Can I show that it hasn’t happened yet, strictly based upon the Bible? Not as such.
Can I show that it hasn’t happened yet based upon the Bible, combined with a knowledge of history? Yes.
But just to show how contrived that you’re trying to make this, can you prove that Christ existed using nothing more than the Bible? No, you cannot.
You can prove that He existed, and that the Bible is a reliable witness to the events of His life, ministry, death and resurrection via supporting historical evidence, eye witnesses and circumstancial evidence, but proving His existance via strictly Biblical sources cannot be done.
Now, understand that I do not mean that the Scriptures are not trustworthy. In fact, I find it to be just the opposite. It’s entirely trustworthy because it has been proven via historical evidence and other evidences.
Furthermore, in answer to your question about do I believe that men will beat their swords into plowshears, literally, in the future?
No, but I do believe that men will recycle their weapons into peaceful pursuits, which is the correct understanding of that verse. After all, while the firearm is a recent development, the image of the sword has been a symbol for warfare, both in the Bible as well as secular texts, for ages and continues to this very day. So again, I ask you, do you see nations recycling their arms into peaceful uses and not fighting against each other, just as the verse said?
Yes, I can.
but proving His existance via strictly Biblical sources cannot be done.
I don’t know why you would say that. The Church has been doing it for 2000 years now. The Bible records faithful witnesses. The Bible is an infallible source. Therefore, Christ’s existence is proved by the testimony of true witnesses captured in an infallible source. That fact that some people do not accept that testimony or infallible source does not impeach the source, or the truth contained in that source.
So, I don’t agree with your premise. If you are trying to argue based on extra-biblical testimony, that will only go so far. The Bible alone gives us everything we need for faith and practice.
If your criteria are some extra-biblical notions of what the prophecy means, e.g., modern weapons in a modern setting, then it is almost impossible to get to the true biblical meaning of the text.
So again, I ask you, do you see nations recycling their arms into peaceful uses and not fighting against each other, just as the verse said?
Eventually, perhaps in several thousand years, I see the nations under the dominion of King Jesus in word and deed. King Jesus who remains firmly enthroned in heaven. As the prophet declared:
They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain, For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord As the waters cover the sea. (Isa. 11:9)It is the gospel that will subdue the nations, and turn them from their hostility towards one another. There is nothing that requires this to be after the Second Coming.
Once Christ subdues the nations, He returns to resurrect His people, and “then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power.” (1 Cor. 15:24)
There is no room in the text for a kingdom on earth post-Second Coming yet pre-eternal state.