The 1000 year Millennium from the Bible

[TMSO]

System issues...double post...--editted.

 

[TMSO]

All the opening announcements of all the gospels are that a king is arriving. Not future. When the resurrection happens there are 3 teachings that he was the Davidic king and that the resurrection was the enthronement of Him as such. This does not mean the world and its news changes; it means that the proclamation of believers is that it is imperative that people obey Him:

Actually, the message from Paul is that the Resurrection marked Christ as the first fruits from the dead. A new Adam. And the kingdom one rules is a reflection of the ruler. Hence Satan is still the ruler of this world, the prince of the air. The world is a reflection of him. Why else does scripture keep telling us that we are enemies of the kingdom, I mean enemies of the world? Why does Paul tell us that the Jews are our enemies for the sake of the gospel? If the world is Jesus Kingdom, why does the world hate us? Again, the kingdom is the reflection of the ruler. That is why the Queen of England is so often pictured speaking in the plural. She is speaking for the state as the head of the state. If "we are not amused", you had better not be amused. Hence scripture says that Herod was upset, everyone was upset. Him being upset tended to have many levels of impact.

"Honor the Son; lest he be angry with you and smite you." Ps 2

That warning was meant to start from Acts 2 going forward.

So, where did David say that this starts from Acts 2? Or are YOU saying that that is where it starts?

There is a sense in which we have the defeat of death already; Jn 10: whoever believes on Him has transfered from death to life.

So, the universal defeat of death where sinners are now immortal? Cool. I can side with that for that, just in case. Does that help you see what Revelation 20 is showing as the final defeat of death. Death is thrown into the lake of fire. That seems FINAL in its reach. It would make death powerless to do anything.

So we can say that the literalism of the Jews at the 1st coming was a huge problem. It disabled them from seeing what Christ was bringing; that he was the new temple, the new manna, the new meat, the new exodus, the new Moses.

He was the new Adam. He was not a new Moses. He did not bring a new law. He freed us from the law, not to bind us to another.

There is no example or evidence that the Jews "spiritualized" the first coming away. Wrong word. They totally missed it's spiritual reality.

They didn't miss it. They can read just as we can. They have a completely different interpretation of Isaiah 53, and it is most certainly spiritualized. I believe they say that this willing servant is Israel, but I don't remember. They could not see God, or the Son of God as a suffering servant, so they changed the interpretation of those passages.

 

[TMSO]

Remember, I not throwing out anything. I'm saying I will not support any doctrine that is not totally clear in normal language elsewhere. I cannot start with material like the Rev and have nothing else. There are so many descriptions of the last day in the NT letters, and no race-nation matters, and everything happens quickly, possibly an hour.

The Bible does not talk about the trinity anywhere in normal language. So, since you will not support any doctrine that is not totally clear in normal language elsewhere, does that mean you are unitarian? I mean, unitarian is clearly presented in scripture in normal language. The reason we have the trinity at all is that people, more intelligent then we are, were able to piece together the implicit teachings of the trinity. I believe that everyone in the early church understood, so Paul and company felt no need to expound upon it. I am probably wrong, but too often Paul says, I already told you about this, or you already know about this, so he doesn't repeat himself. (Which leaves us with holes in our understanding. Who is the one who restrains that is to be removed that the evil one can be brought to light? Paul says, I already told you. He doesn't say it again.

I'm aware of Zech, yet again the "prophecy experts" side-step the obvious again: that the piercing is already quoted in the gospels, and so is referring to that.

" 32 Then the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first and of the other who was crucified with Him. 33 But when they came to Jesus and saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. 34 But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out. 35 And he who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you may believe. 36 For these things were done that the Scripture should be fulfilled, “Not one of His bones shall be broken.” 37 And again another Scripture says, “They shall look on Him whom they pierced.”"

I'm surprised you missed the point of the usage of the prophecy here. This is telling the people that Jesus is the one mentioned in Zechariah. The one who comes down in the end. The one whom "the remaining families" look upon and mourn for. This does not say that Zechariah is fulfilled, but that there is a partial fulfillment that shows the identity of the One in Zechariah.

Another close mention is from Christ Himself. "30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory." However, this speaks of the world. Zechariah speaks to Israel.

This side-stepping is what eventually generates doctrines like 'the church was a plan B, an interruption, a parenthesis that no one knew was coming.' Totally nonsense. It is not found in Eph 3 and not in Acts 15's quote of Amos 9.

It is found in Romans. There is one program, but more than one part. What did Jesus tell the Cushite woman? He has only come for the lost of the house of Israel. Can Jesus make this clear enough? He has come for the lost of the house of Israel. This does not speak to the future of the gospel, which Paul explains in Romans. The Israelites became disobedient (general term for Paul's explanation) by rejecting their Messiah. The Gentiles who were disobedient, became obedient in the acceptance of the gospel (in general, not whole). Paul says that it is by the obedience of the Gentiles that God will have mercy on the disobedient of Israel, and thus Israel will be saved. For God has locked ALL in disobedience that God may have mercy on ALL. This is all one program, but there is more than one part. (Covenant theology and dispensationalism says there are seven...) The time where the Gentiles are receiving the gospel, where Israel is held in disobedience, is known as the time of the Gentiles. There are still Jews being saved, but Paul says that God has placed a partial blindness on Israel. Hence there are still Jews being saved. The blindness is partial. Once this times of the Gentiles is complete, the blindness will be lifted.

The place to start is to sort out whether Acts 2:30 is saying that what David saw was the resurrection. The resurrection was the enthronement of Christ. There is no other grammatical conclusion there. He is treated as enthroned in the end of the teaching, in ch 3 and in ch 4--a pretty solid start, right?

Stop isolating scripture. If you read the whole context, you will see that you are missing important information.
"29 “Men and brethren, let me speak freely to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. 30 Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, [i]according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, 31 he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption. 32 This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses. 33 Therefore being exalted [j]to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear.

34 “For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he says himself:

‘The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at My right hand,
35 Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.” ’
36 “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”"

So let's make this short. What does verses 34 to 35 show? Jesus is not enthroned yet. The Lord said to my Lord "Sit at My right hand, till I make Your enemies Your footstool." A natural reading would be that Jesus will not be enthroned until the Father makes His enemies His footstool. That is what happens before the millennium, when the Father sends the Son to crush His enemies at Jerusalem. He destroys the beast, his image, and all the armies (and other major players) and even has Satan bound in chains and sealed in the bottomless pit. All His enemies are made His footstool. He reigns for the millennium on the seat of David, as David foretold, and at the end, finally defeats all His enemies to include death. At which point, as Paul says, the Son returns the kingdom to the Father. Hence the millennial kingdom is not intended to be eternal. It exists until the Son defeats the final enemy (not just abolish) death.

