Page 2 of 34 FirstFirst 12345678910111213 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 503

Thread: 13 major reasons why I abandoned the Premil doctrine

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    5,647
    Blog Entries
    35

    Re: 13 major reasons why I abandoned the Premil doctrine

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    Since abandoning Premil I have engaged in many debates/discussions on the matter of the second coming, end-times and the here-after. These are some of the major weaknesses I find in the Premil doctrine, and are strong reasons why I believe the dogma should be rejected.

    (1) Premil is totally obsessed with, and dependent upon, Revelation 20. It interprets the rest of Scripture in the light of its opinion of one lone highly-debated chapter located in the most figurative and obscure book in the Bible. All end-time Scripture is viewed through the lens of Revelation 20. This is not a wise way to establish any truth or doctrine.

    One who affirms the idea that Jesus returns prior to the millennial period will naturally discuss the one place where the millennial period is mentioned. We should not object to those who base their doctrine on Revelation 20, since this is where the doctrine is taught. And while it is always a good idea to check our interpretations with the rest of scripture, it is also a temptation to impose our interpretations of other passages into Revelation 20. Whether we fall off the horse on the left side or the right side, no one can deny that we fell off the horse. I would never argue that I began to fall off the right side of the horse because I found that falling off the left side was unproductive.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    5,647
    Blog Entries
    35

    Re: 13 major reasons why I abandoned the Premil doctrine

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    Since abandoning Premil I have engaged in many debates/discussions on the matter of the second coming, end-times and the here-after. These are some of the major weaknesses I find in the Premil doctrine, and are strong reasons why I believe the dogma should be rejected.



    (2) Premil hangs its doctrine on a very precarious frayed thread: that of Revelation 20 following Revelation 19 chronologically in time. To hold this, it has to dismiss the different recaps (or different camera views pertaining to the intra-Advent period) that exist throughout the book of Revelation, divorce it from repeated Scripture on this matter and also explains away the clear and explicit climactic detail that pertains to Revelation 19. Premil is dependent upon the dubious premise that Revelation 20 is chronological to Revelation 19. That is it! Disprove that and Premil has nothing.
    While it is true that John recapitulates various aspects previous ideas found in the apocalypse, and should be aware of that possibility as we read through the text, we should need good literary reason to think that Revelation 20 does not follow chronologically from Revelation 19. I mean, in order to prove that Revelation 20 is a recapitulation of a previous time and place, we need to show what verbal clues John gave his readers to indicate he intended to back track. After all, the chapter and verse numbers don't appear in the original Greek text of the Bible. These were added later. We must not be fooled by the fact that someone has decided to insert a chapter break between

    "21 And the rest were killed with the sword which came from the mouth of Him who sat on the horse, and all the birds were filled with their flesh."

    and

    "Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding the key of the abyss and a great chain in his hand."

    Without a doubt, this is a good spot for a paragraph break. But to my ears, a chapter break implies a substantial, and main division that John may not have intended. The man who originally placed a chapter break at that location has predecided our interpretation for us. So, rather than relying on chapter and verse numbers, our search for John's intent is based on an evaluation of sequential events. What takes place first, what happens next etc. John guides his readers and helps them follow the logic of his presentation and so we need to follow his lead and look for the organizing principle he used to lay this out for us to see.

    Also, and most importantly, it isn't enough to claim that John decided to double back in time and sequence; we need to understand his reason for doing so. We need to ask ourselves, why would he place something out of sequence? What purpose would it serve?

    One place where John seems to double back is chapter 12, where John begins to tell the story from Satan's perspective. This is a clear case where John has started from the beginning and the reason for taking the readers back in time is to explain things from another perspective. A change of perspective is a good reason to double back.

    In my humble opinion, John has not changed the perspective between Revelation 19 and Revelation 20. Rather, he is answering the same question Paul faced in 1Thessalonians chapter 4. What about the dead in Christ?

    1Thess. 4:13-14
    But we do not want you to be uninformed, brethren, about those who are asleep, so that you will not grieve as do the rest who have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus.

    We must remember that we have had thousands of years to think about the idea that Jesus was coming back to be glorified among his followers. These early believers had concerns about their dead loved ones, or perhaps they were old and wondered if they would see that day, having pass away before his return. Paul comforts his readers; don't grieve because God will raise you up to see the Lord glorified and you standing with him. The dead will not be left behind.

    A similar answer is found in Revelation 20. In Revelation 19 we see what happens at the marriage supper of the lamb, and given what Paul said, every believer will be there. But if for some reason, as a first century believer, I didn't have Paul's letter to the Thessalonian church yet, John writes Revelation 20 in order to teach us that the dead in Christ will also rise to rule with him.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    5,647
    Blog Entries
    35

    Re: 13 major reasons why I abandoned the Premil doctrine

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    Since abandoning Premil I have engaged in many debates/discussions on the matter of the second coming, end-times and the here-after. These are some of the major weaknesses I find in the Premil doctrine, and are strong reasons why I believe the dogma should be rejected.



    (3) The detail Premil attributes to Revelation 20 compared to what the inspired text actually says is day and night. Revelation 20 does not remotely say what Premil attribute to it. Many extravagant characteristics, events and ideas are inserted into Revelation 20 that do not exist in the sacred text
    While this does happen and might be true in certain cases, this is no reason to reject Premillennialism in its entirety. The core doctrine teaches that the Second Advent takes place prior to a thousand years of Jesus ruling the earth with a rod of iron, during a time when Satan is in a prison unable to deceive anyone. One may find parallels to this idea in other passages of scripture and we are free to discuss whether such findings are correct or in error, but an error in judgment with regard to finding parallel passages elsewhere is no reason to reject the core doctrine.

    Now, I have read your challenge and call for corroboration, but I think your challenge assumes a premise that may or may not be true, i.e. that John has nothing new to say in the book of Revelation. This presupposition itself must be proven before corroboration can be demanded. If one can show from the text of Revelation that John intends to reveal new information about the future, then we would expect to find ideas and concepts that have no precedent in previous revelation. All Divine revelation enters history at some point in time, whether we are talking about God's revelation to Abraham that he would be the father of many nations, or whether we are talking about the idea that the messiah must suffer and die on a cross for the sins of his people. We can not assume that each and every divine revelation will have precedence with past revelation.

