ECT "For He must reign until ..."

[elohiym]

Nay, friend, that throne of David business is discussed at length in Ezekiel and it has yet to happen.

What passage are you referring to? Let's discuss it.

 

[elohiym]

Re: your post # 17 "...which is why he told the man to not tell any one what had happened" ay, elohiym. Ok; if you say so.

No, that's not how assimilation works.

Do you recall when the unclean women (with the blood issue) touched the Lord? What did he say? What did it mean? Do you realize that if he was subject to the Mosaic Law and it's priesthood he would have been made unclean by that woman touching him; hence his comment, which isn't so cryptic in that light. Since we both believe the Lord is God, did she make Him unclean according to the law, or was God above His law? My answer is the Lord didn't become unclean because the dispensation changed already, and he was the High Priest of a new covenant bypassing the rituals that Paul would later claim were nailed to the cross (Col 2:14).

Luke 7:22 Then Jesus answering said unto them, Go your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached.

I'm not going to guess. What is the point you are trying to make with that verse, Danoh? :idunno:

The other part; about the Law leading them to Christ how that was to have played out... well, you're only partly on solid ground on that one.

Explain.

 

[patrick jane]

There is only one Kingdom.

That already happened. He has been reigning ever since.

Wrong

 

[elohiym]

Wrong

Wrong about what exactly? :idunno:

Are you claiming there is more than one kingdom?

If you are claiming that, what is your evidence?

 

[andyc]

1 Corinthians 15:25 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet.

The Lord Jesus Christ is reigning now while His enemies are being put under His feet.

This discussion will be about how the Lord is reigning now.

Those who believe the Lord's reign is future are welcome to debate.

That's right.
The Hebrews writer is trying to get people to understand that that there is a man in heaven who is over all. God had originally put man over all of this physical world, but since the fall we don't see it because it is corrupted. But we do see Jesus ruling an incorruptible kingdom. This is the reward to those in him.
He rules the Kingdom of God, and he rules in the hearts of the saints currently on earth.

 

[fzappa13]

What passage are you referring to? Let's discuss it.

Eze 38-48 ... that is a lot of discussing.

 

[elohiym]

Eze 38-48 ... that is a lot of discussing.

The third temple is symbolic for the Lord.

That is why He implied He is the Temple of God.

John 2:19 Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up."

What would be the point of a literal, earthly third temple and restarting animal sacrifices for sin? :idunno:

 

[elohiym]

But we do see Jesus ruling an incorruptible kingdom. This is the reward to those in him.
He rules the Kingdom of God, and he rules in the hearts of the saints currently on earth.

Amen.

Colossians 1:13 For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son...

 

[genuineoriginal]

Why do you interpret the 1,000 years as literal?

The 1,000 year reign is meant to be interpreted as literal.

They rejected his reign when he allegedly wasn't reigning and has not been given His kingdom yet? Seems like a contradiction.

Luke 19:12 He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.​

When Jesus said this, He had not left for heaven to receive the kingdom, but He was still a nobleman.
At this point in time, He is a King without a Kingdom.

Luke 19:37-39 37 And when he was come nigh, even now at the descent of the mount of Olives, the whole multitude of the disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the mighty works that they had seen; 38 Saying, Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord: peace in heaven, and glory in the highest. 39 And some of the Pharisees from among the multitude said unto him, Master, rebuke thy disciples.​

Even though Jesus is proclaimed as King, the Pharisees rejected Him as their king, they refused to have Jesus reign over them.

There is no contradiction.

There is only one Kingdom.

I am assuming that you are referring to the coming kingdom mentioned in this verse:

Luke 11:2 2 And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.​

Matthew 28:18 And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth."

That already happened.

Yes.

He has been reigning ever since.

Your conclusion does not follow the premise.
You are assuming that because Jesus has all (ἐξουσία exousia) liberty/power/authority/jurisdiction in heaven and earth, that means He has already been given the kingdom.

Acts 1:1-7 1 The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach, 2 Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen: 3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God: 4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. 5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. 6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? 7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.​

Jesus confirmed to the disciples that He was not restoring the kingdom to Israel, but that the kingdom was being retained by the Father until some later time or season.

When that later time or season comes, at the sounding of the seventh trumpet of Revelation, Jesus is given the kingdom of God to restore to Israel.

 

[elohiym]

I will address your other points, but I would like you to prove this claim first:

The 1,000 year reign is meant to be interpreted as literal.

 

[genuineoriginal]

I will address your other points, but I would like you to prove this claim first:

I would like you to try (and fail miserably) to prove that the 1,000 years is not meant to be taken literally.

_____

Millennium Kingdom: One Thousand Years - Literal or Figurative?

The original question that precipitated Hanegraaff's answer was "How do you know when to spiritualize things in the Bible and when to take them literally." I believe that Matthew Waymeyer provides a much better answer to that caller's question than did Hanegraaff. Waymeyer says: "In order to be considered symbolic, the language in question must possess (a) some degree of absurdity when taken literally and (b) some degree of clarity when taken symbolically." (emphasis original) There is nothing absurd about taking a thousand years literally in Revelation 20 as was noted in the contextual uses of passages like Psalm 50:10- 11.