I would move really slow rather than violate what Hebrews says is the standard for Christian doctrine--the once-for-all atonement of Christ that has eternal status in the court of heaven.

For everyone? Are you a universalist?

Have you ever thought about why a few people would be slaughtered for opposing Israel would be thought of as "the final act of the wrath of God"? Out of all the ages of time and all the people on earth already perished, that one thing at one time is the standard for the wrath of God? I don't think so.

I'm not sure how the whole population of the earth, minus the elect, so considered a few people. Jesus crushes ALL His enemies of the whole population of the world. We aren't talking about a few people. Revelation is clear that the army numbers as the sands of the shore. Given how tiny sand is, you could probably hold our whole army in one hand, perhaps both cupped. Yet you still have the rest of the sand. We aren't talking about a few people.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Okay, let us look at this rationally. John, in two places, states that what is written in Revelation is prophecy that has not yet happened, but the time is near, and God is telling John what must happen in the future. (The future, from the time John is writing.) 33AD is not the future. 33AD is the past. According to Daniel, this is the end of the 69th week. There is still another week to go. A week you seem to ignore. A week that isn't answered in history by 40 AD

No, past events in Revelation are also spoken about. John was told in Revelation 1:19 to write "the things which thou hast seen" (this is PAST EVENTS to John), then "things that ARE" (thing presently occurring in John's days), and then "things which are about to be hereafter" (SOON to occur in John's future).

There are past events written about in Revelation - many of them - in order to set the stage for the events that would SOON transpire in John's imminent future. The literal thousand-year millennium of Revelation 20 is one of those past events.

The topic of the 70 week prophecy deserves its own dedicated post, but I have certainly not ignored it in my comments elsewhere. The entire 70 weeks was an intact time period with NO GAPS. We are not expecting the ending 70th week in our future. Every one of the terms that would be included in it have already been performed, and by the time AD 37 was over.

 

[TMSO]

The topic of the 70 week prophecy deserves its own dedicated post, but I have certainly not ignored it in my comments elsewhere. The entire 70 weeks was an intact time period with NO GAPS. We are not expecting the ending 70th week in our future. Every one of the terms that would be included in it have already been performed, and by the time AD 37 was over.

That would be AD 40. And it is obvious that the 70 weeks are over because no one was prophecying after 40 AD. In fact, John wrote Revelation in 39 AD right? Just so that he wouldn't miss the cut off?

"24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy."
Consider a part of the prophecy that I bring up from Zechariah:
"2 And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Lord of hosts, that I will cut off the names of the idols out of the land, and they shall no more be remembered: and also I will cause the prophets and the unclean spirit to pass out of the land.
3 And it shall come to pass, that when any shall yet prophesy, then his father and his mother that begat him shall say unto him, Thou shalt not live; for thou speakest lies in the name of the Lord: and his father and his mother that begat him shall thrust him through when he prophesieth.
4 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the prophets shall be ashamed every one of his vision, when he hath prophesied; neither shall they wear a rough garment to deceive:"

This is clearly AFTER Jesus is crucified because this is the day that passed:

"8 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.
11 In that day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, as the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon.
12 And the land shall mourn, every family apart; the family of the house of David apart, and their wives apart; the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart;
13 The family of the house of Levi apart, and their wives apart; the family of Shimei apart, and their wives apart;
14 All the families that remain, every family apart, and their wives apart."
" In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness."

I forgot to mention that John quotes this prophecy to show that the person here who is pierced is Jesus, by pointing to Jesus side being pierced by the guardsman's spear. John is not saying that the prophecy in Zechariah is fulfilled, but now, the prophecy that made Jesus the one who was pierced had been fulfilled.

Wow, right there, the finishing of the transgression, and an end to sin. Reconciliation for iniquity right there in Zechariah. Everlasting righteousness, which is no sin. Vision and prophecies sealed up since all has been fulfilled. Jesus anointed king and sitting in the seat of King David. Who are the one's who are saved?
"8 And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the Lord, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein.
9 And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The Lord is my God."

A remnant of Israel is saved, hence it says at the end of the list of those who mourn: "All the families that remain, every family apart, and their wives apart."
There is no mystery to the 70 weeks. There is one week left. What has been going on for the last millennia or so? The times of the Gentiles, and the partial blindness of Israel. Partial is the keyword. While Jesus made it clear that the reconciliation was for Israel to the Cushite woman when He said that He only came to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, God made clear through Peter and through Paul that the salvation of the world would come through the rejection of the Messiah by Israel. And then Paul makes it clear that by the obedience of the Gentiles, salvation would ultimately come to the remnant of the nation of Israel that God has kept for Himself.

I will be honest, looking at the world today, it appears that soon is about to be now. We should have learned from Peter that "quickly" doesn't mean the same thing to God. Soon is always a trick, because it could be a thousand years, and it will always be soon. Why? Because we don't know when. If God did not say soon, who knows how many people would have fallen away under the tribulations they faced. If God didn't say soon, no one would have been watching and waiting. There is a reason that Jesus told the disciples the parable of the 10 bridesmaids. 5 believed soon meant soon, and they weren't prepared for when soon meant... later. Jesus was underlying the mystery of the time of His return.

 

[TMSO]

No, past events in Revelation are also spoken about. John was told in Revelation 1:19 to write "the things which thou hast seen" (this is PAST EVENTS to John), then "things that ARE" (thing presently occurring in John's days), and then "things which are about to be hereafter" (SOON to occur in John's future).

You have divorced this verse from its context. The next verse already has the person telling John an explanation of things "thou hast seen" so that John can record it properly. And then John is writing that this person is telling him this. So, he is writing about things that are. And then he is told to write about things that have already happened...oh no, wait. That isn't what it says. He is told to right about things that will happen "after this". So John has his marching orders. Write everything that he has seen, what he is seeing, and what comes after. It is to the point that he took it literally and wrote, This guy told me to write... He didn't leave out any details. And during the Revelation he is told to stop writing. Why? He is following his marching orders, but this is something that he isn't supposed to write down.

There is one verse you have neglected. "1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:" Nothing about things that have already happened. The thrust of Revelation are things that have yet to happen. Both in John's day, and today. Remember the lesson you should have learned from Peter, from David, and others. The word quickly doesn't mean the same thing to God. The word soon does not mean the same to God. Soon means a lot to us because soon is non-defined. It is simply not yet/not now. That is it. It could be tomorrow, it could be a couple thousand years from now. Soon is always soon, until it becomes now.

