Author Topic: Continuing on the millennium fallacy  (Read 700 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lea

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 673
  • Manna: 8
  • I am rezar
Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« on: Tue Apr 28, 2020 - 18:08:20 »
To sum up the uniform voice of history, the theory of a literal kingdom and reign on the earth was gathered from Jewish fabulous "apocalypse," "unwritten tradition," "carnal misapprehensions," "pretended visions," "suppositions," and "superstitious imaginations." Its advocates were said to be "very limited in their understanding," and "of the simple sort." Millennialism had the worst heretic in the first century for its founder, and its chief advocates thereafter were rejected by the early church. From time to time it was revived by "heretical sects." The vain worldly expectation that the Messiah would establish a literal kingdom caused the Jews to reject him, and his spiritual kingdom. They only wanted an earthly kingdom; hence rejected and crucified the Son of God. As soon as the church began to apostatize, and lost the glory of his spiritual kingdom, vain ambitions awakened the old Jewish desire for a literal kingdom. And so it has come to pass that we have at this time of dead formality a multitude of men teaching the same abominable lie and false hope which crucified Christ nearly nineteen hundred years ago; namely, a literal kingdom of Christ.

Source: H. M. Riggle, "History of the Millennium," The Kingdom of God, 1899.




Christian Forums and Message Board

Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« on: Tue Apr 28, 2020 - 18:08:20 »

Offline DanielConway

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 21
  • Manna: 0
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #1 on: Thu Apr 30, 2020 - 04:43:09 »
I would take that synopsis a step further and posit that not only is a literal kingdom on earth not part of God's plan, but it's watered down cousin, the state church, is also warned against in a proper reading of the apocalyptic literature.  I have posted here in the past that I believe that the first and second beasts of Revelation are spiritual metaphors for the early Pagan and later Constantinian Roman Empires respectively and as such are archtypes for the two great threats that the church faces from the State, oppression and co-option.  A few more posts and I should be able to post here a pdf of a paper I wrote justifying this position.

Offline robycop3

  • Mr.
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Manna: 13
  • Gender: Male
  • A wet bird never flies at night - Sam Hall
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #2 on: Fri May 01, 2020 - 15:33:07 »
  Sorry, Sportzz Fanzz, but SCRIPTURE says differently.

Offline lea

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 673
  • Manna: 8
  • I am rezar
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #3 on: Sat May 02, 2020 - 11:28:25 »
I would take that synopsis a step further and posit that not only is a literal kingdom on earth not part of God's plan, but it's watered down cousin, the state church, is also warned against in a proper reading of the apocalyptic literature.  I have posted here in the past that I believe that the first and second beasts of Revelation are spiritual metaphors for the early Pagan and later Constantinian Roman Empires respectively and as such are archtypes for the two great threats that the church faces from the State, oppression and co-option.  A few more posts and I should be able to post here a pdf of a paper I wrote justifying this position.

I commend you on agreeing that Christ's kingdom is not literal.  But I do think all of Revelation was fulfilled by AD70.

Rev.1 and Rev.22 claim all was to happen soon.  The fall of the Roman empire is not in the Bible.
Not as a "type" or anything else. The events were all to happen soon.

Offline robycop3

  • Mr.
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Manna: 13
  • Gender: Male
  • A wet bird never flies at night - Sam Hall
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #4 on: Sat May 02, 2020 - 13:35:11 »
I commend you on agreeing that Christ's kingdom is not literal.  But I do think all of Revelation was fulfilled by AD70.

Rev.1 and Rev.22 claim all was to happen soon.  The fall of the Roman empire is not in the Bible.
Not as a "type" or anything else. The events were all to happen soon.

...Except that they DIDN'T. Their occurrence is in no legitimate history book anywhere.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #4 on: Sat May 02, 2020 - 13:35:11 »



Offline DanielConway

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 21
  • Manna: 0
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #5 on: Sat May 02, 2020 - 19:31:37 »
I am not going to rehash the arguments in favor of an AD 94 dating of the book of Revelation with you.  I am sure you are familiar with them and have not found them convincing.  Let me say only, what city been universally referred to as "the city that sits on seven hills" except ancient Rome?  An intellectually tortured investigation of the geography around Jerusalem can identify seven hills in it's proximity, but Jerusalem was never known by this title.

