Amen . Rightly dividing the Word of God as usual. The book of Isaiah also has plenty to say about the Reign of the Lord Jesus during the Millennium and the way things will be during this time.
Christ reigns in the believer’s heart most when they are under persecution. Maybe the thousand year reign will just be Him reigning in the hearts of believers during a thousand years of darkness and persecution.
Question hopefully that can be answered. I have been experiencing more and more of what I’ve heard it called as Deja Vu. Is that something that happens spiritually, like a discerning gift to warn and tell you that you are on a right path. When that feeling happens should I take note of what I was doing in that moment and where I was?
Jewish wedding symbolism: (A gospel within the gospel) "Let not your heart be troubled: you believe in God, believe also in me. In my Father's house (in heaven) are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I WILL COME AGAIN, and receive you unto myself; *that where I am* there (in heaven) you may be also. And where I go you know, and the way you know." Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way? Jesus saith unto him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life: *no man* comes unto the Father (who art in heaven), *but* by me." {John 14:1-6} -- The time of the wedding was determined by the bridegroom's father and at the time determined by the father the bridegroom would fetch his bride and bring her back to his place prepared for them at his father's house. And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven about the space of half an hour. {Revelation 8:1} But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men {2 Peter 3:7} (Jer 4:23-28, Zeph 3:6) .... Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. {2 Peter 3:13} -- The resurrected saints will enter in the gates of heaven into the new Jerusalem, that has been prepared for us *in heaven* Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. {Revelation 22:14} (But *the rest of the dead* lived not again until the thousand years were finished.) This is the first resurrection. {Revelation 20:5} ^ No man left alive on earth, after Jesus Christ comes again. Knowing that he which raised up the Lord Jesus will raise up us also by Jesus, and will present us with you (in heaven). {2 Corinthians 4:14} To the end [objective] he may establish your hearts unblameable in holiness *before* God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ *with all his saints* {1 Thessalonians 3:13} (The time of the wedding feast) "But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you IN MY FATHER'S KINGDOM." {Matthew 26:29} --The saints, after the thousand years (tabernacle) in heaven, the saints of God will descend with the Father and the Son and the host of heaven, with the new city and we will be spectators in our Creator's new six day creation of the new heavens and of the new earth. (Rev 21:1, Is 66:22-23, Zach 8:3, 14:4) And the goat (scapegoat) will bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land NOT INHABITED: and he will release the goat in the wilderness. {Leviticus 16:22} And when the thousand years are expired, satan (the literal Azazel the scapegoat) will be loosed out of his prison, (also chains of circumstance.) (The resurrection of the condemnation.) And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, GOG and MAGOG, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and DEVOURED them. {Revelation 20:7-9} And the saints will sing; O death, where is your sting? O grave, where is your victory? {1 Corinthians 15:55} These [The Patriarchs] all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed THAT THEY WERE STRANGERS AND PILGRIMS ON THE EARTH. For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country. And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned. But now they desire a better country, THAT IS AN HEAVENLY: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: *for he hath prepared for them a city* {Romans 11:13-16} Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for GREAT IS YOUR REWARD IN HEAVEN: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you. {Matthew 5:12} For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, *we have a building of God* an house not made with hands, eternal *in the heavens* {2 Corinthians 5:1}
It's unfortunate to see our movement continue to get our eschatology from trinitarians because of the modernist-fundamentalist conflict from over 100 years ago. Hopefully someday we will take an objective look at pre-millenial dispensationalism and its origins without the risk of being blacklisted.
I’m not aware that eschatology needs to be reinvented simply because we are Oneness. You are committing a logical fallacy. Because certain Trinitarians agree with us on eschatology that means the eschatology is wrong? We also agree with Trinitarians on the virgin birth, and the inerrancy of Scripture. Should we reinvent those issue also? Being wrong about the godhead doesn’t intrinsically mean you are wrong about other things that don’t stem from it.
@@mikef6063 No, you seem to be thinking I'm saying "because Trinitarians are mostly pre-millenial dispensationalists, we should not be." That is not what I'm saying. I'm saying that we should apply the same theological rigor to our eschatology that we do with our christology. We frequently say about Christology "let's go back to the Bible instead of church history" but we don't apply this logic when it comes to eschatology. The virgin birth is Biblical. The inerrancy of scripture is biblical. The strict separation of the Church and Israel and an inconsistent, Irvin-Baxter-left-behind application of literal -vs-metaphor hermeneutic, is not Biblical. It is sensational. The analogy is apt because if we approach eschatology the same way we encourage people to approach christology (ignoring historical authority and simply looking at scripture), we would not come up with our current eschatological schema.