    What is God's criteria with regard to prophets who claim to speak for him? He requires that the prophecy not contradict previous revelation and that it not lead the people to worship other gods. Does Premillennialism contradict previous revelation or lead the people to worship other gods? Not in my view. In fact, the general concept that Jesus Christ will rule over Israel, on earth, from MT. Zion has precedent in previous revelation. And it teaches us to worship both God and his son Jesus Christ. Does the Bible ever say that Jesus will rule on earth for a mere thousand year period? No. This is new revelation. Does the Bible say that God will rule from Mt. Zion during a time of righteousness, goodness and truth? Yes it does.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    5,647
    Blog Entries
    35

    Re: 13 major reasons why I abandoned the Premil doctrine

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    Since abandoning Premil I have engaged in many debates/discussions on the matter of the second coming, end-times and the here-after. These are some of the major weaknesses I find in the Premil doctrine, and are strong reasons why I believe the dogma should be rejected.



    (4) Premil's interpretation of Revelation 20 contradicts numerous explicit climactic Scripture.

    I finally understand what you mean by the term "climatic" and if I am right, the presuppostion here is the idea that world events will continue as usual until such time as circumstances suddenly become unstable, dark, and intensely evil culminating in the sudden and impressive Second Coming of Christ, when he brings about the physical death of all remaining infidels and takes his followers into the eternal age. That is, climax follows intense and unbearable crisis. By contrast, Premillennialism understands that Christ will not kill all the infidels on his return, but will rule over them with a rod of iron, bring about righteousness and goodness on earth, and live among his people in shalom (peace and prosperity) in fulfillment of God's promise to Israel.

    The debate centers on whether or not certain passages should be taken as a climatic exit from this world, or whether such passages would actually necessitate such a view.

  5. #20

    Re: 13 major reasons why I abandoned the Premil doctrine

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony P View Post
    Thank you for answers.
    Your welcome. Thanks for yours!

    Does this mean that Jesus will not come back to this earth? As in, rapture, cleanse the earth, NHNE, then Jesus reigns as king of kings?
    Jesus will come back to this earth, as in, rapture, cleanse the earth, NHNE, and reign as king of kings. The debate is not over this, it is normally over 2 other issues, (1) has that reign started since Christ defeated the grave or is it all yet future? Amils believe Christ is currently reigning now in divine authority as God and human authority as man. His Messianic ministry allowed Him to take the Davidic throne. Most Premils believe He is not yet reigning. (2) What type of earth will Christ be coming back to? Amils say a perfect glorified eternal new earth. Premils say an earth like our own that still contains sin, death, disease, corruption, conflict and eventually Satan and billions of wicked. Amils obviously strongly reject this.

    Do you think Israel will build a Temple before Jesus returns? There seems to be several scriptures that suggest there will be one. 2 Thess 2:4, Joel 2:17, etc.
    No! It doesn't say that! The only temple recognized in the NT as having value is the spiritual temple. The temple was destroyed because it is not needed any more. Under the old covenant it was required to facilitate the worship of God in Jerusalem and the typical animal sacrifice system. It simply served as a picture, shadow and type of the spiritual, heavenly and the eternal. There was no more need for any more sin offerings as Christ had made the final sacrifice for sin. What is more the Gospel was no longer going to restricted to one small nation in the Middle East. It was going to spread out to all nations.

    Daniel 9:26 says: “the people of the prince that shall come (speaking of the Roman soldiers) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.”

    In Daniel 9:27 after predicting that the old covenant would be removed, the angel predicted that God would destroy the temple (the centre-point of the sacrifices) forever. We learn: “for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”

    The consummation is the one final future Coming of Christ.

    We see the fulfilment of this in Christ’s words in Matthew 23:37-39: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord (the consummation, as Daniel predicted).”

    Christ continues (to remove any ambiguity as to what He was referring to) in Matthew 24:1-2, “And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple. And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? Verily I say unto you, there shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”

    This couldn’t be clearer.

    What was going to replace the old physical Jewish building in Jerusalem was not something that was restricted to one race but a global spiritual temple that embraced all nations equally.

    In John 4:19-24 we see Christ addressing this subject, in response to a statement made by the woman at the well. The woman said to Christ, “Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet. Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.”

    Christ responded, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.”

    What Christ was teaching here was that a new economy was being introduced through His earthly ministry that would forever replace the old. No longer would the worship of the living God be restricted to a natural geographical land-mass or be centred upon a physical temporal brick building built with hands in earthly Jerusalem, rather, it would now be concentrated in a spiritual eternal temple (the redeemed Church) which is spiritual located within the heavenly New Jerusalem. That temple would not be restricted to one physical nation but would be situated throughout all the nations of the world.

    Since Christ, the worship of God was no longer restricted to a physical earthly building but rather relocated to an invisible spiritual temple called the Church. The Old Testament tabernacle, as important and powerful as it was, was therefore a deficient temporal type of the more perfect spiritual fulfilment in Christ and in His Church. This teaching about the spiritual manifestation of the temple was clearly an anathema to the unbelieving Jew and was regarded as complete heresy.

    The house referred to here is a spiritual house and relates to the Lord Jesus Christ and the building of His spiritual body – the Church. Any Jew interpreting this Old Testament text literally would have mistakenly assumed that the hope for the nations in the last days would arise in the form of the physical temporal earthly temple in Jerusalem rather than a new spiritual temple.

    Christ also declared during His ministry, whilst standing in the actual temple, “I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple” (Matthew 12:6). However, the Jews in the main had No comprehension of that glorious statement. To this spiritual Temple would the nations finally find mercy, thus, fulfilling perfectly what the old temple couldn’t. And thus, through Himself (the living Temple), fulfilling Isaiah 2:2 that all nations shall flow unto it.”

    Agreed. But is it a physical place on a physical new earth?
    It could be or it could be a spiritual description of God''s people. Remember Revelation is saturated in figurative terms. There are strong arguments on either side. Others saw that the NJ literally represents the bride of Christ. In Revelation 21:1-4 it declares, “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.”
    "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).

    http://www.evangelicaltruth.com/

    WPM

  6. #21

    Re: 13 major reasons why I abandoned the Premil doctrine

    Quote Originally Posted by ForHisglory View Post
    OK let's work through them and see how many I agree with you or find unsupported as being strawman arguments - IOW NOT Premil doctrine, but Premil according to wpm.
    Appreciate!

    I don't find Premil obsessed with this. It is the ONLY passage that specifies the length of the Millennium and is where the root of the name comes from in Amil as well as Premil, so the same argument can be laid at Amils. I for one have NEVER viewed End Time Scripture through the lens of Rev 20. I find each passage stands alone in its own context. This is your first strawman.
    Because the alleged Premil future millennial age is not known anywhere in Scripture, Premils have to build everything they hold on this highly symbolic passage. Amils have countless Scripture that predicts a climactic Coming of Christ, which sees the rescue of all the elect and the destruction of all the wicked, the removal of the bondage of corruption and the introduction of perfection and eternal bliss.

