| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Azaliah" |
| Date: |
19 Dec 2006 11:53:03 AM |
| Object: |
1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???
Richard Anthony
Did you know that the phrase "1000 Year Reign of Christ"
does not appear anywhere in scripture? Nor the word
"millenium"? Does this surprise you? Notice in the above
title, we did not spell out the word "thousand," but used
"1000" instead. This is because numbers are fictions in
numerical form and have no substance. And the "1000
year reign of Christ" is also a fiction according to
Scripture, which has has no substance. It is born and bred
from the doctrines of man, not from the Holy Scripture.
The "thousand year reign" appears nowhere in the sixty-six
books, 1,189 chapters, 31,173 verses of the Bible except in
this one passage where it occurs six times in six consecutive
verses (Revelation 20:3-8). It is not solid study to build
an entire system of beliefs about the end of the age and
the status of the kingdom on such a highly symbolic passage.
More especially when that interpretation conflicts with other
plain passages of scripture.
Revelation 20:3-8 is the only passage in the entire
scriptures that the so-called premillinialists have as the
basis for the "1000 year reign". What endless variations
of concocted fables have resulted! Clearly it does not
contain the detail that they attribute to it.
First, it should be pointed out that scripture does not
speak of "the thousand year reign of Christ". Revelation 20:4
says, "...and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded
for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God,...and
they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years".
It's not Christ that reigns 1000 years, but those who were
killed for God's sake that reign with Christ 1000 years.
To illustrate, consider the phrase, "John Doe reigned with
the king for one year". Does this mean the king reigned
for only one year? No, it does not. The king could reign
for many years, but the point is not how long the king reigned
but how long John reigned with the king. The king isn't the
subject, it is speaking about how long John reigns with him.
Likewise, Revelation 20:4 is not about how long Jesus will
reign, but how long others will reign with Jesus. There's
a big difference.
There are some things not mentioned in Revelation 20.
* First, it does not mention the second coming
of Christ.
* Second, it does not mention a reign on earth.
* Third, this passage does not mention a bodily
resurrection.
* Fourth, it does not mention Christ on earth.
* And fifth, it does not mention us, it says "they"
lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Who are the "they" that lived and reigned with Christ?
The souls of them that had been beheaded for their testimony
of Jesus. In an earlier chapter of this same book of
Revelations, in Chapter 6:9-11, the picture is of the souls of
martyrs who had been slain for the word of God under an altar
crying for vengeance. Here the martyrs are on thrones, God's
inevitable judgment has come. The victory came in the spirit
world (not the physical), and God assured their victory. This
passage only speaks of the "dead" reigning with Christ, this
passage does not speak about those who are "alive" reigning
with Christ.
The passage also mentions the first resurrection, which
is in contrast with the second death. The point is not that
the righteous is raised a thousand years before the wicked,
for a physical reign on earth, but that the cause of Christ
for which the martyrs died is triumphant. Evil is not forever
on the throne. God has overcome.
This passage says nothing about Jesus coming to this earth
and establishing a worldly kingdom at Jerusalem -- those that
so teach are duty-bound to prove their doctrines with
scripture, not just their imaginations.
Revelation 20:4, "…and they lived and reigned with
Christ a thousand years."
This is where the phrase "1000 year reign" came from.
Its proper use would be limited to exactly what John was
describing at this point. The so-called "premillinialists"
believe that they will be worldly conquerors with Christ when
He comes to reign on this earth for 1000 years; but Paul says
that "we are more than conquerors through him that loved us"
now! And this is the essence of what John the Revelator is
communicating. There is no reason to differentiate between
these reigns. There is no reason to believe (other than
impatience or dissatisfaction with God's plan for us) that
there is anything sweeter on this earth than reigning in
His kingdom, now.
At Revelation 20:6, the first resurrection clearly applies
to those dead in Christ who lived and reigned with Christ
for the figurative "1000-year period" in wait for the final
judgment and the general resurrection of the just and the
unjust. The second death is explained further below. It is
the ultimate death that those who are lost will experience
at that judgment, the first death being physical death.
While the saints and true believers who die physically
experience this first death, the second death will have
no power over them.
While the main thrust of Revelation 20:6 is that the
righteous dead are reigning with Christ, there is no reason
to believe that those of us on this earth do not share in this
reign now. One of the major losses of the "premillinialists"
is that, in their quest for a worldly kingdom in the future,
they fail to recognize the blessings of Christ reigning in
our lives now.
Let us now compare scripture with scripture to interpret
the "thousand years." In scripture, the term "thousand",
when in reference to time, is always used symbolically of
a predetermined time that God chooses. In other cases,
it is always used symbolically for a large number of people
or things. Surely, nobody can honestly interpret the
following "thousands" as literal:
People or Things
Job 9:3, "If he will contend with him, he cannot
answer him one of a thousand."
Psalms 50:10, "For every beast of the forest is mine,
and the cattle upon a thousand hills."
Ecclesiastes 7:28, "...one man among a thousand have I
found; but a woman among all those have I not found."
Song of Solomon 4:4, "…whereon there hang a thousand
bucklers, all shields of mighty men."
Daniel 5:1, "Belshazzar the king made a great feast
to a thousand of his lords, and drank wine before
the thousand."
Daniel 7:10, "...thousand thousands ministered unto
him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood
before him."
Days, Years, and Generations
Deuteronomy 7:9, "…which keepeth covenant and
mercy with them that…keep his commandments to
a thousand generations;"
1 Chronicles 16:15, "Be ye mindful always of his
covenant; the word which he commanded to a
thousand generations;"
Psalms 84:10, "For a day in thy courts is better than
a thousand."
Psalms 90:4, "For a thousand years in thy sight are
but as yesterday when it is past,"
Psalms 105:8, "He hath remembered his covenant for
ever, the word which he commanded to a thousand
generations."
Ecclesiastes 6:6, "Yea, though he live a thousand
years twice told, yet hath he seen no good: do not
all go to one place?"
2 Peter 3:8, "...one day is with the Lord as a
thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."
It should be obvious from the above that every occurance
of the word "thousand," by itself, throughout scripture, is
not literal but symbolic for a large number or long period
of time. Then, why is it when we go to the book of Revelation
(the most symbolic book of them all), many interpret this
thousand years as literal? Especially when there is no
scriptural warrant for doing so?
Futurists make the same mistake that the Jews who
crucified Christ made -- they were not satisfied with a
spiritual kingdom; they had to have a literal, worldly,
physical kingdom. The Truth of the matter is not that
Christ will reign for a thousand years some time in the
future, but that Christ is reigning now, and will continue
to reign for eternity. We do not have to wait for His Kingdom
to come sometime in the future before He starts reigning over
our lives, for Christ's Kingdom is here now, and He desires
that we reign with Him now, whether we choose to recognize
it or not!
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/1000.html
http://www.ecclesia.org/
--
Azaliah (ats-al-yaw'-hoo) "Jah has reserved"
<((>< <((>< <((><
"Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth."
- John 17:17
..
.
|
|
| User: "Fred A Stover" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
20 Dec 2006 12:18:05 PM |
|
|
"Azaliah" <_giantwaffle_@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:079go212826l0i0lo165f6d5msla0dc2fi@4ax.com...
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???
Richard Anthony
Did you know that the phrase "1000 Year Reign of Christ"
does not appear anywhere in scripture? Nor the word
"millenium"? Does this surprise you?
Duh....... Try my Bible, gullible one.
