The Bible teaches that the kingdom of God has been established and exists on earth now."

Well, since there was no reply, I shall only advance a couple of passages that I intended to introduce in the first affirmative. First of all, Dan 7: 13-14. I utilize this passage simply because people of Scotty"s mindset have a penchant for citing it as if it supports their position. It doesn"t. It supports mine. Here, Daniel says: "I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed." In that vision, Daniel saw one like the Son of Man (Jesus Christ) who "came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days" (God the Father). And there " in the presence of God the Father " was given Him (Jesus Christ) three things: dominion, glory, and what? A kingdom. Daniel did not say "coming from God the Father" to receive a kingdom, but going to " and going in or with clouds - the Father to receive it. So, mark it, Daniel sees Jesus Christ going to the Father in clouds. To what end? To receive a kingdom. Well, has He done that? I cite Acts 1: 9-11: "And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven." 1. Daniel says Jesus would go to the Father with clouds for the purpose of receiving a kingdom. 2.Luke says that Jesus ascended to the Father, and a cloud received Him. 3.My opponent says Jesus went to the Father and a cloud received Him, but He has yet to receive, or even have, any kingdom at all. Then he advertises himself as a "literal prophecy interpreter". Truth is, my opponent thinks that Jesus Christ went to heaven, sits at the right hand of the Father, yet has received no kingdom at all and rules over no kingdom. And he perverts the prophecy of Daniel to make it read, "I saw " one like the Son of man " come FROM the Ancient of days " and there was given him " a kingdom. Why? He asserts an anachronism and simply wants Jesus right here on earth to establish His kingdom. Scotty, the passage pictures the ascension of Acts 1. Jesus has already gone to God the Father with clouds. He"s already received His kingdom and is now reigning over it. Daniel 7: 13-14 is not a "second coming" passage. It"s an ascension passage. Tell you something else, casually. He ascended to the Father not only to receive a kingdom, but also to receive dominion, according to Daniel. Well, has He received that? "Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: and hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all." (Eph 1: 20-23). Does He have dominion now? Paul says He does. He ascended with clouds to heaven to receive dominion, glory, and a kingdom. Paul says He has the dominion part. So He got that much, anyway. But along comes Scotty and says there is no kingdom here today. I"ve heard these fella go postal and try to retreat and say, "Well, yeah, ok, Jesus has a kingdom, but it"s not HERE." Such nonsense! Where, pray tell, is it? Can you locate it? Then they don a mysterious aura and say, "My kingdom is not of this world". Well, where exactly was Paul when he penned "translated us into the kingdom." Where was he? Where was John when he said the same thing? They were right here on earth, alive and breathing and writing. The meaning of "my kingdom is not of this world" is not that the kingdom does not exist on earth. It means exactly what I believe: the kingdom of Jesus Christ is not conformed to the nature of earthly kingdoms. The White House is in heaven " not over in Jerusalem. His servants do not engage in carnal warfare in defense of His kingdom. Thus, your "spiritually literal" excuse (which is just jibberish for saying it"s figurative in the first place) won"t fly very well as an explanation. Alright, Jesus Christ said, two thousand years ago: "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel." (Mark 1: 15) I"ve asked, "What time is fulfilled?" What was the Lord talking about? I submitted that He had at least partial reference to Daniel 2 because He and His listeners were living in the days of the Roman Empire, the 4th worldwide kingdom. Of course Scotty will take the legs and feet and toes of Daniel"s image and try to stretch them out over a period of two thousand more years " after "the time is fulfilled." In advance, I"ll predict that trying to tack on two thousand years after "the time is fulfilled" isn"t going to work very well, i. e. that dog isn"t going to hunt. But alas, you can try it, Scotty. Ok, you can also tack on the imminency of the ascension, the return to the Father with clouds, as a little more of that "the time is fulfilled." That"s exactly why John and Jesus said the kingdom was "at hand", "near", to "shortly come to pass." Why? Because Jesus returned to the Father to receive a kingdom. He"s not coming FROM the Father to receive a kingdom. Just look at the (probable) disparity: (1)Jesus ascended to receive glory. Did He? Paul says, "Yes" (2)Jesus ascended to receive dominion. Did He? Paul say, "Yes" (3)Jesus ascended to receive a kingdom. Did He? Well, it will evolve upon my opponent to elaborate. If yes, where is this kingdom? Where are the citizens of it? Where do they reside? I"ll close. I really didn"t want to introduce a bunch of new arguments, and I typed casually much as I talk. And I"ll post this early in the day so Scotty will have all day long to respond to it. I"d really like him to answer a few questions in the process of replying: (1)What time was fulfilled as per Mark 1: 15? (2)Does the kingdom exist today? (3)Does Jesus reign today? (4)Does Jesus sit on the Throne of David today? (5)If the kingdom does exist today, where is it? (6)Were Paul and the Colossians in the kingdom? (7)If so, are you? And it took me a grand total, Scotty, of 41 minutes to type this reply. That's all. It doesn't take me days to answer an argument, and I do not string out debates over weeks. Also, I will be out-of-town starting Thursday and thus I can't go beyond Wednesday on any debate. Also, I didn't introduce any new arguments: I introduced one more passage in Dan 7 as supportive of Mark 1, "the time is fulfilled." There won't BE any new affirmatives until you respond to the ones previously submitted.