The kingdom as prophesied in Dan 2:44 and heralded in Mark 1:15 and Matthew 4:17 has never appeared

Con said, "Do you notice there is no Bible passage for his 2nd part about the so-called "visible earthly kingdom"? I most certainly did too. Let me quote what I wrote: "The facts are that Christ told his disciples that they would see it(Matthew 16:28), that this kingdom would come with power(Daniel 7:22, Revelation 12:10), and millions see it(Isaiah 2:2-3, 11:9-12, Amos 9:11-15, Zechariah 14:9,16-21)." Con said, " Alright, there we have it. The kingdom of heaven heralded as "at hand" by both John and Jesus was POST-PONED! So they simply got it wrong! My opponent says that both Jesus and John explicitly said it was "at hand", and my opponent says, "Oh, that's literal." But it didn't happen! It hasn't happened yet. So Jesus and John literally missed it, huh?" They did not get it wrong. Failure and postponement ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. If I reschedule an appointment, I didn't fail, I put it off to a later date. The Old Testament never said that Jesus would set up the kingdom in the first century, thus Jesus can postpone his it and the prophecy doesn't fail. Con said, "Alright, then it was never truly, really, actually "at hand" to start with, was it?" It most certainly was. Did you read what I wrote? Let me repeat again: "IT NEEDS TO BE REMEMBERED THAT Jesus came ORIGINALLY ONLY FOR THE JEWS(Matthew 10:5-7). NONE OF THE GENTILES WERE TO BE SAVED. But when the JEWS rejected CHRIST(John 1:11) and crucified Him(Matthew 27) He went to the Gentiles. He EVEN gave the JEWS A SECOND CHANCE AFTER THE CRUCIFIXION(Luke 23:34) when he forgave them. But when they stoned Stephen in Acts 7 God was done with the Jews as a nation. In Acts 8, the Ethiopian Eunuch(Gentile) gets saved. In Acts 9 Paul gets saved and becomes an Apostle TO GENTILE CHRISTIANS. In Acts 10, Cornelius a gentile gets saved. Its at this point that the kingdom of Heaven IS NO LONGER "at hand." The fact of the matter is that THE DEVIL HAD CONTROL OF ALL THE KINGDOMS WHEN CHRIST CAME. The Devil said to Christ in Matthew 4:8-9: "Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him ALL THE KINGDOMS OF THE WORLD, and the glory of them; And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me." Christ is not currently reigning over his kingdom right now, THE DEVIL IS. And before Con says," Well, that was before the Crucifixion" I would like to remind Con that the Devil wasn't tied and bound(figuratively or literally) after the Cross. Romans 16:20 says: " And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen." This proves Satan isn't through with yet. Thus, the binding in Revelation 20 IS STILL FUTURE. Furthermore, the disciples asked Christ just before His Ascension if he would now restore the kingdom to Israel(Acts 1:6). And you know, Con, he didn't say, "No, you idiots, its a spiritual kingdom." He said in Acts 1:7: "And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power." In other words, you can't know when its coming, BUT ITS COMING. Con, I submit to you that Jesus Christ believes in an eathly, literal, visible kingdom. Con said, "But your proof that Col 1: 13 does not refer to the "kingdom of heaven" is sorely lacking." I'm not sure how. Verse 14 makes it clear that its a spiritual kingdom. Con said, "And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron ... " And you concur: "The 4th kingdom of Daniel 2 in verse 44 is the Roman Empire." Yes it is the Roman Empire, but its a Revived Roman Empire thats still future. That's clear from Daniel 2:44 which says: And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever. Has God's kingdom consumed all these kingdoms? Then why is Rome still a powerful entity? How about Greece? Or Iran(Persia)? Has God's kingdom been left to other people? Indeed it has since God's nowhere to be found on this earth. He's left it to some lousy Christians who are in submission to secular governments. If we are kings NOW, then God has certainly left his kingdom to other people. The only correct interpretation is that this Roman Empire will be revived and then Destroyed at the Second Coming. Further, God has done a lousy job of reigning over this world if he's the king right now. Millions of murders, rapes, thefts, wars, explosions, famines, plagues, extortion, government coverups, and holes in the ozone layer makes God a lousy king. Wouldn't you have to agree, Con? Con says, "I emphatically deny that. It's not the point of this discussion, but of course, is essential to your theology on premilleniallism. Jesus Christ came for both Jew and Gentile. Such was the mystery of the ages: that both Jew and Gentile would be united in one body, the church, and I cite Ephesians, particular chapter 1." There is Jew and Gentile in a Church body NOW, but its after the Crucifixion. He came ORIGINALLY for the Jews. If you deny that, then explain Matthew 10:5-6 which says: " These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Con said, "There's a certain warning pronounced on people that add or remove. "But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel." Peter didn't simply say, "This is what Joel says." He says, "This is THAT" - what you are seeing now is what Joel was talking about: this is the beginning of fulfillment of that prophesy, and the prophecy was ultimately fulfilled at the conversion of Cornelius." Peter is like a yankee up north. When Southerners talk, they say, "That's true." When Yankee's talk, they say, "This is true." It's the "this" that's confusing. But that's how Peter talks, he says, "This is that." Further, Con when you say, "This is that which was spoken by Joel", he meant literally, "THIS is THAT," is rather funny since NOTHING LITERALLY happened in Acts 2 that was prophesied in Joel 2. Peter has to make it figurative. Peter is using a sermon illustration from Joel 2. Any pastor does this with stories from the Bible when he preaches a sermon. Con says, "If Jesus can change an "at hand" to mean 2,000+ years (which I deny anyway), could He not shorten this supposed 1,000 year reign to one second? Would that be possible?" Indeed, he could, but the Bible fulfils prophecies literally. Sources http://www.biblegateway.com... http://www.biblegateway.com... http://www.biblegateway.com... http://www.biblegateway.com...