Offline robycop3

  • Mr.
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Manna: 13
  • Gender: Male
  • A wet bird never flies at night - Sam Hall
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #6 on: Sun May 03, 2020 - 09:48:55 »
I am not going to rehash the arguments in favor of an AD 94 dating of the book of Revelation with you.  I am sure you are familiar with them and have not found them convincing.  Let me say only, what city been universally referred to as "the city that sits on seven hills" except ancient Rome?  An intellectually tortured investigation of the geography around Jerusalem can identify seven hills in it's proximity, but Jerusalem was never known by this title.

  And what city but ROME, ITALY could be the city of Rev. 17:18 ?

   Preterism must invent tall tales & attempt to re-write history in order to try to sustain itself. We see that right here in this thread !

Offline lea

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 673
  • Manna: 8
  • I am rezar
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #7 on: Wed May 06, 2020 - 19:37:23 »
  And what city but ROME, ITALY could be the city of Rev. 17:18 ?

   Preterism must invent tall tales & attempt to re-write history in order to try to sustain itself. We see that right here in this thread !

Christian Zionism has no future for Christians!

Being made the Motley Fool out of!

Offline robycop3

  • Mr.
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Manna: 13
  • Gender: Male
  • A wet bird never flies at night - Sam Hall
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #8 on: Thu May 07, 2020 - 05:03:33 »
Christian Zionism has no future for Christians!

Being made the Motley Fool out of!

  You're moving the goal posts again.

Offline 3 Resurrections

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 840
  • Manna: 25
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #9 on: Thu May 07, 2020 - 11:08:36 »
Jerusalem was known from antiquity as being established among a set of mountains... long before Rome was ever founded on the banks of the Tiber.

Psalms 125:2 - “As the mountains are round about Jerusalem, so the Lord is round about his people from henceforth even for ever.”

Offline robycop3

  • Mr.
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Manna: 13
  • Gender: Male
  • A wet bird never flies at night - Sam Hall
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #10 on: Thu May 07, 2020 - 16:35:43 »
Jerusalem was known from antiquity as being established among a set of mountains... long before Rome was ever founded on the banks of the Tiber.

Psalms 125:2 - “As the mountains are round about Jerusalem, so the Lord is round about his people from henceforth even for ever.”

  Rome was known as "the city of 7 hills" for millenia, while Jerusalem was never knows by that title.

Offline lea

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 673
  • Manna: 8
  • I am rezar
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #11 on: Thu May 07, 2020 - 20:12:31 »
So, what else, continue on with your interpretation, if you can find the knowledge and energy ol dude.

Offline Rella

  • ..
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6357
  • Manna: 650
  • Definitely 7. Approaching 8
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #12 on: Thu May 07, 2020 - 20:52:25 »
Christian Zionism has no future for Christians!

Being made the Motley Fool out of!

Some day,my friend, you ARE going to know how wrong you have been.

And Rome has been referred to worldwide as the city on 7 hills.

Offline 3 Resurrections

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 840
  • Manna: 25
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #13 on: Thu May 07, 2020 - 21:29:57 »
Hi Rella,

We don’t need to argue if it’s either Rome or Jerusalem sitting on 7 hills.  IT’S BOTH.  The Beast from the Sea in Rev. 13 had the 7 hills of Rome that fit with its historical identity.  Without any doubt, the Sea Beast was connected with the Roman Republic turned empire, because the seat of the dragon / Satan which was in Pergamos (Rev. 2:13 compared to Rev. 13:2) was given to the Roman Republic by the dying King Attalus III as a bequest in AD 133, since he had no heir of his own to pass his entire Pergamum kingdom to.

But the other THIRD Scarlet Beast of Rev. 17 appearing in the wilderness was connected with Jerusalem and a different set of 7 hills that this city sat upon.  This Scarlet Beast had a fluctuating existence - a condition that once “WAS”, then “IS NOT”, then “IS” again in existence, and was also “ABOUT TO” arise from the bottomless pit and go into destruction in John’s days.   

