore discourage ye the heart of the children of Israel from going over into the land which the LORD hath given them?

Num 32:11,

Surely none of the men that came up out of Egypt, from twenty years old and upward, shall see the land which I sware unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob; because they have not wholly followed me:

Num 33:53,

And ye shall dispossess [the inhabitants] of the land, and dwell therein: for I have given you the land to possess it.

Num 34:2,

Command the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye come into the land of Canaan; (this [is] the land that shall fall unto you for an inheritance, [even] the land of Canaan with the coasts thereof:)

Num 34:12,

And the border shall go down to Jordan, and the goings out of it shall be at the salt sea: this shall be your land with the coasts thereof round about.

Num 36:2,

And they said, The LORD commanded my lord to give the land for an inheritance by lot to the children of Israel: and my lord was commanded by the LORD to give the inheritance of Zelophehad our brother unto his daughters.

Deut 1:8,

Behold, I have set the land before you: go in and possess the land which the LORD sware unto your fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give unto them and to their seed after them.

Deut 1:21,

Behold, the LORD thy God hath set the land before thee: go up [and] possess [it], as the LORD God of thy fathers hath said unto thee; fear not, neither be discouraged.

Deut 1:35,

Surely there shall not one of these men of this evil generation see that good land, which I sware to give unto your fathers,

Deut 2:29,

(As the children of Esau which dwell in Seir, and the Moabites which dwell in Ar, did unto me;) until I shall pass over Jordan into the land which the LORD our God giveth us.

 

[Rich R]

Explain how Israel's earth (silver) is as good as the Church's heaven (gold).

I didn't say anything about anybody getting silver.

I'd think if any explanation is warranted it'd be you explaining where God gave Israel silver. At least I think that's what you intimated. To be honest, I'm not sure exactly what your point was with that parable.

 

[covenantee]

I didn't say anything about anybody getting silver.

I'd think if any explanation is warranted it'd be you explaining where God gave Israel silver. At least I think that's what you intimated. To be honest, I'm not sure exactly what your point was with that parable.

Are you saying that Israel's earth is as good as the Church's heaven?

If so, then you should waste no time exhuming Abraham et al and reprimanding them severely for seeking a better heavenly country, when the earthly one they had was just as good.

You're right, you don't get the point of the parable.

Just leave it for those who do.

 

[IndianaRob]

Are you saying that Israel's earth is as good as the Church's heaven?

If so, then you should waste no time exhuming Abraham et al and reprimanding them severely for seeking a better heavenly country, when the earthly one they had was just as good.

You're right, you don't get the point of the parable.

Just leave it for those who do.

What’s your take on these verses. Seems to me that the “better thing” they were looking for was the kingdom of Heaven on earth that we as believers enjoy today.

Heb 11:39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:
Heb 11:40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.