: "Rev. 20:4-5
And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto
them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of
Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast,
neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in
their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years (but
the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were
finished). This is the first resurrection.
--
http://www.geocities.com/alphadiego66medina@sbcglobal.net/index.htm
Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as
a little child, he shall not enter therein. (Mark 10:15)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Flowerchild8245" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
20 Dec 2006 08:54:46 PM |
|
|
Fred A Stover wrote:
"Azaliah" <_giantwaffle_@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:079go212826l0i0lo165f6d5msla0dc2fi@4ax.com...
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???
Richard Anthony
Did you know that the phrase "1000 Year Reign of Christ"
does not appear anywhere in scripture? Nor the word
"millenium"? Does this surprise you?
Duh....... Try my Bible, gullible one.
: "Rev. 20:4-5
And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto
them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of
Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast,
neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in
their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years (but
the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were
finished). This is the first resurrection.
I see "they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years".
I do not see "Christ returned to earth and reigned for a thousand
years".
I see they died for preaching the word of God, and that they came back
to life.
They are worthy to have become preists of God and Christ, first to
preach, first to die. They have reigned amongst the Apostles thrones,
in the highest heaven, the great and high court of God.
Jesus is indeed the King and reigns in a tabernacle not made by the
hand of men, but the hand of God! He is King because He has received
His kingdom, and He reigns!
Hello Azaliah!
Hello Gatekeeper!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred A Stover" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 05:05:37 AM |
|
|
"Flowerchild8245" <flowerchild8245@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1166669686.766267.284420@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Fred A Stover wrote:
"Azaliah" <_giantwaffle_@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:079go212826l0i0lo165f6d5msla0dc2fi@4ax.com...
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???
Richard Anthony
Did you know that the phrase "1000 Year Reign of Christ"
does not appear anywhere in scripture? Nor the word
"millenium"? Does this surprise you?
Duh....... Try my Bible, gullible one.
: "Rev. 20:4-5
And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given
unto
them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of
Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast,
neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads,
or in
their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years
(but
the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were
finished). This is the first resurrection.
I see "they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years".
I do not see "Christ returned to earth and reigned for a thousand
years".
I see they died for preaching the word of God, and that they came back
to life.
That's because you don't read the rest of the book, which reveal His Christ
returning, verses like these:
..
Zech. 12:8-10
In that day shall the Lord defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he
that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of
David shall be as God, as the angel of the Lord before them.
[9] And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy
all the nations that come against Jerusalem. [10] And I will pour upon the
house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace
and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced,
and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be
in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.
Zech. 14:4
And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is
before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the
midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very
great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and
half of it toward the south.
Rev. 19:11-13
And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon
him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and
make war. [12] His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many
crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. [13]
And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called
The Word of God.
Hello Azaliah!
Hello Gatekeeper!
The satanic trio.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "gatekeeper" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
20 Dec 2006 10:11:35 PM |
|
|
Flowerchild8245 wrote:
Fred A Stover wrote:
"Azaliah" <_giantwaffle_@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:079go212826l0i0lo165f6d5msla0dc2fi@4ax.com...
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???
Richard Anthony
Did you know that the phrase "1000 Year Reign of Christ"
does not appear anywhere in scripture? Nor the word
"millenium"? Does this surprise you?
Duh....... Try my Bible, gullible one.
: "Rev. 20:4-5
And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto
them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of
Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast,
neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in
their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years (but
the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were
finished). This is the first resurrection.
I see "they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years".
I do not see "Christ returned to earth and reigned for a thousand
years".
I see they died for preaching the word of God, and that they came back
to life.
They are worthy to have become preists of God and Christ, first to
preach, first to die. They have reigned amongst the Apostles thrones,
in the highest heaven, the great and high court of God.
Jesus is indeed the King and reigns in a tabernacle not made by the
hand of men, but the hand of God! He is King because He has received
His kingdom, and He reigns!
Hello Azaliah!
Hello Gatekeeper!
Greetings Flowerchild8245,
The King, He Reigns in Glory Now,
and We lift our voices to Him!
We celebrate His Love to us Now,
that We shall reign with Him in Glory!
When we see Him Face to face!
and know the wonders of His Grace!
The Eastgate is open, the King is in Residence! Whosoever will, may
come in!
Gatekeeper
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred A Stover" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 05:05:37 AM |
|
|
"gatekeeper" <gatekeeper.eastgate@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1166674294.970667.212730@t46g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Flowerchild8245 wrote:
Fred A Stover wrote:
"Azaliah" <_giantwaffle_@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:079go212826l0i0lo165f6d5msla0dc2fi@4ax.com...
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???
Richard Anthony
Did you know that the phrase "1000 Year Reign of Christ"
does not appear anywhere in scripture? Nor the word
"millenium"? Does this surprise you?
Duh....... Try my Bible, gullible one.
: "Rev. 20:4-5
And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given
unto
them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness
of
Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the
beast,
neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads,
or in
their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years
(but
the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were
finished). This is the first resurrection.
I see "they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years".
I do not see "Christ returned to earth and reigned for a thousand
years".
I see they died for preaching the word of God, and that they came back
to life.
They are worthy to have become preists of God and Christ, first to
preach, first to die. They have reigned amongst the Apostles thrones,
in the highest heaven, the great and high court of God.
Jesus is indeed the King and reigns in a tabernacle not made by the
hand of men, but the hand of God! He is King because He has received
His kingdom, and He reigns!
Hello Azaliah!
Hello Gatekeeper!
Greetings Flowerchild8245,
The King, He Reigns in Glory Now,
and We lift our voices to Him!
We celebrate His Love to us Now,
that We shall reign with Him in Glory!
When we see Him Face to face!
and know the wonders of His Grace!
So you say, Satan. He says He sits at the right hand of the father until His
enemies are His footstool, then "the Son of man shall come in his glory, and
all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his
glory" (Matt 25:31).
--
http://www.geocities.com/alphadiego66medina@sbcglobal.net/index.htm
Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as
a little child, he shall not enter therein. (Mark 10:15)
The Eastgate is open, the King is in Residence! Whosoever will, may
come in!
Gatekeeper
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Flowerchild8245" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
20 Dec 2006 10:31:40 PM |
|
|
gatekeeper wrote:
Flowerchild8245 wrote:
Fred A Stover wrote:
"Azaliah" <_giantwaffle_@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:079go212826l0i0lo165f6d5msla0dc2fi@4ax.com...
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???
Richard Anthony
Did you know that the phrase "1000 Year Reign of Christ"
does not appear anywhere in scripture? Nor the word
"millenium"? Does this surprise you?
Duh....... Try my Bible, gullible one.
: "Rev. 20:4-5
And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto
them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of
Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast,
neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in
their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years (but
the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were
finished). This is the first resurrection.
I see "they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years".
I do not see "Christ returned to earth and reigned for a thousand
years".
I see they died for preaching the word of God, and that they came back
to life.
They are worthy to have become preists of God and Christ, first to
preach, first to die. They have reigned amongst the Apostles thrones,
in the highest heaven, the great and high court of God.
Jesus is indeed the King and reigns in a tabernacle not made by the
hand of men, but the hand of God! He is King because He has received
His kingdom, and He reigns!
Hello Azaliah!
Hello Gatekeeper!
Greetings Flowerchild8245,
The King, He Reigns in Glory Now,
and We lift our voices to Him!
We celebrate His Love to us Now,
that We shall reign with Him in Glory!
