O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?
Hi everybody, a new member with the same old questions here. I have been aware of preterism for a couple of years now and though I find much of it appealing I however have challenges with primarily 2 issues, one being the resurrection and the other being the end of the old covenant. These may even be the same question. Searching for discussions about these issues has led me here, Im sure it will be beneficial, so just bear with me guy.
How is 1 Cor 15:12-13 " Now if Christ is preached that he hath been raised from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, neither hath Christ been raised" to be understood
Hi Brother Les,
Your zeal and faithfulness to what you perceive to be true does you credit. All God's servants should demonstrate this dedication, because He is most worthy of it. But it is not "a zeal according to knowledge" in this case of the Matthew 27:52-53 saints. They truly are referred to more than this one occasion in Matthew 27:52-53, but even if they were mentioned only one time in scripture, does that discount the truth of their experience? What of the thousand-year period that is referred to only once in all of scripture by that description? What of the sole mention of Lazarus raised from the dead in John? The Nicodemus story? The young man fleeing naked in the Garden of Gethsemane? What of scripture's total absence of the word "Trinity"? Does that discount the three-in-one aspect of the God-head? Etc., etc.
The "single-mention" objection to the Matthew 27 story is not a valid argument that negates what happened in that account. It is the same argument futurist types throw against this story when I bring it up for discussion elsewhere. Nobody quite knows what to do with the Matthew 27 saints, but understanding their story is absolutely critical for comprehending the true nature of everything encompassed in the resurrection.
I realize that it would totally disrupt the Full Preterist paradigm if they acknowledged that these Matthew 27 Firstfruits saints were a bona fide example of the resurrected state. The entire Full Preterist doctrine would be affected to some degree. Which is why I don't expect any of the scriptures I am bringing up related to this topic to convince those that are completely sold on the Full Preterist view that the physical body has nothing to do with resurrection. Thankfully, the correct viewpoint on this issue does not determine whether we are a child of God or not.
If you are convinced your view is the correct one, Brother Les, it takes more than just a dismissive wave of your hand to prove my position is incorrect. Try reasoning with scripture texts - I try to heed what God's word tells me - not the opinions of men. You have the Full Preterist script faithfully committed to memory, but where are your texts?
That being said, I do agree with you that the law and the priesthood was changed with the New Covenant. This was launched by Christ at the "First Resurrection" in AD 33 (Heb. 7:12). That "unchangeable priesthood" (Heb. 7:24) of the order of Melchizedek is part of the point I am making: that is, Christ's resurrected body as our high priest in heaven NEVER CHANGED after He first ascended to the Father on the day of the "First Resurrection".
Melchizedek provided the living example of that unchangeable priesthood. He had "neither beginning of days, nor end of life", because he was made to be just like the Son of God (Heb. 7:3). Did you ever realize that Melchizedek was still alive when Hebrews was written? Hebrews 7:8 says so. It is my belief after comparing all the scripture accounts related to Melchizedek that he was actually the same as the translated Enoch from of old - merely re-introduced to the world after the flood as the deathless priest of the Most High God, with no obvious mother or father - or children (because those in the eternal state do not procreate). I also believe this is why we have Jude and others quoting the prophecies of Enoch, because Enoch / Melchizedek was still around and able to be quoted.
You may think that this is another so-called "rabbit trail" of my personal opinion, but I challenge you to read this link where I posted scriptures that are related to this subject:
http://www.gracecentered.com/christian_forums/apologetics-forum/who... comments #79 and #80
Melchizedek, the priest of the Most High God, who had "no end of life" was the perfect example of Christ's ever-living high priesthood body of flesh and bone that "passed into the heavens". Hebrews 7:28 proves this. "For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath which was since the law, maketh the Son who is CONSECRATED (or PERFECTED) FOR EVERMORE." (the oath of God to the Son in Psalms 110:4 - "Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek").
You do know in what sense God used the word "perfected" here, don't you? It's the same as how it is used in Hebrews 5:9. "And being MADE PERFECT" (at His resurrection), "He became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey Him." That resurrected perfection of Christ's body remained in that state "forever, after the order of Melchizedek". Christ was "raised in power" - the "power of an endless life" (Heb. 7:16), which "continueth ever" (Heb. 7:24), because "He ever liveth" (Heb. 7:25), just like Melchizedek, who was still bodily-alive several millennia later. That was because, like Christ, Melchizedek had no end of life either (Heb. 7:3).
