Joel wrote:
B. McCausland, thank you. The whole book of Revelation is full of figures and pictures as well as other End Times books in Scripture. Dispensationalism comes from trying to take everything in Revelation literally.

See eternity explains sequence of happenings to subdits living in the context of time with quantifying terms of their own perception.

James Thomas wrote:
Where is the biblical warrant that demands the thousand years to be interpreted literally a thousand years ?

E. G. If revelation 20 is meant to be literal, how a literal physical chain can be used to bind a wicked spirit? And how long or strong does the chain need to be?
If you take the text as literal this makes no sense. But if you understand that the passage is talking about God holding Satan in restrain, as a dog on a lead, for him to fulfill his purposes, it does.

Or how is it that the first resurrection mention in the same chapter grants those experiencing it reigning with Christ?
Because the first resurrection speaks of the new birth.

"We are risen with Christ unto new life"
"I assign unto you a kingdom"

Joel wrote:
All very good comments, brothers. May God bless us all with clear understanding of the Scriptures. The word “eschatology” is not found in the English Bible, mine are least, but we can still use it although it means different things to each of us.

Mike wrote:
Good examples, B., thanks! I guess my issue is not with using 1000 as a figure of speech so much as using the term millenium when the term is definition limited to a real time period. Unlike 1000, millenium is poorly used when used as a figure.

John UK wrote:
1. ... God had a great concern for the poor in our midst.
... laws were given which assisted the poor and ensured they did not starve to death.

2. ... the new apostolic church operated what we would call today an anti-capitalist system.

3. ... "Christian Communism" is probably more valid than "Christian Capitalism"

2. Sorry John, but the NT as much as the OT is full of enterprise, personal initiative towards profit making in view to be able to help others with it when needed. This is capitalism.

Mike wrote:
And we should discern the figures from things that aren't. The Bible didn't come up with the term millenium. Why use a word that has specific meaning to describe a figure? When you say we are in the millenium, you are saying we are in a specific period of time. When the Bible means to convey a non-specific period, doesn't it often use the term "..a time.."? Eccl. 3 as example.

See,

"For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills."

"He has remembered his covenant for ever, the word which he commanded to a thousand generations."

John UK wrote:
Brother, do you believe then that there are some similarities between certain aspects of communism and the teaching of Jehovah in the OT and Jesus and the apostles in the NT?

My main misgiving about the issue is the parting grounds of communism as a philosophy and its code of ethics, which greatly difer, and even contradict, the bottom line of biblical philanthropy.

John UK wrote:
Sister B, there might have been just cause for upset, if Bro US really imagined and was portraying that folks in the UK really thought that the services provided by the NHS were somehow delivered without any cost to anyone.
... in which case, he would have been attempting to upset us, telling us in no uncertain terms that folks who think the NHS services are free, are without doubt fools.
But none of us in the UK say that the services are "free", but "free at the point of use". There is a world of difference between these two.

"free at the point of use" which is true.

We are not dismissing how this is made possible or denying how it is financed, neither its viability.

Sir, it appears you like playing semantics.

Semantics is when we insist in giving a meaning different to the obvious by subterfuge
E. G. Playing semantics is denying that a child can be known also as a kid, a boy or a daughter.
Any of these names does not invalidate the first, but semantics will insist it does in a given setting.

Unprofitable Servant wrote:
You could say it is prepaid through taxes and high fuel cost. It is like a buy ohe get one free offer, the second item is at no extra cost but if you didn't spend the money for the first one you wouldn't be able to enjoy the second one "free". That doesn't even count the cost of excessive delays, limited time with an actual physician, denied procedures and even out of pocket co-pays. To say it is free at any point is at best, misleading.

Mike wrote:
I wonder why it is often thought prayer isn't answered if the answer is no?

See,
"when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, *I will not hear*: your hands are full of blood."

"... pray not thou for this people, neither lift up a cry or prayer for them: for *I will not hear them* in the time that they cry unto me ..."

In short,
"He that turns away his ear from hearing the law,
even his prayer shall be abomination."

**

QC
Sensible advice for brother John

The Quiet Christian wrote:
Deep question, John. In the Lord's incredible Providence, He has ordained that we should ask Him and He should answer. The Lord is so far above us that often the "why" of why He does things this way is beyond me.
What think thee on said topic?

There are prayers God will not answer because the issues are the direct consequence of man's sin collectively which need addressed.

Prayer is not a merry-go-round charm, or a mere wishful thinking that magically may erase man's wrong doings without a consequence.

Prayer is answered when people *turn*.
See prayer is not the same as turning, but prayer and turning go together,

"If my people, ... pray, ... *and turn* from their wicked ways;
*then* will I hear ... "

Eventually God might 'shake' the heavens and the earth to put an end to an era of sin, but he does this often by bringing peoples to their knees with all the consequences attached to it.

**

Stevenr
We trust God working inside the parameters of his laws and statutes, not according to our reasoning and logic.
He expects and commands us to be prudent, yet he has a blue print for the theory of state, law and order, by which refined western governments have thrived, in contrast to tribal rule.
The two things are mixed up in the American way of thinking regarding the issue.

One wonders wrote:
Didn’t mean to leave out part of quote that refers to the carrying the sword for areas in which there is known present danger like a church that is in a neighborhood that has 7 homicides within 2 miles of it. Hope that puts it back in context