There are past events written about in Revelation - many of them - in order to set the stage for the events that would SOON transpire in John's imminent future. The literal thousand-year millennium of Revelation 20 is one of those past events.

The millennium is not a past event. It is future. As in the previous post, which I did set aside solely for the 70 weeks, it is the prophecy from Zechariah that marks the beginning of the millennium. Jesus has shown Himself to the remnant of Israel, and Israel is now at the end of sin, the transgression is over, prophecy is done, etc. It is basically the Jewish, chosen people of God version, of
"29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:

30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."

This is Jesus dealing with the world. To them, He is not the One whom they have pierced, as that is Israel. The gathering of the elect is shown to be the whole earth, from one end of heaven to the other.

This is the start of the millennium. The end is when Jesus destroys utterly all enemies, and returns the Kingdom to the Father. (I Corinthians 15) The final enemy destroyed is death, when death and hades (hell) are thrown into the lake of fire. So, if people are still dying and going to hell, then this has NOT happened yet.

 

[Mr GLee]

There is one verse you have neglected. "1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:" Nothing about things that have already happened. The thrust of Revelation are things that have yet to happen. Both in John's day, and today. Remember the lesson you should have learned from Peter, from David, and others. The word quickly doesn't mean the same thing to God. The word soon does not mean the same to God. Soon means a lot to us because soon is non-defined. It is simply not yet/not now. That is it. It could be tomorrow, it could be a couple thousand years from now. Soon is always soon, until it becomes now.

Yes, also he sent and signified the prophecy . Signified the language of parable. Not just sent the "literal understanding". Again signified called hidden manna in Revelation 2:17 giving us ears to hear his understanding.

Revelation 2:17 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

That thousand years in the parable chapter 20 is an unknown just as the first 3 uses before Revelation. . . no sign to wonder after were given

I would think we should be careful remember Satan is the king of lying wonders. He has no other voice.

 

[EarlyActs]

Actually, the message from Paul is that the Resurrection marked Christ as the first fruits from the dead. A new Adam. And the kingdom one rules is a reflection of the ruler. Hence Satan is still the ruler of this world, the prince of the air. The world is a reflection of him. Why else does scripture keep telling us that we are enemies of the kingdom, I mean enemies of the world? Why does Paul tell us that the Jews are our enemies for the sake of the gospel? If the world is Jesus Kingdom, why does the world hate us? Again, the kingdom is the reflection of the ruler. That is why the Queen of England is so often pictured speaking in the plural. She is speaking for the state as the head of the state. If "we are not amused", you had better not be amused. Hence scripture says that Herod was upset, everyone was upset. Him being upset tended to have many levels of impact.

So, where did David say that this starts from Acts 2? Or are YOU saying that that is where it starts?

So, the universal defeat of death where sinners are now immortal? Cool. I can side with that for that, just in case. Does that help you see what Revelation 20 is showing as the final defeat of death. Death is thrown into the lake of fire. That seems FINAL in its reach. It would make death powerless to do anything.

He was the new Adam. He was not a new Moses. He did not bring a new law. He freed us from the law, not to bind us to another.

They didn't miss it. They can read just as we can. They have a completely different interpretation of Isaiah 53, and it is most certainly spiritualized. I believe they say that this willing servant is Israel, but I don't remember. They could not see God, or the Son of God as a suffering servant, so they changed the interpretation of those passages.

Acts 2:30, 31's grammar actually says that David saw the resurrection as the enthronement of the king that would descend from him. The conclusion of that sermon repeats that Jesus is now Lord and Christ. In ch 3 we see Peter saying that Christ is now in a celebratory reception in heaven until the NHNE. In ch 4 Ps 2 is quoted, that Christ has been enthroned, and all rulers and ordinary folks must honor him "lest they be dashed."

Reminder: the reign of God did not come with 'signs to be observed.' It exists in the imperative sense, not the indicative. The imperative means 'He should be regarded as king by mankind.' This was announced worldwide by all the visitors to that Pentecost who heard these teachings and returned home to their communities.

 

[EarlyActs]

Actually, the message from Paul is that the Resurrection marked Christ as the first fruits from the dead. A new Adam. And the kingdom one rules is a reflection of the ruler. Hence Satan is still the ruler of this world, the prince of the air. The world is a reflection of him. Why else does scripture keep telling us that we are enemies of the kingdom, I mean enemies of the world? Why does Paul tell us that the Jews are our enemies for the sake of the gospel? If the world is Jesus Kingdom, why does the world hate us? Again, the kingdom is the reflection of the ruler. That is why the Queen of England is so often pictured speaking in the plural. She is speaking for the state as the head of the state. If "we are not amused", you had better not be amused. Hence scripture says that Herod was upset, everyone was upset. Him being upset tended to have many levels of impact.

So, where did David say that this starts from Acts 2? Or are YOU saying that that is where it starts?

So, the universal defeat of death where sinners are now immortal? Cool. I can side with that for that, just in case. Does that help you see what Revelation 20 is showing as the final defeat of death. Death is thrown into the lake of fire. That seems FINAL in its reach. It would make death powerless to do anything.

He was the new Adam. He was not a new Moses. He did not bring a new law. He freed us from the law, not to bind us to another.

They didn't miss it. They can read just as we can. They have a completely different interpretation of Isaiah 53, and it is most certainly spiritualized. I believe they say that this willing servant is Israel, but I don't remember. They could not see God, or the Son of God as a suffering servant, so they changed the interpretation of those passages.

re death:
Yes, Christ defeated death in his event, and several OT passages and His sayings confirm this.

As I mentioned before, only the futurized starting-point of what you say is off. It all should be starting in Christ. Notice this pulsing stance of the NT: "The time has come; the reign of God is here." If you read the OT regularly, you know that this is meeting exactly where the OT leaves you waiting.

 

[EarlyActs]

Actually, the message from Paul is that the Resurrection marked Christ as the first fruits from the dead. A new Adam. And the kingdom one rules is a reflection of the ruler. Hence Satan is still the ruler of this world, the prince of the air. The world is a reflection of him. Why else does scripture keep telling us that we are enemies of the kingdom, I mean enemies of the world? Why does Paul tell us that the Jews are our enemies for the sake of the gospel? If the world is Jesus Kingdom, why does the world hate us? Again, the kingdom is the reflection of the ruler. That is why the Queen of England is so often pictured speaking in the plural. She is speaking for the state as the head of the state. If "we are not amused", you had better not be amused. Hence scripture says that Herod was upset, everyone was upset. Him being upset tended to have many levels of impact.