This variable condition of existence for the Scarlet Beast was not a feature of the other Roman Sea Beast of Rev. 13.  Rome sitting on its 7 hills certainly could not be described as being in an “IS NOT” condition as John was writing Revelation.  And there are several more features that differ between the first and the third beasts of Revelation that I have listed before on another post, proving that these two cannot be the same Beast under discussion in both Rev. 13:2 and Rev.17.

Offline DanielConway

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 21
  • Manna: 0
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #14 on: Fri May 08, 2020 - 10:14:13 »
Quote
But the other THIRD Scarlet Beast of Rev. 17 appearing in the wilderness was connected with Jerusalem and a different set of 7 hills that this city sat upon.  This Scarlet Beast had a fluctuating existence - a condition that once “WAS”, then “IS NOT”, then “IS” again in existence, and was also “ABOUT TO” arise from the bottomless pit and go into destruction in John’s days.   


I disagree with your assertion that the scarlett beast could not have been Rome because of a fluctuating existance.  Pagan Imperial Rome emerged out of Republican Rome and became a great oppressor.  This is the fist Manifestation of the beast and was active during John's day.  Pagan Rome disintigrated during the Imperial Crisis and for a brief period was not in control.   I strongly suspect this is what John foretells when he say it now is not.  Rome goes on to reconstitute itself while at the same time co-opting the main body of the church and goes on to oppress for another 110 years or so.  John foretells this when he says the beast will come again. Finally Rome is sacked in AD 410 and Romes empire comes to an end.  It was here that the beast went to its destruction. 

Offline 3 Resurrections

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 840
  • Manna: 25
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #15 on: Fri May 08, 2020 - 12:28:29 »
Hi DanielConway,

The difference between our positions shows up when one doesn’t pay very careful attention to the particular verb tenses that John used.

If John said that the Scarlet Beast “IS not”, he meant that, at the same time he was writing Revelation, that this Scarlet Beast was not functioning - at all.  At that time, it was in the bottomless pit as John was writing.  This cannot be said of Rome, which was very much active while John was writing Revelation in late AD 59 or early AD 60.

The “abussos”, or bottomless pit is not a place or location.  It’s a CONDITION or STATUS of something or someone.  Just as Christ’s physical body was in the “abussos” in a non-functioning condition while He was physically dead for 3 days and nights (Rom. 10:7).

We have to pay very careful attention to the verb tenses in the Rev. 17:8 phrase describing the future actions of the Scarlet Beast.  At the time John was writing, he said that the Scarlet Beast “...IS ABOUT TO COME UP OUT OF THE ABYSS, and into destruction to go.” 

This is a compound verb - the Scarlet Beast would “come”, and it would “go”.  Not only was the Scarlet Beast “ABOUT TO COME UP” from a non-functioning status as John was writing, it was ALSO “ABOUT TO GO INTO DESTRUCTION” as John was writing, soon after it had risen to life again.  This didn’t give it much time at all to operate in this world, once it had “come”. 

Daniel, your view doesn’t really acknowledge the very IMMINENT arrival and the very short lifespan of the Scarlet Beast back in John’s days.  This imminence factor can only be caught by reading the Greek “mello” term used in this phrase.  Check the Interlinear or the YLT versions.  The KJV hides it, and consequently ruins the interpretation. 

This Scarlet Beast was the independent kingdom nation of Israel that used to exist for almost 80 years in Maccabean times, which then lost that status of independence in 63BC when Pompey put the nation under tribute to Rome.  However, this independent kingdom nation of Israel was about to arise to life again in AD 66 under the Zealot uprising, but it would soon after that go to destruction in AD 70 when Rome crushed the rebellion by burning Jerusalem.

Daniel, your view also has a problem explaining why Rome, along with the “False Prophet” / Beast from the land, would be thrown alive into the Lake of Fire that was Jerusalem’s “Second death” as a nation, if Rome really was the Scarlet Beast. 