When we see Him Face to face!
and know the wonders of His Grace!
The Eastgate is open, the King is in Residence! Whosoever will, may
come in!
Gatekeeper
Amen brother! In this new age of Christ, all flesh shall see the
salvation of God!
Glory, honor, and power, to the King! He is King of all King's, even
the little kings of the earth, right now, and Lord of all Lord's, so He
is the LORD, having all power in heaven and earth.
Peace on earth for all those pleasing Him!
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Azaliah" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 10:59:35 AM |
|
|
On 20 Dec 2006 18:54:46 -0800, while bungee jumping,
"Flowerchild8245" <flowerchild8245@msn.com> shouted thusly:
I see "they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years".
Yes, "THEY reigned WITH Christ for a thousand years".
It has nothing to do with how long Christ reigns. Christ
started reigning when He ascended.
--
Azaliah (ats-al-yaw'-hoo) "Jah has reserved"
<((>< <((>< <((><
"Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth."
- John 17:17
..
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred A Stover" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 10:51:33 PM |
|
|
"Azaliah" <_giantwaffle_@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:baflo2hknpnlllf1uccl0us31n442ju133@4ax.com...
On 20 Dec 2006 18:54:46 -0800, while bungee jumping,
"Flowerchild8245" <flowerchild8245@msn.com> shouted thusly:
I see "they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years".
Yes, "THEY reigned WITH Christ for a thousand years".
It has nothing to do with how long Christ reigns. Christ
started reigning when He ascended.
ROTFL!!!!!!
More of your ignorance on the reigns of Christ? That's exactly how long they
reign, 1000 years, in the millennial day of the Lord. Scripture continues to
confuse you: "For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his
feet" (1 Cor. 15:25).
--
http://www.geocities.com/alphadiego66medina@sbcglobal.net/index.htm
Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as
a little child, he shall not enter therein. (Mark 10:15)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Wide Eyed in Wonder" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 08:19:44 AM |
|
|
Azaliah wrote:
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???
A post of mine before...
It has been alleged at times that the concept of the Millenial reign of
Christ is a modern invention. This is to refute that. Eusebius (3-4th
century church historian and author of the following quote), which was,
at times, out of favor with the church for his beliefs.
However, St. Irenaeus (2nd century saint mentioned by Eusebius below)
was a bishop and helped craft the apostles creed. Papias (also
entioned below) was also a 2nd century Bishop.
The fact that Eusebius disagreed with Irenaeus and Papias to the point
of sladering their character below is irrelevant to the point that THE
EARLY CHURCH BELIEVED IN A MILLENIUM KINGDOM, where Christ would rule
on earth.
(from Eusebius -The Church History by Paul Maier)
"Papias supplies other stories that reached him by word of mouth, along
with some strange parables and unknown teaching of the Savior, as well
as other more legendary accounts. Among them, he says that after the
resurrection of the dead, there will be a thousand year
period when the kingdom of Christ will be established on this earth in
material form. I suppose that he got these notions by misunderstanding
the apostolic accounts, not realizing that they had used mystic and
symbolic language. For he was a man of limited
intelligence, as is clear from his books. Due to him, however, many
church writers after him held the same opinion, relying on his early
date: Irenaeus, for example, and any others who adopted the same
views."
If the thousand years is supposed to be past, I guess those of the
early church in the days didn't know it.
Ken Clifton
http://www.lulu.com/writingken
.
|
|
|
| User: "Azaliah" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 02:22:04 PM |
|
|
On 21 Dec 2006 06:19:44 -0800, while bungee jumping, "Wide
Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> shouted thusly:
Azaliah wrote:
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???
A post of mine before...
It has been alleged at times that the concept of the Millenial
reign of Christ is a modern invention. This is to refute that.
Eusebius (3-4th century church historian and author of the
following quote), which was, at times, out of favor with the
church for his beliefs.
However, St. Irenaeus (2nd century saint mentioned by
Eusebius below) was a bishop and helped craft the apostles
creed. Papias (also entioned below) was also a 2nd century
Bishop.
The fact that Eusebius disagreed with Irenaeus and Papias
to the point of sladering their character below is irrelevant
to the point that THE EARLY CHURCH BELIEVED IN A
MILLENIUM KINGDOM, where Christ would rule on earth.
So Ken, the others don't count? Why choose Eusebius?
Because you think he agrees with you, that's why. But
he doesn't. He is saying the opposite. See below.
(from Eusebius -The Church History by Paul Maier)
"Papias supplies other stories that reached him by word
of mouth, along with some strange parables and unknown
teaching of the Savior, as well as other more legendary
accounts. Among them, he says that after the resurrection
of the dead, there will be a thousand year period when
the kingdom of Christ will be established on this earth
in material form. I suppose that he got these notions
by misunderstanding the apostolic accounts, not realizing
that they had used mystic and symbolic language. For
he was a man of limited intelligence, as is clear from
his books. Due to him, however, many church writers
after him held the same opinion, relying on his early
date: Irenaeus, for example, and any others who adopted
the same views."
If the thousand years is supposed to be past, I guess
those of the early church in the days didn't know it.
You stated that we must take the Bible literally.
Eusebius said that the writers used, "mystic
and symbolic language". You were wrong.
But now here is where you fail. Eusebius says above,
that Papias was wrong for thinking that after the
resurrection of the dead, that there would be a literal,
material kingdom of Christ on Earth. Eusebius said
that he "supposed that he got these notions by
misunderstanding the apostolic accounts, not realizing
that they used mystic and symbolic language".
In other words:
Papias: After the resurrection of the dead, there will be
a thousand year period when the kingdom of Christ will
be established on this earth in material form.
Eusebius: I suppose that he got these notions by
misunderstanding the apostolic accounts, not realizing
that they had used mystic and symbolic language.
Furthermore, Eusebius goes on to say that "he was
a man of limited intelligence".
Now since you said that the Bible and this supposed
1,000 year reign of Christ on Earth is to be taken
literally, this means that YOU are a man of limited
intelligence and that YOU do not realize that the
Apostles used symbolic language!
You also quoted him saying... "Due to him, however,
many church writers after him held the same opinion".
This means that those who wrote of this error of an
earthly, material kingdom of Christ relied on his writing
and are therefore, also wrong by your own measure,
since YOU, KEN, placed Eusebius as the ruler by which
we should measure the truth of this doctrine. So don't
bother quoting anyone else. You have already ruled
out their words.
Of course I don't expect you to admit to any of this.
But here it is, in black and white, for all to read.
--
Azaliah (ats-al-yaw'-hoo) "Jah has reserved"
<((>< <((>< <((><
"Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth."
- John 17:17
..
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 12:01:47 PM |
|
|
Azaliah wrote:
On 21 Dec 2006 06:19:44 -0800, while bungee jumping, "Wide
Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> shouted thusly:
Azaliah wrote:
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???
A post of mine before...
It has been alleged at times that the concept of the Millenial
reign of Christ is a modern invention. This is to refute that.
Eusebius (3-4th century church historian and author of the
following quote), which was, at times, out of favor with the
church for his beliefs.
However, St. Irenaeus (2nd century saint mentioned by
Eusebius below) was a bishop and helped craft the apostles
creed. Papias (also entioned below) was also a 2nd century
Bishop.
The fact that Eusebius disagreed with Irenaeus and Papias
to the point of sladering their character below is irrelevant
to the point that THE EARLY CHURCH BELIEVED IN A
MILLENIUM KINGDOM, where Christ would rule on earth.