    Nope, there is no requirement for Rev 20 to be chronologically after Rev 19. What is a REAL problem for Amil is a simple lack of chronology. Premil does require chronology to have meaning and by determining that as being a basic assumption, then after comparing what is stated, we find that logically Rev 20 DOES follow Rev 19. Yet another strawman as you claim it is a precariously frayed thread, when there is nothing frayed about it.
    This is totally wrong and disingenuous. Sorry that you cannot be honest in your response.

    Huh???
    Nothing additional added by Premil. There is NOTHING in this claim except whatever is going on in your mind. People are resurrected is clearly stated in Rev 20,so to say it happens as per Premil is NOT adding to what is stated. As to anything else, this is just your conjecture without details to discuss.
    Ok, for example:

    Where in Revelation 20 does it mention Christ on earth?
    Where in Revelation 20 does it talk about this complete and absolute peace in the millennium?
    Where in Revelation 20 does it mention Christ ruling with a rod of iron for "a thousand years"?
    Where in Revelation 20 do we find any mention of freeing from the curse,” “gradual restoration,” “progressive renewal” or “a process of renovation” that Premils speak of?
    Where in Revelation 20 does it teach two distinct future judgement days (that will see all mankind stand before Christ to give account for their lives) separated by a literal 1000 years?
    Where in Revelation 20 is Israel mentioned, never mind even hinted at, as holding a superior position to the Gentiles?

    Again claims without specifics, seems like you are just on a smear campaign.
    Smear? The Bible clearly and repeatedly shows that Christ destroys every enemy when He comes, the last enemy being death (Luke 20:34-36, 1 Corinthians 15:50-55, Romans 8:16-23, 1 Peter 1:3-5, Revelation 20:11-15 and Revelation 21:1-5). The age to come has no room for "time" (John 6:39-44, 54, John 11:21-27, John 12:48, Ephesians 1:10 and Revelation 10:5-7), "mortals" (Luke 20:34-36, Romans 8:19-23, 1 Corinthians 15:50-55 and Revelation 21-22) or the unregenerate (Psalms 37:9-11, Luke 17:26-30, 1 Corinthians 6:9, I Thessalonians 5:2-3, 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10).

    Job 14:12-14, Isaiah 13:9-11, Isaiah 34:1-4, 8, Isaiah 65:17-21, Isaiah 66:22-24, Joel 2:3, Joel 2:10-11, Malachi 4:1-3, Matthew 24:29-30, Matthew 24:35-44, Mark 13:24-26, Luke 21:25-27, Romans 8:18-23, 1 Corinthians 15:23-24, 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10 , 2 Peter 3:10-13, Hebrews 1:10-12, Revelation 6:13-17, Revelation 16:15-20, Revelation 19:11-16 and Revelation 20:11-15 speak of the removal of the old corrupt heavens and earth and their replacement with the one-and-only new heavens and new earth being ushered in at the Second Coming.

    The Premil view of one lone passage is supposed to negate all this and much more! I don't think so!

    More smear without any substance. The shadow or type is given so that we can CORRECTLY understand what is going on. You seem to want to remove any shadow or its reality.
    Smear? Not so! For example, your (and Premils) understanding of Ezekiel 40-47 suggesting that this belongs to a future age and that it suggests we are resurrecting the old covenant arrangement of more meat offerings, sin offerings, trespass offerings, burnt offerings, peace offerings, drink offerings is totally forbidden by NT Scripture. It means little to you that a future millennium is not even mentioned in the text. What is more, Christ paid the full penalty for sin by this final transaction for sin. This satisfied the Father and appeased His wrath upon sin. This in turn reconciled all that desired forgiveness and cleansing to a holy God. There was nothing lacking in this sacrifice or nothing that needed added to, as you seem to think. Be absolutely sure, Christ covered all the bases. He was the complete and absolute fulfilment of every aspect of the Law. He was indeed the Law-keeper. There will never again be a sacrifice for sin that carries God's blessing. Christ’s atonement satisfied heaven’s holy demands and ensured that there would never again be another sacrifice/offering for sin carrying God’s blessing.

    Yet another smear, almost half-way into your reasons, and yet to be given a specific issue you have with Premil. What specific passage is incorrectly literalised or spiritualised according to CONTEXT?
    Smear? Such extreme language does nothing for your position, but actually harms it. Any way, take 2 Peter 3:10-13. Premils do not know what to do with its explicit climactic detail. Many spiritualize it away as figurative. It is not real fire, it is not the real earth, it is not the whole earth, etc, etc. This is truly amazing. Yet when it comes to the a clearly symbolic book like Revelation Premils insist on a rigid literalist approach to it. I do not think so!

    To be continued...
    "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).

    http://www.evangelicaltruth.com/

    WPM

  7. #22

    Re: 13 major reasons why I abandoned the Premil doctrine

    Quote Originally Posted by CadyandZoe View Post
    By contrast, Premillennialism understands that Christ will not kill all the infidels on his return, but will rule over them with a rod of iron, bring about righteousness and goodness on earth, and live among his people in shalom (peace and prosperity) in fulfillment of God's promise to Israel.
    Who is this 3rd group of humans at the Second Coming that populate the Premil new earth - who are obviously too righteous to be destroyed yet too wicked to be rescued? And, what qualifies them to survive the wrath of God?
    "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).

    http://www.evangelicaltruth.com/

    WPM

  8. #23

    Re: 13 major reasons why I abandoned the Premil doctrine

    Quote Originally Posted by ForHisglory View Post
    So what are you lacking corroboration for? Satan being bound? As there is ONLY one place in scripture which speaks of his being cast into the pit, then Amil has no corroboration either. ONLY one place speaks of his release AFTER the 1K, so Amil also lacks corroboration.
    That is not true! There is other Scripture that clearly demonstrates that the whole kingdom of darkness is under restraint in a spiritual prison today, and that they will be released from that at the end to wreak havoc before Jesus comes. Satan and his minions are located there in Revelation 9:1-11 before the 7th trumpet (and the second coming). Satan is placed there in Revelation 9:11 and 20:3. 2 Peter 2:4, Jude v 6 and Revelation 9:1-11 shows the demonic world in a current spiritually bound condition in the abyss. This all fits in with the detail in John 12:31-33 and Revelation 12:9-13 that tells us that Satan was roundly and spiritually defeated through the life, death and resurrection of Christ, which resulted in him being banished from heaven, along with 1/3 of the angels. This all correlates with Matthew 12:22-29, Mark 3:11, 23-27 Luke 11:20-22, Colossians 2:13-15, Hebrews 2:14-15 and I John 3:8 that depicts Satan as bound, defeated, incapacitated, divested of power, disarmed, brought to naught, undone, and stripped through Christ's sinless life, atoning death and triumphant resurrection. Satan has not been rendered immobile or inoperative but is limited in his power, kingship and influence by being defeated on the cross. He is like a dog on a chain. He is shackled.

