[mfblume]

conclusion...

But Mfblume does not account for the MANY scriptures covering events BETWEEN the rapture and the White Throne Judgment. Amillenium teaching cannot explain WHO IS BEING RULED OVER AFTER THE RAPTURE HAS OCCURRED.

Brother, there a no "buts" about it. The scriptures in 1 Cor 15 show that all tears are wiped away at the rapture. You cannot say, "But but but". Let's not ignore Paul's reference. You are trying to squeeze out of the issue at hand by standing in your dilemma and pointing to something else.

Our whole difference of opinion is based upon my proposition that the scriptures you refer to about our rulership over nations IS FULFILLED in the here and NOW. You are arguing in a circle now. You are saying that I am wrong about ruling now, because you are right about not ruling now and that we rule later. Instead of actually responding to my reference in Isa 25:8, you just say, "but but but what about something else?"

However the SCRIPTURES show various time Saints RULING over nations of people.

That is right now. And it totally fits the bible! Eph 2 says we're seated with him, and Eph 1 says He is seated over all NAMES and POWERS in this world and the world to come. So we rule now as we will rule after the white throne. You PRESUME it must be sinners we rule over after the rapture. Where does it say that? We rule over the sinful nations NOW. But after the rapture there are no sinners. But why say we do not rule then? It never said we rule SINNERS after the rapture. You added that to the scriptures.

Can one scripture such as "death being swallowed up in victory" be applied to more than one event?

No! This is a common ploy used, but it has no solid precedent. Many say there is more than one fulfillment of a prophecy. And there is in certain old testament types and new testament antitypes, though. Paul said the prophecy will BE BROUGHT TO PASS. That means it no longer awaits anything. Bringing something "to pass" means it's purpose is finished. It's fulfillment HAS PASSED. Before coming to pass, it awaited fulfillment. If it was to be fulfilled TWICE, then Paul would not say IT WAS BROUGHT TO PASS.

Here is an example of one scripture being applied to two separate events that were HUNDREDS OF YEARS APART.

The Spirit applied this concerning the exodus from Egypt.

1: When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.
2: As they called them, so they went from them: they sacrificed unto Baalim, and burned incense to graven images. Hosea 11:1-2

Yet the Spirit applies this same verse hundreds of years later to the time when Jesus came back from Egypt.

14: When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt:
15: And was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son. Matt. 2:14-15

So God has been known to apply one scripture to several events.

There are TYPICAL events of the Old Testament that have TRUE fulfillment later in the New Testament. But let's not fail to notice a common denominator in such instances that are genuine examples of double fulfillment. The common denominator is that there is a lesser fulfillment before the cross and the greater fulfillment after the cross. WE FIND NO SUCH EXAMPLE where something is fulfilled BOTH TIMES AFTER THE CROSS.

This is an elaborate attempt to force the scriptures to say anything we want, when we CAN ONLY take an Old Testament fulfillment and see it fulfilled a second time SPIRITUALLY in the New Testament.

If we start doing that with prophecies, then what will stop anyone from saying there will be two white throne judgments, or two millenniums, or two times when Christ ceases to rule? lol

It is always AN OLD TESTAMENT TYPE AND NEW TESTAMENT ANTITYPE that comprises any double fulfillment in the bible. Can you show me an example where this is not true?

If he says death ends in 1 Cor. 15 then it means death ends for the Saints who were IN CHRIST at his coming.

Incorrect. He ceases to rule when death ends. That means He cannot rule during a millennium. And the only way to reconcile it all is to realize that death is done away with forever at the rapture, and so He ceases to rule since all ENEMIES are put under His feet.

WATCH THIS: If he ceases to rule when all enemies are under his feet, HOW COME THERE ARE SINNERS IN THE MILLENNIUM? SINNERS ARE HIS ENEMIES. You said sinners exist in the millennium! And after the millennium the nations are gathered by satan to war against the holy city. That sounds like ENEMIES of Christ to me. But Paul said ALL ENEMIES are put beneath His feet at the rapture, the last one being death.

You have to either say NO ENEMIES are put under his feet at the rapture, or ALL of them are. That means you have to say the COMING OF CHRIST is NOT THE RAPTURE, although that would violate the thought that Paul listed EVERY MAN's resurrection to physical immortal life as being only two events... Christ's and those who are His at his coming.

Anyway you slice it, it does not work.

Personally I dont think I have total understanding of how the Kingdom will unfold from now to eternity. However the Amillenium teaching seems to ignore or symbolize away a lot of scripture. To much for me to feel comfortable with.

No, it is the only view that makes sense of all the scriptures without causing them to contradict one another.

Will this satisfy Mfblume? No. I dont expect it will. Yet in taking into account all scripture I believe this is more in line with the whole counsel of YHWH than the total symbolizing method of interpretation.

It cannot be. You made several errors.

1) You said death is only defeated for the saints in 1 Cor 15. Paul said ALL ENEMIES are defeated then, and you have enemies during the millennium.

2) You ignored Isa 25:8's reference to all tears wiped away, although Paul cited that verse to say the contents are fulfilled at the rapture.

3) You said there are double fulfillments, which the BIBLE DOES show us, but failed to notice the only examples found in the Bible are only fulfilled in an Old Testament type and a New Testament antitype.

4) You failed to note that Christ ceases to rule when death is destroyed at the rapture, disallowing for a millennium after the rapture for Him to rule.

In summary 1 Cor. 15 cannot simply be taken on its own APART FROM the entire body of scripture concerning the resurrection and eternity. It needs to fit AS ONE MORE PIECE of the truth it takes to make the whole.

I agree perfectly. And my proposition shows that the only way it can fit the rest of the bible, and not propose contradictions in the bible, is to say THERE IS NO MILLENNIUM, and the church age is the 1000 years in Rev 20.

Will you be satisfied with that? No. You perhaps will repeat your error in neglecting to deal with points I have repeated now many times. You cannot keep shoving these under the carpet, Michael. You have to deal with EVERYTHING I propose that causes error in your teaching.

Instead of refusing to answer a direct point I make, and saying, "But what about this other thing?", you need to be honest with yourself and try to answer each biblical point I show that contradicts your teaching.

THANKS SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME, EVERYONE! I am enjoying this thoughtful chat. Is it not great that we can chat without personal insults and attitudes?