So, where did David say that this starts from Acts 2? Or are YOU saying that that is where it starts?

So, the universal defeat of death where sinners are now immortal? Cool. I can side with that for that, just in case. Does that help you see what Revelation 20 is showing as the final defeat of death. Death is thrown into the lake of fire. That seems FINAL in its reach. It would make death powerless to do anything.

He was the new Adam. He was not a new Moses. He did not bring a new law. He freed us from the law, not to bind us to another.

They didn't miss it. They can read just as we can. They have a completely different interpretation of Isaiah 53, and it is most certainly spiritualized. I believe they say that this willing servant is Israel, but I don't remember. They could not see God, or the Son of God as a suffering servant, so they changed the interpretation of those passages.

re the new Moses.
See Acts 3; "God will raise up a prophet like me; and anyone who does not adhere will be humiliatingly punished." More symbolically, Jesus spent 40 days in the desert before putting together the new Israel.

 

[EarlyActs]

Actually, the message from Paul is that the Resurrection marked Christ as the first fruits from the dead. A new Adam. And the kingdom one rules is a reflection of the ruler. Hence Satan is still the ruler of this world, the prince of the air. The world is a reflection of him. Why else does scripture keep telling us that we are enemies of the kingdom, I mean enemies of the world? Why does Paul tell us that the Jews are our enemies for the sake of the gospel? If the world is Jesus Kingdom, why does the world hate us? Again, the kingdom is the reflection of the ruler. That is why the Queen of England is so often pictured speaking in the plural. She is speaking for the state as the head of the state. If "we are not amused", you had better not be amused. Hence scripture says that Herod was upset, everyone was upset. Him being upset tended to have many levels of impact.

So, where did David say that this starts from Acts 2? Or are YOU saying that that is where it starts?

So, the universal defeat of death where sinners are now immortal? Cool. I can side with that for that, just in case. Does that help you see what Revelation 20 is showing as the final defeat of death. Death is thrown into the lake of fire. That seems FINAL in its reach. It would make death powerless to do anything.

He was the new Adam. He was not a new Moses. He did not bring a new law. He freed us from the law, not to bind us to another.

They didn't miss it. They can read just as we can. They have a completely different interpretation of Isaiah 53, and it is most certainly spiritualized. I believe they say that this willing servant is Israel, but I don't remember. They could not see God, or the Son of God as a suffering servant, so they changed the interpretation of those passages.

re spiritualizing.
They totally missed it. The OT is Christocentric; they were Judaistic. That Judaizing is why they did think Is 53 was about the race-nation. The mistake of not seeing Messiah as a normal human suffering person, once for all time, is not spiritualizing but is their rebellious nature.

The typical person who spiritualizes today is the person who says 70 AD was the return of Christ and the start of the NHNE.

When Christ declared that he was completing Ps 118 and was the cornerstone of the new temple, he was not doing the above spiritualizing. He was however expressing the truly spiritual completion that Ps 118 had in mind. Cp the end of Eph 2.

People don't like hearing that Acts 2:30 is about the resurrection, so they say it is only a passing confirmation that the millenium will come in the future. They say that calling the resurrection the enthronement of Christ is a goofy 'spiritualizing.' Those people are not seeing the truly spiritual meaning of the resurrection and they are being trite literalists about the race-nation-temple.

 

[3 Resurrections]

There is one verse you have neglected. "1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:" Nothing about things that have already happened. The thrust of Revelation are things that have yet to happen. Both in John's day, and today. Remember the lesson you should have learned from Peter, from David, and others. The word quickly doesn't mean the same thing to God. The word soon does not mean the same to God. Soon means a lot to us because soon is non-defined. It is simply not yet/not now. That is it. It could be tomorrow, it could be a couple thousand years from now. Soon is always soon, until it becomes now.

That is not a verse I have neglected. "Shortly come to pass" means those events which were included in "the things which are about to be hereafter" in John's days. And God using those time-relevant terms was not to simply talk to Himself. He intended the sense of what "shortly" and "soon" meant on humanity's terms. You are right that "soon means a lot to us". God was using those time-relevant terms such as "soon" and "shortly" to convey the natural meaning of those words to us on a human level.

And for you to say that Revelation is only about future events is to ignore all the past events mentioned in the book, namely...

The past crucifixion death of Christ - "I am He that liveth and WAS dead..."
The past effects of "Jezebel" the self-named prophetess's influence on the early church.
The past recorded activity of the 7 churches.
The past martyrdom of Antipas.
The past birth and ascension of Christ, the "man-child" caught up to God's throne.
The past battle in heaven between Michael and his angels and Satan and his angels.
The past enthronement of the 12 disciples on Rev. 20's thrones when Christ gave them authority to pass judgment on church affairs.
The past Rev. 20 millennium which ended with Christ's "First resurrection" event in AD 33.
The past binding of Satan, and his past release at the end of the millennium, which would last only a "short time" after John wrote Rev.
The past 666-year history of the Sea Beast, ever since the Babylonian "lion" empire under Nebuchadnezzar.
The past mark imposed by the Land Beast in homage of the ancient Sea Beast.
The past existence of the Scarlet Beast which once "WAS" in existence, but would soon be revived to existence again.
The past white horse rider, Christ, going forth conquering and to conquer the nations with the advance of the gospel evangelism in the days of the early church.
The past record of Mystery Babylon killing the saints and prophets, and the martyrs of Jesus.
The past persecution of the woman and her seed by the Dragon during Saul's flood of persecution of the early church, and the church's literal flight into the wilderness of Judea in Acts 8.

etc.

 

[EarlyActs]

The Bible does not talk about the trinity anywhere in normal language. So, since you will not support any doctrine that is not totally clear in normal language elsewhere, does that mean you are unitarian? I mean, unitarian is clearly presented in scripture in normal language. The reason we have the trinity at all is that people, more intelligent then we are, were able to piece together the implicit teachings of the trinity. I believe that everyone in the early church understood, so Paul and company felt no need to expound upon it. I am probably wrong, but too often Paul says, I already told you about this, or you already know about this, so he doesn't repeat himself. (Which leaves us with holes in our understanding. Who is the one who restrains that is to be removed that the evil one can be brought to light? Paul says, I already told you. He doesn't say it again.

