Future kingdom

 There is the claim that Christ is reigning in his kingdom now, that there is no future millennial reign of Christ before the final, eternal state.  The millennial reign is now through the church.  I believe it is significant that it is written that Jesus spent 40 days with his disciples after the resurrection, speaking on things pertaining to the kingdom of God:  "... He also presented Himself alive after His suffering by many infallible proofs, being seen by them during forty days and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God." Acts 1:3 After Jesus told them to wait in Jerusalem for the Holy Spirit, they asked him if the kingdom would be then restored to Israel: "Therefore, when they had come together, they asked Him, saying, "Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" Acts 1.6  How could they ask this after being taught about the kingdom of God, if there wasn't to be any restoration of Israel?  Jesus doesn't correct them by saying that there will be no restoration of Israel, instead, he says the timing is not for them to know:   "And He said to them, "It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority. But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth." Acts 1:6-8   

The disciples were not taught that there was no future restoration of Israel.   They still expected it, and they were not corrected about it, except that the timing of it was not for them to know.  hat they did not know was what God was going to do in the near future that would involve creating a new people for his purposes, being the gentile-jew assembly, commonly called the "Church."  This "dispensation," being a new divine administration or stewardship, is only a temporal purpose of God in time.  This is the time of the millennial kingdom of Christ.  The kingdom is in a sense represented in the church, as Christ's ambassadors, but it is not the kingdom in the sense in which Christ will reign over the earth from Jerusalem over the nations in a manifested way, as we see in the Old Testament prophets, like Isaiah or Micah:  

² Now it shall come to pass in the latter days
That the mountain of the LORD's house
Shall be established on the top of the mountains,
And shall be exalted above the hills;
And all nations shall flow to it.
³ Many people shall come and say,
"Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD,
To the house of the God of Jacob;
He will teach us His ways,
And we shall walk in His paths."
For out of Zion shall go forth the law,
And the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
⁴ He shall judge between the nations,
And rebuke many people;
They shall beat their swords into plowshares,
And their spears into pruning hooks;
Nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
Neither shall they learn war anymore. Isaiah 2:2-4

​¹ Now it shall come to pass in the latter days
That the mountain of the LORD's house
Shall be established on the top of the mountains,
And shall be exalted above the hills;
And peoples shall flow to it.
² Many nations shall come and say,
"Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD,
To the house of the God of Jacob;
He will teach us His ways,
And we shall walk in His paths."
For out of Zion the law shall go forth,
And the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
³ He shall judge between many peoples,
And rebuke strong nations afar off;
They shall beat their swords into plowshares,
And their spears into pruning hooks;
Nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
Neither shall they learn war anymore.
⁴ But everyone shall sit under his vine and under his fig tree,
And no one shall make them afraid;
For the mouth of the LORD of hosts has spoken.
⁵ For all people walk each in the name of his god,
But we will walk in the name of the LORD our God
Forever and ever. Micah 4:1-5

Futurists believe the kingdom is yet future, and not all of them would agree in an "already/ not yet" kingdom of Christ, but I believe you could say Christ reigns in a sense through the Church now, being that His kingdom authority is represented in the Church, but his manifested reign over the earth and nations is yet future.   It will involve a restoration of Israel as a people and Nation in which Romans 11:16 is fulfilled when "all Israel will be saved":  this is the restoration of the nation as a people of God in which all of its members will have salvation; it will be a new dispensation, being the millennial reign of Christ in which Israel will be restored as a people in special relationship and role for God.  This will not change the terms of salvation any more than how someone was justified during the Old Testament times--Abraham was justified by faith, but it is a change of people for God's purposes in time. During the future reign of Christ,  people will be identified by their nation, Israel being one of them:   

"In that day Israel will be one of three with Egypt and Assyria—a blessing in the midst of the land,  whom the LORD of hosts shall bless, saying, 'Blessed is Egypt My people, and Assyria the work of My hands, and Israel My inheritance.'" Isaiah 19:24-25

moral decline

 The apostle Paul in his last letter (to Timothy) prophesied a moral decline as time progresses...

" But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away!" 2Tim3.1-5

"But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived."
2Tim3.13

In saying these things, Paul instructs Timothy...

"But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." 2Tim3.14-17

Women elders

Some seek to justify women in the role of elder (same as overseer) by appealing to certain references about women of significance in Scripture (especially the New Testament), but none of those references specifically state that they were in acting in the role as an elder.

What we see is that women, like men, can have the same spiritual gifts or functions toward edifying the Church assembly, but many conflate those functions with that role that has qualifications, being an elder, and that role is by appointment.  Functions like "pastor" or "preacher" have become common designating terms for the lead elder, but they are really functions that can have an application to either sex.  One who pastors or preaches or teaches can do it without being an elder.  You could say that all elders are teachers, but not all teachers are elders.  Elders must meet specific qualifications; the Apostle Paul set forth these qualifications in First Timothy and in Titus.   Paul sent Titus to "appoint" elders.  Elders are not self-appointed.  But pastor or teacher and preacher are functions, not the exact same thing as an elder which has certain qualifications.  

One of the qualifications is that the elder is the "husband of one wife."  One of the arguments against women pastors is that a woman obviously cannot be the husbands of one wife.  The comeback is either that this is a saying that was meant to be non-gender specific, since there are actually no male pronouns in the Greek in the text,  or that women could not practice polygamy, and so Paul is addressing specifically men in that case. Neither seems likely, because in the same letter to Timothy, in setting forth the restrictions concerning taking in widows by the church, Paul says, "Do not let a widow under sixty years old be taken into the number, and not unless she has been the wife of one man ..." 1 Timothy 5:9 Surely, he was gender specific concerning widows.  Of course, the comeback will be that the requirement concerning widows would be gender specific, because men cannot be widows.  Yet the singling out of wives or women in verse 11 to have certain qualities would suggest that the qualifications--including being the husband of one wife--are gender specific to the men.  (Was he referring to polyandry, being a woman with more than one husband, or was it about divorce or being devoted to one man at a time?  That's another issue that one has to wrestle with.)