    Satan is released from there near the end in Revelation 20:7. That verse expressly describes the abyss as a “prison.” The release of Satan at the end from the abyss restriction (Revelation 9:1-11 and Revelation 20:7) corresponds with the beast also rising from the abyss (Revelation 11:7, Revelation 13:5 -18 and Revelation 17:8) and also the many fallen angels (Revelation 9:1-11).

    Amil has loads of strong biblical evidence for locating the defeat of Satan and the resulting binding of Satan to this age. What has Premil?

    What Scripture, if any, do you consider definitely corroborates the Premillennial interpretation of Revelation 20 that Satan will be bound for a time-span of 1000 years after the Second Advent then released for a "little season" to deceive the nations, and then destroyed?

    The answer is: Nothing! That is why I say: Premil is a non-corroborative doctrine.

    The restoration of animal sacrifices is not agreed by all Premil, but there are plenty of passages which support the idea of it. These have been given to you, but you reject them because they aren't in Rev 20, which means YOU are obsessing over Rev 20.
    As there are multiple judgements in scripture and multiple resurrections, then your requirement for it somehow to be in Rev 20 is again YOUR obsessing over Rev 20. As there is ONLY one place in scripture which speaks specifically about the release of Satan, then Amil suffers from the same lack of corroboration. Though Premil would point to various OT prophecies which line up with such things.
    So again a reason without any basis.
    Where in Scripture does it talk about "resurrection days" or "judgment days"? It is always singular. It always depicts both the righteous and the wicked receiving their eternal reward at the second coming.

    Further smearing and incorrect understanding of Premil. Premil recognises that Satan is a defeated foe, but he is not yet vanquished and still is deceiving people this very day. Amil are unable to explain how he is still deceiving people, or why nations are still in darkness, as IF there understanding were correct then ALL the nations would be full of light of the gospel - which sadly they are not. Premil highlight the importance of what WE need to do, with Christ's power to bring taht light, and release for prisoners and sight for the blind. This is about a war we are in, which Christ has won, but the battle is being fought right now.
    Smearing? I think you imagine if you repeat a lie enough someone will believe it. Not so! This says more about the impotence of your argument than anything I have written. The fact is, you are the one that is always arguing that: Christ is not king today. He is not reigning today. He is not sovereign today. You are the one continually lauding the power, authority and influence of Satan over the intra-Advent period instead of what Christ has been doing throughout the nations for 2000 years. You are always exalting the achievements of Satan on the earth. You never acknowledge the great invasion of the nations by the Gospel and the amazing success the Church has enjoyed for 2000 years.

    Another strawman. Which Premil says the New has not arrived? Again charges without specifics, without substance. Just more smearing.
    For example, Amos 9:8-15 declares, “Behold, the eyes of the Lord GOD are upon the sinful kingdom, and I will destroy it from off the face of the earth; saving that I will not utterly destroy the house of Jacob, saith the LORD. For, lo, I will command, and I will sift the house of Israel among all nations, like as corn is sifted in a sieve, yet shall not the least grain fall upon the earth. All the sinners of my people shall die by the sword, which say, The evil shall not overtake nor prevent us. In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old: That they may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen, which are called by my name, saith the LORD that doeth this. Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that the plowman shall overtake the reaper, and the treader of grapes him that soweth seed; and the mountains shall drop sweet wine, and all the hills shall melt. And I will bring again the captivity of my people of Israel, and they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them. And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the LORD thy God.”

    Premils try to locate this in a future millennium.

    James, in complete agreement with the other disciples, and in total accord with their line of argument, locates this in this age: Men and brethren, hearken unto me: Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up. That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things. Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God(vv 13-19).

    James linkage of the salvation of the Gentiles with the fulfilment of the rebuilding of David’s tabernacle (or house) is unmistakable. In fact, after confirming Christ “did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name” he adds “And to this agree the words of the prophets.” This word “agree” in the original is the Greek word sumphoneo meaning ‘to be harmony, accord, suitable or concur. The great commission saw the realisation of the rebuilding of “the tabernacle of David” which had expressly “fallen down.” The righteous reign of David typified the perfect kingship of Christ ruling over His people. This house was not restricted to those of Jewish descent, but embraced those of all nations, colours and creeds.

    Also, Zechariah 12:10 says, And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.”

    Premils try to locate this in a future millennium.

    But Matthew 27:27-35 locates this at the cross: “Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the common hall, and gathered unto him the whole band of soldiers. And they stripped him, and put on him a scarlet robe. And when they had platted a crown of thorns, they put it upon his head, and a reed in his right hand: and they bowed the knee before him, and mocked him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews! And they spit upon him, and took the reed, and smote him on the head. And after that they had mocked him, they took the robe off from him, and put his own raiment on him, and led him away to crucify him. And as they came out, they found a man of Cyrene, Simon by name: him they compelled to bear his cross. And when they were come unto a place called Golgotha, that is to say, a place of a skull, They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink. And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots.”

    As there is ONLY one passage that speaks specifically of 1K years Amils have the same problem of a lack of corroboration. There is no Mark 1 and Mark 2 except IF you call yourself NEW creation mark 1, speaking of yourself now, and NEW creation mark 2, speaking of yourself after Jesus return's when you are clothed in incorruptibility. I would say you are the same one NEW creation, but that you are being transformed. This same picture we are given for what God will do with the earth, redeeming and restoring it. IT is NEW, but being transformed. If you have an issue with that, then you have an issue with HOW God does things, not with what scripture says.
    When does Revelation say the NHNE arrives - before or after the millennium?
    Where does Scripture locate the last days - in the intra-Advent period now or in a future millennium?


    A relatively new claim, yet one which is proven in scripture in Paul's writings alone. The question we have to ask ourselves is what does the CONTEXT show us about how these words are used. Ats 2 has this:
    Act 2:5 Now there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men from every nation under heaven.
    This would suggest EVERY nation, so were people from Korea, Japan, Olmecs etc at this event? If you answer no they weren't then this means that you are speaking against your own view point. If you say they were, then were is your evidence for such a thing?
    So your charge is not a charge against Premil, but against how you WISH to understand the Bible in every case, and how the Bible itself explains itself. You can read the following verses to know which nations are mentioned.
    Again, according to you, nothing can be taken literal in Scripture and nothing means what it really says it means. Amils disagree with that philosophy.

