The Kingdom of Jesus Christ was set up and established in the 1st Century

I do agree with my opponent that I could have posted by entire speech without reading her arguments, but I did say I would cover them in this round. I find it interesting that my opponent stresses that there has never been a kingdom under Jesus Christ before. So, if we are to concentrate solely on that then we are concentrating on a time period of 1,000 years, scene that is how long scripture says Christ rules for. That kingdom is in fact the subject of the "Covenant for a Kingdom" whihc Christ made with his disciples in the upper room before he died. My opponent makes a big thing oh John the Baptiser saying "The Kingdom is near (or at hand)", and indeed it was, in the person of the king designate, God's son, Jesus Christ, in the same sense that Jesus told the scribes and Pharisees (Luke 17:21) ASV(i) 21 neither shall they say, Lo, here! or, There! for lo, the kingdom of God is within you. Notice especially that Christ says "the kingdom of God is within you", not "will be", but "is" this raises the question therefore, was the kingdom already set up? Well not according to my opponent, and in fact not to me either. However it does somewhat more than the imminence that my opponent claims for other statements. My opponent then refers to Matthew 4:17 which also uses the phrase "at hand" but surely this is used in precisely the same sense as by John the Baptiser, and Jesus saying the kingdom was within them at Luke 17:21. No imminence there, simply proximity of the king designate. Again in Mark 1:14,15, where my opponent cites the same basic phraseology, and again the intent is the same, not the imminence of the kingdom but the proximity of the king designate.The question what time was fulfilled is a good one and yet her answer suffers from precisely the same problem of tense as previously. Jesus says that the time is fulfilled, not "will be" but "is", and since one thing we are both agreed on is that the kingdom was not set up at that time Jesus cannot be referring to it in the way she implies. Is my opponent merely reading into those scriptures something she wishes to see? A dangerous practice if that is the case. The understanding of "near" and "at hand" in the sense it is so obviously used does not preclude the kingdom not being set up until approximately 1914. Yes, the phrases mean exactly what God wished them to mean. Nothing more, nothing less, to paraphrase Lewis Carrol. I do not speculate. I simply use the apparent long term meaning of Daniel 4 and foolw this reasoning: CALCULATING THE "SEVEN TIMES" of Daniel. "Seven times" = 7 X 360 = 2,520 years A Biblical "time," or year = 12 X 30 days = 360. (Rev. 11:2,"3; 12:6,"14) In the fulfillment of the "seven times" each day equals one year. (Ezek. 4:6; Num. 14:34) Early October, 607"B.C.E., to December 31,"607"B.C.E.= 1/4 year January 1,"606"B.C.E., to December 31,"1"B.C.E. = 606 years January 1,"1"C.E., to December 31,"1913 = 1,913 years January 1,"1914, to early October, 1914 = 3/4 year Total: 2,520 years That seems to me a reasonable calculations which appears to be born out by the history of the last 150 years or nearly. The "twin" prophecy at Daniel 2 has a long term fulfilment also, which fits in nicely with the "beast with 7 heads and ten horns of Revelation. and that is a succession of powers which appears to work out to: The head of gold represented the Babylonian Empire. The breasts and arms of silver depicted Medo-Persia. The belly and thighs of copper pointed to ancient Greece. The legs of iron pictured the Roman Empire. The feet, an amalgam of iron and clay, symbolize the politically and socially incohesive state of affairs during the time of the Anglo-American world power. Fanciful? Possibly but it is significant that all of these powers had a profound effect on God's people. The apparent gap between the Roman Empire and the Anglo-American alliance could be explained by the fact that the Roman Empire eventually became the Holy Roman Empire, of which even Nazi Germany was recognised to be a part. My opponent speculates on Mark 9:1. This can be understood in a number of ways, the most popular being that some of those did indeed see the kingdom of God in a vision during the transfiguration, to which Peter later referred: 2 Peter 1:17 ASV(i) 17 For he received from God the Father honor and glory, when there was borne such a voice to him by the Majestic Glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased: Here Peter quotes the words heard during tat transfiguration scene as recorded at Matthew 17:2-5 ASV(i) 2 and he was transfigured before them; and his face did shine as the sun, and his garments became white as the light. 3 And behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elijah talking with him. 4 And Peter answered, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, I will make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah. 5 While he was yet speaking, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold, a voice out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him. In 1914 or thereabouts, these ones would have been in heaven with the Christ taking up their thrones of co-ruler-ship. Why were they still expectant? Well why did the JWs expect Armageddon to come straight away in 1914? Simpy because they expected things to happen more quickly than God intended them to, and God did not enlighten them until it was His time to do so. It is a mistake easily made by those who are eager to see that kingdom ruling the earth with all it promises. After all, Even Jesus did not know when ti was going to happen at that stage. Matthew 24:36 ASV(i) 36 But of that day and hour knoweth no one, not even the angels of heaven, neither the Son, but the Father only. If even God's own son, who would be completely involved in it, did not know why should the disciples know? Nowhere in Luke 24:49 is the kingdom mentioned. Yes they got the power in the upper room, when they were anointed with holy spirit, God's power, but where is any mention of the kingdom, and why, ever afterwards did the Apostles still speak of the kingdom as coming> Why also in Acts 7:55 did Stephen, in the power of holy spirit, not see Jesus on his throne, but simply standing at the right hand of his Father, as a patient Right Hand Man. ASV(i) 55 But he, being full of the Holy Spirit, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God. Ah yes, Peter said, as you point out "THIS - what you are seeing ... THIS - what you are hearing - is THAT which Joel prophesied." What was that prophecy in Joel? Joel 2:28-32 ASV(i) 28 And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: 29 and also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my Spirit. 30 And I will show wonders in the heavens and in the earth: blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke. 31 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and terrible day of Jehovah cometh. 32 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of Jehovah shall be delivered; for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be those that escape, as Jehovah hath said, and among the remnant those whom Jehovah doth call. No mention whatever of time-scale, nor of the kingdom, and according to revelation, that too has a dual fulfilment. Long range and short range. Well I am about to run out of Characters now, with so much left to say so I shall leave you with a thought. 1 Corinthians 2:10 ASV(i) 10 "But unto us God revealed them through the Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God". We need holy spirit to understand spiritual things.