When Paul gives the qualifications for Deacons, he says, "Likewise, their wives must be reverent, not slanderers, temperate, faithful in all things." 1 Timothy 3:11  "Wives" can be translated "women," and this why some believe women can be deacons.  Those who point out that male pronouns are not used in the preceding qualifications for elder and deacon but added to the text would need to explain why a specific reference to women and their conduct needs to be made.  If the qualifications are non-gender specific, then why single out women?   The non-gender specific claim so that the qualifications can be applied to women is not helped by saying the reference in verse 11 is about women and not wives.  Aren't those qualifications needed by men too?  Why make a specific reference to women?  

Nevertheless, I believe it is referring to wives of the deacons (and surely of the elders), because why single out women for a few specific qualifications apart from men?  But to have these requirements of the wives of the men who would be considered for the role of elder or deacon would make sense.  Women serving as deacons does not receive as much opposition as with elder because of 1 Timothy 3:11, and the role doesn't have the same weight as elder, when it comes to having authority over another.  But I believe that "wives" is more likely than "women."

The word "submit" is brought up on this issue.  The claim is made that though Scripture says that wives are to submit to their husbands:  Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord.  For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body.  Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. Ephesians 5:22-24   It also says we are to submit to one another:  submitting to one another in the fear of God. Ephesians 5:21  Submission speaks of being "put under," or to come under the authority of another.   In the church, we submit to one another by respecting the differing functions or roles each have. The roles of husband and wife are not the same.  It has been said that submission could be understood as "being supportive of."  Recognizing and respecting the role of another would be "being supportive of."   Are the roles of men and women or husband and wife exactly the same?  We are told in Scripture that the "head" of woman is man:  But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. 1 Corinthians 11:3.  This shows a distinction in some sense.   It has been claimed that this word in the Greek means something like "first soldier in."  What exactly does that mean, and why such a distinction?  Men and women are obviously different, and even the "head" reference reveals something different between the sexes.  Equality doesn't mean that there are not differences in roles, especially in this temporal existence.  Submission to all would involve recognizing and supporting those distinctive roles.

updated 8/11/2026

temporal and eternal

 Though I am not a classical dispensationalist--which is a system of theology that recognizes distinct Divine stewardships--I do believe we see distinctions in the purposes of God involving people that are temporal.  The temporal needs to be distinguished from the eternal.   God can have a people for his purpose that is temporal, while from an eternal perspective, there is only one people of God.  Israel was the people of God for His purposes in time, Israel being a distinct nation of people. Presently, the "Church" is the people of God for His purposes in time, the Church being believers of all nations.  God will again restore Israel as a people and nation for His purposes in time.  These distinct people groups are temporal for the Divine purpose in time.  But eternally, there is only one people of God, which looks like the Church does now, because it consists of all believers, while Israel did not consist of all believers, though there may have been very few among the gentiles apart from Israel--not even every Israelite was a believer under the Mosaic law.  It's no different than the fact that all believers are one in Christ, but they have different roles in their service to God, but I suppose that even in the final eternal state, there will be some distinction of roles among the people of God.   That will have to do with rewards and how the world to come will function.   

within means

 

I chose to work for an auto supplier factory most of my life to afford raising a family. And it wasn't the highest pay, about 32,000. average a year for about 37 years before I retired. That's the average, not what I started with (15,313. in '86) and the highest (50,290. in 2021--it went down after that) that I made in a year. I worked a whole lot of overtime too. My wife made about 72,000 total throughout her life--she mostly stayed home to take care of the kids and grandkids. We lived within our means, and I paid off our debts before 40 years old. On that factory income. I did a lot of DIY home improvements to save a lot of money--our first home was about 750 square feet on a slab with no garage, and I bought cheap vehicles. 

Women roles

 

Back in the early 80's, when I was still a member in a SBC church (Southern Baptist Convention), I took classes through a SBC school called Luther Rice Seminary (Bible College Division).

I took a class in Typology, and the textbook was written by a woman; her name was Ada R. Habershon. Luther Rice was a conservative SBC school, and yet, we used a book written by a woman on a theological topic.

There is the question as to whether women can be in a place of authority over men, being an elder or overseer—which I understand to be the same thing.

I made reference to the use of the book by a woman in the SBC school. I don't believe the issue is whether men can learn from the efforts of women. Luther Rice didn't seem to have a problem with that.

You can learn from anybody, and like anything, you have to judge what they are saying. I can listen to or read anything by anybody, but I will still seek to discern truth from error.

The word “pastor” seems to have taken on a more specific meaning than its broader meaning. “Pastor” translates the same Greek word as for “shepherd,” and it could more generally apply to anyone who teaches others, but it has taken on a more specific application for the head/lead elder who is usually a vocational elder—he gets paid to “pastor” the church.  But in a general sense, the pastor is a teacher, and both men and women can fulfill that role. That role is not the same as being an elder, which is an office for which one has to be qualified. Though Ephesians 4:11 has “pastor-teacher” as one of the things given to the church, “pastor” is not in the Apostle Paul's list in First Corinthians 12:28 of spiritual gifts, but “teacher” is—which is set as third in importance in the Church after Apostles and Prophets. Why isn't there a reference to “pastors?” I believe pastor and teacher are interchangeable as to function.

The word “preach,” like pastor, has taken on a more specific meaning, such as giving the “sermon” to the congregation, but the word simply means to “herald” a message. It's not limited to just men to do such. And this is a role, or a function, not limited to the office of elder. Of course the question will be asked whether a woman can do this as the sermon to the church. Is it stepping over the line?  Personally, I can choose to listen to a woman “preach” like I read a book. I will judge its content.

I do believe when it comes to the gifts of the Spirit (roles or functions in the Church for its edification), a woman can do what a man can do as far as the general understanding of the roles and the words used for those roles.