So Ken, the others don't count? Why choose Eusebius?
Because you think he agrees with you, that's why. But
he doesn't. He is saying the opposite. See below.
Don't you read? I just said...look right above this...that he
disagreed with them to the point of slandering them.
(from Eusebius -The Church History by Paul Maier)
"Papias supplies other stories that reached him by word
of mouth, along with some strange parables and unknown
teaching of the Savior, as well as other more legendary
accounts. Among them, he says that after the resurrection
of the dead, there will be a thousand year period when
the kingdom of Christ will be established on this earth
in material form. I suppose that he got these notions
by misunderstanding the apostolic accounts, not realizing
that they had used mystic and symbolic language. For
he was a man of limited intelligence, as is clear from
his books. Due to him, however, many church writers
after him held the same opinion, relying on his early
date: Irenaeus, for example, and any others who adopted
the same views."
If the thousand years is supposed to be past, I guess
those of the early church in the days didn't know it.
You stated that we must take the Bible literally.
Eusebius said that the writers used, "mystic
and symbolic language". You were wrong.
But now here is where you fail. Eusebius says above,
that Papias was wrong for thinking that after the
resurrection of the dead, that there would be a literal,
material kingdom of Christ on Earth. Eusebius said
that he "supposed that he got these notions by
misunderstanding the apostolic accounts, not realizing
that they used mystic and symbolic language".
Exactly, Eusebius (not a religious authority but a secular historian)
said the early church believed exactly what I said they did. What
purpose would have for lying about them?
In other words:
Papias: After the resurrection of the dead, there will be
a thousand year period when the kingdom of Christ will
be established on this earth in material form.
Eusebius: I suppose that he got these notions by
misunderstanding the apostolic accounts, not realizing
that they had used mystic and symbolic language.
Furthermore, Eusebius goes on to say that "he was
a man of limited intelligence".
Now since you said that the Bible and this supposed
1,000 year reign of Christ on Earth is to be taken
literally, this means that YOU are a man of limited
intelligence and that YOU do not realize that the
Apostles used symbolic language!
You also quoted him saying... "Due to him, however,
many church writers after him held the same opinion".
This means that those who wrote of this error of an
earthly, material kingdom of Christ relied on his writing
and are therefore, also wrong by your own measure,
since YOU, KEN, placed Eusebius as the ruler by which
we should measure the truth of this doctrine. So don't
bother quoting anyone else. You have already ruled
out their words.
Of course I don't expect you to admit to any of this.
But here it is, in black and white, for all to read.
--
Reading, apparently, is a quality you lack. Go back and reread my
post, since you never read that I didn't use Eusibius as a religious
authority but a secular history. I agree with the individuals he spoke
of (Papias and Iraeneus), which existed over a century before him.
Ken Clifton
http://www.lulu.com/writingken
.
|
|
|
| User: "Azaliah" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 08:53:18 PM |
|
|
On 21 Dec 2006 10:01:47 -0800, while bungee jumping,
kands00@hotmail.com shouted thusly:
(from Eusebius -The Church History by Paul Maier)
"Papias supplies other stories that reached him by word
of mouth, along with some strange parables and unknown
teaching of the Savior, as well as other more legendary
accounts. Among them, he says that after the resurrection
of the dead, there will be a thousand year period when
the kingdom of Christ will be established on this earth
in material form. I suppose that he got these notions
by misunderstanding the apostolic accounts, not realizing
that they had used mystic and symbolic language. For
he was a man of limited intelligence, as is clear from
his books. Due to him, however, many church writers
after him held the same opinion, relying on his early
date: Irenaeus, for example, and any others who adopted
the same views."
If the thousand years is supposed to be past, I guess
those of the early church in the days didn't know it.
You stated that we must take the Bible literally.
Eusebius said that the writers used, "mystic
and symbolic language". You were wrong.
But now here is where you fail. Eusebius says above,
that Papias was wrong for thinking that after the
resurrection of the dead, that there would be a literal,
material kingdom of Christ on Earth. Eusebius said
that he "supposed that he got these notions by
misunderstanding the apostolic accounts, not realizing
that they used mystic and symbolic language".
Exactly, Eusebius (not a religious authority but a secular historian)
said the early church believed exactly what I said they did. What
purpose would have for lying about them?
Actually, he pointed out that it was not grounded
in Scripture, but in "unknown parables". It was
not something drawn from what the Lord said.
The bottom line is that you pick and choose what
you want. And you conveniently forget how much
nonsense Irenaeus proposed.
And FYI, Eusebius was a Bishop. You are wrong again, Ken.
That quote was taken from
"This same historian (Papias) also gives other accounts,
which he says he adds as received by him from unwritten
tradition, likewise certain strange parables of our Lord,
and of His doctrine and some other matters rather too
fabulous. In these he says there would be a certain
millennium after the resurrection, and that there would
be a corporeal reign of Christ on this very earth; which
things he appears to have imagined, as if they were
authorized by the apostolic narrations, not understanding
correctly those matters which they propounded mystically
in their representations. For he was very limited in his
comprehension, as is evident from his discourses; yet
he was the cause why most of the ecclesiastical writers,
urging the antiquity of man, were carried away by a similar
opinion; as, for instance, Irenaeus, or any other that adopted
such sentiments."
Eusebius is saying that it this literal reign was not right.
Furthermore, people like you continue to misread
the Scriptures.
"And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment
was committed to them. Then I saw THE SOULS of those
who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for
the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his
image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads
or on their hands. And THEY lived and reigned WITH Christ
for a thousand years." - Revelation 20:4
John saw "the souls" of them, not bodies.
John said that THEY reigned for a thousand years,
not that Christ reigned for a thousand years.
Christ's reign is eternal and He began to reign when
He ascended, as the Bible says. He is not waiting
to reign, only after sin is gone. Read the Bible.
Specifically, 1 Cor 15:25, where it tells you this.
You do what you want and believe what you want.
All you have proved to me, is that you pick and
choose and ignore every Scripture that causes
a problem for you and every response. You still
can't admit that you tried to bind God to linear time.
You know it, I know it. Yet Futurists are far more
concerned about their doctrines, than the Scriptures
and they prove this every time they ignore a sound
rebuttal of their ridiculous claims.
I won't argue with you, because you do ignore
everything I say, every time. So what is the point?
You can't even get it through your head that your
claim that you preach the Gospel, while only telling
people that they are condemned and getting angry
when people ask you why you don't also offer
the path to salvation, proves that your pride is
far too great for you to consider anything other
than your own words. You are another OWD,
to me.
--
Azaliah (ats-al-yaw'-hoo) "Jah has reserved"
<((>< <((>< <((><
"Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth."
- John 17:17
..
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Code Programmer" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 08:31:11 PM |
|
|
The whole point of everything is to have the kingdom on earth.
Jesus said it.
The Meek shall inherit the earth.
Because the fighters will be dead.
Jesus kingdom is about peace on earth and good will to all men.
If we all are dying to meet the kingdom, then it has stayed something in the
next life.
Too many have strived for this, and wasted their lives, with loop holes of
martyrdom.
Yes there is an after life.
But the whole point of this life, is to live it like it is kingdom of
heaven, and our choices and actions make it heaven on earth. If everyone
loved and respected each other this would be heaven on earth.
Perhaps we need a bit of hell on earth as we have had even now, to give us
perspective.
--
PEace
www.worldpeace.mail333.com
Ray M O'Keeffe
An open mind has eyes to see and ears to hear.