Brother Les, you have also said that the 144,000 Firstfruits saints (of Rev. 14:4) came into the picture at the end of the Mosaic age. That's not possible, because then they would have to be called the "Secondfruits" instead, since Christ's and the Matt. 27 saints' resurrection was the Firstfruits. That "Firstfruits" title means something definite. There actually was a judgment that took place when the 144,000 Firstfruits came into the picture, but it was the judgment of Satan (John 16:8-11) when he was judged and cast out of heaven unto the earth after Christ's first ascension (Rev. 12:10-11) on the day of His AD 33 resurrection. The next resurrection at the end of the Mosaic age was the AD 70 one on that year's Pentecost Day. During all that time from AD 33 until AD 70, those 144,000 Firstfruits resurrected saints were SEALED - an assurance of protection until they finally joined all the newly-resurrected saints in AD 70, and were all together "received" unto Christ, so that where He was, they could be also (John 14:3).
None of this above is written with any anticipation of changing your mind, Brother Les, because you are clearly set in your beliefs already. I provide it in case anyone reading this exchange might think there is no reasonable biblical response to what you have written.
You weave an interesting tale. Not Biblical at all, but interesting in your own mind. I will make this post short, as I have no time to rebut your make believe.
1. There was no Resurrection of anyone from The Death, But Joshua Messiah in AD33. The Prophets never spoke of more than one Resurrection/Judgment, the Blessings and Curses of The Fulfillment of The Law of Moses. Your 'three' different 'mass' resurrections is your delusion and not Biblical.
2. Resurrection (The Hope of The Fathers) could only come about AT The Judgment of The People (OC Israel), The Place, (Jerusalem and Judea), and The Law (The Mosaic Law).
3. The is no AGE after the fullness of The New Covenant Age. Peace has been established with HIS People. The 'Church Age', has no end.
4. You are distorting the view of The Types and The Anti-Types. The Shadow and The Real.
Joshua 5:5-10 The Reproach of Egypt was rolled off of The Children of Israel, forty years after leaving Egypt. This is The Shadow/Type. AD70, The Reproach of Moses was rolled off of The People (Remnant/Elect) and this is The Anti-Type/Real.
Patricia, you have inserted ideas into Scripture That the Sanhedrin (Temple Leadership and Government) would never believe and is not OT Scriptural (the Sanhedrin knew the Prophecies of Daniel and closed their eyes and ears) and your ideas that the Apostles never believed or taught. You have woven a tale by pulling verses out of context and making up something that really makes no sense. The Greatest Love Story ever told is about Marriage and Redemption, Salvation, Resurrection (AD70), and you have turned that into some type of never ending drama that has no effect and some unknown ending. Sad...very Sad
Hi Brother Les,
Your point #1 is a pure contradiction of the Matthew 27:52-53 account. This story about the resurrected Matt. 27 saints may be an uncomfortable one for you, but it won't go away simply because you don't want to admit it's there. Likewise your opinion that there cannot be more than one resurrection. The very title "FIRST Resurrection" in Rev. 20:5 DEMANDS another resurrection event - or more. This is entirely biblical.
Your point #3 is also a pure contradiction of Paul's writings. Let's make this simple. You have said there are not multiple ages through human history - just the Old Covenant and New Covenant ages. A rather common view, but easily disproved by the apostle Paul. Are you presuming that there was no period of human history in the world BEFORE God established the Old Covenant with Abraham in Gen 15:18, and re-confirmed it with the nation of Israel in Exodus 6:3-5?
There was AT LEAST ONE AGE BEFORE THE OLD COVENANT established with Abraham. Paul says so in I Cor. 10:11 (YLT). "And all these things as types did happen to those persons, and they were written for our admonition, to whom the END OF THE AGES (PLURAL) did come." The Greek word used here I see is aionon - undoubtedly plural. That means there was more than one age of human history leading up to the end in AD 70, which included the Old Covenant Age Paul was then occupying.