There can be circumstances where it is more appropriate for one sex over the other to fulfill a certain function, such as a man teacher leading teenage boys or young adult men.

I don't believe having a certain gift is the same thing as having the office of elder. Not only are there qualifications (1 Timothy 3:1-7), it is, what I can see in Scripture, limited to men.

Even men who are gifted teachers may not qualify to be an elder.

Some men become elders who are not qualified, because their homes are not in order—their children are out of control, or they have a violent temper, or they are not able to teach, have a bad reputation, etc.

Men and women are equals as persons, and yes, “there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:8), but that does not mean God hasn't put limits on what the sexes can do in this temporal stage of life. 

The Apostle Paul said that he did “not permit a woman to teach or have authority over a man” (1 Timothy 2:11). I take that “authority over a man” to mean a woman should not be in a place of authoritative leadership over a man--at least in a spiritual sense. 

Jewish State

 I will admit that I support a Jewish state primarily because I believe Israel, as a people and nation, will be restored at the second coming of Christ.

I believe the Jewish people should have the right to dwell safely in a land, and why not in the land that was originally promised to them by God?

I do believe that they are as a nation still under the consequences of the wrath of God, and anything that is established now for them as a nation is only temporary.

Someone claimed that Muslims are fleeing to other nations because of Israel, but they are leaving many nations that have nothing to do with Israel, and there are many non-Jews that live in Israel. I've been there and can attest to that.

The non-Jewish Palestinians who chose to leave the land of Israel when the Arabs attacked back in 1948, chose to do so with the intention of taking the land of the Jews after they were defeated--"driven into the Mediterranean Sea"--but that didn't happen.

The Arab nations could absorb those Palestinians, but they choose not to--so to always have an accusation against the Jewish State and blame the Palestinians being still in camps on "the occupation."

The British gave the Arabs, the land of Jordan. They were supposed to give Israel land, but they didn't, and President Clinton worked out a Palestinian state plan with Arafat, but in the end he rejected it.

The government of Gaza, which is Hamas, continually shoots rockets in Israel, and they have hundreds of miles of tunnels, so what is Israel To do? When Hamas uses their own citizens as Shields, it's very hard to fight a war. In past wars, the United States killed civilians in the attempt to defeat the Japanese and the Germans; it's not the way you would like it, but what do you do? War is not simply maintaining an equal number of people killed. In World War II, Hitler and the Nazis in Germany had to be stopped. Japan had to be stopped. It's not about equal numbers. It's about stopping them.

Israel's turning

 Israel's future turning away from sin/ ungodliness...

I believe the references to Israel being turned away from godliness and sin is a standing and state distinction.

We read this in Romans, chapter 11:26-27, where it says "the Deliverer will come out of Zion and He will turn ungodliness from Jacob; and this is my covenant with them, when I take away their sins."

We see this also in the book of Acts where Peter talks about Israel, being blessed by the coming of Jesus, "in turning every one of you away from your iniquities," Acts 3:26.

I believe the turning away has to do with their state, their conduct, while the remission of sins has to do with their standing, their identity.

Because of the remission of sins, which changes their standing and identity before God, they will turn away from their ungodliness/ iniquities. Though not stated, remission of their sins will result in their new birth. And by the enablement of the new birth and the knowledge of the remission of their sins, they will be motivated and enabled to have a conduct consistent with their new standing with God.

We can see standing and state in Titus 2:11 that says "for the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men teaching us that denying ungodliness and worldly less we should live sober, righteously, and godly in this present age, looking for the blessed hope, and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ."

By the grace of God, we are saved, and that salvation teaches us to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts and to live soberly righteously and godly in this present age, as we look for the blessed Hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ. 

The standing is not determine by the state, but the state is an expected result and a guaranteed potential of the standing—it's not automatic but is a potential reality. Because of all that will happen with Israel as a people and nation at the coming of Christ, they will be the people God wanted them to be, because of the remission of their sins, by the grace of God.

Fig Tree parable

 ³² "Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. ³³ So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near—at the doors! ³⁴ Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. ³⁵ Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away. Matthew 24:32-35

The fig tree was used as an analogy by Jesus.

When the fig tree's branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. So also, when you see all the things about which Jesus spoke, you can know his coming (and the "Day of the Lord" wrath) is near--"at the door." Matthew 24:32-33

The cosmic signs at the end of great tribulation will mean His coming is "at the door":

²⁹ "Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. ³⁰ Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. ³¹ And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.” Matthew 24:29-31

25 "And there will be signs in the sun, in the moon, and in the stars; and on the earth distress of nations, with perplexity, the sea and the waves roaring; 26 men's hearts failing them from fear and the expectation of those things which are coming on the earth, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 27 Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 28 Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near." Luke 21:25-28

Also consider:

"12 I looked when He opened the sixth seal, and behold, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became like blood. 13 And the stars of heaven fell to the earth, as a fig tree drops its late figs when it is shaken by a mighty wind. 14 Then the sky receded as a scroll when it is rolled up, and every mountain and island was moved out of its place. 15 And the kings of the earth, the great men, the rich men, the commanders, the mighty men, every slave and every free man, hid themselves in the caves and in the rocks of the mountains, 16 and said to the mountains and rocks, "Fall on us and hide us from the face of Him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! 17 For the great day of His wrath has come, and who is able to stand?" Revelation 6:12-17

^“9 Proclaim this among the nations: "Prepare for war! Wake up the mighty men, Let all the men of war draw near, Let them come up. ¹⁰ Beat your plowshares into swords And your pruning hooks into spears; Let the weak say, 'I am strong.'" ¹¹ Assemble and come, all you nations, And gather together all around. Cause Your mighty ones to go down there, O LORD. ¹² "Let the nations be wakened, and come up to the Valley of Jehoshaphat; For there I will sit to judge all the surrounding nations. ¹³ Put in the sickle, for the harvest is ripe. Come, go down; For the winepress is full, The vats overflow— For their wickedness is great." ¹⁴ Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision! For the day of the LORD is near in the valley of decision. ¹⁵ The sun and moon will grow dark, And the stars will diminish their brightness. ¹⁶ The LORD also will roar from Zion, And utter His voice from Jerusalem; The heavens and earth will shake; But the LORD will be a shelter for His people, And the strength of the children of Israel.” Joel 3:9-16

