The Kingdom of God (SeanD and ApologiaPhoenix) Split Topic

[seanD]

I don't think that Satan would have the world as dominion in this sense, no? The dominion is given from all mankind to the remnant of the faithful - in Israel to those who have faith in the OT covenant and outside of Israel to those who follow in faith the God they know in their hearts and from nature.

Otherwise, I think you'd be forced into the Ransom Theory of salvation, and I don't think we want to say that.

The preterists and Faith preachers are flat out wrong in their theology here. Jesus never regained dominion of the world, before and after his resurrection. This occurs when he returns. This is why Jesus repeated over and over that his kingdom was not of this world, "You are not of the world because I've called you out of the world, etc etc. Jesus called Satan the "prince of this world," because this world is currently under his dominion. Every country, every nation, every continent, every kingdom, every empire, every government, he is currently in control of and ruling at the moment. True, Satan doesn't have dominion over Christians (those under the new covenant) themselves (spiritually speaking), but this doesn't mean that they won't be subjected to Satan's persecution. The Christian presently existing in the world is like a foreigner in a foreign land who is not welcomed, in fact despised. The Christian is a marked illegal alien and fugitive. But greater is he who is residing in the Christian than he that is in the world. I can pull out a whole deluge of scripture to back this, but it would be rather pointless since one can't read but a chapter of scripture in the NT and not find support for this.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

The preterists and Faith preachers are flat out wrong in their theology here. Jesus never regained dominion of the world, before and after his resurrection. This occurs when he returns. This is why Jesus repeated over and over that his kingdom was not of this world, "You are not of the world because I've called you out of the world, etc etc. Jesus called Satan the "prince of this world," because this world is currently under his dominion. Every country, every nation, every continent, every kingdom, every empire, every government, he is currently in control of and ruling at the moment. True, Satan doesn't have dominion over Christians (those under the new covenant) themselves (spiritually speaking), but this doesn't mean that they won't be subjected to Satan's persecution. The Christian presently existing in the world is like a foreigner in a foreign land who is not welcomed, in fact despised. The Christian is a marked illegal alien and fugitive. But greater is he who is residing in the Christian than he that is in the world. I can pull out a whole deluge of scripture to back this, but it would be rather pointless since one can't read but a chapter of scripture in the NT and not find support for this.

Nice straw man on Preterism. I would contend that Jesus has dominion. He said in John 12 that now is the time for the prince of this world to be cast out and I believe that he did such. Christ is reigning now.

[seanD]

Nice straw man on Preterism. I would contend that Jesus has dominion. He said in John 12 that now is the time for the prince of this world to be cast out and I believe that he did such. Christ is reigning now.

He's reigning through us spiritually, yes. As Christians, we're no longer enslaved to the flesh, which is Satan's tool he uses to control us. But Christ has not been given dominion of the world yet, and unfortunately we are out numbered by those who Satan does rule through the flesh. If Christ was reigning this world, then it wouldn't be in the mess that it's in, nor would we experience such opposition. I don't even need to pull scripture here, because this is based on logic alone.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

He's reigning through us spiritually, yes. As Christians, we're no longer enslaved to the flesh, which is Satan's tool he uses to control us. But Christ has not been given dominion of the world yet, and unfortunately we are out numbered by those who Satan does rule through the flesh. If Christ was reigning this world, then it wouldn't be in the mess that it's in, nor would we experience such opposition. I don't even need to pull scripture here, because this is based on logic alone.

False. Christ's reign began and it is spreading like a mustard seed. You have an all-or-nothing deal. I say he is reigning now and his dominion is spreading as the gospel is.

Really. Find out what my view is before you criticize it.

[seanD]

False. Christ's reign began and it is spreading like a mustard seed. You have an all-or-nothing deal. I say he is reigning now and his dominion is spreading as the gospel is.

Really. Find out what my view is before you criticize it.

It depends on what you mean by "reigning." Principalities currently rule this world. God is ultimately reigning over them, of course, but Satan is reigning this world no more or less than he was before Jesus resurrected. Christians are deluded to think that things will get better once the gospel spreads. The gospel has been spreading for 2,000 years and nothing has changed in the way violence and madness. Only now we have weapons that can wipe out mass populations. Things will get much worse. Horrifyingly worse, once Satan realizes that his global reign is coming to an end, and Christians who are expecting things to get better are in for quite a shock.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

It depends on what you mean by "reigning." Principalities currently rule this world. God is ultimately reigning over them everything, but Satan is reigning this world no more or less than he was before Jesus resurrected.