The reality was quite the contrary; Christ in His Matt. 22:7 parable equates the Roman armies with God sending forth “HIS armies” to judge the rebellious citizens who murdered his servants the prophets.  He would then burn up their city (a prediction of Jerusalem’s AD 70 destruction by fire during the final Roman onslaught).  This necessitates the existence of THREE different beasts in Revelation;  in other words, two Beasts who were thrown alive into Jerusalem’s Lake of Fire along with the Devil and his angels, and one more Beast that God used as a tool to accomplish this judgment.

Offline robycop3

  • Mr.
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Manna: 13
  • Gender: Male
  • A wet bird never flies at night - Sam Hall
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #16 on: Sat May 09, 2020 - 08:03:49 »
  With all due respect, Sir, your post is full of imagination. OF COURSE the scarlet beast "was,t' & STILL "isn't" ! it's the kingdom of the antichrist, and also the antichrist himself, which haven't yet come.

  It's not a matter of verb tenses; it's a matter of REALITY & HISTORY. those events have simply NOT YET HAPPENED.

Offline 3 Resurrections

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 840
  • Manna: 25
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #17 on: Sun May 10, 2020 - 11:24:35 »
I agree with you, robycop3, that the Scarlet Beast IS connected with the anti-christ element.  But that’s only because the first-century Zealot factions who denied that Jesus was the fulfillment of Daniel 9:25’s prophecy were incorporated within that third Judean Beast.  In the days that I and II John were written, those “many anti-christs” had already come, and the single “THE Anti-Christ” was going to come out from among them at that time (I John 2:18-19). 

Verb tenses are indeed vital to understanding WHEN God had already done something, or was ABOUT TO do something.  Robycop3, you may regard history as your specialty, but in simple English grammar and sentence structure, you fall far short of understanding these things.  Don’t you remember how to conjugate a verb?  This is not rocket science.

Here’s the II John 7 verse from the Interlinear, since the KJV is fuzzy on this one.  “Because many deceivers ENTERED (past tense  for John’s days) into the world, those who do not confess Jesus Christ coming in the flesh - this IS (present tense back in John’s days) THE DECEIVER and THE ANTICHRIST.”

You are mistakenly transporting the fulfillment of THE Anti-christ into our future days, when John’s language of a past fulfillment tells us otherwise.  Why is this so difficult for you?


Offline robycop3

  • Mr.
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Manna: 13
  • Gender: Male
  • A wet bird never flies at night - Sam Hall
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #18 on: Mon May 11, 2020 - 05:15:31 »
  Once again - No matter how many times you repeat "soon", etc. the TRUTH is, those events simply HAVEN'T YET HAPPENED ! Not trying to be smart-aleck, but you haven't provided the slightest proof that they have already happened !

Offline 3 Resurrections

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 840
  • Manna: 25
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #19 on: Mon May 11, 2020 - 10:44:36 »
Robycop3, you really do have a mental block concerning the simple grammar which describes WHEN these things took place.  You can’t simply toss scripture’s verb tenses out the window, merely because they counter your expectations.  Your problem is you are reading the language of the prophecies, and adding your own flair to what you think is going on in them.  Then you are taking those added-on characteristics of the prophecies and saying “See there everyone?  THIS has not taken place yet!” 

You need to go back to square one and moderate the inflated expectations you have put upon the actual written terms of those scripture prophecies.  I do read carefully whatever you take time to write - and these inflated expectations seem to be an ongoing issue in almost everything you present.

Offline robycop3

  • Mr.
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Manna: 13
  • Gender: Male
  • A wet bird never flies at night - Sam Hall
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #20 on: Mon May 11, 2020 - 14:51:36 »
  No "expectations" to it; just REALITY. no matter how many times you SAY those events have occurred, the TRUTH is, they HAVEN'T. Otherwise, you could show them from history, as they're not exactly small.

Offline lea

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 673
  • Manna: 8
  • I am rezar
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #21 on: Mon May 11, 2020 - 15:03:25 »
  No "expectations" to it; just REALITY. no matter how many times you SAY those events have occurred, the TRUTH is, they HAVEN'T. Otherwise, you could show them from history, as they're not exactly small.

Troll, why don't you start your own thread?