​”¹ Behold, the day of the LORD is coming, And your spoil will be divided in your midst. ² For I will gather all the nations to battle against Jerusalem; The city shall be taken, The houses rifled, And the women ravished. Half of the city shall go into captivity, But the remnant of the people shall not be cut off from the city. ³ Then the LORD will go forth And fight against those nations, As He fights in the day of battle. ⁴ And in that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, Which faces Jerusalem on the east. And the Mount of Olives shall be split in two, From east to west, Making a very large valley; Half of the mountain shall move toward the north And half of it toward the south. ⁵ Then you shall flee through My mountain valley, For the mountain valley shall reach to Azal. Yes, you shall flee As you fled from the earthquake In the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Thus the LORD my God will come, And all the saints with You.” Zechariah 14:1-5

^“12 Then the sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up, so that the way of the kings from the east might be prepared. ¹³ And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs coming out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. ¹⁴ For they are spirits of demons, performing signs, which go out to the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty. ¹⁵ "Behold, I am coming as a thief. Blessed is he who watches, and keeps his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame." ¹⁶ And they gathered them together to the place called in Hebrew, Armageddon.” Revelation 16:12-16

Concerning “this generation” not passing away until all these things fulfilled:

I believe there is good reason to see this as a reference to the character of the nation of Israel, and not with reference to a time period, being the First Century.

Matt 24:34 (NKJV) "Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place.”

That generation of Israel according to her character would not pass away until all the things prophesied would take place. “This generation” is often identified as an evil and adulterous generation by Christ.

Matthew 12:39  But He answered and said to them, "An  evil  and adulterous  generation  seeks after a sign, and no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah.

Luke 11:29  And while the crowds were thickly gathered together, He began to say, "This is an  evil   generation . It seeks a sign, and no sign will be given to it except the sign of Jonah the prophet.

Matthew 11:16  "But to what shall I liken  this   generation ? It is like children sitting in the marketplaces and calling to their companion."

23:36-37a  "Assuredly, I say to you, all these things will come upon  this   generation.  " O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her!"

Mark 8:38  "For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in  this  adulterous and sinful  generation , of him the Son of Man also will be ashamed when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels."

Luke 16:8

(NKJV Strong's Bible) So the master commended the unjust steward because he had dealt shrewdly. For the sons of this world are more shrewd in their generation than the sons of light."

 

 Peter said, And with many other words he testified and exhorted them, saying, "Be saved from  this  perverse  generation . Acts 2:40

 

Psalm 78:8

"And not be like their fathers,

A stubborn and rebellious generation,

A generation that did not prepare its heart

And whose spirit was not faithful to God."

Spiritual Gifts Thoughts

 1) Spiritual gifts are divine enablements—grace given by God through the Holy Spirit—to fulfill a role in the body of Christ for its edification and equipping others for ministry.

--⁶ Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, let us prophesy in proportion to our faith; ⁷ or ministry, let us use it in our ministering; he who teaches, in teaching; ⁸ he who exhorts, in exhortation; he who gives, with liberality; he who leads, with diligence; he who shows mercy, with cheerfulness. Romans 12:6-8

--⁷ But to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ's gift. ⁸ Therefore He says: "When He ascended on high, He led captivity captive, And gave gifts to men." ...¹¹ And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, ¹² for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, ¹³ till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; ¹ Ephesians 4:7-14

2) Not all have the same gift(s).

--²⁷ Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually. ...²⁹ Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? ³⁰ Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? 1 Corinthians 12:27-30

3) The spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. The believer has control over the use of his gift; he can determine to exercise it or not, and this is to maintain a degree of order and opportunity in the assembly.

--³² And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. ³³ For God is not the author of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints. 1 Corinthians 14:32-33

--²⁷ If anyone speaks in a tongue, let there be two or at the most three, each in turn, and let one interpret. ²⁸ But if there is no interpreter, let him keep silent in church, and let him speak to himself and to God. ²⁹ Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge. ³⁰ But if anything is revealed to another who sits by, let the first keep silent. ³¹ For you can all prophesy one by one, that all may learn and all may be encouraged. 1 Corinthians 14:27-31

--⁴⁰ Let all things be done decently and in order. 1 Corinthians 14:40

4) The usual requirement of the Sunday Morning sermon and the requirement to keep the attention of children and adults for Sunday School classes may be more than what the gifts provide. The gift of teaching or knowledge may be some short simple truth to impart to the gathering, but instead, there is an expectation to have something that can keep the attention of people, often requiring some degree of entertainment.

--²⁹ Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge. ³⁰ But if anything is revealed to another who sits by, let the first keep silent. ³¹ For you can all prophesy one by one, that all may learn and all may be encouraged. 1 Corinthians 14:279-31

5) The Apostle Paul speaks of a maturity principle concerning the gifts, or at least concerning certain gifts in First Corinthians 13:8-12.

What he says is somewhat obscure and open to debate.

In referencing the gifts of knowledge—though he may just mean particular knowledge and not the gift itself—and prophesying and tongues, he speaks of their incompleteness and transience.

Paul speaks of that which is complete, which is to come, when that which is incomplete or partial will go away. This complete thing is not identified.

Some say Scripture, and some say it's the coming of Christ or the kingdom.

It would seem that the complete and the incomplete should be the same kind of thing: complete knowledge will replace incomplete knowledge. But that doesn't necessarily mean the completed canon of Scripture is in view.