Okay, that is history working backward from the close of the Old Covenant Age in AD 70. Now look forward in time from the end time of that Old Covenant Age. Paul said there were PLURAL AGES that were expected beyond the end of that Old Covenant Age he was then sitting in. Ephesians 2:7 (YLT), "...that He might show, in THE AGES (PLURAL) THAT ARE COMING, the exceeding riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus." That means there were going to be at least TWO ages of human history in the future when Paul was writing in the end of the Old Covenant Age. Count them up. The total is at least 2 ages before AD 70's end, which included that Old Covenant Age, and then at least 2 ages after AD 70. That makes at least 4 ages total, with one of them coming AFTER the New Covenant Age. It's not difficult math. That means, of necessity, that there is a CULMINATION POINT OF THE NEW COVENANT AGE. Since the Old Covenant Age ended with a resurrection in AD 70, how far-fetched is it to say that the end of the New Covenant Age ALSO ends with another mass resurrection of those who lived and died under the New Covenant conditions?
We have Paul's reassurance in Ephesians 2:7 that, even in the Age AFTER the New Covenant Age, God will continue to show "the exceeding riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus." What do we have to fear about the Age following the New Covenant Age? According to Paul, God and Christ will still be graciously kind toward those of us that are IN Christ Jesus. The NC relationship never ends, even though the Age we occupy does come to a conclusion with an Age following after it. Save your tears, Brother Les. There is nothing sad at all about this reassurance we are given by Paul.
Slow you are. Jesus talked about 'This Age (Mosaic) and Age to Come (Messianic). There were many 'Ages' before the Mosaic Age. Never said that there were not. There were even Ages Before Adam (The Man)....
Slow you are. write a lot and have empty words you do.
you are grabbing for a rope that is tied to nothing when you 'think' that the Saints that came out of 'the tombs', were Resurrected from THE DEATH (I can use the bold type too) of Adam. The Hebrew writer states that as long as The Temple stood, it (The Temple/Law/Prophets) Had Standing... ie. in Full Effect of The Sin Death....
All things written had to be Fulfilled BEFORE the fullness and complete forgiveness of SIN had came about. What do you not understand about 'All Things Written'? The Hebrew Writer was admonishing The Hebrews NOT to go back to the Sin Death Cultus.... As long as The Temple stood.. the Hebrews had a choice.... Moses or Christ. Roll their Sins Forward year by year or be completely Sin Free AT THE JUDGMENT of The People/Place/ and the Law.... If the Hebrew went back to Moses, they could not go unto Christ. What? Crucify Christ over and over again? God Forbid.
Speak empty words you do..... your timelines are off and your eschatology is found wanting....
I just dropped The Mike.....
I am sure that you have heard/read of the Apostle Peter speaking at Pentecost
He says some very interesting things about King David. David said that "'The Lord', would not leave his soul in Hell."
Peter said (at Pentecost) "Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day".
All of the 'flesh and blood' people spoke in tongues. Peter said they were not 'drunk'. Peter said that King David (was still) dead and buried and in his tomb...
and Peter said NOTHING about OT Prophet Saints that were there roaming around or 'with them'
This is That that was prophesied by Joel. The Holy Spirit Coming to The Flesh and Blood Living Saints. Joel did not Prophesy about 'resurrected (to stand up) saints' FROM SIN out of Tombs that were asleep, before Jesus was put INTO His Tomb...
Acts 2:34 " For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,"
Peter NEVER said to anyone... "Here's King David...(with your 144,000) above ground... 'we' can see him and touch him and talk to him..."
Because David and all OT Saints were still in Sheol....
Did 'some' leave their tombs? Yes, but they were still dead because of their sins and never 'alive' until The Judgment. The Bible says that they walked around the city and that was the last that was written on that subject per the Bible. What fully happened to these 'Saints' is purely speculation from the Biblical stand point. But we do know that Peter stated that King David was Still in the tomb/grave.
I am laughing at your paradigm... but it is really not funny, it is sad for you.
Hey Patricia and Les,
I've got no dogs in the fight, but as an observer, it seems you are both talking around each other. This isn't a 100% he's right/she's right debate. As I see it, there is a little error in both of your ideas, and there are LOTS of right things in BOTH of your ideas.
So, why can't you BOTH agree on what is common, and then get to the real meat of the questions? As an observer, I have lost the point of your original discussion! Too many twists and turns...
I have always appreciated your diplomatic approach on this forum. Blessed are the peacemakers. Apologies if it seems this has gone off in a multitude of directions that has made your head spin.