The literal reading of a thousand years in Revelation 20 makes perfect sense. The only reason it may seem strange to an individual would be because they have a bias, for some reason, against such an understanding. Non-premillennialists have just such a bias: if they let the statements of a thousand years stand, then this passage clearly teaches premillennialism. "With this in mind," concludes Waymeyer, "it is difficult to imagine why one would consider the 'thousand years' in Revelation 20 to be symbolic language, for it possesses neither a degree of absurdity when taken literally, nor a degree of clarity when taken symbolically."
_____​

 

[elohiym]

I would like you to try (and fail miserably) to prove that the 1,000 years is not meant to be taken literally.

Whether they are literal or figurative, I only have to prove that Christ is reigning before the thousand years, not without a kingdom until the thousand years.

Colossians 1:13 For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son...

Have you been transferred to His kingdom?
Are you seated in Him now?
Is He sitting on a throne now?

As for proving the thousand years are symbolic ...

What is the first resurrection? That happens before the thousand year reign. If you experienced the first resurrection, you are reigning with Christ now and the thousand years is symbolic.

 

[elohiym]

Also, would you agree that the lifespan of a man can be roughly one thousand years according to evidence in scripture, e.g. Adam (930), Yered (962), Methuselah (969) and Noah (950)?

"Even if the other man lives a thousand years twice and does not enjoy good things-- do not all go to one place?"

 

[elohiym]

"Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom."

:think:

 

[fzappa13]

The third temple is symbolic for the Lord.

That is why He implied He is the Temple of God.

I missed that verse. Perhaps you could enlighten me.

That is why He implied He is the Temple of God.

John 2:19 Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up."

That would require a figurative reading of all passages concerning this temple and it would appear that many of the occurrences associated with the implementation of this temple would preclude that.

What would be the point of a literal, earthly third temple and restarting animal sacrifices for sin?

The point of God's ordinances is that they are prophetic. Most of these prophecies have a three fold fulfillment. Understanding what ordinances are not a part of Eze 40-48 gives you an indicator of those that are yet to be fully fulfilled at that time … if that's not a Non Sequitur.

 

[elohiym]

That would require a figurative reading of all passages concerning this temple and it would appear that many of the occurrences associated with the implementation of this temple would preclude that.

Ezekiel 47:12 12 “By the river on its bank, on one side and on the other, will grow all kinds of trees for food. Their leaves will not wither and their fruit will not fail. They will bear every month because their water flows from the sanctuary, and their fruit will be for food and their leaves for healing.”

Does that sound familiar? Is that literal?

The point of God's ordinances is that they are prophetic. Most of these prophecies have a three fold fulfillment. Understanding what ordinances are not a part of Eze 40-48 gives you an indicator of those that are yet to be fully fulfilled at that time … if that's not a Non Sequitur.

Ezekiel 44:9 Thus says the Lord GOD, "No foreigner uncircumcised in heart and uncircumcised in flesh, of all the foreigners who are among the sons of Israel, shall enter My sanctuary."

Mandatory circumcision? Can't be future.

Regarding the symbolism...

You may be interested in this: "If we enlarge Ezekiel's map till Ezekiel's city is the size of Revelation's New Jerusalem, then Ezekiel's map encircles the globe."

I don't agree with everything in that paper, such as a literal New Jerusalem or a literal temple outside it, but it's interesting nonetheless.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Whether they are literal or figurative, I only have to prove that Christ is reigning before the thousand years, not without a kingdom until the thousand years.

Colossians 1:13 For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son...

Never try to use an Aorist Indicative Greek verb to try to establish a timeline.

_____
The aorist tense is characterized by its emphasis on punctiliar action; that is, the concept of the verb is considered without regard for past, present, or future time. There is no direct or clear English equivalent for this tense
_____​

_____
The indicative mood is a simple statement of fact. If an action really occurs or has occurred or will occur, it will be rendered in the indicative mood.
_____​

 

[genuineoriginal]

As for proving the thousand years are symbolic ...

What is the first resurrection? That happens before the thousand year reign. If you experienced the first resurrection, you are reigning with Christ now and the thousand years is symbolic.

These passages show when the first resurrection happens:

1 Thessalonians 4:13-17 13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. 15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.​

1 Corinthians 15:51-54 51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. 54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.​

1 John 3:2 2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.​

 

[genuineoriginal]

"Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom."

:think:

Someone that saw the Son of Man coming in His kingdom wrote the book of Revelation describing what he saw.

 

[elohiym]

Never try to use an Aorist Indicative Greek verb to try to establish a timeline.

Colossians 1:13 For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son...

Were you rescued from the domain of darkness?
Were transferred to the kingdom of His beloved Son?
Does Christ reign in the kingdom of God's beloved Son?