It could be the conditions that will exist at the coming of Christ with reference to knowledge. One might conclude this with Paul's words: “ For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known.” 1 Corinthians 13:12

Yet, interestingly, Paul also says: ^“When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things.” 1 Corinthians 13:11 This speaks of maturity.

Maybe the obscurity is in the fact that there is a progressive move away from the need for certain gifts as the Church matured. Maybe there was less of a need for the more miraculous sign gifts to establish the Church as it matured. What was needed early on would gradually fade away as the church matured from a child to an adult—something like that.

The church still needs the roles necessary for its edification and equipping, but not in the same way.

Obviously, something has changed in the way the church looks and functions today. It could be that the church is more carnal, or tradition has limited it proper function, or it could be a combination of all these things: carnality, tradition, and a certain maturity since the First Century.

Whatever has happened over the centuries, regarding spiritual gifts, the principle that every believer is a part of the body and has a role in its edification needs to be maintained.

Nee's Local Churches

Watchman Nee, a Chinese evangelist in the early 20th century, started what was called "local churches," being that there should be only one Christian church in each city, named according to that city-- such as "the church that was in Jerusalem." 

According to Nee, this means that "the church in her locality must be inclusive, not exclusive," that is, it "must include all the children of God in the whole spectrum of Christian faith and practice." 

He believed in a plurality of elders but rejected the distinction between clergy and laity. 

He believed the gatherings should center around the Lord's Supper.  

The local churches would practice mutuality in their meetings based on verses such as First Corinthians 14:26: "Whenever you come together, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up"--participants are encouraged to request hymns, make brief comments, or offer prayers or praises at will.  (This info comes from Wikipedia.)

I suppose this didn't exclude the need for meeting in smaller groups, but only that those groups within a particular city would be the church of that city. The churches of the New Testament writings were identified by the city they resided in. 

There is the debate as to whether the New Testament is giving a prescription or description of Church function, but surely First Corinthians 14 is not merely descriptive, since Paul was instructing the Church about how it should function to accomplish its purpose to edify and equip for ministry when they come together.

Most Churches' "Sunday Morning Worship service" functions much different than Nee's local churches.  

What if the church had a tradition that aligned more with Nee's view of the church, as opposed to the large auditorium gathering with the one-man Sunday morning sermon-service?

Private Property rights

 The right to have private property can find sanction in Scripture. It is not necessarily more spiritual to have no property or to have all things in common to the point that there is no private ownership. It could be more spiritual to share what you own with those in need than to have common ownership.

Scripture reveals that in the age to come, each will sit under his own vine and his own fig tree and not be afraid. Having one's own fig tree is a characteristic of the coming kingdom.

​¹ Now it shall come to pass in the latter days That the mountain of the LORD's house Shall be established on the top of the mountains, And shall be exalted above the hills; And peoples shall flow to it.

² Many nations shall come and say, "Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, To the house of the God of Jacob; He will teach us His ways, And we shall walk in His paths." For out of Zion the law shall go forth, And the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.

³ He shall judge between many peoples, And rebuke strong nations afar off; They shall beat their swords into plowshares, And their spears into pruning hooks; Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, Neither shall they learn war anymore.

⁴ But everyone shall sit under his vine and under his fig tree,

And no one shall make them afraid;

For the mouth of the LORD of hosts has spoken.

Micah 4:1-4

Personal property gives one a sense of significance and security.

If one has property that produces, it becomes a means of personally providing for others who do not have.

The Old Testament Law directed farmers of the land to not reap the corner of their fields completely so that the poor of the land could find themselves something to eat.

If a person had to sell their property due to debt, they would receive the property back in the year of Jubilee, because that property was theirs forever.

The right to Property forever was the promise to Israel in the land of Canaan.

“...you shall consecrate the fiftieth year and proclaim liberty throughout all the land to all its inhabitants. It shall be a Jubilee for you; and each of you shall return to his possession, and each of you shall return to his family. ¹¹ That fiftieth year shall be a Jubilee to you...”

Leviticus 25:10-11

The only way one should lose their property is through selling it or giving it away.

Islamic Armageddon

Islam believes in an antichrist who is to come. It could be that the nations that gather to fight for the “battle of Armageddon” at Jerusalem believe that Jesus at His coming is the antichrist, and so they go to war against Christ. The nations could be predominately Islamic.

​¹ Behold, the day of the LORD is coming, And your spoil will be divided in your midst.

² For I will gather all the nations to battle against Jerusalem;

The city shall be taken, The houses rifled, And the women ravished. Half of the city shall go into captivity, But the remnant of the people shall not be cut off from the city.

³ Then the LORD will go forth And fight against those nations, As He fights in the day of battle.

Zechariah 14:1-3

¹² Then the sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up, so that the way of the kings from the east might be prepared.

¹³ And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs coming out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.

¹⁴ For they are spirits of demons, performing signs, which go out to the kings of the earth and of the whole world,

to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.

¹⁵ "Behold, I am coming as a thief. Blessed is he who watches, and keeps his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame."

¹⁶ And they gathered them together to the place called in Hebrew, Armageddon.

Revelation 16:12-16

¹¹ Now I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse. And He who sat on him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and makes war.

Revelation 19:11

¹⁹ And I saw the beast, the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against Him who sat on the horse and against His army.

²⁰ Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone.

²¹ And the rest were killed with the sword which proceeded from the mouth of Him who sat on the horse.

Revelation 19:19-21

What is life

 "For whoever desires 

to save his **life 

will lose it, 

but whoever loses his **life

for My sake 

will find it. 

For what profit is it 

to a man 

if he gains the whole world, 

and loses his own **life? 

Or what will a man give 

in exchange for his **life?" 

Matthew 16:25-26 

"Therefore I say to you, 

do not worry about your **life, 

what you will eat, 

or what you will drink; 

nor about your body, 

what you will put on.

 

Is not **life more than food 

and the body more than clothing?" 

Matthew 6.25 

**"life" translates the Greek word "psuche." 

This Greek word means life, soul, self, person. 

