Scriptures that prove the Millennial Reign of Jesus Christ on Earth

[missmuffet]

13 minutes ago, Marilyn C said:

Hi missmuffet,

It is only the appearance not the physical form, which I really doubt they can do, except possess some one & then of course it is that human who can procreate NOT the possessing demon. You are going way beyond any scripture there sis, and even Shiloh would not agree with you!

Marilyn.

Question: "Who were the sons of God and daughters of men in Genesis 6:1-4?"

Answer: Genesis 6:1-4 refers to the sons of God and the daughters of men. There have been several suggestions as to who the sons of God were and why the children they had with daughters of men grew into a race of giants (that is what the word Nephilim seems to indicate).

The three primary views on the identity of the sons of God are 1) they were fallen angels, 2) they were powerful human rulers, or 3) they were godly descendants of Seth intermarrying with wicked descendants of Cain. Giving weight to the first theory is the fact that in the Old Testament the phrase “sons of God” always refers to angels (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7). A potential problem with this is in Matthew 22:30, which indicates that angels do not marry. The Bible gives us no reason to believe that angels have a gender or are able to reproduce. The other two views do not present this problem.

The weakness of views 2) and 3) is that ordinary human males marrying ordinary human females does not account for why the offspring were “giants” or “heroes of old, men of renown.” Further, why would God decide to bring the flood on the earth (Genesis 6:5-7) when God had never forbade powerful human males or descendants of Seth to marry ordinary human females or descendants of Cain? The oncoming judgment of Genesis 6:5-7 is linked to what took place in Genesis 6:1-4. Only the obscene, perverse marriage of fallen angels with human females would seem to justify such a harsh judgment.

As previously noted, the weakness of the first view is that Matthew 22:30 declares, “At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.” However, the text does not say “angels are not able to marry.” Rather, it indicates only that angels do not marry. Second, Matthew 22:30 is referring to the “angels in heaven.” It is not referring to fallen angels, who do not care about God’s created order and actively seek ways to disrupt God’s plan. The fact that God’s holy angels do not marry or engage in sexual relations does not mean the same is true of Satan and his demons.

View 1) is the most likely position. Yes, it is an interesting “contradiction” to say that angels are sexless and then to say that the “sons of God” were fallen angels who procreated with human females. However, while angels are spiritual beings (Hebrews 1:14), they can appear in human, physical form (Mark 16:5). The men of Sodom and Gomorrah wanted to have sex with the two angels who were with Lot (Genesis 19:1-5). It is plausible that angels are capable of taking on human form, even to the point of replicating human sexuality and possibly even reproduction. Why do the fallen angels not do this more often? It seems that God imprisoned the fallen angels who committed this evil sin, so that the other fallen angels would not do the same (as described in Jude 6). Earlier Hebrew interpreters and apocryphal and pseudopigraphal writings are unanimous in holding to the view that fallen angels are the “sons of God” mentioned in Genesis 6:1-4. This by no means closes the debate. However, the view that Genesis 6:1-4 involves fallen angels mating with human females has a strong contextual, grammatical, and historical basis.

https://www.gotquestions.org/sons-of-God.html

[Quasar93]

26 minutes ago, Marilyn C said:

Hi Quasar,

Lots there to agree on dear bro, however not this part -

Also during this millennial kingdom the removal of the curse of the land along with the elimination of sickness can be expected. (Isa 11:6-9 and 33:24).

 

Let`s actually look at what God`s word says -

`..They shall not hurt nor destroy IN ALL MY HOLY MONTAIN.` (Isa. 11: 9)

`Look upon Zion, the city of appointed feasts; your eyes will see Jerusalem.....and the inhabitant (of Jerusalem) will not say. "I am sick." (Isa. 33: 20 & 24)

So we see that it is only in Jerusalem and on Mt Zion where the glory of the Lord rests that these things will happen.

Marilyn.

 

Hi Marilyn,

 

You are barking up the wrong tree, because the Scriptures documenting Jesus 1,000 year reign on earth refute the views you are propogating.  Read the following from Rev.19:11-21, about Jesus return from His marriage to the Church in heaven with them, in His second coming.  Followed by His fight with the Antichrist, the False Prophet and the ten horns/nations, in the battle of Armageddon, defeating them and ending the tribulation.  Note especially how He is going to rule the nations of the earth.  The coming tribulation will be world wide, not just in Israel.

 

 The Rider on the White Horse

11"And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. 12His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. 13And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. 14And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. 15And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. 16And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

Defeat of the Beast and False Prophet

17And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;18That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.

19And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.

20And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. 21And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh."

 

 

Quasar93

Edited December 6, 2017 by Quasar93

[Quasar93]

36 minutes ago, Marilyn C said:

Hi Quasar,

I don`t believe that view of the fallen angels as God never made angels with the ability to procreate.

Marilyn.

How are the angels described in the Bible, who come to the earth with messages and responsibilities to fulfill for God?  Review Gen.18-19. Tell me, how do you describe those OT sons of god, that many other esteemed expositors describe as angels.

 

 

Quasar93

[ForHisGlory37]

25 minutes ago, missmuffet said:

Question: "Who were the sons of God and daughters of men in Genesis 6:1-4?"