If you don't get to the end because you dont like the message, then dont be
surprised when it all goes south and you didnt see it coming.
God loves everyone. Remember that.
Blessed are the peace makers they shall be called the sons of God.
Many 666 Signs Point to 1 man...
http://beast666.faithweb.com/signs666.htm
5th Trumpet Fulfilled (Iraq) Pictures show prophecies.
http://beast666.faithweb.com/FifthTrumpet.htm
911 Foreknown by God points to Beast in Power
http://www.id-chip.4t.com/
www.angelfire.com/oz/zen/prophecy/
http://watchman888.land.ru/images/
http://beast666.faithweb.com/
"Azaliah" <_giantwaffle_@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:k8qlo2l0s8hd6ckmgr0r0alhobk2874kvp@4ax.com...
On 21 Dec 2006 06:19:44 -0800, while bungee jumping, "Wide
Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> shouted thusly:
Azaliah wrote:
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???
A post of mine before...
It has been alleged at times that the concept of the Millenial
reign of Christ is a modern invention. This is to refute that.
Eusebius (3-4th century church historian and author of the
following quote), which was, at times, out of favor with the
church for his beliefs.
However, St. Irenaeus (2nd century saint mentioned by
Eusebius below) was a bishop and helped craft the apostles
creed. Papias (also entioned below) was also a 2nd century
Bishop.
The fact that Eusebius disagreed with Irenaeus and Papias
to the point of sladering their character below is irrelevant
to the point that THE EARLY CHURCH BELIEVED IN A
MILLENIUM KINGDOM, where Christ would rule on earth.
So Ken, the others don't count? Why choose Eusebius?
Because you think he agrees with you, that's why. But
he doesn't. He is saying the opposite. See below.
(from Eusebius -The Church History by Paul Maier)
"Papias supplies other stories that reached him by word
of mouth, along with some strange parables and unknown
teaching of the Savior, as well as other more legendary
accounts. Among them, he says that after the resurrection
of the dead, there will be a thousand year period when
the kingdom of Christ will be established on this earth
in material form. I suppose that he got these notions
by misunderstanding the apostolic accounts, not realizing
that they had used mystic and symbolic language. For
he was a man of limited intelligence, as is clear from
his books. Due to him, however, many church writers
after him held the same opinion, relying on his early
date: Irenaeus, for example, and any others who adopted
the same views."
If the thousand years is supposed to be past, I guess
those of the early church in the days didn't know it.
You stated that we must take the Bible literally.
Eusebius said that the writers used, "mystic
and symbolic language". You were wrong.
But now here is where you fail. Eusebius says above,
that Papias was wrong for thinking that after the
resurrection of the dead, that there would be a literal,
material kingdom of Christ on Earth. Eusebius said
that he "supposed that he got these notions by
misunderstanding the apostolic accounts, not realizing
that they used mystic and symbolic language".
In other words:
Papias: After the resurrection of the dead, there will be
a thousand year period when the kingdom of Christ will
be established on this earth in material form.
Eusebius: I suppose that he got these notions by
misunderstanding the apostolic accounts, not realizing
that they had used mystic and symbolic language.
Furthermore, Eusebius goes on to say that "he was
a man of limited intelligence".
Now since you said that the Bible and this supposed
1,000 year reign of Christ on Earth is to be taken
literally, this means that YOU are a man of limited
intelligence and that YOU do not realize that the
Apostles used symbolic language!
You also quoted him saying... "Due to him, however,
many church writers after him held the same opinion".
This means that those who wrote of this error of an
earthly, material kingdom of Christ relied on his writing
and are therefore, also wrong by your own measure,
since YOU, KEN, placed Eusebius as the ruler by which
we should measure the truth of this doctrine. So don't
bother quoting anyone else. You have already ruled
out their words.
Of course I don't expect you to admit to any of this.
But here it is, in black and white, for all to read.
--
Azaliah (ats-al-yaw'-hoo) "Jah has reserved"
<((>< <((>< <((><
"Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth."
- John 17:17
.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "gatekeeper" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
19 Dec 2006 10:06:08 AM |
|
|
Azaliah wrote:
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???
Richard Anthony
Did you know that the phrase "1000 Year Reign of Christ"
does not appear anywhere in scripture? Nor the word
"millenium"? Does this surprise you? Notice in the above
title, we did not spell out the word "thousand," but used
"1000" instead. This is because numbers are fictions in
numerical form and have no substance. And the "1000
year reign of Christ" is also a fiction according to
Scripture, which has has no substance. It is born and bred
from the doctrines of man, not from the Holy Scripture.
The "thousand year reign" appears nowhere in the sixty-six
books, 1,189 chapters, 31,173 verses of the Bible except in
this one passage where it occurs six times in six consecutive
verses (Revelation 20:3-8). It is not solid study to build
an entire system of beliefs about the end of the age and
the status of the kingdom on such a highly symbolic passage.
More especially when that interpretation conflicts with other
plain passages of scripture.
Revelation 20:3-8 is the only passage in the entire
scriptures that the so-called premillinialists have as the
basis for the "1000 year reign". What endless variations
of concocted fables have resulted! Clearly it does not
contain the detail that they attribute to it.
First, it should be pointed out that scripture does not
speak of "the thousand year reign of Christ". Revelation 20:4
says, "...and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded
for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God,...and
they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years".
It's not Christ that reigns 1000 years, but those who were
killed for God's sake that reign with Christ 1000 years.
To illustrate, consider the phrase, "John Doe reigned with
the king for one year". Does this mean the king reigned
for only one year? No, it does not. The king could reign
for many years, but the point is not how long the king reigned
but how long John reigned with the king. The king isn't the
subject, it is speaking about how long John reigns with him.
Likewise, Revelation 20:4 is not about how long Jesus will
reign, but how long others will reign with Jesus. There's
a big difference.
There are some things not mentioned in Revelation 20.
* First, it does not mention the second coming
of Christ.
* Second, it does not mention a reign on earth.
* Third, this passage does not mention a bodily
resurrection.
* Fourth, it does not mention Christ on earth.
* And fifth, it does not mention us, it says "they"
lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Who are the "they" that lived and reigned with Christ?
The souls of them that had been beheaded for their testimony
of Jesus. In an earlier chapter of this same book of
Revelations, in Chapter 6:9-11, the picture is of the souls of
martyrs who had been slain for the word of God under an altar
crying for vengeance. Here the martyrs are on thrones, God's
inevitable judgment has come. The victory came in the spirit
world (not the physical), and God assured their victory. This
passage only speaks of the "dead" reigning with Christ, this
passage does not speak about those who are "alive" reigning
with Christ.
The passage also mentions the first resurrection, which
is in contrast with the second death. The point is not that
the righteous is raised a thousand years before the wicked,
for a physical reign on earth, but that the cause of Christ
for which the martyrs died is triumphant. Evil is not forever
on the throne. God has overcome.
This passage says nothing about Jesus coming to this earth
and establishing a worldly kingdom at Jerusalem -- those that
so teach are duty-bound to prove their doctrines with
scripture, not just their imaginations.
Revelation 20:4, "...and they lived and reigned with
Christ a thousand years."
This is where the phrase "1000 year reign" came from.