Israel debate

  I just watched a debate on Israel and the Iranian war on YouTube.

One of the participants was a man named Clinton Baldwin (Ph.D.).

Baldwin said that “Israel is the “most apartheid and cruel nation on the planet.” And they are “committing genocide” and “war crimes” and are “more wicked” and “brutal” than the Palestinian people.

I call this zeitgeist. It's just getting worse.

Baldwin said he was a Bible believer.

But more zeitgeist...

He went on to say—I guess he was making a connection with the issue of the debate, though this is really off topic-- that in the Old Testament where Israel was told by God to go in and possess the land of the Canaanites by destroying them was not really what God said to do, but was “the ancient authors putting words on the lips of God.” He said it was not “history” or “factual”: “God never told them to do such a thing.”

I don't know if Baldwin rejects the authorship of Moses of the Pentateuch (Jesus said Moses wrote about Him), but he would be saying that Moses lied about God's command to the Hebrews. But that would mean that Moses or the ancient authors—as he worded it—said that God would also destroy them, Israel, if they brought the abominations of the Canaanites into their homes.

Deuteronomy does prophesy that Israel would soon perish in the land because of their turning away from God. Did the “ancient authors” put this on the lips of God? Did Baldwin never read about the Assyrian and Babylonian captivities of the Hebrew nation for their idolatry and injustices?

Baldwin also goes on to claim that all the prophecies in the Old Testament concerning Israel that speak of their restoration into the land should of happened back then, but they never happened at all, and the prophecies only had meaning to them back then.

This approach to Scripture and the growing attitude towards the Jewish nation and people are all part of the spirit of the age. It's getting worse as I see it on social media, and not just among theological preterists and historicists and social liberals but among social conservatives.

I was just reading Deuteronomy Chapter 7 and 8 this morning... some excerpts:

¹² "Then it shall come to pass, because you listen to these judgments, and keep and do them, that the LORD your God will keep with you the covenant and the mercy which He swore to your fathers.

¹³ And He will love you and bless you and multiply you; He will also bless the fruit of your womb and the fruit of your land, your grain and your new wine and your oil, the increase of your cattle and the offspring of your flock, in the land of which He swore to your fathers to give you.

¹⁴ You shall be blessed above all peoples; …

¹⁶ Also you shall destroy all the peoples whom the LORD your God delivers over to you; your eye shall have no pity on them; nor shall you serve their gods, for that will be a snare to you.

¹⁷ "If you should say in your heart, 'These nations are greater than I; how can I dispossess them?'—

¹⁸ you shall not be afraid of them, but you shall remember well what the LORD your God did to Pharaoh and to all Egypt:

¹⁹ the great trials which your eyes saw, the signs and the wonders, the mighty hand and the outstretched arm, by which the LORD your God brought you out. So shall the LORD your God do to all the peoples of whom you are afraid. ...

²² And the LORD your God will drive out those nations before you little by little; you will be unable to destroy them at once, lest the beasts of the field become too numerous for you.

²³ But the LORD your God will deliver them over to you, and will inflict defeat upon them until they are destroyed. …

²⁵ You shall burn the carved images of their gods with fire; you shall not covet the silver or gold that is on them, nor take it for yourselves, lest you be snared by it; for it is an abomination to the LORD your God.

²⁶ Nor shall you bring an abomination into your house, lest you be doomed to destruction like it. You shall utterly detest it and utterly abhor it, for it is an accursed thing. Remember the LORD Your God ​

¹ "Every commandment which I command you today you must be careful to observe, that you may live and multiply, and go in and possess the land of which the LORD swore to your fathers. …

that He might make you know that man shall not live by bread alone; but man lives by every word that proceeds from the mouth of the LORD.

Deuteronomy 7:12 - 8:3

my solar system

 I installed an off-grid solar system about 4 ½ years ago. Neighbors and others have asked me about it. I've said it is an expensive hobby, because I don't know if it will pay for itself. Maybe in 20 years.

I originally intended it to be backup for my refrigerator and freezer, if there's a power outage. But I kept adding to it solar panels and battery backup, because I determined that I could use it to run my HVAC system and water heater. Our house is all electric. My last electric bill was $43. The highest is around December and January when we have a lot of clouds, and the sun is at its lowest in the sky.

I did save a lot of money by doing all the install by myself. I bought a 5000-watt, single phase inverter (220-240 volts only). The solar panels could be bought a lot cheaper today if you buy them by the skid load, but I bought a few at a time. The Lithium batteries are the most expensive part.

I have an “Off-grid” inverter in that I do not sell my power back to the electric company—I'm the sole user of the power generated. I'm still connected to the grid, and if there is not enough solar or my batteries are too low, the inverter draws power from the grid. The inverter converts the dc current from the solar panels to ac current and outputs to 220 volts only. I use a transformer to get a neutral for the 110 voltages from the 220 volts.

I've had situations where I had more solar power created than I needed to run my loads (HVAC, water heater, refrigerators, freezer, some lights, etc.) and charge my batteries to 100%, so I looked into buying an electric car (3 years ago) to benefit from the excess solar.

If it wasn't for the solar, I would not have gotten an EV. I think a hybrid makes more sense.

Though I don't have to buy gas or change oil, I do pay a yearly fee for the EV which was double the first year, and it will be about a $1000. total for 4 years (it's up to 230. a year now in Indiana).

I do have to charge the car off the grid when there isn't enough solar, especially late Fall through early Spring. I also thought, back in 2023 when I bought the EV, that gas prices could go really high, and I would have my solar to charge my car as an alternative.

There's been a few times that we've had a power outage, and I was able to keep the appliances running and lights on.

There have been some issues with the system over the past few years. There is some communication problem between the batteries and the inverter. I've tried different things, but the batteries will sometimes charge and discharge unevenly. Yet the company recently made a firmware update for the batteries that I was able to get and install, and they have been working flawlessly for several months.