@@qwertyuiopqwertyuiop0 Umm, if you aren't aware, relatively few UPCI churches advocate Irvin Baxter "post-trib + his own strange additions" teaching, and Dr. Bernard is certainly not advocating for it. You seem to be quite confused. The recognition of the scriptural distinction between Israel and the Church does not arise from Irvin Baxter nor church history. It arises from a consistent literal interpretation of scripture. All other views are products of later corruptions of church history based upon faulty "the Jesus killed Jesus" reasoning (antisemitism) plus the faulty hermeneutic of Origenian/Augustinian allegorism. One of the earliest such corruptions is that of Replacement Theology (the Church replaces Israel in God's program), which arose quite early in the second century, while strangely, they were essentially all still Chiliasts (meaning they expected a literal future Millennium). You are unaware of this? The early Catholic Church eagerly embraced this idea, as well as the Amillennialism that arose from the idea of Greek Gnostic influence on early so-called "church fathers" like Augustine, whose views became Catholic dogma. It was these views that provided the foundation for the multitude of pogroms, the Inquisition, and the overall mentality of the Medieval Church (Amillennialism), which viewed its mission as trying to conquer the world "for Christianity." It was also embraced by the Reformers like Martin Luther, who wrote one of the most bitterly antisemitic books in the history of the church. It was those sentiments that later were fulfilled in the Nazi persecutions of the Jews in the Holocaust, and the cause for the silent pulpits. The Nazi's were simply bringing the ideas of Luther full circle. And the ideas of Luther originate in the false doctrine you seem to be advocating. We can summarize it by saying "from Augustine to Auschwitz". You are on the wrong side of history and the wrong side of biblical doctrine.
Waiting to be born. Or it may be possible that, depending on how close we are to are to the Day of the Lord, they could be alive today, but I doubt it personally.
Jesus said in Mark 9:1 " There are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God come with POWER". So, when did this happen? In Col 1:13 it says, " God has transferred us from the dominion of darkness and TRANSFERRED US TO THE KINGDOM OF HIS BELOVED SON"....so when does God transfer us to the KINGDOM of his beloved Son? Heb 12:28 says that "we have received a kingdom that cannot be shaken", so when did we receive that kingdom? Perhaps David could tell us......either the kingdom is here, or there is some very old people walking around, for they would not taste death until the kingdom came with power....
Briefly, Acts 2 is the answer to all 3 of your questions. During the church age (now) The "...kingdom of God is... righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost." Rom. 14: 17 and "...the kingdom of God is within you." Lk. 17: 21.
You asked: "Jesus said in Mark 9:1 " There are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God come with POWER". So, when did this happen? " This happened when several of the disciples witnessed an early preview of this future coming in glory; when they witnessed what we call the Transfiguration of Christ. You asked: "In Col 1:13 it says, " God has transferred us from the dominion of darkness and TRANSFERRED US TO THE KINGDOM OF HIS BELOVED SON"....so when does God transfer us to the KINGDOM of his beloved Son? Heb 12:28 says that "we have received a kingdom that cannot be shaken", so when did we receive that kingdom?" We are joint-heirs with Christ and will rule and reign with Him in the future kingdom, as scripture tells us. The kingdom of God, or Kingdom of heaven, should be understood in distinction from the future Millennial Reign of Christ, which is a subset within the wider concept of the former. After Pentecost, believers are able to partake in some level of the spiritual aspects of that kingdom, and yet its full earthly manifestation is a future reality. Christ is not ruling on earth from Jerusalem yet, as is promised in the Millennium. Christ has not physically and spiritually restored Israel yet, as is promised in the Millennium. The earth has not yet been partially restored and the effects of the curse partially reversed, as is promised in the Millennium. Satan is not yet bound, as should be abundantly obvious, as is promised in the Millennium. The lambs are not laying down with the wolves, as is promised in the future Millennium. I could go on and on.
@@isadormoti6977 So, when did the power come? In Acts 1:8 Jesus said the apostles would receive POWER from on high when the HS would fall on them and it would happen in Jerusalem. And you are right, it happened in Acts 2, that is when the POWER CAME, also remember in Matt 16:18 Jesus told Peter " I will build MY CHURCH.....I WILL GIVE YOU THE KEYS OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN.." so, church/kingdom are interchangeable here and Peter was given the "KEYS" and Jesus built his church/kingdom starting in Acts 2. His kingdom is a spiritual kingdom, not a physical kingdom and the kingdom that Jesus built on this earth is his church... There is no scripture that Jesus will rule and reign on earth from Jerusalem..... It is apparent we have the kingdom NOW.... I agree with you
@@mikef6063 It clearly says that we HAVE RECEIVED A KINGDOM, does it not? and it clearly says that " some standing there would see the kingdom come with power", does it not? In Acts 1:8 Jesus tells his apostles " You shall receive POWER from on high when the HS has come upon you" and it would happen in Jerusalem, this happens in Acts 2. This is when the kingdom/church started, remember in Matt 16:18 Jesus told Peter that he would build his CHURCH and would give Peter the KEYS to the kingdom of heaven. Peter was given the keys in Acts 2, he preached the first gospel sermon, the DBR of Christ and it says that when they received his word and were baptized, the Lord added them to the saved, his church. The kingdom that Jesus built upon this earth is his church, it is a spiritual kingdom, not a physical one and no where in scripture does it say that Christ will rule on earth in Jerusalem, his kingdom is here or Jesus lied when he said, " some of you standing here will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God come with power", they saw it in Acts 2.