But after all, the crux of the matter that all of these points are circling around is really concentrated in one question only: namely....
"Does the example of Christ and those Matthew 27:52-53 saints of the "Firstfruits" resurrection also include a physical resurrection of immortal flesh-and-bone bodies for all of them on that occasion, or does it not?"
The answer of "YES, IT DOES" that I have been giving does NOT erase an AD 70 second resurrection event of the same nature. And I am using the apostle Paul's proof in Ephesians 2:7 of a culmination point of the New Covenant Age in our future to say that a third resurrection at that time of the same type as the first two resurrections for the saints will finish off human history. This is before God starts that next age following the New Covenant Age, in which all the resurrected saints from all three resurrections will actively participate in some way known only to Him.
My view admits enthusiastically that "all things WRITTEN" were indeed fulfilled in the AD 70 era. Every bit of Revelation and Daniel. But if we are honest with Revelation 10:4, some prophecies were NOT WRITTEN DOWN. They were sealed for later fulfillment sometime during the New Covenant Age. What I am doing is matching up the sealed content of what the 7 thunders uttered in Revelation 10:4 with some deductive reasoning that a third mass resurrection of flesh-and-bones bodies of the saints fits into that time period that the 7 thunders spoke about. My deductions are based on known truths about God's promises and the types we are shown in the Old Testament...not an unreasonable or unbiblical approach.
And contrary to the "sad" quality Brother is assigning to this, I have never felt so hopeful or confident about God's purposes for my future or that of the world I live in, as God is my witness. If the fruit of the Spirit is supposed to include "joy", then I can testify that this paradigm I am presenting has infused me with this, as I have never experienced before in all of my almost-60 years of living. Anyone posting on this site can feel free to dispute my deductions as much as they like, but you'll never convince me that my joy about these things is not heaven's gift to me.
The title of the thread is Resurrection.
you look(ed) for three Bodily Resurrection(s)
What is your belief of when Revelation was written?
Rev 10:4 does not say that what the noise of the thunders was a future prophecy. And he was told not to write this down for a reason.
You say that we are not in the New Covenant Age, but that as you say is 'in our future'. What Age are we in? You should answer per the Jewish mindset of this thought. Mosaic or Messianic?
The book of Ephesians is written to Ephesians. Where is Ephesians is the 'fleshing' out of three bodily Resurrections?
Hi again Brother Les,
Don't have too much time here...got a rush job on the table I really should be working on...no retirement for me quite yet...
My firm conviction based on internal evidence in Revelation compared with other scriptures and the dates that history gives to the events in Acts and Daniel tells me that Revelation was written without doubt in AD 59 - no sooner, and no later. My last post here describing the 666-year old Sea Beast of Revelation is part of this proof of an AD 59 date of composition.
As for the Rev. 10:4 being a future prophecy, I base that on the fact that this prophetic material was SEALED. The typical (and correct) stance of Preterism when interpreting Daniel's prophecies is to recognize that the SEALED prophecies in Daniel meant that they were to be reserved for fulfillment at the later time of the end. Sealing is a process that reserves a predicted fulfillment to happen at a time further down the calendar, which Daniel's prophecies truly were. All Daniel's prophecies were unsealed in the time of the end of the Mosaic Age, as John's visions of Revelation's opened seals show us. To be consistent, then, we then have to say that the sealing of Revelation 10:4's prophetic material must also, like Daniel's prophecies, be reserved for a time further down the timeline than the end of the Old Covenant Age that was then at hand in the first century.
You must have read me wrong about the New Covenant Age timing. I wholeheartedly agree that we ARE in the New Covenant Age presently. The New Heaven and the New Earth is a present reality for us, without doubt, as Isaiah foretold. But the Ephesians 2:7 verse predicts that, (from Paul's perspective of sitting in the end of the Old Covenant Age), there were coming AGES (PLURAL) expected to follow that Old Covenant Age. That means #1), Paul expected the soon-approaching New Covenant Age, which we are presently in, and #2) yet another nameless age to follow after the close of this New Covenant Age - with whatever name you want to put on it, since it will be inhabited by the completed collection of all bodily-resurrected believers by then. In between our New Covenant Age and the one to follow, there is of necessity a transition point. I believe this transition point is the date of the THIRD bodily resurrection, just like there were THREE required harvest feast celebrations for all of Israel to participate in, as pictured for us back under the OT law.