I had to watch a lot of videos by guys on YouTube to make sure I got things correct, like Will Prowse and David Pos. I would highly recommend watching Will Prowse on YouTube if you think you might want to try to install any solar system yourself. You can waste a lot of money really fast if you don't know what you are doing and buy the wrong things. Except as backup that solar can provide in a power outage, it may not be worth the bother and expense. Unless you want an expensive hobby.

Illumination and disagreement

 Recently, I was asked why it is that there can be so much disagreement between Christians if the Holy Spirit illuminates us to the truth of the Scriptures—understanding illumination as that enabling of the Holy Spirit to understand the truth of the Scriptures.

I responded by saying that my answer to that will probably not be well received, but I believe the illumination of the Holy Spirit is bound up in the Scriptures themselves. Our understanding involves comparing Scripture with Scripture: “...the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.” 1 Corinthians 2:13 The problem may be that we don't understand the immediate context or our understanding is in contradiction with something else Scripture says that we are ignorant about.

Ignorance of Scripture is a major factor, but not the only problem. Yet, we need to understand that Scripture is the word of God, and it is a product of the Holy Spirit. God's word is truth and light in itself. Jesus said, “The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.” John 6:63 Jesus said this to his disciples. They heard things from Jesus that they didn't understand and found hard to accept. We read that because of this, “From that time many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more.” John 6:66

Those disciples were not able to accept what he said or endure it, because they could not make sense of it. It appears that they had not responded to other teachings of God that would have enabled them to accept what Jesus said, as Jesus said concerning them, “It is written in the prophets, 'And they shall all be taught by God.' Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me.” John 6:45 Understanding is a process of here a little and there a little: “But the word of the LORD was to them, 'Precept upon precept, precept upon precept, Line upon line, line upon line, Here a little, there a little.'" Isaiah 28:13 The problem was they did not respond to what revelation they had positively, so they did not understand further revelation. What Jesus said about the use of parables relates to this: "Because it has been given to you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. ¹² For whoever has, to him more will be given, and he will have abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him. ¹³ Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. ¹⁴ And in them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled, which says: 'Hearing you will hear and shall not understand, And seeing you will see and not perceive; ¹⁵ For the hearts of this people have grown dull. Their ears are hard of hearing, And their eyes they have closed.'” Matthew 13:11-15

The other reasons for such differences among Christians have to do with past influences and fear of ostracism. Probably many do not know why they believe what they believe, but it is what they always believed. A friend of mine once questioned his church's view on water baptism in a Bible Study class. An older member asked him how he could question what they always believed. A better response would be to demonstrate from Scripture why you believe what you do, not that it is what your denomination has always believed. Most if not all begin their Christian life accepting as a package deal the things believed by the Christian denomination, they are a part of. If later you begin to question some of those things, you will risk being ostracized by the group. That's not a comfortable thing to experience. You may be advised to leave it alone or risk being cut off from the group. Fear of the consequences of being at odds with family and friends is a great motivator in what you believe. But it depends on what the differences are and how they are handled. People generally don't like conflict, and they avoid trying to work through the differences. I know in the past when someone asked me as to why I believed something the way I do, and I would begin to explain it from Scripture, they would change the topic on me. I took that to mean they didn't want to discuss it.

So, why do we disagree so much if illumination is the work of the Holy Spirit? I believe it's because illumination is bound up in the word of God (Scripture), and the Scripture is a product and tool of the Holy Spirit. The Illumination is comparing Scripture with Scripture, and therefore ignorance of Scripture is a major problem. But it's not just that. There are the influences of the past from our upbringing, from family and friends, and church denomination—what makes them distinctive. And then there is the fear of being ostracized, if we go against them. For most of Church history, those who went against the established religious beliefs were at risk of torture or being put to death. It's obviously not that bad today, but there is still the threat of being ostracized or limited in some way. It's safer to go with, to trust the beliefs of, those you know and trust.

Jews returned

Most of this comes from cassette tapes of lectures by Marv Rosenthal, probably from the 1980's.

In the late 1800’s, Jews slowly began to return to what is commonly called “Palestine,” which was a sickly land owned by Syrians and Egyptians.

The land was under the control of the Ottoman Empire (Turkey) from 1517 to 1917--the end of World War 1, when the Empire was defeated and the control went to Great Britain. There was not a Palestinian State or even a country of Jordan until after WW1.

But prior to this, the land was greatly wrecked by the removal of trees which resulted in the loss of the topsoil. Taxes were determined by the number of trees on the land, and so they were cut down. Soldiers would cut down trees when they marched through the land, and when the locomotive was introduced, trees were cut down for fuel. The land was mostly barren and malaria infested swamp.

There were always a handful of Jews and Arabs living there together from the first century until the 1800s, and it was said you could go for 50 miles and not see a living soul and come across a sickly village—this was claimed by Mark Twain when he traveled there.

In the late 1800’s, Jews began to return and buy the land from the Syrian and Egyptian landlords, and they drained the swamps and make the land livable.

It wasn’t until the rise in anti-Semitism, that a Hungarian born Jewish man named Theodor Herzl pursued a homeland for the Jews in Palestine. Herzl reached the conclusion that anti-Jewish sentiment would make Jewish assimilation impossible, and that the only solution for Jews was the establishment of a Jewish state.

In 1896, Herzl published the pamphlet “Der Judenstaat,” in which he elaborated his visions of a Jewish homeland. His ideas attracted international attention, and rapidly established him as a major figure in the Jewish world.

In 1897, Herzl convened the First Zionist Congress in the Stadtcasino Basel, Switzerland, and was elected president of the Zionist Organization. He began a series of diplomatic initiatives to build support for a Jewish state, appealing unsuccessfully to German emperor Wilhelm II and Ottoman sultan Abdul Hamid II.