@@DannyLoyd I already answered these questions. As for your last paragraph, you are greatly in error. You desperately need to reacquaint yourself with the Old Testament, then reread the New and see the clear connections that the authors build on. Israel has a future in God's program, and the Church is not Israel. You are committing serious errors and as a result, your downstream conclusions are way off the mark. Take the Bible literally, just like normal speech or writing. The Old Testament DOES speak of all those things VERY CLEARLY. Please review it, and this time do not allegorize it away.
Revelation almost didn’t make the cut to be included in Scripture in the 5th CE. Martin Luther certainly almost yanked Revelation out of the Reformed Bible with the other books he and the Rome Revolters removed from Christian Canon. So. The question one should ask themselves what is the concern with Revelation? Orthodox Christianity accepts Revelation as canon as it was included in the standard of Scripture. But, you will never hear it included in the Divine Liturgy. The Church Fathers warned that this particular book contained too much imagery and was nearly impossible to understand concretely. They warned that Revelation, although canon, could be used to manipulate followers of Christ and harm many. Their wisdom stands - even Dr Bernard states that there is a lot going on and it’s difficult to understand. Best rule of thumb - whenever you read in Revelation, or hear folks teach or proclaim out of Revelation - is to remain skeptical of any conclusion folks come up with - as greater than 90 percent of what folks say is pure speculation. This guards you from harming yourself or others. Why such an emphasis with Revelation in Pop Christianity? Firstly, a Scottish immigrant to the US in the American Revival period got the ear of Moody - and the whole Jesus Saves folks discovered that the Book was influential on the behavior of folks. And the rest is history …. It’s no different today. I remember praying nightly at my church was a young Oneness convert nearly alone most nights. But - someone released a book or something in 1988 - 88 Reasons why Jesus would return in 88… folks caught wind of this teaching and the local church was full of folks praying. Know Jesus in the power of His resurrection. And don’t look at Eschatological books until you solidly understand the Faith… AND when you do read in Revelations, be careful not tie yourself tightly to an opinion. Things in that book have changed … not the scriptures themselves - but how folks teach as so called sound doctrine … has changed with the times. Dr Bernard’s commentary here was certainly central and I didn’t take away anything that I considered outlandish. But at the end of the day - it’s just an opinion. Good job!
You are greatly in error. Revelation not only CAN and SHOULD be understood, but it was MEANT to be studied and understood. Actually it is not that difficult, you simply must first know your Old Testament. There are hundreds of OT allusions in Revelation and if you do not have a solid understand of OT concepts first, you will struggle with Revelation. I want to emphasize that Revelation is the ONLY book of the Bible that actually promises blessings to those who read it!!! Further, the name of the book itself means “unveiling”, indicating that the entire point is for people to UNDERSTAND! Under your view maybe it should be called the Book of Veiling instead of Unveiling. It is typical of Satan to try to first question whether God’s Word is actually God’s Word, then make it seem as if it doesn’t matter, and then act as if any interpretation is simply man’s worthless opinion, and we can’t actually understand or know it. You seem to be following Satan’s algorithm of argumentation. It fails every time.