" 32 Then the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first and of the other who was crucified with Him. 33 But when they came to Jesus and saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. 34 But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out. 35 And he who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you may believe. 36 For these things were done that the Scripture should be fulfilled, “Not one of His bones shall be broken.” 37 And again another Scripture says, “They shall look on Him whom they pierced.”"

I'm surprised you missed the point of the usage of the prophecy here. This is telling the people that Jesus is the one mentioned in Zechariah. The one who comes down in the end. The one whom "the remaining families" look upon and mourn for. This does not say that Zechariah is fulfilled, but that there is a partial fulfillment that shows the identity of the One in Zechariah.

Another close mention is from Christ Himself. "30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory." However, this speaks of the world. Zechariah speaks to Israel.

It is found in Romans. There is one program, but more than one part. What did Jesus tell the Cushite woman? He has only come for the lost of the house of Israel. Can Jesus make this clear enough? He has come for the lost of the house of Israel. This does not speak to the future of the gospel, which Paul explains in Romans. The Israelites became disobedient (general term for Paul's explanation) by rejecting their Messiah. The Gentiles who were disobedient, became obedient in the acceptance of the gospel (in general, not whole). Paul says that it is by the obedience of the Gentiles that God will have mercy on the disobedient of Israel, and thus Israel will be saved. For God has locked ALL in disobedience that God may have mercy on ALL. This is all one program, but there is more than one part. (Covenant theology and dispensationalism says there are seven...) The time where the Gentiles are receiving the gospel, where Israel is held in disobedience, is known as the time of the Gentiles. There are still Jews being saved, but Paul says that God has placed a partial blindness on Israel. Hence there are still Jews being saved. The blindness is partial. Once this times of the Gentiles is complete, the blindness will be lifted.

Stop isolating scripture. If you read the whole context, you will see that you are missing important information.
"29 “Men and brethren, let me speak freely to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. 30 Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, [i]according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, 31 he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption. 32 This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses. 33 Therefore being exalted [j]to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear.

34 “For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he says himself:

‘The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at My right hand,
35 Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.” ’
36 “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”"

So let's make this short. What does verses 34 to 35 show? Jesus is not enthroned yet. The Lord said to my Lord "Sit at My right hand, till I make Your enemies Your footstool." A natural reading would be that Jesus will not be enthroned until the Father makes His enemies His footstool. That is what happens before the millennium, when the Father sends the Son to crush His enemies at Jerusalem. He destroys the beast, his image, and all the armies (and other major players) and even has Satan bound in chains and sealed in the bottomless pit. All His enemies are made His footstool. He reigns for the millennium on the seat of David, as David foretold, and at the end, finally defeats all His enemies to include death. At which point, as Paul says, the Son returns the kingdom to the Father. Hence the millennial kingdom is not intended to be eternal. It exists until the Son defeats the final enemy (not just abolish) death.

For everyone? Are you a universalist?

I'm not sure how the whole population of the earth, minus the elect, so considered a few people. Jesus crushes ALL His enemies of the whole population of the world. We aren't talking about a few people. Revelation is clear that the army numbers as the sands of the shore. Given how tiny sand is, you could probably hold our whole army in one hand, perhaps both cupped. Yet you still have the rest of the sand. We aren't talking about a few people.

re normal language about the final day of judgement
All the normal language passages have nothing about a Rev type string of events. It is over very quick. The world system may be harassing the saints for quite a while, but I mean the final judgement is over very quick and the believers are with the Lord in the bliss of the NHNE. I'm referring to Rom 2, 8, I Cor 15, Heb 9, 2 Peter 3, I Th 2, 4, 5, II Th 1, 2. Please show specifically how any of those are stretched out into several years.

 

[EarlyActs]

The Bible does not talk about the trinity anywhere in normal language. So, since you will not support any doctrine that is not totally clear in normal language elsewhere, does that mean you are unitarian? I mean, unitarian is clearly presented in scripture in normal language. The reason we have the trinity at all is that people, more intelligent then we are, were able to piece together the implicit teachings of the trinity. I believe that everyone in the early church understood, so Paul and company felt no need to expound upon it. I am probably wrong, but too often Paul says, I already told you about this, or you already know about this, so he doesn't repeat himself. (Which leaves us with holes in our understanding. Who is the one who restrains that is to be removed that the evil one can be brought to light? Paul says, I already told you. He doesn't say it again.

" 32 Then the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first and of the other who was crucified with Him. 33 But when they came to Jesus and saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. 34 But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out. 35 And he who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you may believe. 36 For these things were done that the Scripture should be fulfilled, “Not one of His bones shall be broken.” 37 And again another Scripture says, “They shall look on Him whom they pierced.”"

I'm surprised you missed the point of the usage of the prophecy here. This is telling the people that Jesus is the one mentioned in Zechariah. The one who comes down in the end. The one whom "the remaining families" look upon and mourn for. This does not say that Zechariah is fulfilled, but that there is a partial fulfillment that shows the identity of the One in Zechariah.

Another close mention is from Christ Himself. "30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory." However, this speaks of the world. Zechariah speaks to Israel.

It is found in Romans. There is one program, but more than one part. What did Jesus tell the Cushite woman? He has only come for the lost of the house of Israel. Can Jesus make this clear enough? He has come for the lost of the house of Israel. This does not speak to the future of the gospel, which Paul explains in Romans. The Israelites became disobedient (general term for Paul's explanation) by rejecting their Messiah. The Gentiles who were disobedient, became obedient in the acceptance of the gospel (in general, not whole). Paul says that it is by the obedience of the Gentiles that God will have mercy on the disobedient of Israel, and thus Israel will be saved. For God has locked ALL in disobedience that God may have mercy on ALL. This is all one program, but there is more than one part. (Covenant theology and dispensationalism says there are seven...) The time where the Gentiles are receiving the gospel, where Israel is held in disobedience, is known as the time of the Gentiles. There are still Jews being saved, but Paul says that God has placed a partial blindness on Israel. Hence there are still Jews being saved. The blindness is partial. Once this times of the Gentiles is complete, the blindness will be lifted.

Stop isolating scripture. If you read the whole context, you will see that you are missing important information.
"29 “Men and brethren, let me speak freely to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. 30 Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, [i]according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, 31 he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption. 32 This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses. 33 Therefore being exalted [j]to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear.