    As you invent there being two groups in the first place then the issue is with yourself. All are in Adam, for ALL were born of Adam, even Jesus. However of those of Adam we find that people can then switch between different groups.
    Who then are this 3rd group of humans that Scripture knows nothing that are too wicked to be raptured at the second coming and too righteous to be destroyed? The reality is there are only two peoples in this world – the righteous and the unrighteous; those "in Adam" (the 1st birth) and those "in Christ" (2nd birth).
    Sorry, but the VINE has NOT been cut down. The Olive Tree has NOT been cut down. Where does scripture have the Fig Tree cut down? Premil doesn't have a fixation with natural Israel, but does see that God has this present time of the Gentiles, which WILL come to an end. The Kingdom of God is NOT solely for the Jews, but then this is another classic strawman for it NEVER was solely for the Jews. A bit like your strawman arguments about sacrifices.
    When you wish to post some specific scripture which you can show has an incorrect understanding on it WITHIN context, then I may see it as worthwhile responding again. As it is I feel like I have wasted 30 minutes responding to smears.
    I did not say the vine or the olive tree. I said the fig tree. Natural Israel is likened to the fig tree, not the vine or the olive tree. Stop trying to divert. Premil has natural Israel raised up with all their old covenant privileges in their alleged future millennium as the chosen race ruling over the Gentiles. Where in Revelation 20 is Israel mentioned, never mind even hinted at as holding a superior position to the Gentiles?

    The fig tree in Scripture symbolizes natural Israel. During the Lord’s earthly ministry He taught of the demise of natural Israel by way of this symbol and by way of a parable, in Luke 13:6-9, saying, “A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none. Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground? And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it: And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down.”

    The fig tree in Scripture symbolises natural Israel. During the Lord’s earthly ministry He taught of the demise of natural Israel by way of this symbol and by way of a parable, in Luke 13:6-9, saying, “A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none. Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground? And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it: And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down.”

    Here Christ is speaking of Israel’s fruitlessness (as a fig tree). He presents this as the reason why the fig tree must be cut. Here, He is referring to how they rebelled against His message of salvation and hence brought forth no fruit acceptable unto God. That ministry lasted 3 years on this earth and culminated in the Jews crucifying the Messiah. In the parable Christ refers to the length of His ministry.

    On the day after His triumphant entry into Jerusalem, the city of Jerusalem heralded Him, saying, “Hosanna; Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord: Blessed be the kingdom of our father David, that cometh in the name of the Lord: Hosanna in the highest (Mark 11:9-11).

    Mark 11:13-14 continues, seeing a fig tree afar off having leaves, he came, if haply he might find any thing thereon: and when he came to it, he found nothing but leaves; for the time of figs was not yet. And Jesus answered and said unto it, No man eat fruit of thee hereafter for ever.”

    Did Christ curse this fig tree simply to prove His deity? Did He do it for no obvious reason? Or was He impressing some great spiritual truth upon His disciples in regard to natural Israel?

    This was not an irrelevant act to prove Christ’s deity or omnipotence; it was an object lesson in regard to Israel. The fig tree symbolically represents the physical nation of Israel whereas the Olive tree represents the spiritual people of Israel. When Christ cursed the fig tree He was revealing the removing of the exclusive theocratic favour of God from the physical nation of Israel, whereas, the other will exist forever. Never again will God’s favour be restricted to a physical temporal earthly nation, but rather to a spiritual eternal heavenly nation.
    "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).

    http://www.evangelicaltruth.com/

    WPM

  9. #24

    Re: 13 major reasons why I abandoned the Premil doctrine

    Quote Originally Posted by CadyandZoe View Post
    One who affirms the idea that Jesus returns prior to the millennial period will naturally discuss the one place where the millennial period is mentioned. We should not object to those who base their doctrine on Revelation 20, since this is where the doctrine is taught. And while it is always a good idea to check our interpretations with the rest of scripture, it is also a temptation to impose our interpretations of other passages into Revelation 20. Whether we fall off the horse on the left side or the right side, no one can deny that we fell off the horse. I would never argue that I began to fall off the right side of the horse because I found that falling off the left side was unproductive.
    Corroboration is an essential doctrine for proving any major doctrine. Ignoring it and building your belief on obscure language and private interpretation is a false conclusion fallacy. The mode of hermeneutics of any school of thought must perfectly correlate with the consistent and explicit teaching of Scripture. The only sure way to interpret Scripture is with other Scripture. 2 Peter 1:20 says, no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation.”

    Personal interpretation of a Scripture alone is untrustworthy. That is private interpretation. It should be supported by other clear and repeated Scripture. After all, there is a harmony to all truth. Scripture does not contradict Scripture.

    The foremost consideration when studying Scripture must be to establish the contextual meaning of the text, whether it is literal, symbolic or parabolic, and who, what and when it relates to. Is it speaking of the past, present or future? Is it principally speaking to the people receiving it or is it speaking prophetically of an approaching event. And finally, and most importantly, what is the consistent repeated testimony of the rest of Scripture on the said matter. We should always compare Scripture with Scripture and interpret it in the light of the full written counsel of God. The only sure way to interpret Scripture effectively is with other Scripture. Scripture is the best interpreter of Scripture, not the human mind. 2 Corinthians 13:1 highlights a divine evidential imperative, which if ignored will bring Bible students into all forms of strange teaching. It states, “In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.” This important principle is outlined repeatedly both the OT and the NT.

    This important principle was decreed of God throughout the Old Testament in order to corroborate evidence in the case of witnesses - to prove matters of evidence. It is also presented in the New Testament time as the criteria for establishing truth. 1 Corinthians 2:13 says, the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.”

    God expects us to compare Scripture with Scripture – the spiritual with the spiritual. Scripture is the supreme and absolute means for interpreting other Scripture.
    "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).

    http://www.evangelicaltruth.com/

    WPM

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    11,652

    Re: 13 major reasons why I abandoned the Premil doctrine

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    Since abandoning Premil I have engaged in many debates/discussions on the matter of the second coming, end-times and the here-after. These are some of the major weaknesses I find in the Premil doctrine, and are strong reasons why I believe the dogma should be rejected.
    I appreciate your willingness to explain your decision to change, but I hope you'll reconsider.

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    (1) Premil is totally obsessed with, and dependent upon, Revelation 20. It interprets the rest of Scripture in the light of its opinion of one lone highly-debated chapter located in the most figurative and obscure book in the Bible. All end-time Scripture is viewed through the lens of Revelation 20. This is not a wise way to establish any truth or doctrine.
    Premil is dependent on Premil only in terms of the *length of time.* It is not dependent upon Rev 20 for the *fact* of the Kingdom Age itself, which is the most important consideration.