@@mikef6063 - Hey Mike - thanks for sharing your opinion. As you have said, one needs a solid understanding of OT concepts. What exactly does that look like? Is it how you see it? Or is it how the Branch Davidians saw it? Or is it like how the Seventh Day Adventist interpreted it back in the day? Is what I said wrong because I mentioned Church Fathers? How much Scripture does the average OP ‘know’? Is there a test? And if a wayward doctrine was preached, God forbid, and someone screamed at folks while jumping around shaking a TTOP (Terrible Towels of Pentecost) - is it anointed? My 25 years on a Oneness pew observation is - not everyone is well versed in Scriptures. Your very words proved my point. How many people get wrapped up and off course in the prophetic books… they struggle. And they falter. Let’s examine my assertion: when did the Heterodox became focused on ‘eisgeting’ not exegeting on Revelation and preached from their various desks? Was this focus on Revelation an innovation? And why wasn’t this Book emphasized in Historical Christianity? Pre Trib. Post Trib. Mid Trib. … there is tons of guessing here. And, folks who may not be as scholarly and adept as you are - are harmed by this churn. Like I said. Know Christ God in the power of His resurrection - first. And gradually work your way if you are truly led to by the Holy Spirit … in Eschatology. But make sure your Christology and Theology. And your ecclesiology and your Soteriology are solid - first. Otherwise you will harm others. And yourself. Now, where is that verse that says Search the scriptures - in them you will find eternal life - and who said that? Trust you are well. Lovingly, Cuthbert
@@realmccoy124 All of that flowery text (without much substance I might add) really just seems to boil down to your own internal frustrations as an obvious post-millennialist that Pentecostals don't generally share that misunderstanding. I didn't actually see any good or relevant questions being asked. Just more "we can't know anything so let's not try" babble. If you have any real questions to ask I'll be happy to respond.
@@mikef6063 - perhaps you missed my point entirely in your zeal to cut off my ear with your righteous sword. I’m not Heterodox. And. My canon of Scripture hasn’t changed since it was settled by Council nearly 1500 years ago. Whereas your Bible was modified from that Standard… and as I said, Luther and the lot would have removed Revelation entirely 500 years ago. And. We wouldn’t be having this conversation because you wouldn’t have Revelation to reference. Yes. All scripture is given by the inspiration of God …. But not all scripture is weighted the same. I think it speaks of sincere milk…. And principal teachings… Pretty sure this whole eschatology arena is more weightier than something s new convert is ready to dabble into as new babes. But. Since you’re a champion of the faith. Go for it. Just don’t build a compound in Waco, Texas. Haha. I’m being silly. Cheers. Be encouraged. Lovingly, Cuthbert
@@realmccoy124 No "Cuthbert," perhaps you missed the entire point of my first post, which I notice you have not yet addressed. You keep referring to councils and Luther. All of that is irrelevant to me, since the vast majority of the true church had already accepted all of the NT books prior to those councils. As even Bart Ehrman, the great skeptic and leading world expert on this subject admits in Lost Christianities, "The canon of the New Testament was ratified by widespread consensus rather than by official proclamation." The doctrine of the preservation of scripture refutes your idea that I wouldn't have Revelation if your church councils and reformers didn't agree. God would have preserved His true Word, just as He has. You wrote: "Yes. All scripture is given by the inspiration of God …. But not all scripture is weighted the same. I think it speaks of sincere milk…. And principal teachings…" I'm not sure why you wrote this, but I don't believe it addresses anything I actually said in my first post. You claim "not all scripture is weighted the same". Not sure what you mean or where you got that idea, but I don't think it was from scripture. If you are trying to say that understanding eschatology is not a prerequisite for salvation, then yes of course. Nobody ever claimed otherwise. You wrote: "Pretty sure this whole eschatology arena is more weightier than something s new convert is ready to dabble into as new babes." Pretty sure it's not, since Paul was already teaching the Thessalonians about eschatology within several weeks of their conversion and founding as a new church. The only thing that makes eschatology difficult is those like yourself who either propose it should be ignored, and/or have embraced a deviant view not taught in scripture (such as post-mil). I notice you didn't deny my labeling of you as post-mil/post-trib btw. You said: "But. Since you’re a champion of the faith. Go for it. Just don’t build a compound in Waco, Texas. Haha" We are all called to be champions of the faith, it is a shame you so willingly fall short of that. Hopefully there is time for you to repent. And I'm not sure why you are mentioning Waco or the branch Davidians in response to a simple discussion by Bro Bernard about basic eschatology. Why has this so threatened you? Why are you so triggered? It seems your church didn't do a good job of grounding you in sound teaching, and you now are convinced nothing can be known with any level of confidence. For that I blame them, and you have my sympathy. The church should be teaching more of this, not less. I think the only thing you've said that I agree with is that the average UPCI pewsitter has a low level of understanding of the Bible. THAT is the truth for sure in my experience. Jumping and shouting and music seem to be the goal, or at least the main emphasis, not a sound and systematic study of the scriptures.
Thank you brother Bernard great teaching, may GOD'S peace and presence continue with you forever.
Praise the Lord! Thank you Dr. Bernard for another great teaching. 🙏
Praise God 🙏
Thank you for the explanation because you give me the understanding about the millennial kingdom.
God bless you more 🙏
Love these explanations
Amén
Amen . Rightly dividing the Word of God as usual. The book of Isaiah also has plenty to say about the Reign of the Lord Jesus during the Millennium and the way things will be during this time.
Where does Isaiah talk about the Millenium? I would like to check it out.