Its proper use would be limited to exactly what John was
describing at this point. The so-called "premillinialists"
believe that they will be worldly conquerors with Christ when
He comes to reign on this earth for 1000 years; but Paul says
that "we are more than conquerors through him that loved us"
now! And this is the essence of what John the Revelator is
communicating. There is no reason to differentiate between
these reigns. There is no reason to believe (other than
impatience or dissatisfaction with God's plan for us) that
there is anything sweeter on this earth than reigning in
His kingdom, now.
At Revelation 20:6, the first resurrection clearly applies
to those dead in Christ who lived and reigned with Christ
for the figurative "1000-year period" in wait for the final
judgment and the general resurrection of the just and the
unjust. The second death is explained further below. It is
the ultimate death that those who are lost will experience
at that judgment, the first death being physical death.
While the saints and true believers who die physically
experience this first death, the second death will have
no power over them.
While the main thrust of Revelation 20:6 is that the
righteous dead are reigning with Christ, there is no reason
to believe that those of us on this earth do not share in this
reign now. One of the major losses of the "premillinialists"
is that, in their quest for a worldly kingdom in the future,
they fail to recognize the blessings of Christ reigning in
our lives now.
Let us now compare scripture with scripture to interpret
the "thousand years." In scripture, the term "thousand",
when in reference to time, is always used symbolically of
a predetermined time that God chooses. In other cases,
it is always used symbolically for a large number of people
or things. Surely, nobody can honestly interpret the
following "thousands" as literal:
People or Things
Job 9:3, "If he will contend with him, he cannot
answer him one of a thousand."
Psalms 50:10, "For every beast of the forest is mine,
and the cattle upon a thousand hills."
Ecclesiastes 7:28, "...one man among a thousand have I
found; but a woman among all those have I not found."
Song of Solomon 4:4, "...whereon there hang a thousand
bucklers, all shields of mighty men."
Daniel 5:1, "Belshazzar the king made a great feast
to a thousand of his lords, and drank wine before
the thousand."
Daniel 7:10, "...thousand thousands ministered unto
him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood
before him."
Days, Years, and Generations
Deuteronomy 7:9, "...which keepeth covenant and
mercy with them that...keep his commandments to
a thousand generations;"
1 Chronicles 16:15, "Be ye mindful always of his
covenant; the word which he commanded to a
thousand generations;"
Psalms 84:10, "For a day in thy courts is better than
a thousand."
Psalms 90:4, "For a thousand years in thy sight are
but as yesterday when it is past,"
Psalms 105:8, "He hath remembered his covenant for
ever, the word which he commanded to a thousand
generations."
Ecclesiastes 6:6, "Yea, though he live a thousand
years twice told, yet hath he seen no good: do not
all go to one place?"
2 Peter 3:8, "...one day is with the Lord as a
thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."
It should be obvious from the above that every occurance
of the word "thousand," by itself, throughout scripture, is
not literal but symbolic for a large number or long period
of time. Then, why is it when we go to the book of Revelation
(the most symbolic book of them all), many interpret this
thousand years as literal? Especially when there is no
scriptural warrant for doing so?
Futurists make the same mistake that the Jews who
crucified Christ made -- they were not satisfied with a
spiritual kingdom; they had to have a literal, worldly,
physical kingdom. The Truth of the matter is not that
Christ will reign for a thousand years some time in the
future, but that Christ is reigning now, and will continue
to reign for eternity. We do not have to wait for His Kingdom
to come sometime in the future before He starts reigning over
our lives, for Christ's Kingdom is here now, and He desires
that we reign with Him now, whether we choose to recognize
it or not!
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/1000.html
http://www.ecclesia.org/
--
Azaliah (ats-al-yaw'-hoo) "Jah has reserved"
<((>< <((>< <((><
"Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth."
- John 17:17
.
Thank you Azaliah, Hallelujah! This is a great post to start the Day!
The Eastgate is Open, The King is in Residence! Whosoever will, may
come in!
Gatekeeper
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Wide Eyed in Wonder" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 08:09:16 AM |
|
|
Azaliah wrote:
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???
Adventists make a fatal error in attacking the literalism of
fundamentalists. They, accidentally, shoot their own foundation out
from under themselves. If the bible is not to be taken literally, why
would "soon" be taken as a literal human timeframe (instead of the
timeframe of the one that spoke the word...of whom a thousand years is
as a day)?
Ken Clifton
http://www.lulu.com/writingken
.
|
|
|
| User: "Azaliah" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 02:05:35 PM |
|
|
On 21 Dec 2006 06:09:16 -0800, while bungee jumping, "Wide
Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> shouted thusly:
Azaliah wrote:
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???
Adventists make a fatal error in attacking the literalism of
fundamentalists.
I'm not an Adventist. Nor am I attacking "fundamentalists"
and trying to falsely paint a fundamentalist as one who
must believe in a literal earthly, 1,000 year reign of Christ
is a deceitful tactic. You are trying to make it seem as if
anyone who disagrees with you, is some nut case lunatic
on the fringe of Christianity. Again, that is deceitful,
especially since I have repeatedly told you that I am not
an Adventist and this shows therefore, that you are
intentionally lying!
They, accidentally, shoot their own foundation out
from under themselves.
Is that why you had to apply false labels and snipped
my entire post?
If the bible is not to be taken literally, why
would "soon" be taken as a literal human timeframe (instead of the
timeframe of the one that spoke the word...of whom a thousand years is
as a day)?
Peter stated an obvious metaphor, to show that time has
no meaning to God. But it does to man. And that is why
time statements are made in human time. But if you wish
to think that God has "1,000 year days", then you have just
bound God to linear time and you are also by default
claiming that He has night time as well and yet, the Bible
tells us that there is no darkness with God.
But hey, if you want to take everything literally, then
please tell us where we can find it written that God was
literally seen riding a cloud into Egypt, regarding the
fulfilled prophecy listed in Isaiah 19:1?
You have failed to answer to that each and every time
and this makes you a hypocrite!
And John said in Revelation, that "the time is at hand",
when he wrote it in the 1st century.
Note: THE TIME is at hand.
You have no argument to make. You only have attacks
and false accusations.
--
Azaliah (ats-al-yaw'-hoo) "Jah has reserved"
<((>< <((>< <((><
"Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth."
- John 17:17
..
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred A Stover" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 11:05:11 PM |
|
|
"Azaliah" <_giantwaffle_@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:tsplo2ph822eosri61uqed94g160b0tof5@4ax.com...
On 21 Dec 2006 06:09:16 -0800, while bungee jumping, "Wide
Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> shouted thusly:
Azaliah wrote:
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???
Adventists make a fatal error in attacking the literalism of
fundamentalists.
I'm not an Adventist.
No, you're a Satanist.
Nor am I attacking "fundamentalists"
and trying to falsely paint a fundamentalist as one who
must believe in a literal earthly, 1,000 year reign of Christ
is a deceitful tactic. You are trying to make it seem as if
anyone who disagrees with you, is some nut case lunatic
on the fringe of Christianity. Again, that is deceitful,
especially since I have repeatedly told you that I am not
an Adventist and this shows therefore, that you are
intentionally lying!
Early Church Father Tertullian (circa 160-225 AD):
"But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although
before heaven, only in another state of existence; inasmuch as it will be
after the resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of
Jerusalem, 'let down from heaven,'"
Early Church Father Justin Martyr (circa 100-165 AD):
"We have perceived, moreover, that the expression, 'The day of the Lord is
as a thousand years,' is connected with this subject. And further, there was
a certain man with us, whose name was John, one of the apostles of Christ,
who prophesied, by a revelation that was made to him, that those who
believed in our Christ would dwell a thousand years in Jerusalem; and that
thereafter the general, and, in short, the eternal resurrection and judgment
of all men would likewise take place. Just as our Lord also said, 'They
shall neither marry nor be given in marriage, but shall be equal to the
angels, the children of the God of the resurrection.'"