34 “For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he says himself:

‘The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at My right hand,
35 Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.” ’
36 “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”"

So let's make this short. What does verses 34 to 35 show? Jesus is not enthroned yet. The Lord said to my Lord "Sit at My right hand, till I make Your enemies Your footstool." A natural reading would be that Jesus will not be enthroned until the Father makes His enemies His footstool. That is what happens before the millennium, when the Father sends the Son to crush His enemies at Jerusalem. He destroys the beast, his image, and all the armies (and other major players) and even has Satan bound in chains and sealed in the bottomless pit. All His enemies are made His footstool. He reigns for the millennium on the seat of David, as David foretold, and at the end, finally defeats all His enemies to include death. At which point, as Paul says, the Son returns the kingdom to the Father. Hence the millennial kingdom is not intended to be eternal. It exists until the Son defeats the final enemy (not just abolish) death.

For everyone? Are you a universalist?

I'm not sure how the whole population of the earth, minus the elect, so considered a few people. Jesus crushes ALL His enemies of the whole population of the world. We aren't talking about a few people. Revelation is clear that the army numbers as the sands of the shore. Given how tiny sand is, you could probably hold our whole army in one hand, perhaps both cupped. Yet you still have the rest of the sand. We aren't talking about a few people.

btw there are two many topics in your posts. Please do one topic per post. Too much to chase.

re Zechariah
36 For these things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled, “Not a bone of his will be broken.”[da] 37 And again another scripture says, “They will look on the one whom they have pierced.”[db]
Please quote if you are going to claim it was not fulfilled, just confirmed or something. You are wrong. Writers in the NT who are describing the crucifixion are not suddenly pre-occupied with the 2nd coming.

 

[EarlyActs]

The Bible does not talk about the trinity anywhere in normal language. So, since you will not support any doctrine that is not totally clear in normal language elsewhere, does that mean you are unitarian? I mean, unitarian is clearly presented in scripture in normal language. The reason we have the trinity at all is that people, more intelligent then we are, were able to piece together the implicit teachings of the trinity. I believe that everyone in the early church understood, so Paul and company felt no need to expound upon it. I am probably wrong, but too often Paul says, I already told you about this, or you already know about this, so he doesn't repeat himself. (Which leaves us with holes in our understanding. Who is the one who restrains that is to be removed that the evil one can be brought to light? Paul says, I already told you. He doesn't say it again.

" 32 Then the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first and of the other who was crucified with Him. 33 But when they came to Jesus and saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. 34 But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out. 35 And he who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you may believe. 36 For these things were done that the Scripture should be fulfilled, “Not one of His bones shall be broken.” 37 And again another Scripture says, “They shall look on Him whom they pierced.”"

I'm surprised you missed the point of the usage of the prophecy here. This is telling the people that Jesus is the one mentioned in Zechariah. The one who comes down in the end. The one whom "the remaining families" look upon and mourn for. This does not say that Zechariah is fulfilled, but that there is a partial fulfillment that shows the identity of the One in Zechariah.

Another close mention is from Christ Himself. "30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory." However, this speaks of the world. Zechariah speaks to Israel.

It is found in Romans. There is one program, but more than one part. What did Jesus tell the Cushite woman? He has only come for the lost of the house of Israel. Can Jesus make this clear enough? He has come for the lost of the house of Israel. This does not speak to the future of the gospel, which Paul explains in Romans. The Israelites became disobedient (general term for Paul's explanation) by rejecting their Messiah. The Gentiles who were disobedient, became obedient in the acceptance of the gospel (in general, not whole). Paul says that it is by the obedience of the Gentiles that God will have mercy on the disobedient of Israel, and thus Israel will be saved. For God has locked ALL in disobedience that God may have mercy on ALL. This is all one program, but there is more than one part. (Covenant theology and dispensationalism says there are seven...) The time where the Gentiles are receiving the gospel, where Israel is held in disobedience, is known as the time of the Gentiles. There are still Jews being saved, but Paul says that God has placed a partial blindness on Israel. Hence there are still Jews being saved. The blindness is partial. Once this times of the Gentiles is complete, the blindness will be lifted.

Stop isolating scripture. If you read the whole context, you will see that you are missing important information.
"29 “Men and brethren, let me speak freely to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. 30 Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, [i]according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, 31 he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption. 32 This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses. 33 Therefore being exalted [j]to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear.

34 “For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he says himself:

‘The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at My right hand,
35 Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.” ’
36 “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”"

So let's make this short. What does verses 34 to 35 show? Jesus is not enthroned yet. The Lord said to my Lord "Sit at My right hand, till I make Your enemies Your footstool." A natural reading would be that Jesus will not be enthroned until the Father makes His enemies His footstool. That is what happens before the millennium, when the Father sends the Son to crush His enemies at Jerusalem. He destroys the beast, his image, and all the armies (and other major players) and even has Satan bound in chains and sealed in the bottomless pit. All His enemies are made His footstool. He reigns for the millennium on the seat of David, as David foretold, and at the end, finally defeats all His enemies to include death. At which point, as Paul says, the Son returns the kingdom to the Father. Hence the millennial kingdom is not intended to be eternal. It exists until the Son defeats the final enemy (not just abolish) death.

For everyone? Are you a universalist?

I'm not sure how the whole population of the earth, minus the elect, so considered a few people. Jesus crushes ALL His enemies of the whole population of the world. We aren't talking about a few people. Revelation is clear that the army numbers as the sands of the shore. Given how tiny sand is, you could probably hold our whole army in one hand, perhaps both cupped. Yet you still have the rest of the sand. We aren't talking about a few people.

re two programs
the verses about 'only the lost house of Israel' do not confirm that; just the opposite. She turns out having more faith than Israel!

But an incident like that is not the place to decide this. You need to look at Eph 2-3. Where it was clearly always the plan to save the gentiles. As with Acts 15, quoting Amos 9. Rom 11 too. Everything is concluded in Christ: mercy for both. Yes Israel will keep on being partly blind til the end of the age, and always was partly blind. That's how Paul corrects the idea that they were the only believers or were perfect. No, he says the remnant was always different from the whole community, and there were always gentiles who believed.

 

[Mr GLee]

That is not a verse I have neglected. "Shortly come to pass" means those events which were included in "the things which are about to be hereafter" in John's days. And God using those time-relevant terms was not to simply talk to Himself. He intended the sense of what "shortly" and "soon" meant on humanity's terms. You are right that "soon means a lot to us". God was using those time-relevant terms such as "soon" and "shortly" to convey the natural meaning of those words to us on a human level.

Shortly come to pass is the end of the world or end of the age. Signified meaning made known through parables.

Shortly bring "the end" to pass

Genesis 41:32 And for that the dream was doubled unto Pharaoh twice; it is because the thing is established by God, and God will shortly bring it to pass.