@@jlar1984 oh sure Isaiah chp 11 gives a description of it.
53 is the most messianic then liok around for context. Psalam 22 is excellent.@@jlar1984
❤❤❤❤❤
Christ reigns in the believer’s heart most when they are under persecution. Maybe the thousand year reign will just be Him reigning in the hearts of believers during a thousand years of darkness and persecution.
Is a literal kingdom
Isn't the intro too lengthy
Question hopefully that can be answered.
I have been experiencing more and more of what I’ve heard it called as Deja Vu. Is that something that happens spiritually, like a discerning gift to warn and tell you that you are on a right path. When that feeling happens should I take note of what I was doing in that moment and where I was?
Jewish wedding symbolism:
(A gospel within the gospel)
"Let not your heart be troubled: you believe in God, believe also in me.
In my Father's house (in heaven) are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
And if I go and prepare a place for you, I WILL COME AGAIN, and receive you unto myself; *that where I am* there (in heaven) you may be also.
And where I go you know, and the way you know."
Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?
Jesus saith unto him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life: *no man* comes unto the Father (who art in heaven), *but* by me."
{John 14:1-6}
-- The time of the wedding was determined by the bridegroom's father and at the time determined by the father the bridegroom would fetch his bride and bring her back to his place prepared for them at his father's house.
And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven about the space of half an hour.
{Revelation 8:1}
But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men
{2 Peter 3:7} (Jer 4:23-28, Zeph 3:6)
....
Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.
{2 Peter 3:13}
-- The resurrected saints will enter in the gates of heaven into the new Jerusalem, that has been prepared for us *in heaven*
Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
{Revelation 22:14}
(But *the rest of the dead* lived not again until the thousand years were finished.) This is the first resurrection.
{Revelation 20:5}
^
No man left alive on earth, after Jesus Christ comes again.
Knowing that he which raised up the Lord Jesus will raise up us also by Jesus, and will present us with you (in heaven).
{2 Corinthians 4:14}
To the end [objective] he may establish your hearts unblameable in holiness *before* God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ *with all his saints*
{1 Thessalonians 3:13}
(The time of the wedding feast)
"But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you IN MY FATHER'S KINGDOM."
{Matthew 26:29}
--The saints, after the thousand years (tabernacle) in heaven, the saints of God will descend with the Father and the Son and the host of heaven, with the new city and we will be spectators in our Creator's new six day creation of the new heavens and of the new earth. (Rev 21:1, Is 66:22-23, Zach 8:3, 14:4)
And the goat (scapegoat) will bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land NOT INHABITED: and he will release the goat in the wilderness.
{Leviticus 16:22}
And when the thousand years are expired, satan (the literal Azazel the scapegoat) will be loosed out of his prison, (also chains of circumstance.)
(The resurrection of the condemnation.)
And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
And will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, GOG and MAGOG, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and DEVOURED them.
{Revelation 20:7-9}
And the saints will sing;
O death, where is your sting? O grave, where is your victory?
{1 Corinthians 15:55}
These [The Patriarchs] all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed THAT THEY WERE STRANGERS AND PILGRIMS ON THE EARTH.
For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.
And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned.
But now they desire a better country, THAT IS AN HEAVENLY: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: *for he hath prepared for them a city*
{Romans 11:13-16}
Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for GREAT IS YOUR REWARD IN HEAVEN: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.
{Matthew 5:12}
For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, *we have a building of God* an house not made with hands, eternal *in the heavens*
{2 Corinthians 5:1}
It's unfortunate to see our movement continue to get our eschatology from trinitarians because of the modernist-fundamentalist conflict from over 100 years ago.
Hopefully someday we will take an objective look at pre-millenial dispensationalism and its origins without the risk of being blacklisted.
I’m not aware that eschatology needs to be reinvented simply because we are Oneness. You are committing a logical fallacy. Because certain Trinitarians agree with us on eschatology that means the eschatology is wrong? We also agree with Trinitarians on the virgin birth, and the inerrancy of Scripture. Should we reinvent those issue also? Being wrong about the godhead doesn’t intrinsically mean you are wrong about other things that don’t stem from it.
@@mikef6063 No, you seem to be thinking I'm saying "because Trinitarians are mostly pre-millenial dispensationalists, we should not be." That is not what I'm saying. I'm saying that we should apply the same theological rigor to our eschatology that we do with our christology. We frequently say about Christology "let's go back to the Bible instead of church history" but we don't apply this logic when it comes to eschatology. The virgin birth is Biblical. The inerrancy of scripture is biblical. The strict separation of the Church and Israel and an inconsistent, Irvin-Baxter-left-behind application of literal -vs-metaphor hermeneutic, is not Biblical. It is sensational.