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    (2) Premil hangs its doctrine on a very precarious frayed thread: that of Revelation 20 following Revelation 19 chronologically in time. To hold this, it has to dismiss the different recaps (or different camera views pertaining to the intra-Advent period) that exist throughout the book of Revelation, divorce it from repeated Scripture on this matter and also explains away the clear and explicit climactic detail that pertains to Revelation 19. Premil is dependent upon the dubious premise that Revelation 20 is chronological to Revelation 19. That is it! Disprove that and Premil has nothing.
    This is nearly incomprehensible. Your argument is that there are different camera angles? As to the chronology of Rev 20 following Rev 19 nothing could be clearer. That is not a "dubious premise." The Beast is killed in Rev 19, and those who had been beheaded by the Beast are resurrected in Rev 20 and given to reign for *1000 years!*

    Rev 20.4 I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    (3) The detail Premil attributes to Revelation 20 compared to what the inspired text actually says is day and night. Revelation 20 does not remotely say what Premil attribute to it. Many extravagant characteristics, events and ideas are inserted into Revelation 20 that do not exist in the sacred text.
    Several of the things attributed to the Millennial Age are due to a broader context. It would be like saying the King James Bible has nothing to do with the Scriptures because we do not find the word "Scriptures" in the name. The broader context of the Millennial Age is the book of Revelation and the OT Prophets. They all contribute to the idea of the Millennial Age, which is synonymous with the Kingdom Age. Why do we find that to be so? It is because in Rev 20 we find that those beheaded by the Beast are Christians given to "rule for 1000 years." This is a *Kingdom!* They reign *with Christ.* So this is *Christ's Kingdom!*

    So when we look at the Millennial Age as synonymous with the Kingdom Age we can look into all that the OT Prophets had to say about the coming Kingdom of Christ. And most Christians recognize that the predictions of Christ's Coming in the OT Prophets referred to either of two things. Either the prophecies were of Christ's 1st Coming, or they were of Christ's 2nd Coming. The 2nd Coming is the Kingdom Age, and we can draw upon all of those prophecies to recognize the attributes of the Kingdom Age.

    I'm not clear whether you view this "Kingdom Age" as being synonymous with the current Church Age, or synonymous with the coming age of the New Heavens and the New Earth? At any rate, Christians do recognize a Kingdom Age predicted by the OT Prophets, and these attributes are equated by Premils with the Millennial Age--justifiably so.

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    (4) Premil's interpretation of Revelation 20 contradicts numerous explicit climactic Scripture.
    There are no examples here. It's kind of like, "take my word for it!"

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    (5) Premil is always explaining away the clear and explicit New Testament Scripture (the fuller revelation) by the shadow, type and vaguer Old Testament.
    Premil spiritualizes the literal passages and literalize the spiritual passages. Their hyper-literalistic approach to highly figurative Revelation is a case-in-point.
    The clear and explicit NT Scripture *is* Premil! It is Amil that *allegorizes* Rev 20! A literal view of the Millennium is *not* hyper-literal! It is the literal view, ie it is exactly what is stated. And furthermore, we are told to be careful not to subtract from any of the words of this revelation!

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    (7) Premil lacks corroboration for all their fundamental beliefs on Revelation 20. Whether you look at the binding of Satan, the release of Satan 1,000 years after the second coming, the restoration of animal sacrifices in an alleged future millennium, a thousand years of peace, perfection and prosperity, two different judgment days, two different resurrection days, the rebellion of the wicked at the end of the millennium, these enjoy no other support in Scripture. I struggle with this, because the only way to authenticate and understand any doctrine is interpret it with other Scripture.
    Corroboration is only necessary as the Holy Spirit requires it. Doubting Thomas was granted corroboration of Jesus' resurrection only by concession--he should've believed on the evidence already in place. We are required to "compare Scripture with other Scriptures." This is not the same as "corroboration." This is a security check, to ensure that we are drawing upon the right Spirit and upon the right body of truth. The Kingdom Age is fully established in the OT Prophets. The addition of a 1000 year time period to that Kingdom Age does not require corroboration. The truth is already established in advance. The truths of the Revelation itself are already based on previous OT prophecies, in particular Daniel. The "restoration of animal sacrifices" is not uniformly held by all Premils. And it has nothing to do with belief in a literal Millennium itself!

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    (8) Premil is constantly exalting the power and influence of Satan and diluting the sovereign power and influence of Christ... Premil portrays a BIG devil and a small god, Amil has a small devil and a BIG God...
    The idea that Christ's Kingdom is already reigning in full glory, and that Satan is "bound," is absurd and unbiblical. Biblically, Satan is the "prince of the power of the air," our adversary. And antichrists exist throughout this age to persecute the Church and to oppose God's word. The suffering of the Church is to the people of this world the "weakness of God." But they do not understand that the weakness of God is actually strength, the strength to triumph over temptation and over sin. A Church persecuted by Satan is therefore not a "small god," but a "big God." The idea that the Church's persecution indicates a "small god" is unscriptural.


    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    (9) Another major error that Premil make is that it constantly presents the Old Testament as if the new covenant has never arrived. It is as if Jesus Christ has not come and fulfilled the old imperfect typical arrangement and introduced the new perfect eternal arrangement. It is as if the Old Testament promises have not been interpreted by the New Testament writers. What Premils insist is literal, physical, visible and earthly, the New Testament writers interpret as figurative, spiritual, invisible and heavenly. What Premils locate in their supposed future millennium, the New Testament writers locate in our current intra-Advent period.
    The eschatological Kingdom of Christ as portrayed by the OT Prophets is not yet here! That is why Premils do not portray the Kingdom as here *literally!* And many Christians who are not Premil would reject this as well. They would put the coming Kingdom as yet future as well, and perhaps associate it with the NHNE--the eternal Age.

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    (10) Because Premil lacks any corroboration in Scripture for a future 1,000 years’ age after the second coming, it invents 2 “last days” periods to allow Premil to fit. Mark 1 now, and Mark 2 after the second coming. Premils also invent 2 new heavens and new earths. Mark 1 they relate to their alleged future millennium and is sin-cursed and corrupt. Mark 2 is perfect and incorrupt and they equate it to 1,000 years+ after this.
    I have no clue what you mean by Mark 1 and Mark 2? I can have a lot more than just two sets of "last days!" I can have the "last days" of the reign of Antiochus 4. I can have the last days of the Kingdom of Israel before Assyria invaded. I can have the "last days" of Judah before Babylon destroyed them. Words mean what they mean in context. Usually when we speak of the "last days" of the present age we are talking about either the NT Age or the 3.5 years Great Tribulation. They both have to do with the last days of the current age. If you're talking about the last days of the Millennial Age then obviously we are indeed talking about a different time period and about another set of last days! But that isn't even a biblical issue!