 

[TMSO]

Acts 2:30, 31's grammar actually says that David saw the resurrection as the enthronement of the king that would descend from him. The conclusion of that sermon repeats that Jesus is now Lord and Christ. In ch 3 we see Peter saying that Christ is now in a celebratory reception in heaven until the NHNE. In ch 4 Ps 2 is quoted, that Christ has been enthroned, and all rulers and ordinary folks must honor him "lest they be dashed."

Here is the thing. A/The kingdom is a reflection of the king. So, when we look at Earth and the world today, do you see a reflection of God, or perhaps a reflection of Satan/sin. This is still Satan's domain, which is within God's domain as everything is God's creation. This is why we have Job where Satan is asking God permission to do things. He is still within God's domain, and as such, he doesn't have the right to do as he pleases. One should be able to see this when Jesus casts the demons in to the pigs. What did they ask Jesus first. They said they know who He is, and asked if He had come to judge them "before the time". His rhetorical answer was no. He had not come to judge them before the time. What is this time these demons spoke of? The end of time. The final judgement. They recognized Jesus. They knew they had an end. They did not recognize why Jesus was on Earth at that time, so asked Him if their final judgement had arrived.

Reminder: the reign of God did not come with 'signs to be observed.' It exists in the imperative sense, not the indicative. The imperative means 'He should be regarded as king by mankind.' This was announced worldwide by all the visitors to that Pentecost who heard these teachings and returned home to their communities.

He is regarded as king, however, the dominion of Earth sits with Satan. This is because dominion was given to Adam, and Satan took it from Adam when Adam sinned. However, He is still within God's domain, and recognizes that. When the end times come, Satan will rebel (for some reason) and there will be war in heaven. Satan will finally lose his place, be thrown down to earth, there to wander/plan/cause strife until he meets his end. His focus will be on destroying all that is God's in an effort to defeat God. That is Jerusalem, God's beloved city, and the remnant of His chosen people. If Satan can destroy that, he wins.

 

[TMSO]

re death:
Yes, Christ defeated death in his event, and several OT passages and His sayings confirm this.

Someone else brought this up, but it didn't say that Christ had defeated death but had abolished death. If death was defeated, then no one would die. Looking at the end of Revelation 20, if death has been defeated, no one would go to hell. (Both death and hell are thrown into the lake of fire). Also, death is related to sin. So unless God's kingdom is a kingdom of sin, sin is defeated and wiped out of God's creation, and as such, death and hell are also done away with, for death is solely the result of sin. We hear that from Paul. For by one man sin entered the world, and through sin death. In the same way, through Christ, who was sinless, life has entered the world. However, as we all know, that life is limited to those who believe and are thus sealed up in Christ to be raised up on the last day to everlasting life. The only thing that has happened so far is that the power of death has been diminished. In Christ, death is abolished, and has no power of Him or those who believe in Him. Outside of Christ, death reigns supreme. However, Christ will ultimately defeat death, and death will not longer be a part of the creation. This is recorded at the end of Revelation 20, when death and hades[hell] are thrown into the lake of fire, after all whose names are not written in the book of life are thrown into the lake of fire. At this time, the Son will return the Kingdom to the Father, and we will have a new heavens and new earth.

As I mentioned before, only the futurized starting-point of what you say is off. It all should be starting in Christ. Notice this pulsing stance of the NT: "The time has come; the reign of God is here." If you read the OT regularly, you know that this is meeting exactly where the OT leaves you waiting.

The Kingdom is here, because the King entered the scene. However, He is sitting at the right hand of God until God makes His enemies His footstool, as David said. At which time He will reign over all in the millennial kingdom, which is intended to be the fulfillment of the Old Testament promises. That kingdom was not intended to be eternal, and will mark the end of the age. To me, this is shown by Paul in I Corinthians 15 when the Son gives the kingdom back to the Father after the defeat of death, the final enemy. And that is the UNIVERSAL defeat of death. Death will no longer be found in God's Kingdom, within God's creation. There will be everlasting life, and everlasting righteousness. Sin will have no place in the next age. Where there is no sin, there is no death. For it is by sin that death entered the world.

 

[TMSO]

re spiritualizing.
They totally missed it. The OT is Christocentric; they were Judaistic. That Judaizing is why they did think Is 53 was about the race-nation. The mistake of not seeing Messiah as a normal human suffering person, once for all time, is not spiritualizing but is their rebellious nature.

They could not/would not believe that their conquering Messiah-King (in their minds) would ever be a suffering servant. So they spiritualized the prophecy, where God's prophecies are straight forward, with the events encapsulated in prophetic utterance are carried out literally. Hence Isaiah 53 was literally fulfilled in Christ. That is why one can look at Daniel's 70 week prophecy, and trace its literal fulfillment. Where we can't understand the prophetic utterance, God gave the key. A week symbolizes seven years. That cracks open the prophecy to where one can link the prophecy to fulfillment. Consider the prophecy in Zechariah about the one who comes to Earth and saves Jerusalem in Zechariah 12. They will recognize Him whom they have pierced. This didn't mean anything at the time. Who was pierced? John removes the air of mystery around that whole prophecy by showing that Jesus is the one who was pierced by a guardsman's spear at the cross. So the one who saved Jerusalem in that future prophecy is the Messiah (as they would understand), and John shows that Jesus truly is the Messiah that will save Israel.

The typical person who spiritualizes today is the person who says 70 AD was the return of Christ and the start of the NHNE.

I can only agree that this may be typical. (I haven't gone that deep into what is spiritualized and how, or who started it, etc.) There are some who say that the 70 weeks had no gaps, which would mean Jesus returned in 40AD. (Weird beliefs...) So, I can only say that I am not positive what is "typical".

When Christ declared that he was completing Ps 118 and was the cornerstone of the new temple, he was not doing the above spiritualizing. He was however expressing the truly spiritual completion that Ps 118 had in mind. Cp the end of Eph 2.

To understand what that means, one has to understand what is being symbolized by temple.

People don't like hearing that Acts 2:30 is about the resurrection, so they say it is only a passing confirmation that the millenium will come in the future. They say that calling the resurrection the enthronement of Christ is a goofy 'spiritualizing.' Those people are not seeing the truly spiritual meaning of the resurrection and they are being trite literalists about the race-nation-temple.