Jesus said the prince of this world would be cast out. He said "Now is the time." Was he wrong?

Christians are deluded to think that things will get better once the gospel spreads.

Yeah. Because we all know the gospel doesn't have the power to change the hearts of men and that wherever it spreads, it doesn't change things.

The gospel has been spreading for 2,000 years and nothing has changed in the way violence and madness.

Baloney. Go to some places where the gospel has reformed the world. Do the gladiator games go on today? Do you see people in the former Roman Empire leaving their children out to be eaten by wild beasts?

Only now we have weapons that can wipe out mass populations. Things will get much worse. Horrifyingly worse, once Satan realizes that his global reign is coming to an end, and Christians who are expecting things to get better are in for quite a shock.

So the kingdom is spreading like a mustard seed and things are going to get much worse.

I hate to see how you think things are going to be when the kingdom is a full reality.

[seanD]

Jesus said the prince of this world would be cast out. He said "Now is the time." Was he wrong?

The problem is that if we pick scriptures here and there out of spiritual context (and I'm not saying you or I am right in this case), there are contradictory passages if we assume that Jesus was speaking in a literal fashion here and not in a spiritual fashion. What do we do with Paul's statement in Ephesians (6:12). What do we do with Jesus' "my kingdom is not of this world?" Why didn't he say "my kingdom is currently not of this world?" What do we do with our own eyes -- the state that world has been in for 2,000 years if Christ is reigning?

Baloney. Go to some places where the gospel has reformed the world. Do the gladiator games go on today? Do you see people in the former Roman Empire leaving their children out to be eaten by wild beasts?

You're comparing ancient Barbarism to what's going on today? Just because nations are more "civil" doesn't mean they are any less violent. I can't honestly think of anything even in the ancient world that can compare to the acts of Mao, Stalin, Hitler, who wiped out masses of their own population. Can you think of anything more devastating in the ancient world than Hiroshima or Nagasaki? Should we go down the historical list and compare horrifying events of the 20th century to the ancient century? Come on, man, that was a weak rebuttal.

[Anon]

Only now we have weapons that can wipe out mass populations. Things will get much worse. Horrifyingly worse, once Satan realizes that his global reign is coming to an end, and Christians who are expecting things to get better are in for quite a shock.

There are some amillennialists who'd disagree with the charge that they expect things to get better on Earth.

[seanD]

There are some amillennialists who'd disagree with the charge that they expect things to get better on Earth.

Okay. But my point was that I don't see how anyone can argue that the world is no longer under Satan's domain with a straight face when looking at how progressively worse -- in overall violence and evil -- the world is getting. Jesus would not have claimed that the world hates them because he called them out of the world, if the world was Christ's domain.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

The problem is that if we pick scriptures here and there out of spiritual context (and I'm not saying you or I am right in this case),

Oh please. Of course you are. The reason you think Preterists are wrong is that you think you're right and if you're right, I which contradict you, am automatically wrong. At least have the guts to come out and say it.

there are contradictory passages if we assume that Jesus was speaking in a literal fashion here and not in a spiritual fashion.

Then do tell what the "spiritual fashion" is of this verse.

What do we do with Paul's statement in Ephesians (6:12).

Well, for starters, as a Preterist, I believe it.

What do we do with Jesus' "my kingdom is not of this world?"

He was talking to Pilate and saying that while he was a king, his kingdom was not earthly in origin but heavenly. He wasn't building an army of soldiers but of saints.

Why didn't he say "my kingdom is currently not of this world?"

Why should he have?

What do we do with our own eyes -- the state that world has been in for 2,000 years if Christ is reigning?

Let's see. How far has the gospel spread? How many souls are saved today? I live in a country where I can worship Christ freely. The gospel is gaining ground in China breaking down Communism. Missionaries are going around the world spreading the gospel and billions of people are going to be populating Heaven.

That's what I see.

You're comparing ancient Barbarism to what's going on today?

You were. You said the world hasn't got any better. I figured you were making a comparison by using a comparing word like "better."