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    (11) General unqualified phrases like “all,” “all nations,” “the living and the dead,” “every man,” “every one,” “men,” “man,” “all men every where,” “the flesh of all men,” “all that dwell upon the earth,” “they that dwell on the earth,” “the world” and “all the world” that objective and impartial Bible students acknowledge embrace the whole human race are redefined and explained away to let Premil fit.
    These words are not given context. The application of universal terms can be either literal or a generalization--it depends on the context. When the Scriptures say "the whole world will worship the Beast" it is a generalization, because it is qualified by the narrow application to those who are not predestined for salvation. Since we don't always know who that is, we have to await final judgment to determine who truly belongs to the Beast. We are admonished not to judge before the time, ie before Judgment Day, because sometimes wheat and chaff look alike. This means that there will be unbelievers on earth *before* the Coming of Christ who do not take the mark of the Beast and who will not worship the Beast. They may get saved *after* Christ comes.

    When the Scriptures say all flesh will be destroyed when the Beast is judged this also is a generalization, and is qualified by the narrow application to the Antichristian Conspiracy. It has to do with all *kinds* of men, great and small, and not just all of mankind universally. Obviously, there are Christians getting saved in the Tribulation Period, because in Rev 14 the angel is still evangelizing the world! And the Church in the 10 nation Beast Empire is severely persecuted, ie literally beheaded. This is therefore world-wide in scope but narrow in terms of the extent of the empire, ie it only has 10 nations with worshippers from beyond.

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    (12) Premil invents a 3rd group of humans that Scripture knows nothing of that are too wicked to be raptured at the second coming and too righteous to be destroyed. The reality is there are only two peoples in this world – the righteous and the unrighteous; those "in Adam" (the 1st birth) and those "in Christ" (2nd birth).
    Unbelievers who are not raptured at Christ's Coming are not necessarily "wicked"--any more than Cornelius was wicked as an unbeliever! If men remain unsaved at Christ's Coming it is because the gospel mission is not finished at that point, and has not reached everybody with a "clean" gospel. Many people reject the gospel because it is contaminated by unworthy delivery systems. That unbelievers get saved at Christ's Coming is apparent by the many prophecies of Israel's final salvation given in the OT Prophets. When Christ comes the whole earth will "mourn" (Rev 1). This means there will be repentance at Christ's Coming. In Rev 11 we read that Jerusalem's judgment will occasion many repenting, ie fearing the Lord. The judgment of Jerusalem takes place just prior to the coming of Christ's Kingdom. Furthermore, we read that many of the judgments depicted in the Revelation only *partly* destroy the earth and mankind. The story of Noah's Flood indicates that God is willing to judge the world, whether by flood or by fire, but not to annihilate mankind. It is to spare the righteous, and to give a gospel of hope to those who repent.

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    (13) Premil has an unhealthy obsessive focus on natural Israel, wrongly believing her to be God’s chosen people today under the new covenant.
    Paul in Romans 9-11 makes it clear that Israel remains chosen by God. This does not mean they are elite over all nations because they are no longer an exclusive nation, due to the Law no longer being the means of separation. But they are not elite because God promised not just Israel but a company of nations. They are distinguished today by the gospel of Christ when that system is embraced by an entire nation. Israel's Christian salvation remains future and is indicated by the several references to her in the Revelation, the 144,000 first fruits and the New Jerusalem with the names of all 12 tribes of Israel on her gates.

  11. #26

    Re: 13 major reasons why I abandoned the Premil doctrine

    Quote Originally Posted by CadyandZoe View Post
    While it is true that John recapitulates various aspects previous ideas found in the apocalypse, and should be aware of that possibility as we read through the text, we should need good literary reason to think that Revelation 20 does not follow chronologically from Revelation 19. I mean, in order to prove that Revelation 20 is a recapitulation of a previous time and place, we need to show what verbal clues John gave his readers to indicate he intended to back track. After all, the chapter and verse numbers don't appear in the original Greek text of the Bible. These were added later. We must not be fooled by the fact that someone has decided to insert a chapter break between

    "21 And the rest were killed with the sword which came from the mouth of Him who sat on the horse, and all the birds were filled with their flesh."

    and

    "Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding the key of the abyss and a great chain in his hand."

    Without a doubt, this is a good spot for a paragraph break. But to my ears, a chapter break implies a substantial, and main division that John may not have intended. The man who originally placed a chapter break at that location has predecided our interpretation for us. So, rather than relying on chapter and verse numbers, our search for John's intent is based on an evaluation of sequential events. What takes place first, what happens next etc. John guides his readers and helps them follow the logic of his presentation and so we need to follow his lead and look for the organizing principle he used to lay this out for us to see.

    Also, and most importantly, it isn't enough to claim that John decided to double back in time and sequence; we need to understand his reason for doing so. We need to ask ourselves, why would he place something out of sequence? What purpose would it serve?

    One place where John seems to double back is chapter 12, where John begins to tell the story from Satan's perspective. This is a clear case where John has started from the beginning and the reason for taking the readers back in time is to explain things from another perspective. A change of perspective is a good reason to double back.

    In my humble opinion, John has not changed the perspective between Revelation 19 and Revelation 20. Rather, he is answering the same question Paul faced in 1Thessalonians chapter 4. What about the dead in Christ?

    1Thess. 4:13-14
    But we do not want you to be uninformed, brethren, about those who are asleep, so that you will not grieve as do the rest who have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus.

    We must remember that we have had thousands of years to think about the idea that Jesus was coming back to be glorified among his followers. These early believers had concerns about their dead loved ones, or perhaps they were old and wondered if they would see that day, having pass away before his return. Paul comforts his readers; don't grieve because God will raise you up to see the Lord glorified and you standing with him. The dead will not be left behind.

    A similar answer is found in Revelation 20. In Revelation 19 we see what happens at the marriage supper of the lamb, and given what Paul said, every believer will be there. But if for some reason, as a first century believer, I didn't have Paul's letter to the Thessalonian church yet, John writes Revelation 20 in order to teach us that the dead in Christ will also rise to rule with him.
    Rev 19 describes the climactic coming of the Lord and the destruction of all the wicked. It tells us that “the flesh of all men both free and bond, both small and great” would be destroyed. The suffix "both free and bond, both small and great” is added to insure even Premils couldn't wiggle out of this. The beast's army relates to all who are not in the Lamb's Book of Life from the foundation of the world. That is as water-tight in my estimation and as comprehensive and all-embracing as the Holy Spirit can explain it. Obviously not enough for Premils, with their preconceived doctrine on chronology.
    "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).

    http://www.evangelicaltruth.com/

    WPM

  12. #27

    Re: 13 major reasons why I abandoned the Premil doctrine

    Quote Originally Posted by CadyandZoe View Post
    While this does happen and might be true in certain cases, this is no reason to reject Premillennialism in its entirety. The core doctrine teaches that the Second Advent takes place prior to a thousand years of Jesus ruling the earth with a rod of iron, during a time when Satan is in a prison unable to deceive anyone. One may find parallels to this idea in other passages of scripture and we are free to discuss whether such findings are correct or in error, but an error in judgment with regard to finding parallel passages elsewhere is no reason to reject the core doctrine.

