The kingdom of God.

[Checkpoint]

Some seem to think it is entirely future, while others give the impression they are always thinking of it as present, and to not be looking at the future in kingdom terms at all.

Jesus had much to say about the kingdom, including this:

Luke 16:

6 The Law and the Prophets were until John; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and everyone is being zealously urged into it.

So, where do you stand as to whether it is present, future, or has both a present and a future aspect?

On what basis?

According to which scriptures?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 126 by onewithhim]

4) What do these two scriptures mean: Isaiah 9:6,7; Daniel 2:44 ?

So can I just get this clear, Isaiah 9 speaks of Jesus Christ heading a government.

- Is this something different from the Kingdom which he also heads? Does he head two seperate ruling authorities or just the one?

[JehovahsWitness]

God's kingdom will be set up "in the days of those kings", [...] "those kings" represented the Roman empire that was ruling during the time of Jesus.

So are you saying that the kingdom was "set up" during the reign or the Roman cesars? That before Rome God's kingdom had not been "set up"?

[2timothy316]

God's kingdom will be set up "in the days of those kings", [...] "those kings" represented the Roman empire that was ruling during the time of Jesus.

So are you saying that the kingdom was "set up" during the reign or the Roman cesars? That before Rome God's kingdom had not been "set up"?

If it was setup during the time of the Roman empire then why was it immediately 'trampled'?

Jesus said,
"Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled." Luke 21:24

Another translation for the word 'trampled' is 'under foot'.

What are is the 'appointed times of the nations'? Why is Jerusalem, the seat of God's rulership, under the foot of the nations and for how long?

[Checkpoint]

God's kingdom will be set up "in the days of those kings", [...] "those kings" represented the Roman empire that was ruling during the time of Jesus.

So are you saying that the kingdom was "set up" during the reign or the Roman cesars? That before Rome God's kingdom had not been "set up"?

I am saying what the verse says, and equating that time as during the Roman Empire.

The kingdom "set up" was of a different nature to what had been before.

If it was setup during the time of the Roman empire then why was it immediately 'trampled'?

Jesus said,
"Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled." Luke 21:24

Another translation for the word 'trampled' is 'under foot'.

What are is the 'appointed times of the nations'? Why is Jerusalem, the seat of God's rulership, under the foot of the nations and for how long?

Be cause it was no longer "the seat God's rulership" and so was treated as you described.

Paul explains the change well in Galatians 4:

[Monta]

[Replying to post 173 by 2timothy316]


"Jesus said,
"Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled." Luke 21:24

Another translation for the word 'trampled' is 'under foot'.

What are is the 'appointed times of the nations'? Why is Jerusalem, the seat of God's rulership, under the foot of the nations and for how long?"

This could be talking about complete destruction of Jerusalem; Revelation talks about filthy Jerusalem which now it is where blood has and is being spilled.

The Holy Jerusalem descends from heaven as it clearly describes its streets of gold, no need for the sun as the light of God/wisdom will be their light - all spiritual significance.

[Checkpoint]

God's kingdom will be set up "in the days of those kings", [...] "those kings" represented the Roman empire that was ruling during the time of Jesus.

So are you saying that the kingdom was "set up" during the reign or the Roman cesars? That before Rome God's kingdom had not been "set up"?

I am saying what the verse says, and equating that time as during the Roman Empire.

The kingdom "set up" was of a different nature to what had been before.

If it was setup during the time of the Roman empire then why was it immediately 'trampled'?

Jesus said,
"Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled." Luke 21:24

Another translation for the word 'trampled' is 'under foot'.

What are is the 'appointed times of the nations'? Why is Jerusalem, the seat of God's rulership, under the foot of the nations and for how long?

Be cause it was no longer "the seat God's rulership" and so was treated as you described.

Paul explains the change well in Galatians 4:21-31.

The kingdom is of the Jerusalem above, of the Spirit, not of the Jerusalem below, of the flesh.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 175 by Checkpoint]

So are you saying that the kingdom was "set up" during the reign or the Roman cesars? That before Rome God's kingdom had not been "set up"?

I am saying what the verse says, and equating that time as during the Roman Empire.

So is that a "yes" or a "no" (I don't know is an acceptable answer)

I will remind you of the question (please spare me the vague, "grey-speak" avoidance, double speak non-answers...).

Are you saying that the kingdom was "set up" during the reign of the Roman cesars?




JW

[tam]

{snip}... a monarchical government has a king (or queen).

So which kind of Government does Jesus head?

ISAIAH 9:6
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called [...] Prince of Peace.

I'm not sure why you snipped all that came before that comment, but if we are going by the definition that you provided, He is a King; therefore, His government would be a monarchical government.

Peace to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 137 by 2timothy316]

I don't know if people are being evasive, I think its more that is the way they have been taught; meaningless expressionss are the mainstay of religions that have no real answers and it all comes to a head with the kingdom because for them its the great unknown; simply put, they don't know what God's kingdom is! I don't think its a "ploy" (well for some it is, but for most not), its just when they asked their pastors "What is God's Kingdom?" they were told "Blah blah blah blah - doesn't mean anything - blah blah blah blah .. Go in peace my son and for pity's sake don't ask me any more questions"

For those that make an effort to read the bible it often comes down to not knowing the difference between Jehovah's Sovereignty and the Messianic kingdom, so they end up trying to encompass every scripture they have ever read with the word king or ruler in it together thus the ... "It has always been, is now, will be in the future, is in heaven but on earth and everwhere, everyone is in it, nobody is in it it stared in the past but it will start in the future , it is coming, arrived, yet promised, yet past yet future, yet now... etc"

It would be funny if it weren't so important.



JW

The confusion is exactly what Satan wants. Remember Eve. Satan asked, 'is it so'? (Gen 3:1)

Satan might as well be asking, 'is it so that the kingdom of God is real'? It is up to the Eve's (we are all Eve) of the world to give their answer, yes or no. An answer of 'yes and no' is a no. I feel you on the importance of it all too. We are doing the best we can though. If a person doesn't want to see it or Jehovah will not let them see it, then really we might as well be punching at air.

I agree that there is nothing we can do if a person doesn't want to "see." (I don't believe that Jehovah ever keeps someone from seeing the truth.) All we can do is try to tell them. They are responsible for their own "sight."

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 141 by Checkpoint]

Uh-huh. True. It's just like if Prince Charles of Great Britain is set to take over ruling the kingdom (his mother having died or abdicated or whatever), and before he is officially installed as king he goes riding through London in one of his limousines, with the people calling out, "Save, we pray, our king!" Does this mean he was already installed as the king? No, because he wasn't. So what does it mean? That they recognize that Prince Charles has been designated as their future king, though he hasn't formally taken the throne as yet.

Bada bing. Bada boom.

We are not talking about how man operates but how God does.

Jesus made that very clear.

Are you saying that my analogy is erroneous? Would you explain why you think this?