onewithhim wrote:
Monta wrote:
[
Replying to post 83 by Checkpoint]
"We pray for God's will to be done, that His kingdom rule will prevail in individual lives.
When God answers, the kingdom does come, as people experience what Paul wrote about.
Romans 14:17
For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit."
Yes, not one off but continuously flowing to all peoples/generations.
In case you haven't noticed, it hasn't come yet, and it's quite obvious from everything we see happening in the news. If you are content with the way this system of things is being run, then you will not recognize Christ's Kingdom when it does come and will be in complete astonishment as to what will be happening.
So, your argument is that the coming of the kingdom will be 'obvious' to you from watching the news?
The problem with this approach is that the scriptures are filled with cases where the people don't see, they are blind, they see but they do not understand the significance of the events and so they miss the point. Paul told his persecuted, beleaguered readers they were 'more than conquerors' but, perhaps you would insist that they look around and that it was obvious that they were the ones being beaten, killed, persecuted and oppressed.
On balance, it is not a good argument to rely on 'looking around' or reading the news.
If you think the kingdom didn't come in power with the fall of Jerusalem, in Jesus's this generation, then I think you need to address the scriptures that teach that is did or was supposed to have.
For example, in Rev 11, we have the two witnesses, who testify in and against the Great City, where the Lord was slain. These are prophets, and their blood is shed by Jerusalem.
Then, the blood of the prophets and saints is repaid, the dead prophets are judged, and those who destroy the earth (land) are destroyed. (Rev 11:18). But this is when the kingdom comes:
We give thanks to you, Lord God Almighty,
who is and who was,
for you have taken your great power
and begun to reign.
The nations raged,
but your wrath came,
and the time for the dead to be judged,
and for rewarding your servants, the prophets and saints,
and those who fear your name,
both small and great,
and for destroying the destroyers of the earth. (Rev 11:17-18)
According to Jesus, the blood of the prophets is avenged at the desolation of the house of Jerusalem in his generation (Mat 23:29-39). And when the signs of Jerusalem's fall were to appear, the kingdom would be near (Luke 21:31).
So, if you are going to say that the kingdom did not come when the blood of the prophets was avenged against Jerusalem, in Jesus's this generation, shouldn't you address the material that promised the coming of kingdom at that time?
How about the coming of the kingdom at the shattering of the power of the holy people in Dan 12 / Mat 13? Shouldn't you address that and try to show that it does not mean that the kingdom of God comes at the fall of Jerusalem?
I'm not sure why you seem to be ignoring the wealth of material in the scriptures teaching that the kingdom comes at the fall of Jerusalem.