The analogy is apt because if we approach eschatology the same way we encourage people to approach christology (ignoring historical authority and simply looking at scripture), we would not come up with our current eschatological schema.
@@qwertyuiopqwertyuiop0 Umm, if you aren't aware, relatively few UPCI churches advocate Irvin Baxter "post-trib + his own strange additions" teaching, and Dr. Bernard is certainly not advocating for it.
You seem to be quite confused. The recognition of the scriptural distinction between Israel and the Church does not arise from Irvin Baxter nor church history. It arises from a consistent literal interpretation of scripture. All other views are products of later corruptions of church history based upon faulty "the Jesus killed Jesus" reasoning (antisemitism) plus the faulty hermeneutic of Origenian/Augustinian allegorism. One of the earliest such corruptions is that of Replacement Theology (the Church replaces Israel in God's program), which arose quite early in the second century, while strangely, they were essentially all still Chiliasts (meaning they expected a literal future Millennium). You are unaware of this? The early Catholic Church eagerly embraced this idea, as well as the Amillennialism that arose from the idea of Greek Gnostic influence on early so-called "church fathers" like Augustine, whose views became Catholic dogma. It was these views that provided the foundation for the multitude of pogroms, the Inquisition, and the overall mentality of the Medieval Church (Amillennialism), which viewed its mission as trying to conquer the world "for Christianity." It was also embraced by the Reformers like Martin Luther, who wrote one of the most bitterly antisemitic books in the history of the church. It was those sentiments that later were fulfilled in the Nazi persecutions of the Jews in the Holocaust, and the cause for the silent pulpits. The Nazi's were simply bringing the ideas of Luther full circle. And the ideas of Luther originate in the false doctrine you seem to be advocating. We can summarize it by saying "from Augustine to Auschwitz". You are on the wrong side of history and the wrong side of biblical doctrine.
If the 144,000 are waiting to be resurrected when the 1,000 year reign of Jesus starts, where are the 144,000 now?
Waiting to be born. Or it may be possible that, depending on how close we are to are to the Day of the Lord, they could be alive today, but I doubt it personally.
Jesus said in Mark 9:1 " There are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God come with POWER". So, when did this happen? In Col 1:13 it says, " God has transferred us from the dominion of darkness and TRANSFERRED US TO THE KINGDOM OF HIS BELOVED SON"....so when does God transfer us to the KINGDOM of his beloved Son? Heb 12:28 says that "we have received a kingdom that cannot be shaken", so when did we receive that kingdom?
Perhaps David could tell us......either the kingdom is here, or there is some very old people walking around, for they would not taste death until the kingdom came with power....
Briefly, Acts 2 is the answer to all 3 of your questions.
During the church age (now) The "...kingdom of God is... righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost." Rom. 14: 17 and "...the kingdom of God is within you." Lk. 17: 21.
You asked: "Jesus said in Mark 9:1 " There are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God come with POWER". So, when did this happen? "
This happened when several of the disciples witnessed an early preview of this future coming in glory; when they witnessed what we call the Transfiguration of Christ.
You asked: "In Col 1:13 it says, " God has transferred us from the dominion of darkness and TRANSFERRED US TO THE KINGDOM OF HIS BELOVED SON"....so when does God transfer us to the KINGDOM of his beloved Son? Heb 12:28 says that "we have received a kingdom that cannot be shaken", so when did we receive that kingdom?"
We are joint-heirs with Christ and will rule and reign with Him in the future kingdom, as scripture tells us. The kingdom of God, or Kingdom of heaven, should be understood in distinction from the future Millennial Reign of Christ, which is a subset within the wider concept of the former. After Pentecost, believers are able to partake in some level of the spiritual aspects of that kingdom, and yet its full earthly manifestation is a future reality. Christ is not ruling on earth from Jerusalem yet, as is promised in the Millennium. Christ has not physically and spiritually restored Israel yet, as is promised in the Millennium. The earth has not yet been partially restored and the effects of the curse partially reversed, as is promised in the Millennium. Satan is not yet bound, as should be abundantly obvious, as is promised in the Millennium. The lambs are not laying down with the wolves, as is promised in the future Millennium. I could go on and on.
@@isadormoti6977 So, when did the power come? In Acts 1:8 Jesus said the apostles would receive POWER from on high when the HS would fall on them and it would happen in Jerusalem. And you are right, it happened in Acts 2, that is when the POWER CAME, also remember in Matt 16:18 Jesus told Peter " I will build MY CHURCH.....I WILL GIVE YOU THE KEYS OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN.." so, church/kingdom are interchangeable here and Peter was given the "KEYS" and Jesus built his church/kingdom starting in Acts 2.