Offline robycop3

  • Mr.
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Manna: 13
  • Gender: Male
  • A wet bird never flies at night - Sam Hall
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #22 on: Mon May 11, 2020 - 15:12:09 »
 Talkin' to yourself, Drama Queen ?

Offline lea

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 673
  • Manna: 8
  • I am rezar
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #23 on: Mon May 11, 2020 - 15:27:47 »
Talkin' to yourself, Drama Queen ?

Sure you're referring to me? I don't think so.

Offline robycop3

  • Mr.
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Manna: 13
  • Gender: Male
  • A wet bird never flies at night - Sam Hall
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #24 on: Tue May 12, 2020 - 05:12:31 »
  You prove it.

Offline lea

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 673
  • Manna: 8
  • I am rezar
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #25 on: Tue May 12, 2020 - 18:11:07 »
  You prove it.
What kind of fairy answer is that?

Offline robycop3

  • Mr.
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Manna: 13
  • Gender: Male
  • A wet bird never flies at night - Sam Hall
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #26 on: Wed May 13, 2020 - 04:53:19 »
What kind of fairy answer is that?

best way to answer a clueless Aesop-ette.

Offline lea

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 673
  • Manna: 8
  • I am rezar
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #27 on: Sat May 16, 2020 - 17:03:18 »
best way to answer a clueless Aesop-ette.
Your whole doomsday view is a fictional video game!

All your posts, since you came here lack any fruit of the Spirit!

You are just a hostile person. ::crackup::

Offline robycop3

  • Mr.
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Manna: 13
  • Gender: Male
  • A wet bird never flies at night - Sam Hall
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #28 on: Sun May 17, 2020 - 09:15:54 »
Your whole doomsday view is a fictional video game!

All your posts, since you came here lack any fruit of the Spirit!

You are just a hostile person. ::crackup::

  I've asked you for **PROOF**, & all you've provided is fiction.

Offline lea

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 673
  • Manna: 8
  • I am rezar
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #29 on: Sun May 17, 2020 - 13:18:15 »
  I've asked you for **PROOF**, & all you've provided is fiction.

Prove that you're not a Judaizer like the ones in Peter's day!

Offline robycop3

  • Mr.
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Manna: 13
  • Gender: Male
  • A wet bird never flies at night - Sam Hall
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #30 on: Sun May 17, 2020 - 16:50:32 »
Prove that you're not a Judaizer like the ones in Peter's day!

Simple - I'm not a Jew !

 And you're moving the goal posts again when you're reminded you CANNOT prove the pret garbage is not false.

Offline Rella

  • ..
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6357
  • Manna: 650
  • Definitely 7. Approaching 8
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #31 on: Mon May 18, 2020 - 06:40:02 »
Simple - I'm not a Jew !

 And you're moving the goal posts again when you're reminded you CANNOT prove the pret garbage is not false.

Non Preterism people agree.  It is garbage. Thank you for your apt description ::tippinghat::

Offline lea

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 673
  • Manna: 8
  • I am rezar
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #32 on: Mon May 18, 2020 - 11:57:18 »
Simple - I'm not a Jew !

 And you're moving the goal posts again when you're reminded you CANNOT prove the pret garbage is not false.

Maybe not a Jew, but a Christian Zionist Judaizer.

The Pharisees wanted a literal, physical King and kingdom from their Messiah. 

Same with you!



Offline robycop3

  • Mr.
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Manna: 13
  • Gender: Male
  • A wet bird never flies at night - Sam Hall
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #33 on: Mon May 18, 2020 - 16:30:07 »
Maybe not a Jew, but a Christian Zionist Judaizer.

The Pharisees wanted a literal, physical King and kingdom from their Messiah. 

Same with you!

  And Jesus is gonna be JUST THAT !

 The Pharisees wanted it RIGHT THEN, but they hadn't heeded OT prophecy about Messiah.

Offline lea

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 673
  • Manna: 8
  • I am rezar
Re: Continuing on the millennium fallacy
« Reply #34 on: Mon May 18, 2020 - 18:35:38 »
  And Jesus is gonna be JUST THAT !

 The Pharisees wanted it RIGHT THEN, but they hadn't heeded OT prophecy about Messiah.
Show Biblically proof of your last sentence.