At the Sixth Zionist Congress in 1903, Herzl presented the Uganda Scheme, endorsed by Colonial Secretary Joseph Chamberlain on behalf of the British government. The proposal, which sought to create a temporary refuge for the Jews in British East Africa following the Kishinev pogrom, was met with strong opposition and ultimately rejected. 

In 1897, Herzl wrote in his diary that “today, I have founded the modern State of Israel, and it will become a reality in 5 or 50 years.” In 1947, the United Nations would partition Palestine and form a Jewish State.

There would be more Zion Congresses calling for a homeland for the Jew. They discussed different places for a homeland for the Jews, such as South America and places in Africa, but in the end they said the only place they could have a homeland was in the land of Israel, because that was where their roots are.

During WW1, the Jews in Israel fought with the Allies. At the end of the war, Great Britain captured that area called Palestine from the Ottoman Empire. In 1917, Great Britain came out with a document called the “Balfour Declaration,” named after Lord Balfour of Great Britain. Balfour said, “his Majesty's government looks with favor for the establishment of a homeland in Palestine for the Jew.”

That declaration came about because of a chemist named Chaim Weizmann, a British citzen, who developed a process used for explosives that greatly benefitted the British during the first world war. The British were indebted to him and asked what they could do for him, and he said not for him but for his people, a homeland.

In 1922, the League of Nations gave to Great Britain the Mandate: we want you to establish a homeland in Palestine for the Jews. But it did not come about due to government changes, and some Jews didn't want it, thinking it would create another wave of anti-Semitism.

In 1938, many Jews sought to flee Germny and Europe, as Hitler had already begun his purge of the Jews. They tried to go to places like America, Canada, and Australia, but they were not allowed due to immigration quotas being met. So many Jews were trapped. One place they tried to get into was Israel. So more and more Jews begin to go to Israel (in the 1930s). 

 Britain was still in control of Palestine since 1917, and the surrounding Arab nations went to Great Britain and said that they did not like these Jews coming back there. Under pressure from the Arab nations and with another war looming in 1938, and the British wanting the Arab nations' support as in WW1, they passed what was called “the White Papers.” The White Papers restricted the number of Jews coming into Palestine to 15,000 a year. Jews were fleeing for their lives and couldn't get into Western nations due to immigration quotas already met. So, they tried to get into Israel any way they could.

Menachim Begin, a former Prime Minister of Israel, tried to help Jews get into Israel, and he was called a terrorist because he had to resist the British and the restriction of the White Papers. 

Some 6 million Jews would perish under Hitler and the Nazis.

Following the second world war, Jews did not have homes to return to, so they sought to go to Israel, but the White Papers were still in effect. They tried to get there by ships, but the British Navy would stop them and send them back from where they came or send them to the island of Cyprus. There was a shipped called the “Exodus” filled with Jews that refused to go back, went on a hunger strike, and threatened to blow themselves up if the British boarded her. (The movie “The Exodus” is on Youtube to watch for free—a main character performed by Paul Newman whose paternal grandparents were Jewish.) The British had more than a hundred thousand troops stationed in Israel trying to keep an uneasy peace between the Arab and the Jew.

So, the matter was turned over to the United Nations which was established after WW2 in 1947 to be voted on. The U.S. President was Harry Truman, and he was advised against voting in favor of the Jewish State because it would likely fail, and it would look bad for the U.S., but he called the ambassador of America to the United Nations and said you will throw support behind the State of Israel to the United Nations. 

Because of the U.S. Support, other nations got on board, and the vote passed to partition Palestine to form a Jewish State (1947). The land was far smaller than that was originally promised by the British, but the Jews said they would take it. The surrounding Arab nations said that if Israel declares themselves a nation, they would drive them into the Mediterranean Sea within a week.

On May 14^th, 1948, Ben Gurion, who would be first Prime Minister, declared Israel a nation among the nations of the world from Tel Aviv. The surrounding Arab nations said to the Palestinian Arabs living in Israel--who were allowed to live in Israel and be citizens--we are going to drive the Jews into the Mediterranean Sea in one week, so you get out of the way, and after we destroy them, you can go back and have both your property and your Jewish neighbor's property. The Jews did not drive them out or threaten them, and there is evidence they pleaded with them to stay. But many left of their own volition and stayed in what is known as the West Bank, a strip of land on the west side of the Jordan River, which was allocated as part of a Palestinian State. They thought they would wait for the Arab nations to drive out the Jews, so they could go back in get both theirs and their Jewish Neighbors' land.

But it did not happen that way, because when the cease fire was reached, Israel had survived and had even captured some of the Arab territory. Now those Arabs who chose to leave and wait for Israel to be defeated were used by the Arab nations to show how horrible the “Imperialistic” and “Zionist” Jews were. The Arab nations could easily absorb these Arabs who fled but did not in order to seek to show the world how horrible the Zionists were. They are kept in refugee camps to blame it on “the Occupation” of the land by the Jews. Yet they left of their own volition because the Arab nations said they were going to destroy the Jews and they could have their property. It didn't turn out that way. 

Three "R"s

The historically agreed upon views of the Church from the beginning concerning eschatology (Last Things) can be represented by the three "R"s:  return, resurrection, and restoration.

The “return” is the physical second coming of Christ; historically, the Church has held to a literal, physical return of Christ to the earth as judge and king.

The “resurrection” is the physical resurrection of the body of all who have died; the righteous will be resurrected to eternal life and the unrighteous will be resurrected to eternal judgment.

The “restoration” is the future restoration of all creation; there will be a new heaven and a new earth in which righteousness dwells, no longer under the corruption due to the original sin of Adam.

Of course, there have been dissenters down through the centuries, and even to this day, but they are outside the historically held views of the Christianity.

Of course, within and related to these three views, there are a lot of details Christians can disagree about, but they are the historically held views.

Jesus will return to the earth literally and physically, the dead shall be raised to physical life, and the creation will be delivered from corruption and restored.

If you reject these things, you are not only rejecting what Scripture teaches, but what the Church has historically held down through the centuries.