Just because nations are more "civil" doesn't mean they are any less violent. I can't honestly think of anything even in the ancient world that can compare to the acts of Mao, Stalin, Hitler, who wiped out masses of their own population.

And did it under atheism. The gospel is making inroads in those areas. They're trying to shut it down and can't.

Can you think of anything more devastating in the ancient world than Hiroshima or Nagasaki? Should we go down the historical list and compare horrifying events of the 20th century to the ancient century? Come on, man, that was a weak rebuttal.

Yes I can think of things more horrifying. People living in that area who would have never got to hear the power of the gospel. Let's do talk about the 20th century in comparison to the 1st. How many people know of YHWH now? How many people know of Jesus? How many Bibles are there? How many charities? How many hospitals? How much education? How much care for the sick and the poor?

Or we could just be someone who only looks at what's bad and ignores the kingdom growing right outside his door.

[seanD]

Oh please. Of course you are. The reason you think Preterists are wrong is that you think you're right and if you're right, I which contradict you, am automatically wrong. At least have the guts to come out and say it.

Actually you don't really want to know what I think about preterism (at least in regards to Revelation). I rarely ever accuse a doctrine of being heretical -- have never done it on this board -- because few things in Christianity are black and white, and most doctrine has some truth, but in this case, I would come very close. These feelings weren't as strong until I got a full dose of what they argue to support it. If the arguments were stronger, I would probably just shirk it off. The reason I feel that way is that it presents a false sense of security for the Christian who believes that nothing like the persecution in the first century could ever occur again in our modern times. This is completely contrary to the continual warnings of Jesus and the NT writers to not get caught off guard, and be ready for the worst, including death.

Let's see. How far has the gospel spread? How many souls are saved today? I live in a country where I can worship Christ freely. The gospel is gaining ground in China breaking down Communism. Missionaries are going around the world spreading the gospel and billions of people are going to be populating Heaven.

That's what I see.

What about serial killers, abortions, child slavery and forced labor, gang violence, drug abuse, public crime, online pornography, child porn, pedophile rings, snuff films, wars (the sheer magnitude and number of comparable deaths and carnage) secularism, atheism (no way can you argue that the latter two were more predominant in the ancient world)? Most of these evils are also in America, the "Christian" nation. How do you explain this?

AP, seriously, I'd rethink this argument, because it's not your strong one. Just because the Western world is more “civil” as a legislative infrastructure, you’re telling me that you think our century is less evil and violent than the first few centuries?

And did it under atheism. The gospel is making inroads in those areas. They're trying to shut it down and can't.

I'm not arguing against the spiritual authority of Christ and the gospel. My main point is that Satan rules this world. This was a result of Adam, and this hasn't changed since, and won't until Christ comes to physically reign, and Satan is finally bound. This is future.

Yes I can think of things more horrifying. People living in that area who would have never got to hear the power of the gospel. Let's do talk about the 20th century in comparison to the 1st. How many people know of YHWH now? How many people know of Jesus? How many Bibles are there? How many charities? How many hospitals? How much education? How much care for the sick and the poor?

Or we could just be someone who only looks at what's bad and ignores the kingdom growing right outside his door.

The kingdom of Christ is growing, I don't disagree, but it's only by of the grace of God. To Satan, it's a cancer, penetrating HIS domain, and he'll cause as much harm as he possibly can, hence the opposition from every side, even within the very church itself.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

Actually you don't really want to know what I think about preterism (at least in regards to Revelation). I rarely ever accuse a doctrine of being heretical

Who said anything about heretical? You called it wrong, which is fine if you disagree, but your statement implied that we Preterists must be ignorant.

-- have never done it on this board -- because few things in Christianity are black and white, and most doctrine has some truth, but in this case, I would come very close.

I could tell you several things in Christianity that are black and white.

Jesus has the full nature of God.
God is a Trinity.
Jesus physically rose from the dead.
The blood of Christ is essential for our atonement.
Justification by faith.

These feelings weren't as strong until I got a full dose of what they argue to support it.

If you knew the arguments, you wouldn't raise the lame objections you did.

If the arguments were stronger, I would probably just shirk it off. The reason I feel that way is that it presents a false sense of security for the Christian who believes that nothing like the persecution in the first century could ever occur again in our modern times.

