Where does Jesus Speak about the Millennium?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,396
113
Do you not see that Daniel says that of these four kingdoms that shall arise, Babylon is the first one on the list. I am not saying this, Daniel said it. It is no wonder you have such a problem with Revelation. You can't even believe what Daniel says.


I suggest a more careful comparison bro of the two lists........and lose the bolded attitude which is beneath you....I do believe Daniel and have spent probably as much time as you in studying it......I see it aligning with Revelation exactly when compared to the 7 Empires that would rule over the Middle East........and an entity that rises out of the 7th which shall carve out the 8th and final EMPIRE to rule........the Kingdom of the BEAST.......No matter our disagreement....7 KINGDOMS will rule the MIDDLE EAST and or HAVE.....EGYPT, ASSYRIA, BABYLON, PERSIA, GREECE, ROME and the 10 HORNS that ARISE out of what ROME conquered......and OUT of the 10 HORNS a BEAST arises and SUBDUES 3 of the 10 HORNS unto HIMSELF and this will the KINGDOM of the BEAST (ANTI-CHRIST SO-CALLED)

NOTHING I have said in within this scope is in error, not only does it fit history, it fits what shall unfold from history. It matches DANIEL, MATCHES REVELATION and matches HISTORY
 

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
9,144
613
113
70
Alabama
[/B]

I suggest a more careful comparison bro of the two lists........and lose the bolded attitude which is beneath you....I do believe Daniel and have spent probably as much time as you in studying it......I see it aligning with Revelation exactly when compared to the 7 Empires that would rule over the Middle East........and an entity that rises out of the 7th which shall carve out the 8th and final EMPIRE to rule........the Kingdom of the BEAST.......No matter our disagreement....7 KINGDOMS will rule the MIDDLE EAST and or HAVE.....EGYPT, ASSYRIA, BABYLON, PERSIA, GREECE, ROME and the 10 HORNS that ARISE out of what ROME conquered......and OUT of the 10 HORNS a BEAST arises and SUBDUES 3 of the 10 HORNS unto HIMSELF and this will the KINGDOM of the BEAST (ANTI-CHRIST SO-CALLED)

NOTHING I have said in within this scope is in error, not only does it fit history, it fits what shall unfold from history. It matches DANIEL, MATCHES REVELATION and matches HISTORY
You are waiting for something that is not part of prophesy and is never going to happen. You are insisting on seven kingdoms in Daniel and Daniel says there would be only four. He has absolutely nothing to say in chapter 2 about any that have already fallen. Everything else is a product of mellinnial imagination.
 

stillness

Senior Member
Jan 28, 2013
1,257
211
63
69
Walk trough the valley
Hi Angela and Miri, Misplaced motivation to get involved in the discussion, "Now we see dimly." An example of seeing dimly: Daniel 8:23 The second world war, very few people are able to see that, yet so explicit to the point of what happened. Even mature Christians like Bonhoeffer got involved in a plot to kill Hitler and failed, He, his brother and others were caught and put to death, just before the end of the war. Had they read and understood that He dies without human hands, after fighting against the Prince of princes, they would not have gotten involved. But it was a time when the daily sacrifice was taken away, Christians in Germany fitting Christians in the rest of the world. The beginning of the restoration of the daily sacrifice, on Christmas eve 1944, Americans and Germans sang together to the Lord on the front line, there more to this as well. The Germans loss motivation to fight except the younger generation. The length of the time the daily sacrifice taken away coincides.
 

Stunnedbygrace

Senior Member
Nov 12, 2015
9,112
822
113
It's not really based on one verse as a poster said. Those who believe our gathering is pretrib/prewrath actually tie many verses in.
And they go on the whole scope of the bible too, that God removes the righteous.

I don't think any of the views bases their belief on any one verse. Not from what little I've heard of the different views.
 

Locutus

Senior Member
Feb 10, 2017
5,928
685
113
Do you not see that Daniel says that of these four kingdoms that shall arise, Babylon is the first one on the list. I am not saying this, Daniel said it. It is no wonder you have such a problem with Revelation. You can't even believe what Daniel says.

Dan 2:37 Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.

Dan 2:38 And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold.

Dan 2:39 And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth.

Dan 2:40 And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise.
 
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,396
113
You are waiting for something that is not part of prophesy and is never going to happen. You are insisting on seven kingdoms in Daniel and Daniel says there would be only four. He has absolutely nothing to say in chapter 2 about any that have already fallen. Everything else is a product of mellinnial imagination.
Your still missing the point....I never said 7 kingdoms are mentioned in DANIEL..I have said 4 ALL 3 or 4 times I have referenced it....REVELATION looks back to the 7...5 are fallen, one is and one is to come.....DANIEL only deals with the 4 that ARE to come, because 3 have already been when Daniel gives chapter 7.......so...quit putting words into what I have said.....and were done.......next to arise the 10 horned kingdom of Revelation out of what ROME conquered...we see this rising NOW....out of that 10 horns the BEAST will rise......he will subdue 3 of the horns to himself.....the last and final kingdom the 8th which is OF THE 7!
 

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
9,144
613
113
70
Alabama
Your still missing the point....I never said 7 kingdoms are mentioned in DANIEL..I have said 4 ALL 3 or 4 times I have referenced it....REVELATION looks back to the 7...5 are fallen, one is and one is to come.....DANIEL only deals with the 4 that ARE to come, because 3 have already been when Daniel gives chapter 7.......so...quit putting words into what I have said.....and were done.......next to arise the 10 horned kingdom of Revelation out of what ROME conquered...we see this rising NOW....out of that 10 horns the BEAST will rise......he will subdue 3 of the horns to himself.....the last and final kingdom the 8th which is OF THE 7!
Once again, John says these are kings, not kingdoms.
"Five have fallen"
– Julius (48-44 BC), Augustus (27 BC - 14 AD), Tiberius (14-37), Caligula (37-41), and Claudius (41-54),
"One now is" – Nero (54-68)
"The other has not yet come and when he comes, he will remain only a little while" – Galba who reigned only seven months from (68-69).
This places it in the historical context.