It is spiritualizing. I wouldn't say goofy. I believe that the millennium begins with Christ's enemies being made His footstool. I believe that is perfectly envisioned by His return to defeat the armies of the antichrist/beast and his image at Jerusalem. ALL His enemies are crushed at that time except for death. Death remains for the end of the millennium, when Jesus crushes Satan totally, and all His enemies are consigned to the lake of fire, to include death and hades. I believe that death is still around, because those who populate the Earth during the millennium kingdom are those who survived that tribulation and have not died yet. Life will continue on, without Satan's deception, but with sin/death not yet eradicated. What form that will take, I couldn't tell you. Will people not die? Will they live the same amount of years as they did before the millennial kingdom? No idea. Will sin be openly present? My one belief on this is that those who enter the millennial kingdom are the elect, and therefore will be unaffected by what is to come at the end of the millennial kingdom.

 

[TMSO]

That is not a verse I have neglected. "Shortly come to pass" means those events which were included in "the things which are about to be hereafter" in John's days. And God using those time-relevant terms was not to simply talk to Himself. He intended the sense of what "shortly" and "soon" meant on humanity's terms. You are right that "soon means a lot to us". God was using those time-relevant terms such as "soon" and "shortly" to convey the natural meaning of those words to us on a human level.

Yes, this verse and others. You rip verses out of context. John is clear that we are to be very careful how we handle Revelation. Very careful, or face the judgements within. Things about to be hereafter. That is, after this moment in time. The being is telling John to write about what he just saw, which the being helps him by explaining "what thou hast seen". John writes it in the now. (This being told me to write these things, and now this being is telling me an explanation of what I saw earlier.) And to write what comes after. John is being told to write it all down. It goes back to the verse I already mentioned. John is writing all that God is showing for the sake of the church, so the church knows what is going to come to pass.

And for you to say that Revelation is only about future events is to ignore all the past events mentioned in the book, namely...

God is the one who said it through John. "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:"
And then what it is: "3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand."

The past crucifixion death of Christ - "I am He that liveth and WAS dead..."
The past effects of "Jezebel" the self-named prophetess's influence on the early church.
The past recorded activity of the 7 churches.
The past martyrdom of Antipas.
The past birth and ascension of Christ, the "man-child" caught up to God's throne.
The past battle in heaven between Michael and his angels and Satan and his angels.
The past enthronement of the 12 disciples on Rev. 20's thrones when Christ gave them authority to pass judgment on church affairs.
The past Rev. 20 millennium which ended with Christ's "First resurrection" event in AD 33.
The past binding of Satan, and his past release at the end of the millennium, which would last only a "short time" after John wrote Rev.
The past 666-year history of the Sea Beast, ever since the Babylonian "lion" empire under Nebuchadnezzar.
The past mark imposed by the Land Beast in homage of the ancient Sea Beast.
The past existence of the Scarlet Beast which once "WAS" in existence, but would soon be revived to existence again.
The past white horse rider, Christ, going forth conquering and to conquer the nations with the advance of the gospel evangelism in the days of the early church.
The past record of Mystery Babylon killing the saints and prophets, and the martyrs of Jesus.
The past persecution of the woman and her seed by the Dragon during Saul's flood of persecution of the early church, and the church's literal flight into the wilderness of Judea in Acts 8.

1. I am He that liveth and was dead. This is prophecy? Or is this John recording what Jesus said in identification of Himself? This is the person telling us who He is.
2. Again, not the focus of Revelation. There is a future due to said influence which is what Revelation is pointing at. Why ignore that. (Because it would mean that Revelation actually is about the future, just like God said through John.)
3. The past recorded activities are not prophecy, and not the aim of the letters. These aren't even used to date the letters. It gives credit where credit is due, gives their "sin" and then proclaims future judgement. (FUTURE, not PAST.)
4. The martyrdom of Antipas is not given as prophecy, but as an example of the fervor the church of Pergamum once had for it's first love.
5. Again, this identifies the woman as Israel. Not the church, and not some other group. And "her seed" are the Jews.
6. This battle was not in the past, and has yet to happen. Whose throne was at Pergamum after 33 AD? Whose deceptions were rampant in the early church? (The devil's... ie. Satan)
7. This enthronement was not past. This is the final judgement, which has yet to occur. However, Israel is judged, according to Jesus, by the 12.
8. The millennium hasn't started yet, so no, it isn't finished. You would have the millennium start less then 200 years after Israel left Egypt. There is no lineage of David yet. Jesus has no throne yet as far as Psalms and Revelation are concerned.
9. Satan has not been bound yet. Giving him super powers to thwart God's judgement does not overcome that obstacle. However, if you think you can prove that Satan has the power to thwart God, please explain.
10. I would read Irenaeus warnings before proceeding here. Understand that Polycarp was John's disciple, and that he spoke with John. Also understand that Polycarp, Polycarp's disciple Papias, and Irenaeus were all premillennialists. (Eusebius records this in the Ecclesiastical Histories of the Church.) You would think that John's disciple would get it right. Especially since, according to you, the Revelation occurred years before Polycarp was John's disciple. [Again, not John Mark, who died before Polycarp was born.]
11. The mark of the beast is GLOBAL, not local. NO ONE will be able to buy or sell without this mark. It is also this mark that damned all to hell, according to the angels who proclaimed the three woes. In other words if ANYONE used this mark, they are hell bound, NO HOPE. Of this, Revelation is VERY clear.
12. Any was is not of importance to Revelation, but what is to come. Again, God was very clear and John wrote it down.
13. Actually the Lamb was Jesus. That horse is something else. (One of the four horsemen of the apocalypse.) This has nothing to do with the gospel.
14. Mystery Babylon Rome, the city on seven waters and mountains (which actually is a very accurate description of Rome.) Read Dave Hunt's book, A Woman Rides the Beast. He made a solid case for this being the Roman Catholic Church. (I am not saying he is right, but he makes a solid case.) Some also believe that the prevailing religious/political power will actually be the Caliphate. There is none now, but they are pushing for one. Consider that most of the refugees entering European countries are Moslems who refuse to integrate. Their populations are growing rapidly. And now they are coming here, and Biden is throwing out the red carpet. Consider that this increasing influence is present in all the pro-Hamas, anti-Israel protests, that are now larger then ever. The left has gone from calling the extreme right Nazis, to being Nazis.
15. This is completely wrong. This is the persecution of Israel and the Jews. This is Satan's attempt to destroy God's chosen people, and have victory. God's promises to Israel assure that there will be a remnant alive at the end. God's promises. If Satan can prevent this, the God has failed. This is why Israel has been the focal point of much violence for millennia/centuries. Even the Roman Catholic Church was slaughtering the Jews during the crusades.

etc.

There is no etc.