You have put up a link for Pastor David Curtis' sermon on this Ephesians topic, which I promise I will look into when I have a moment free. I do refer often to his website and the material he presents, although I find certain things said that I am unable to reconcile with scripture. I am especially indebted to Pastor Curtis for his sermon series on the divine council, that opened up answers to a LOT of scripture questions for me. Not the least of which was determining just how all the elements of Daniel's statue could be said to be destroyed simultaneously. But, off topic on that one...
Forgive me for my insulting and degrading words from past posts, they were uncalled for and I apologize.
1) AD 59 for the date of the Revelation seems to be very close. I have read where some people believe that it was written before the Books of Peter. Pastor David Curtis is of the firm belief that it was written by a member of the Sanhedrin, Lazarus.
2) I reread your statements on the 'New Covenant Age' and read that too fast and see your understanding that we are in the New Covenant Age. It seemed that you are still looking for prophecy to be 'fulfilled' in the future, in the New Covenant Age.
3) when you read the sermon/article from David Curtis, it will address the usage of Eph 2:7, 'coming Ages'. Knowing that when Eph. was written was during the Mosaic Age, with the Age to come is the Messianic Age. Mosaic/Messianic Age(s) are religious. There were and are many civil ages before the Mosaic Age and During the Messianic Age. I believe that there is a passage in the Bible that states something to the effect., " 'The Law' was even before Moses, it was just not written down ". That is not a direct 'quote', but the meaning is, from Adam to Christ, there was 'The Law' (just was not written down) and got a name at Sinai. From Christ (Messianic) forward is into the unknown, unending future, Age upon Age, never ending. As I have said before, I can understand that there 'Ages' before Adam (I am an Old Earth Age believer) and that there are and to be many 'Ages' into the future, but they are are under the umbrella of a continual Messianic Age Kingship, as The Law of Moses Age was from Adam unto Christ ( to AD70 Judgment of Mosaic Age).
Hi Brother Les,
That's quite alright...as they say, "No harm, no foul". For a while there you had me feeling as if I were 3 decades younger, 50 lbs. lighter, with all my teeth and a full head of dark hair again. On those terms, you can call me a "girl" any day of the week, with my blessing!
Now, let's see, where were we before I got buried under a mound of drapery fabric...
Your point #1 about Revelation possibly written before Peter: YES, I do think that was true. The I Peter 5:13 reference to "the church that is at Babylon" I believe is copying John's earlier reference to Jerusalem as Babylon in Revelation. I have also come to agree that Pastor David Curtis is on target with Lazarus the beloved disciple as the author of Revelation. And the epistles. And the book of John also.
The fact that Lazarus was the author of Revelation helps give some additional evidence that the resurrection includes that of the physical body as well, and that this is not a condition that can be discarded. The common presumption about Lazarus' story is that he simply died again later. But that's not even possible for someone who has been made incorruptible by the power of the Spirit of God. If John Eleazar / Lazarus wrote Revelation (and Pastor Curtis' case for this appears airtight), then the story we have handed down to us by Tertullian and Jerome about John surviving being boiled in oil by Nero's orders (executed by the proconsul at Ephesus before John was sent to Patmos) is not so much of a miracle after all. It just proves that a resurrected body of flesh and bones such as Lazarus possessed is incapable of destruction by any means whatsoever - including being dunked in a vat of boiling oil.
One reason I give credence to this story passed down by Tertullian is the commendation John Eleazar / Lazarus gives to Demetrius in III John 12. Aside from the addressee, (Gaius), Demetrius is the lone individual that John Eleazar / Lazarus singles out to give his special personal recommendation for following the truth. I believe this Demetrius in III John 12 is none other than the Ephesian silversmith Demetrius who instigated a riot in Ephesus against Paul in Acts 19:24, and who was converted to the truth afterward. Now, what kind of astounding event would it have taken to cause that ardent idol-worshipping silversmith to switch his allegiance over to Christ, so completely - and so soon? I'm guessing Mr. Demetrius in Ephesus got a ring-side seat at witnessing the unsuccessful attempt by the proconsul of Ephesus to turn the resurrected John Eleazar / Lazarus into a deep-fried crispy critter. Watching a failed attempt to martyr John in person would be a rather convincing testimony to Demetrius of the power of Paul's resurrecting Savior, I would think.
