Millennial Kingdom

I agree that all eschat' systems have their problems, but I see far more problems in premil than in the other systems, and far less in preterism. (I'm still partial pret, not full, by the way).

Even the great John Gill, a historical premil, in his effort to literalize Rev 20 and following, speculates (by his own admission) that Gog/Magog is the mass of the resurrected damned - an interpretation which requires the admission of metaphors in the passage.

This is the delimma of those that claim to take Revelation literally - in the end, they allow for the use of metaphor not much less than the idealist does.

 

I am premill and pretrib. I have never hear anyone say that.

 

I have read that there will animal sacrifices in the temple during the MK. I can't understand that at all.

 

Thanks for asking. The biggest problem at work is keeping my foot elevated. If I don't, it really gets sore. I have a rigid cast from toes to knee. This cast has no room for any foot swelling, that is why it gets sore. I try to limit the pain killers because it really slows down the lower GI. Not good. I'm taking an injectable blood thinner which is awfull. I basically have little fat tissue in the tummy area.

 

Me too and I agree. I see a lot of theology in this thread that I have never seen or heard before.

 

If you don't understand animal sacrifices in the millennial temple then how do you understand God ordained animal sacrifices during any other period of human history?

Are we not all, from Adam to the last man saved by grace through faith in the risen Christ, paid for by His sacrifice at the cross?

 

Huh? Why would there be animal sacrifices in the Kingdom in which Jesus is King and has already paid the LAST sacrifice for sin?

Maybe you can explain it to me?

 

Not in the MK but likely in the tribulation. This will be a result of not recognizing the Messiah has come. It is not something God ordains but just the Jews wanting to carry on.

 

Those who hold to this doctrine claim it is a "memorial" or a symbolic way of looking back to the sacrifice at the cross.

In addition (they say) the blood of bulls and goats never took away sin anyway but pointed in the direction of the future looking forward to His coming sacrifice which would take away sin.

HankD

 

That makes more sense. I wonder why some think there will be sacrifices in the MK? I don't know where they get that.

 

Right after you explain to me why there would be God ordained animal sacrifices at any time in the human experience when the sins of every human were attoned for only once at the cross by the second person of a triune God, a God who has always existed, who created all things by His word, who knows all things, is in control of all things and who in the beginning, at the time He created all things knew to the very last person who were the elect and who are not.

 

I don't understand the position of animal sacrifices in the MK when Christ is right there ruling and reigning, that is why I asked you to explain it to me. If you'd rather not that's fine.

 

In Ezekiel 40:38-43 and 43:18-27 speaks of animal sacrifices during the 1000 years. The bible does not give the reason why but it may be because
these sacrifices are meant to direct the attention of people born during the Millennium back to the cross, just as in Old Testament times they looked forward to it. The intent for both would be the same, causing people to realize that they’re sinners in need of a savior, but that is just a guess as to why.

 

Has not Jehovah God been ruling and reigning from "In the Beginning"? Or has creation been on "auto pilot" or "semi auto pilot" waiting for the MK?

 

Several times in Ez. 40-48 it tells you what the sacrifices are for:

Ezekiel 46:20
Then said he unto me, This [is] the place where the priests shall boil the trespass offering and the sin offering, where they shall bake the meat offering; that they bear [them] not out into the utter court, to sanctify the people.

 

Thank you for the reference. I can't argue with God's word.

 

I'm confused as to why a sin offering would be required of people who have already been saved by putting their faith in the Lamb of God.

 

I don't think I could have said it better myself. But I think what I would really like to communicate is that if an individual really wants to know the answer to the question of the Millennial period, they will hit the books of a wide range of viewpoints. They will compare those viewpoints to Scripture. They will understand the views of those with whom they disagree with. They will not be satisfied with trying to understand those opposing viewpoints by studying and repeating what those who disagree with them at the expense of reading and studying the actual persons with whom they disagree with. To put it another way, for example if you read Riddlebarger thinking that it will help you understand Chafer, well you will not. Why, because Riddlebarger doesn't teach Chafer's views, instead, he misrepresents them. Sad but true.

There are nice people on this forum with 1000s of posts who reject a theology that they clearly don't understand. I know this because of what they write. I'm not trying to say that I have it all under control, I don't and I'm a flawed individual. But having been away from here for a few months and returning yesterday I'm really surprised at the basic misinformation in this thread.

 

I just found THIS on Gotquestions.org.

Thomas, what is your view?