His kingdom is a spiritual kingdom, not a physical kingdom and the kingdom that Jesus built on this earth is his church...
There is no scripture that Jesus will rule and reign on earth from Jerusalem..... It is apparent we have the kingdom NOW.... I agree with you
@@mikef6063 It clearly says that we HAVE RECEIVED A KINGDOM, does it not? and it clearly says that " some standing there would see the kingdom come with power", does it not? In Acts 1:8 Jesus tells his apostles " You shall receive POWER from on high when the HS has come upon you" and it would happen in Jerusalem, this happens in Acts 2. This is when the kingdom/church started, remember in Matt 16:18 Jesus told Peter that he would build his CHURCH and would give Peter the KEYS to the kingdom of heaven. Peter was given the keys in Acts 2, he preached the first gospel sermon, the DBR of Christ and it says that when they received his word and were baptized, the Lord added them to the saved, his church.
The kingdom that Jesus built upon this earth is his church, it is a spiritual kingdom, not a physical one and no where in scripture does it say that Christ will rule on earth in Jerusalem, his kingdom is here or Jesus lied when he said, " some of you standing here will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God come with power", they saw it in Acts 2.
@@DannyLoyd I already answered these questions. As for your last paragraph, you are greatly in error. You desperately need to reacquaint yourself with the Old Testament, then reread the New and see the clear connections that the authors build on. Israel has a future in God's program, and the Church is not Israel. You are committing serious errors and as a result, your downstream conclusions are way off the mark. Take the Bible literally, just like normal speech or writing. The Old Testament DOES speak of all those things VERY CLEARLY. Please review it, and this time do not allegorize it away.
Amazing that a man so learned and anointed can miss entirely the book of Revelation and eschatology!
Revelation almost didn’t make the cut to be included in Scripture in the 5th CE. Martin Luther certainly almost yanked Revelation out of the Reformed Bible with the other books he and the Rome Revolters removed from Christian Canon.
So. The question one should ask themselves what is the concern with Revelation?
Orthodox Christianity accepts Revelation as canon as it was included in the standard of Scripture. But, you will never hear it included in the Divine Liturgy. The Church Fathers warned that this particular book contained too much imagery and was nearly impossible to understand concretely. They warned that Revelation, although canon, could be used to manipulate followers of Christ and harm many.
Their wisdom stands - even Dr Bernard states that there is a lot going on and it’s difficult to understand.
Best rule of thumb - whenever you read in Revelation, or hear folks teach or proclaim out of Revelation - is to remain skeptical of any conclusion folks come up with - as greater than 90 percent of what folks say is pure speculation. This guards you from harming yourself or others.
Why such an emphasis with Revelation in Pop Christianity? Firstly, a Scottish immigrant to the US in the American Revival period got the ear of Moody - and the whole Jesus Saves folks discovered that the Book was influential on the behavior of folks. And the rest is history ….
It’s no different today. I remember praying nightly at my church was a young Oneness convert nearly alone most nights. But - someone released a book or something in 1988 - 88 Reasons why Jesus would return in 88… folks caught wind of this teaching and the local church was full of folks praying.
Know Jesus in the power of His resurrection. And don’t look at Eschatological books until you solidly understand the Faith… AND when you do read in Revelations, be careful not tie yourself tightly to an opinion. Things in that book have changed … not the scriptures themselves - but how folks teach as so called sound doctrine … has changed with the times.
Dr Bernard’s commentary here was certainly central and I didn’t take away anything that I considered outlandish. But at the end of the day - it’s just an opinion. Good job!
You are greatly in error. Revelation not only CAN and SHOULD be understood, but it was MEANT to be studied and understood. Actually it is not that difficult, you simply must first know your Old Testament. There are hundreds of OT allusions in Revelation and if you do not have a solid understand of OT concepts first, you will struggle with Revelation.
I want to emphasize that Revelation is the ONLY book of the Bible that actually promises blessings to those who read it!!! Further, the name of the book itself means “unveiling”, indicating that the entire point is for people to UNDERSTAND! Under your view maybe it should be called the Book of Veiling instead of Unveiling.
It is typical of Satan to try to first question whether God’s Word is actually God’s Word, then make it seem as if it doesn’t matter, and then act as if any interpretation is simply man’s worthless opinion, and we can’t actually understand or know it. You seem to be following Satan’s algorithm of argumentation. It fails every time.
@@mikef6063 - Hey Mike - thanks for sharing your opinion. As you have said, one needs a solid understanding of OT concepts. What exactly does that look like? Is it how you see it? Or is it how the Branch Davidians saw it? Or is it like how the Seventh Day Adventist interpreted it back in the day?
Is what I said wrong because I mentioned Church Fathers?