Show me the Preterist who teaches this.

This is completely contrary to the continual warnings of Jesus and the NT writers to not get caught off guard, and be ready for the worst, including death.

Again, show me the Preterist who denies the reality of persecution.

What about serial killers, abortions, child slavery and forced labor, gang violence, drug abuse, public crime, online pornography, child porn, pedophile rings, snuff films, wars (the sheer magnitude and number of comparable deaths and carnage) secularism, atheism (no way can you argue that the latter two were more predominant in the ancient world)? Most of these evils are also in America, the "Christian" nation. How do you explain this?

Because we're not being a Christian nation. It's simple. Where the gospel is taught the most, the people are for the better and righteousness follows. We have a watered-down version. Sometimes I think it would be good if the government started persecuting us. We might develop some really influential Christianity.

AP, seriously, I'd rethink this argument, because it's not your strong one. Just because the Western world is more “civil” as a legislative infrastructure, you’re telling me that you think our century is less evil and violent than the first few centuries?

I said the gospel is stronger in the world today than it ever was. The kingdom is spreading like a tree that's growing. The yeast is working its way through the door. That's exactly the way Jesus said the kingdom would be.

I'm not arguing against the spiritual authority of Christ and the gospel. My main point is that Satan rules this world. This was a result of Adam, and this hasn't changed since, and won't until Christ comes to physically reign, and Satan is finally bound. This is future.

Which is simply repeating your point without dealing with mine. Jesus said "Now is the time." I explained the passages you asked me to and what has been said about it? Squat. Do you just want to rant against a view you're not really examining?

The kingdom of Christ is growing, I don't disagree, but it's only by of the grace of God.

Gasp! Wow! We Preterists had no idea! God is the one who is growing his kingdom! Incredible!

To Satan, it's a cancer, penetrating HIS domain, and he'll cause as much harm as he possibly can, hence the opposition from every side, even within the very church itself.

People don't need satan's help to do evil. Keep this in mind. satan is just an angel. He's not someone omnipresent who can cause all the trouble you think he is. Oh. You also haven't given me any reason to think he's not bound.

[seanD]

Jesus has the full nature of God.
God is a Trinity.
Jesus physically rose from the dead.
The blood of Christ is essential for our atonement.
Justification by faith.

1) Yes, he was God, the logos, prior. He had this restored after the resurrection as a changed being -- an immortalized man. But did he still have this full nature once he was born in the flesh before the resurrection? This is highly debatable.
2) Yes. But who the heck can explain that? No one.
3) Yes.
4) Yes.
5) Yes.

People don't need satan's help to do evil. Keep this in mind. satan is just an angel.
He's not someone omnipresent who can cause all the trouble you think he is.

People are evil because they live by the flesh, which is carnal, yes. But Satan amplifies that, and has principalities helping him. Paul certainly didn't believe that people were persecuting him. He believed wicked principalities and powers ruling THIS world were manipulating those humans.

Oh. You also haven't given me any reason to think he's not bound.

Paul, who warned us about satan on many occasions. If satan was bound, who was Paul warning us about?

[ApologiaPhoenix]

1) Yes, he was God, the logos, prior. He had this restored after the resurrection as a changed being -- an immortalized man. But did he still have this full nature once he was born in the flesh before the resurrection? This is highly debatable.

No. Not at all. It's quite essential in fact that he was fully God on Earth.

2) Yes. But who the heck can explain that? No one.

Explaining and comprehending are two different things.

People are evil because they live by the flesh, which is carnal, yes. But Satan amplifies that, and has principalities helping him. Paul certainly didn't believe that people were persecuting him. He believed wicked principalities and powers ruling THIS world were manipulating those humans.

Oh but he did believe people were willing agents. You are giving satan way too much power.

Paul, who warned us about satan on many occasions. If satan was bound, who was Paul warning us about?

Tell me, when did the age end?

[seanD]

Tell me, when did the age end?

I don't believe the age has ended yet. Revelation records Satan being bound at the end of the book. Even if you want to argue that the temple mentioned in chap 11 is the second temple, Satan wasn't bound until well after that, and after Jesus returned with the saints. So the question is, when do you think the age ended? But this might be a discussion better suited for the eschatology section.