There is the possibility that Augustus could be considered the first emperor and that Galba could be the one who now is but I am not sure this could be proven.
 
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,396
113
Once again, John says these are kings, not kingdoms.
"Five have fallen"
– Julius (48-44 BC), Augustus (27 BC - 14 AD), Tiberius (14-37), Caligula (37-41), and Claudius (41-54),
"One now is" – Nero (54-68)
"The other has not yet come and when he comes, he will remain only a little while" – Galba who reigned only seven months from (68-69).
This places it in the historical context.

There is the possibility that Augustus could be considered the first emperor and that Galba could be the one who now is but I am not sure this could be proven.
Whatever man..........go back to points one and two............good luck
 
Feb 28, 2016
11,311
2,972
113
Next time, pick an easier topic. Teddy bears have only been around since the 1890's, so studying their history is even much easier than studying your country's history. :p
personally, I me, 'wife', think some sort of 'teddies' have been around for a 'long, long, time'...
if my brother didn't have his, back then for 'comfort', our grand-parents would have drove
him insane - at least HE could fall asleep from exhaustion, holding on to his mate..,
Praise God for His Mercy...ETC...
 

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
9,144
613
113
70
Alabama
Whatever man..........go back to points one and two............good luck
I know the argument you are trying to make DC. You are trying to suggest that because Daniel is talking about kingdoms, this means that John is as well. What you are missing in Daniel is that when Daniel speaks of the fourth kingdom in verse 44 he says that "In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom." What kings? The kings of the fourth kingdom. What John is doing is explaining which kings / emperors were involved. He is narrowing the focus of the days of those kings.
 

shrume

Senior Member
Jun 26, 2017
2,193
463
83
I agree with the bolded part above! Unfortunately, dispensationalists have told me many times, including recently on CC, that I am not saved, and going to be left behind, because I take issue with dispensationalism. Eschatology does NOT determine salvation, I have said many times. And yet, there are many brainwashed dispensationalists who believe this.

And this is not an isolated issue. A few years back, I went into a forum run by dispies. I did not say what I believed. I tried to talk about theology we all agreed on.

But what I found, was that dispensationalism invaded every post and every thread. People who were not dispensationalists were condemned as going to hell, over and over. Now, I know how wrong this is, but to even suggest people were saved by grace through faith was to get banned. It was a cult!

I've been in other forums where there is this assumption if you don't believe in a Pre-trib rapture, and premillennialism, then you are in your way to hell.

What an insidious doctrine!!
The pre-trib, pre-mill doctrine is not insidious. What is insidious is insisting that if a person does not believe in it, he's not saved.

And I am not talking about historic pre-millennialism, if that is what you are! I know people who fall under this, and they believe in salvation through Christ, not salvation through narrow minded eschatology! I may not agree with their end times view, but I can agree we all are expecting the second coming of Jesus. And we are saved by God, not a rapture, pre, mid or post trib!

As for denigrating others- well, I have sat back for too long and let aggressive people preach a wrong doctrine on end times. So, if countering one person specifically, who rarely posts anything but his twisted end times view means I am denigrating that person, so be it! But I won't stand by any longer and let dispies try and set the agenda with their false doctrine.

But my purpose is to stand against bad doctrine, not against individuals. But if an individual constantly proclaims this false and unbiblical doctrine, well, then my hope is they will re-examine their beliefs, and maybe find that what they were pushing wasn't the truth at all!
Unfortunately, there are "bad" or misinformed individuals who subscribe to almost every doctrine, insisting that if you do not believe exactly as they do, you're headed for Hell. What saves us is faith in Jesus Christ (Rom 10:9-10; Eph 1:13; 1 Cor 15:1-4), no matter what other things we might or might not believe or understand.

For the record, I believe that pre-millennialism is sound doctrine, and biblical, and I will argue for it to the best of my ability.
Same thing with free-will. But I'm sure not going to say that people who hold to a-millennialism or Calvinism are not saved.

There are people who hold to a faith-only belief who are convinced that if a person places any importance on works at all, he is not saved. I'm on another forum where a woman was absolutely convinced that the holy spirit had given her what to believe, and she was convinced that since I disagreed with her on some things, it was proof that I did not have the holy spirit. There is another person who is absolutely convinced he has not sinned since he was saved (over 12 years ago), and that since I acknowledge that I still sin, there is no way in hell that I can possibly be saved.

The divisions and animosity between Christians is ridiculous.

Unfortunately, there are going to be theological differences until Jesus Christ comes back (which for Christians, will be at the pre-trib rapture.. :) ).

It's too bad we can't seem to discuss things without each of us telling the other how stupid, heretical, and unbiblical they are. Yeah, I'm occasionally guilty of it as well..
 

Stunnedbygrace

Senior Member
Nov 12, 2015
9,112
822
113
Shrume, it is nice to meet you, brother.
You are very wise. :)
 

Locutus

Senior Member
Feb 10, 2017
5,928
685
113
I know the argument you are trying to make DC. You are trying to suggest that because Daniel is talking about kingdoms, this means that John is as well. What you are missing in Daniel is that when Daniel speaks of the fourth kingdom in verse 44 he says that "In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom." What kings? The kings of the fourth kingdom. What John is doing is explaining which kings / emperors were involved. He is narrowing the focus of the days of those kings.
Dan 2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

This is the kingdom set up at Pentecost:

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