Answer: Genesis 6:1-4 refers to the sons of God and the daughters of men. There have been several suggestions as to who the sons of God were and why the children they had with daughters of men grew into a race of giants (that is what the word Nephilim seems to indicate).

The three primary views on the identity of the sons of God are 1) they were fallen angels, 2) they were powerful human rulers, or 3) they were godly descendants of Seth intermarrying with wicked descendants of Cain. Giving weight to the first theory is the fact that in the Old Testament the phrase “sons of God” always refers to angels (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7). A potential problem with this is in Matthew 22:30, which indicates that angels do not marry. The Bible gives us no reason to believe that angels have a gender or are able to reproduce. The other two views do not present this problem.

The weakness of views 2) and 3) is that ordinary human males marrying ordinary human females does not account for why the offspring were “giants” or “heroes of old, men of renown.” Further, why would God decide to bring the flood on the earth (Genesis 6:5-7) when God had never forbade powerful human males or descendants of Seth to marry ordinary human females or descendants of Cain? The oncoming judgment of Genesis 6:5-7 is linked to what took place in Genesis 6:1-4. Only the obscene, perverse marriage of fallen angels with human females would seem to justify such a harsh judgment.

As previously noted, the weakness of the first view is that Matthew 22:30 declares, “At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.” However, the text does not say “angels are not able to marry.” Rather, it indicates only that angels do not marry. Second, Matthew 22:30 is referring to the “angels in heaven.” It is not referring to fallen angels, who do not care about God’s created order and actively seek ways to disrupt God’s plan. The fact that God’s holy angels do not marry or engage in sexual relations does not mean the same is true of Satan and his demons.

View 1) is the most likely position. Yes, it is an interesting “contradiction” to say that angels are sexless and then to say that the “sons of God” were fallen angels who procreated with human females. However, while angels are spiritual beings (Hebrews 1:14), they can appear in human, physical form (Mark 16:5). The men of Sodom and Gomorrah wanted to have sex with the two angels who were with Lot (Genesis 19:1-5). It is plausible that angels are capable of taking on human form, even to the point of replicating human sexuality and possibly even reproduction. Why do the fallen angels not do this more often? It seems that God imprisoned the fallen angels who committed this evil sin, so that the other fallen angels would not do the same (as described in Jude 6). Earlier Hebrew interpreters and apocryphal and pseudopigraphal writings are unanimous in holding to the view that fallen angels are the “sons of God” mentioned in Genesis 6:1-4. This by no means closes the debate. However, the view that Genesis 6:1-4 involves fallen angels mating with human females has a strong contextual, grammatical, and historical basis.

https://www.gotquestions.org/sons-of-God.html

I agree with missmuffet and also the Book of Enoch will enlighten more on the fallen angels.  The Book of Enoch is referenced in the book of Jude ( Jude 1:6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation., v 14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints.) and everything in it aligns with the Bible.  Another thing, the fallen angels corrupted the DNA of man so much, even the plants.  That was why God had to destroy everything except for Noah and his family to safeguard the lineage of the coming Messiah. 

Genesis 6:12 And God looked upon the earth, and behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.

[Marilyn C]

37 minutes ago, missmuffet said:

 

Hi missmuffet,

Not really interested in Mr Gotquestions, as he/she/they are not taking to me. I will discuss with you if you want to though.

Marilyn.

[Marilyn C]

21 minutes ago, Quasar93 said:

How are the angels described in the Bible, who come to the earth with messages and responsibilities to fulfill for God?  Review Gen.18-19. Tell me, how do you describe those OT sons of god, that many other esteemed expositors describe as angels.

 

 

Quasar93

Hi Quasar,

There are esteemed people on each side of the debate, and as people are fallible I`ll always go with God`s word.

`Jesus answered and said to them, "You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like the angels of God in heaven.` (Luke 22: 29 & 30)

Marilyn.

[Marilyn C]

16 minutes ago, ForHisGlory37 said:

I agree with missmuffet and also the Book of Enoch will enlighten more on the fallen angels.  The Book of Enoch is referenced in the book of Jude ( Jude 1:6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation., v 14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints.) and everything in it aligns with the Bible.  Another thing, the fallen angels corrupted the DNA of man so much, even the plants.  That was why God had to destroy everything except for Noah and his family to safeguard the lineage of the coming Messiah. 

Genesis 6:12 And God looked upon the earth, and behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.

Hi ForHisGlory,

Pleased to meet you and discuss this topic. Now the angels that fell left their first estate as you said, were cast from the `mountain of God` the third heaven and they usurped the realm of Principalities and Powers. (Eph. 2: 2  &  6: 12)

Note in Gen. 6: 12 it talks of all FLESH. That is mankind made from the dust of the earth.

BTW behold the Lord cometh with 10,000 of HIS HOLY ONES. These are the angelic hosts, Christ`s heavenly army as the Psalms tell us, (Ps. 68: 17)

regards, Marilyn.