How much Scripture does the average OP ‘know’? Is there a test? And if a wayward doctrine was preached, God forbid, and someone screamed at folks while jumping around shaking a TTOP (Terrible Towels of Pentecost) - is it anointed? My 25 years on a Oneness pew observation is - not everyone is well versed in Scriptures.
Your very words proved my point. How many people get wrapped up and off course in the prophetic books… they struggle. And they falter.
Let’s examine my assertion: when did the Heterodox became focused on ‘eisgeting’ not exegeting on Revelation and preached from their various desks?
Was this focus on Revelation an innovation? And why wasn’t this Book emphasized in Historical Christianity?
Pre Trib. Post Trib. Mid Trib. … there is tons of guessing here. And, folks who may not be as scholarly and adept as you are - are harmed by this churn.
Like I said. Know Christ God in the power of His resurrection - first. And gradually work your way if you are truly led to by the Holy Spirit … in Eschatology. But make sure your Christology and Theology. And your ecclesiology and your Soteriology are solid - first.
Otherwise you will harm others. And yourself.
Now, where is that verse that says Search the scriptures - in them you will find eternal life - and who said that?
Trust you are well. Lovingly, Cuthbert
@@realmccoy124 All of that flowery text (without much substance I might add) really just seems to boil down to your own internal frustrations as an obvious post-millennialist that Pentecostals don't generally share that misunderstanding. I didn't actually see any good or relevant questions being asked. Just more "we can't know anything so let's not try" babble. If you have any real questions to ask I'll be happy to respond.
@@mikef6063 - perhaps you missed my point entirely in your zeal to cut off my ear with your righteous sword.
I’m not Heterodox. And. My canon of Scripture hasn’t changed since it was settled by Council nearly 1500 years ago. Whereas your Bible was modified from that Standard… and as I said, Luther and the lot would have removed Revelation entirely 500 years ago. And. We wouldn’t be having this conversation because you wouldn’t have Revelation to reference.
Yes. All scripture is given by the inspiration of God …. But not all scripture is weighted the same. I think it speaks of sincere milk…. And principal teachings…
Pretty sure this whole eschatology arena is more weightier than something s new convert is ready to dabble into as new babes.
But. Since you’re a champion of the faith. Go for it. Just don’t build a compound in Waco, Texas. Haha. I’m being silly. Cheers. Be encouraged. Lovingly, Cuthbert
@@realmccoy124 No "Cuthbert," perhaps you missed the entire point of my first post, which I notice you have not yet addressed.
You keep referring to councils and Luther. All of that is irrelevant to me, since the vast majority of the true church had already accepted all of the NT books prior to those councils. As even Bart Ehrman, the great skeptic and leading world expert on this subject admits in Lost Christianities, "The canon of the New Testament was ratified by widespread consensus rather than by official proclamation." The doctrine of the preservation of scripture refutes your idea that I wouldn't have Revelation if your church councils and reformers didn't agree. God would have preserved His true Word, just as He has.
You wrote: "Yes. All scripture is given by the inspiration of God …. But not all scripture is weighted the same. I think it speaks of sincere milk…. And principal teachings…"
I'm not sure why you wrote this, but I don't believe it addresses anything I actually said in my first post. You claim "not all scripture is weighted the same". Not sure what you mean or where you got that idea, but I don't think it was from scripture. If you are trying to say that understanding eschatology is not a prerequisite for salvation, then yes of course. Nobody ever claimed otherwise.
You wrote: "Pretty sure this whole eschatology arena is more weightier than something s new convert is ready to dabble into as new babes."
Pretty sure it's not, since Paul was already teaching the Thessalonians about eschatology within several weeks of their conversion and founding as a new church. The only thing that makes eschatology difficult is those like yourself who either propose it should be ignored, and/or have embraced a deviant view not taught in scripture (such as post-mil). I notice you didn't deny my labeling of you as post-mil/post-trib btw.
You said: "But. Since you’re a champion of the faith. Go for it. Just don’t build a compound in Waco, Texas. Haha"
We are all called to be champions of the faith, it is a shame you so willingly fall short of that. Hopefully there is time for you to repent. And I'm not sure why you are mentioning Waco or the branch Davidians in response to a simple discussion by Bro Bernard about basic eschatology. Why has this so threatened you? Why are you so triggered? It seems your church didn't do a good job of grounding you in sound teaching, and you now are convinced nothing can be known with any level of confidence. For that I blame them, and you have my sympathy. The church should be teaching more of this, not less.
I think the only thing you've said that I agree with is that the average UPCI pewsitter has a low level of understanding of the Bible. THAT is the truth for sure in my experience. Jumping and shouting and music seem to be the goal, or at least the main emphasis, not a sound and systematic study of the scriptures.