Early Church Father Irenaeus (circa 130-202 AD):
"For in as many days as this world was made, in so many thousand years shall
it be concluded. And for this reason the Scripture says: Thus the heaven and
the earth were finished, and all their adornment. And God brought to a
conclusion upon the sixth day the works that He had made; and God rested
upon the seventh day from all His works.' This is an account of the things
formerly created, as also it is a prophecy of what is to come. For the day
of the Lord is as a thousand years; and in six days created things were
completed: it is evident, therefore, that they will come to an end at the
sixth thousand year.
"But when this Antichrist shall have devastated all things in this world, he
will reign for three years and six months, and sit in the temple at
Jerusalem; and then the Lord will come from heaven in the clouds, in the
glory of the Father, sending this man and those who follow him into the lake
of fire; but bringing in for the righteous the times of the kingdom, that
is, the rest, the hallowed seventh day; and restoring to Abraham the
promised inheritance, in which kingdom the Lord declared, that 'many coming
from the east and from the west should sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob.'
"The predicted blessing, therefore, belongs unquestionably to the times of
the kingdom, when the righteous shall bear rule upon their rising from the
dead."
They, accidentally, shoot their own foundation out
from under themselves.
Is that why you had to apply false labels and snipped
my entire post?
No, folks snip your posts because they don't want to broadcast Satan's lies.
He was referring to your hyperliteral mis-interpretation of auxiliary words,
and your conjuring an allegorical interpretation of the core of the text, so
it won't contradict your mis-interpretation.
--
http://www.geocities.com/alphadiego66medina@sbcglobal.net/index.htm
Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as
a little child, he shall not enter therein. (Mark 10:15)
.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 12:04:12 PM |
|
|
Azaliah wrote:
On 21 Dec 2006 06:09:16 -0800, while bungee jumping, "Wide
Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> shouted thusly:
Azaliah wrote:
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???
Adventists make a fatal error in attacking the literalism of
fundamentalists.
I'm not an Adventist. Nor am I attacking "fundamentalists"
and trying to falsely paint a fundamentalist as one who
must believe in a literal earthly, 1,000 year reign of Christ
is a deceitful tactic. You are trying to make it seem as if
anyone who disagrees with you, is some nut case lunatic
on the fringe of Christianity. Again, that is deceitful,
especially since I have repeatedly told you that I am not
an Adventist and this shows therefore, that you are
intentionally lying!
They, accidentally, shoot their own foundation out
from under themselves.
Is that why you had to apply false labels and snipped
my entire post?
If the bible is not to be taken literally, why
would "soon" be taken as a literal human timeframe (instead of the
timeframe of the one that spoke the word...of whom a thousand years is
as a day)?
Peter stated an obvious metaphor, to show that time has
no meaning to God. But it does to man. And that is why
time statements are made in human time. But if you wish
to think that God has "1,000 year days", then you have just
bound God to linear time and you are also by default
claiming that He has night time as well and yet, the Bible
tells us that there is no darkness with God.
But hey, if you want to take everything literally, then
please tell us where we can find it written that God was
literally seen riding a cloud into Egypt, regarding the
fulfilled prophecy listed in Isaiah 19:1?
You have failed to answer to that each and every time
and this makes you a hypocrite!
And John said in Revelation, that "the time is at hand",
when he wrote it in the 1st century.
Note: THE TIME is at hand.
You have no argument to make. You only have attacks
and false accusations.
You prove my point. When it serves your purpose, you quote the bible
words as literal. When you disagree, you say it was meant to be
symbolic. Make up your mind. Is "soon" or "at hand" literal (and the
Bible is literal) or is the Bible symbolic (including those terms)?
Ken Clifton
http://www.lulu.com/writingken
.
|
|
|
| User: "Azaliah" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 08:34:29 PM |
|
|
On 21 Dec 2006 10:04:12 -0800, while bungee jumping,
kands00@hotmail.com shouted thusly:
Azaliah wrote:
On 21 Dec 2006 06:09:16 -0800, while bungee jumping, "Wide
Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> shouted thusly:
Azaliah wrote:
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???
Adventists make a fatal error in attacking the literalism of
fundamentalists.
I'm not an Adventist. Nor am I attacking "fundamentalists"
and trying to falsely paint a fundamentalist as one who
must believe in a literal earthly, 1,000 year reign of Christ
is a deceitful tactic. You are trying to make it seem as if
anyone who disagrees with you, is some nut case lunatic
on the fringe of Christianity. Again, that is deceitful,
especially since I have repeatedly told you that I am not
an Adventist and this shows therefore, that you are
intentionally lying!
They, accidentally, shoot their own foundation out
from under themselves.
Is that why you had to apply false labels and snipped
my entire post?
If the bible is not to be taken literally, why
would "soon" be taken as a literal human timeframe (instead of the
timeframe of the one that spoke the word...of whom a thousand years is
as a day)?
Peter stated an obvious metaphor, to show that time has
no meaning to God. But it does to man. And that is why
time statements are made in human time. But if you wish
to think that God has "1,000 year days", then you have just
bound God to linear time and you are also by default
claiming that He has night time as well and yet, the Bible
tells us that there is no darkness with God.
But hey, if you want to take everything literally, then
please tell us where we can find it written that God was
literally seen riding a cloud into Egypt, regarding the
fulfilled prophecy listed in Isaiah 19:1?
You have failed to answer to that each and every time
and this makes you a hypocrite!
And John said in Revelation, that "the time is at hand",
when he wrote it in the 1st century.
Note: THE TIME is at hand.
You have no argument to make. You only have attacks
and false accusations.
You prove my point.
I proved that you are a liar and that you try to bind God
to linear time.
--
Azaliah (ats-al-yaw'-hoo) "Jah has reserved"
<((>< <((>< <((><
"Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth."
- John 17:17
..
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred A Stover" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 11:08:46 PM |
|
|
"Azaliah" <_giantwaffle_@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:n0hmo2puc1vq10emg3dgoad0h04etimfd0@4ax.com...
On 21 Dec 2006 10:04:12 -0800, while bungee jumping,
kands00@hotmail.com shouted thusly:
Azaliah wrote:
On 21 Dec 2006 06:09:16 -0800, while bungee jumping, "Wide
Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> shouted thusly:
Azaliah wrote:
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???
Adventists make a fatal error in attacking the literalism of
fundamentalists.
I'm not an Adventist. Nor am I attacking "fundamentalists"
and trying to falsely paint a fundamentalist as one who
must believe in a literal earthly, 1,000 year reign of Christ
is a deceitful tactic. You are trying to make it seem as if
anyone who disagrees with you, is some nut case lunatic
on the fringe of Christianity. Again, that is deceitful,
especially since I have repeatedly told you that I am not
an Adventist and this shows therefore, that you are
intentionally lying!
They, accidentally, shoot their own foundation out
from under themselves.
Is that why you had to apply false labels and snipped
my entire post?
If the bible is not to be taken literally, why
would "soon" be taken as a literal human timeframe (instead of the
timeframe of the one that spoke the word...of whom a thousand years is
as a day)?