[ForHisGlory37]

2 minutes ago, Marilyn C said:

Hi ForHisGlory,

Pleased to meet you and discuss this topic. Now the angels that fell left their first estate as you said, were cast from the `mountain of God` the third heaven and they usurped the realm of Principalities and Powers. (Eph. 2: 2  &  6: 12)

Note in Gen. 6: 12 it talks of all FLESH. That is mankind made from the dust of the earth.

BTW behold the Lord cometh with 10,000 of HIS HOLY ONES. These are the angelic hosts, Christ`s heavenly army as the Psalms tell us, (Ps. 68: 17)

regards, Marilyn.

Hi Marlyn, nice to meet you too!   I put those scriptures in because I was trying to legitimize the quotes from Enoch just in case you were to question the Book of Enoch.  I merely referenced it from the Book of Jude so that you would know that Jude is recognizing Enoch and his words.  I never said the "angels that fell".  Jude 1:6 says AND THE ANGELS WHICH KEPT NOT THEIR FIRST ESTATE, BUT LEFT THEIR OWN HABITATION.  They chose to leave, they weren't thrown out of heaven.  These angels were different than the ones that were thrown out of heaven with Lucifer. 

Also in Genesis 6:11 the EARTH ALSO WAS CORRUPT BEFORE GOD.  That means everything, not just mankind.  The wicked angels corrupted everything.  Personally, I think that is where we get legends of like the cyclops and minotaur.  Maybe other things like the mermaid?  Everything was corrupted. 

[Guest shiloh357]

3 hours ago, Marilyn C said:

Hi Shiloh,

I see you try and cover yourself by saying `none of the epistles address that topic.` So are you telling me that the Holy Spirit who gave the Apostle Paul the whole counsel  of God omitted that detail of where the Body of Christ will be in the Millennium? I think not dear bro.

The Holy Spirit through the Apostle Paul says - `For I have not shunned to declare to you the whole counsel of God.` (Acts 20: 27) 

These are some of the scriptures that address where we, the Body of Christ will be - (I have posted these before)

1. 1 Peter 1: 3 - 5 `Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has gotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that does not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, who are kept by the power of God through faith for salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.`

2.  Hebrews 12: 22 & 23 `But you have come to Mount Zion, and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the first-born who are registered in heaven, to God, the judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect.`

Marilyn.

Where is the millennium referenced, specifically?

[Guest shiloh357]

4 hours ago, Marilyn C said:

Hi Shiloh,

The doctrine is  `that we the believers are on earth in the millennium.` Now all you ever do is attack me and never have any scriptures to back up what you are saying. So far you have only produced Ez. 40 - 48 which shows that it is the glory of the God of Israel, which fills the inner court, saying that it is the place of his authority and the place of the soles of His feet, (earth being His footstool. Isa. 66: 1)

`And behold, the glory of the God of Israel came from the way of the east. His voice was like the sound of many waters; and the earth shone with His glory. It was like the appearance of the vision which I saw - like the vision which I saw when he came to destroy the city. The visions were like the vision which I saw by the River Chebar; and I fell on my face.

And the glory of the Lord came into the temple by way of the gate which faces towards the east. The Spirit lifted me up and brought me into the inner court; and behold, the glory of the Lord filled the temple.

Then I heard him speaking to me from the temple, while a man stood beside me. And he said to me, "Son of man, this is the place of my throne, (authority) and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever....` (Ez. 43: 2 - 7)

 

It seems you would have us believe that the Lord in the inner chamber will be in there forever and ever!!!!! Of course not. it is His GLORY, that will rest there, making the whole mountaintop most holy. (Ez. 43: 12) The reference to the soles of His feet, indicate that the earth is His footstool as the prophet Isaiah tells us.

So where is/are these scriptures saying that the Lord will be ON the earth during the millennium!!!

Marilyn.

No, you are are trying to redefine "throne"  to mean authority.   You have your own personal hermeneutic.   If you were forced to hold to actual hermeneutics, you would not be able to simply change what words mean and how they are used in order to suit your doctrine.    The word "throne" as it is used in THAT earthly context refers to His throne, his real, actual throne where He will sit during the millennium in His temple.   That is the only proper way to see it, that fits the context.

Even though every version of the Bible translates Revel 5:10 as saints ruling ON the earth, and even though every Greek scholar disagrees with you, you say that the word should be "over." You take it upon yourself to make words mean what you need them to mean in order to promote your misguided teachings.

What's more, you grab any verse you can that mentions heaven and you try to use those verses to address our place of residence in the Millennium, even those verses are not addressing that and have nothing to do with that topic. 

That is why I am so critical of  your use of Scripture all of the time.  If anyone took YOUR words and treated them so irrsponsibly, you would not like it.   But you are molding the Bible around YOUR agenda and are trying to make the Bible mean what you want it to mean.   You could NOT support your views if you applied sound hermeneutics to it.   

My views represent current, mainstream Christian theology on the matter.  Your views are just something you cooked up on your own and have no basis in sound biblical interpretation.

It is impossible to have an intelligent biblical conversation like this when one party thinks they (in this case, you) can just make up their own rules of interpretation as they go along, and expect that their rules of interpretation and their own subjective definitions of terms will be the working definitions for the thread.

Edited December 6, 2017 by shiloh357