I believe Jesus' words in John 2:20-23 about John "tarrying" till He came give us evidence that John Eleazar / Lazarus was one of those like the Matthew 27 saints who were made "alive", and who then "remained" or "tarried" in those resurrected bodies on earth until Christ returned in AD 70. In other words, John Eleazar / Lazarus was one of the "alive" and "remaining" ones that the I Thess. 4:15,17 "rapture" text is speaking about specifically, who joined the newly-resurrected saints in AD 70 as they met the Lord together in the air.
In your #2 point Brother Les, you seem to be objecting that there is any prophecy left to be fulfilled in the New Covenant Age. As I said before, I agree that "All things WRITTEN" were unsealed / fulfilled by the end of the Old Covenant Age. But not all prophecies given were written down, as Rev. 10:4 shows us. And we still have the Zechariah 14:15-19 ongoing fulfillment with the mention of the Feast of Tabernacles, which is AFTER Jerusalem is destroyed in AD 70. The only reason God emphasized that one Feast of Tabernacles out of all the three required feasts is for us to recognize the timing of that Feast as the time for the harvest / resurrection that will take place after the close of the New Covenant Age.
The feast of in-gathering at the end of the year was the largest harvest celebration of all, and with the most variety of crops harvested. This will match the largest bodily resurrection of all, with the most variety of nationalities represented at the end of the New Covenant Age.
When I clicked on your link from Pastor David Curtis about Ephesians 2:7, I recognized it as one I had read a while back. But I read it again anyway. He does a superb job of developing the theme of God's sovereign choice in our salvation, in bringing spiritually dead people to life (and I agree with his position on this, by the way). But his argument against the Ephesians 2:7 PLURAL AGES that follow the end of the Old Covenant Age in AD 70 is a weak one at best. He is arguing from what he thinks is silence in the scripture about an Age to follow the New Covenant Age. The main thrust of his argument is that scripture discusses TWO AGES ONLY - that of the Old Covenant, and the one that was about to come in AD 70 - the New Covenant Age.
Suppose for example that I describe to you two cats that I take care of at my house - how different their personalities are, and how old they are, etc. Just because those two cats are the only ones I bring up for discussion in my conversation with you...does that automatically mean there are no other cats at my home? Of course not. (Actually, I do have more cats, plus a dog thrown in for diversity, but that's beside the point.) The point is that if the two ages of the Old and New Covenants are discussed in scripture, that does not automatically eliminate the existence of any other ages besides those two.
You have mentioned that you believe there were many CIVIL Ages both before the Mosaic Age and during the Messianic Age - just not religious Ages. Those CIVIL Ages would be the equivalent of Daniel's statue of various empires (Chaldean, Medo-Persian, Greek, and Roman) that developed over the centuries. However, Ephesians 2:7's emphasis is NOT on this type of Civil Age - Paul was concentrating on religious ages in that verse, and saying that there were PLURAL religious-type ages to follow the Old Covenant.
Brother Les, you and I and Pastor Curtis would all agree that Christ's rule as our Messiah-king is a kingdom that lasts forever, unlike all Daniel's other civil ages of empire rule. But the ongoing reality of Christ's everlasting kingdom does not disprove a culmination point for evil in this world. I believe this will be accomplished with a final resurrection and judgment that "empties the recycle bin", so to speak, (by bodily-resurrecting all the New Covenant saints), and gets rid of all the "spam" (the wicked who lived and died under the New Covenant Age).
God has been long-suffering with the wickedness of men over the ages, but "long-suffering" is not the same as God "perpetually-suffering" the existence of evil for eternity without end. God has been working His way incrementally in stages toward a planet purged of the presence of any corruptible human inhabitants - with the goal of having only immortal, incorruptible, resurrected saints of His kingdom exercising dominion over the creation in an age that follows the New Covenant Age.
So in a way, Brother Les, I am in sync with your "umbrella" of a continual Messianic kingship that will be contemporary with all future Ages. I have described it before on this forum in geometry terms: the ages of human history are consecutive "segments" on a "line" of time that stretches infinitely in either direction. The "ray" representing the Messiah's kingship (launched as the New Covenant at His resurrection and ascension) does not stop at the same ending "point" of the last "segment" of human history as we know it today - His kingship continues beyond that point to infinity, although human history as it is now will have its closure.