Peter stated an obvious metaphor, to show that time has
no meaning to God. But it does to man. And that is why
time statements are made in human time. But if you wish
to think that God has "1,000 year days", then you have just
bound God to linear time and you are also by default
claiming that He has night time as well and yet, the Bible
tells us that there is no darkness with God.
But hey, if you want to take everything literally, then
please tell us where we can find it written that God was
literally seen riding a cloud into Egypt, regarding the
fulfilled prophecy listed in Isaiah 19:1?
You have failed to answer to that each and every time
and this makes you a hypocrite!
And John said in Revelation, that "the time is at hand",
when he wrote it in the 1st century.
Note: THE TIME is at hand.
You have no argument to make. You only have attacks
and false accusations.
You prove my point.
I proved that you are a liar and that you try to bind God
to linear time.
No, Satan, you're the liar.
--
http://www.geocities.com/alphadiego66medina@sbcglobal.net/index.htm
Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as
a little child, he shall not enter therein. (Mark 10:15)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Randy" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 11:23:28 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 12:05:35 -0800,
in article <tsplo2ph822eosri61uqed94g160b0tof5@4ax.com>,
Azaliah <_giantwaffle_@yahoo.com> wrote:
But hey, if you want to take everything literally, then
please tell us where we can find it written that God was
literally seen riding a cloud into Egypt, regarding the
fulfilled prophecy listed in Isaiah 19:1?
The prophecy of the manner of the Lord's return is defined in
Acts 1:11 "Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye
gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from
you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen
him go into heaven." They did not see him ascend spiritually,
metaphorically, or mystically. They saw Him ascend literally
and bodily, into literal clouds.
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this work alone to escape hell and receive eternal
life (Jn. 3:16; 1 Cor. 15:1-3; Eph. 2:8-10; 2 Thess. 1:8-9).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Azaliah" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 08:33:50 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 11:23:28 -0600, while bungee jumping,
Randy <pulpitfire@gmail.com> shouted thusly:
On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 12:05:35 -0800,
in article <tsplo2ph822eosri61uqed94g160b0tof5@4ax.com>,
Azaliah <_giantwaffle_@yahoo.com> wrote:
But hey, if you want to take everything literally, then
please tell us where we can find it written that God was
literally seen riding a cloud into Egypt, regarding the
fulfilled prophecy listed in Isaiah 19:1?
The prophecy of the manner of the Lord's return is defined in
Acts 1:11
We have been over that passage repeatedly and you are
still snipping vs 9-10.
--
Azaliah (ats-al-yaw'-hoo) "Jah has reserved"
<((>< <((>< <((><
"Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth."
- John 17:17
..
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Wide Eyed in Wonder" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 09:16:24 AM |
|
|
Azaliah wrote:
The 1000 Year Reign of Christ ???
One more response...
Thousand year reign items not fulfilled...
According to Revelation, by the time of the reign, ALL the rivers and
seas are supposed to be blood. ALL the vegetation is supposed to be
burned up. ALL those that took the mark are supposed to be struck with
sores that won't heal. The river Euphrates is supposed to be dried up.
A worldwide earthquake is supposed to happen that destroys the major
cities of the world, split the Jersusalem in three parts, level
mountains, destroy islands, and is accompanied with enourmous
hailstones a hundred pounds each. Needless to day, NONE of these
things have been recorded in history to have happened. In fact,
Revelation 1:7 says,
Rev 1:7 "Look, he is coming with the clouds," and "every eye will
see him, even those who pierced him;" and all peoples on earth "will
mourn because of him."
Now, the "every eye will see him" is from Zecharaiah, which we'll get
to in a minute. But, this passage says very clearly that EVERY eye
will see him, no a select few.
According to Zechariah, the Mount of Olives is supposed to split,
rivers are supposed to flow out of Jerusalem to each of the great lakes
near it, the temple's gates are supposed to be up and active, a plague
of wasting hits all who opposed Israel, and countries that do not go up
yearly to report to God in Jerusalem will get no rain. Again, none of
this is occuring.
Finally, Isaiah 65:20 speaks of a time when people will live extra
long, a believer dying before being a hundred years old will be
considered young. Yet, unbelievers won't live that long. This has not
historically happened, and it cannot refer to Heaven, since there will
be no unbelievers there and no one will die.
Ken Clifton
http://www.lulu.com/writingken
.
|
|
|
| User: "Randy" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 09:44:01 AM |
|
|
On 21 Dec 2006 07:16:24 -0800,
in article
<1166714184.886223.201540@42g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>,
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote:
Needless to day, NONE of these
things have been recorded in history to have happened.
And that's the convenience of a primarily spiritualized system
of interpretation. The Bible can then mean basically whatever
people want it to.
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this work alone to escape hell and receive eternal
life (Jn. 3:16; 1 Cor. 15:1-3; Eph. 2:8-10; 2 Thess. 1:8-9).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Azaliah" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 03:49:16 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 09:44:01 -0600, while bungee jumping,
Randy <pulpitfire@gmail.com> shouted thusly:
On 21 Dec 2006 07:16:24 -0800,
in article
<1166714184.886223.201540@42g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>,
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote:
Needless to day, NONE of these
things have been recorded in history to have happened.
And that's the convenience of a primarily spiritualized system
of interpretation. The Bible can then mean basically whatever
people want it to.
It never ceases to amaze me how people recognize
that there is a great amount of symbolism in the Bible
and yet, when it comes to what may be the most
symbolic book of the Bible (Revelation), they demand
that it be taken literally. What system of interpretation
makes that scenario fly? (:
--
Azaliah (ats-al-yaw'-hoo) "Jah has reserved"
<((>< <((>< <((><
"Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth."
- John 17:17
..
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wide Eyed in Wonder" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 02:47:15 PM |
|
|
Azaliah wrote:
On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 09:44:01 -0600, while bungee jumping,
Randy <pulpitfire@gmail.com> shouted thusly:
On 21 Dec 2006 07:16:24 -0800,
in article
<1166714184.886223.201540@42g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>,
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote:
Needless to day, NONE of these
things have been recorded in history to have happened.
And that's the convenience of a primarily spiritualized system
of interpretation. The Bible can then mean basically whatever
people want it to.
It never ceases to amaze me how people recognize
that there is a great amount of symbolism in the Bible
and yet, when it comes to what may be the most
symbolic book of the Bible (Revelation), they demand
that it be taken literally. What system of interpretation
makes that scenario fly? (:
--
Azaliah (ats-al-yaw'-hoo) "Jah has reserved"
<((>< <((>< <((><
"Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth."
- John 17:17
.
AHHHHH, Pastor Dave, Ananias, that's YOU in Azaliah. Got it. I won't
waste my time anymore, then. Bye.
Ken Clifton
http://www.lulu.com/writingken
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: 1,000 Year Reign of Christ |
21 Dec 2006 10:01:16 AM |
|
|
Randy wrote:
On 21 Dec 2006 07:16:24 -0800,
in article
<1166714184.886223.201540@42g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>,
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote:
Needless to day, NONE of these
things have been recorded in history to have happened.
And that's the convenience of a primarily spiritualized system
of interpretation. The Bible can then mean basically whatever
people want it to.
Can you quote the Bible to back that statement up?
--
Christ died for our sins, and God raised Him from the dead.
Rely on this work alone to escape hell and receive eternal
life (Jn. 3:16; 1 Cor. 15:1-3; Eph. 2:8-10; 2 Thess. 1:8-9).
Ken Clifton
http://www.lulu.com/writingken
.
|
|
| | | |