    Now, I have read your challenge and call for corroboration, but I think your challenge assumes a premise that may or may not be true, i.e. that John has nothing new to say in the book of Revelation. This presupposition itself must be proven before corroboration can be demanded. If one can show from the text of Revelation that John intends to reveal new information about the future, then we would expect to find ideas and concepts that have no precedent in previous revelation. All Divine revelation enters history at some point in time, whether we are talking about God's revelation to Abraham that he would be the father of many nations, or whether we are talking about the idea that the messiah must suffer and die on a cross for the sins of his people. We can not assume that each and every divine revelation will have precedence with past revelation.

    What is God's criteria with regard to prophets who claim to speak for him? He requires that the prophecy not contradict previous revelation and that it not lead the people to worship other gods. Does Premillennialism contradict previous revelation or lead the people to worship other gods? Not in my view. In fact, the general concept that Jesus Christ will rule over Israel, on earth, from MT. Zion has precedent in previous revelation. And it teaches us to worship both God and his son Jesus Christ. Does the Bible ever say that Jesus will rule on earth for a mere thousand year period? No. This is new revelation. Does the Bible say that God will rule from Mt. Zion during a time of righteousness, goodness and truth? Yes it does.
    I have shown in my replies above that there is innovative conflicting teachings in the Premil interpretation of Rev 20 that negate multiple Scripture.
    "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).

    http://www.evangelicaltruth.com/

    WPM

  13. #28

    Re: 13 major reasons why I abandoned the Premil doctrine

    Quote Originally Posted by CadyandZoe View Post
    I finally understand what you mean by the term "climatic" and if I am right, the presuppostion here is the idea that world events will continue as usual until such time as circumstances suddenly become unstable, dark, and intensely evil culminating in the sudden and impressive Second Coming of Christ, when he brings about the physical death of all remaining infidels and takes his followers into the eternal age. That is, climax follows intense and unbearable crisis. By contrast, Premillennialism understands that Christ will not kill all the infidels on his return, but will rule over them with a rod of iron, bring about righteousness and goodness on earth, and live among his people in shalom (peace and prosperity) in fulfillment of God's promise to Israel.

    The debate centers on whether or not certain passages should be taken as a climatic exit from this world, or whether such passages would actually necessitate such a view.
    To Premils, the second coming is just a blip in history. To Amils and Postmils it is the end! The reason they assume that is because Scripture calls the coming of Christ the end. That is good enough for me!
    "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).

    http://www.evangelicaltruth.com/

    WPM

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Outside of the box. Where else?
    Posts
    18,176

    Re: 13 major reasons why I abandoned the Premil doctrine

    Quote Originally Posted by wpm View Post
    Corroboration is an essential doctrine for proving any major doctrine. Ignoring it and building your belief on obscure language and private interpretation is a false conclusion fallacy. The mode of hermeneutics of any school of thought must perfectly correlate with the consistent and explicit teaching of Scripture. The only sure way to interpret Scripture is with other Scripture. 2 Peter 1:20 says, no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation.
    But at the same time that can backfire bigtime when one is allegedly using corroboration, such as Amils oftentimes claim they are doing, but when examining the passages they claim corroborates their claim, it is then clearly seen the passages are not even remotely talking about the same things.

    Such as the little season meaning Rev 9 and the 5th trumpet. Rev 12 when satan gets cast out of heaven equals satan getting bound at the cross. So on and so on. Corroboration means passages should be agreeing with each other at least, which is clearly not the case in these two examples for certain.


    Sometimes it's almost as if you are looking in the mirror when you say some of the things you do, yet you apparently don't even comprehend that these things you are applying to others are also applying to you.

  15. #30

    Re: 13 major reasons why I abandoned the Premil doctrine

    Quote Originally Posted by divaD View Post
    But at the same time that can backfire bigtime when one is allegedly using corroboration, such as Amils oftentimes claim they are doing, but when examining the passages they claim corroborates their claim, it is then clearly seen the passages are not even remotely talking about the same things.

    Such as the little season meaning Rev 9 and the 5th trumpet. Rev 12 when satan gets cast out of heaven equals satan getting bound at the cross. So on and so on. Corroboration means passages should be agreeing with each other at least, which is clearly not the case in these two examples for certain.


    Sometimes it's almost as if you are looking in the mirror when you say some of the things you do, yet you apparently don't even comprehend that these things you are applying to others are also applying to you.
    Not so. You have not yet been able to refute the Amil corroboration on this. I will re-present what I said to FHG:

    There is other Scripture that clearly demonstrates that the whole kingdom of darkness is under restraint in a spiritual prison today, and that they will be released from that at the end to wreak havoc before Jesus comes. Satan and his minions are located there in Revelation 9:1-11 before the 7th trumpet (and the second coming). Satan is placed there in Revelation 9:11 and 20:3. 2 Peter 2:4, Jude v 6 and Revelation 9:1-11 shows the demonic world in a current spiritually bound condition in the abyss. This all fits in with the detail in John 12:31-33 and Revelation 12:9-13 that tells us that Satan was roundly and spiritually defeated through the life, death and resurrection of Christ, which resulted in him being banished from heaven, along with 1/3 of the angels. This all correlates with Matthew 12:22-29, Mark 3:11, 23-27 Luke 11:20-22, Colossians 2:13-15, Hebrews 2:14-15 and I John 3:8 that depicts Satan as bound, defeated, incapacitated, divested of power, disarmed, brought to naught, undone, and stripped through Christ's sinless life, atoning death and triumphant resurrection. Satan has not been rendered immobile or inoperative but is limited in his power, kingship and influence by being defeated on the cross. He is like a dog on a chain. He is shackled.

    Satan is released from there near the end in Revelation 20:7. That verse expressly describes the abyss as a “prison.” The release of Satan at the end from the abyss restriction (Revelation 9:1-11 and Revelation 20:7) corresponds with the beast also rising from the abyss (Revelation 11:7, Revelation 13:5 -18 and Revelation 17:8) and also the many fallen angels (Revelation 9:1-11).

    Amil has loads of strong biblical evidence for locating the defeat of Satan and the resulting binding of Satan to this age. What has Premil?

    What Scripture, if any, do you consider definitely corroborates the Premillennial interpretation of Revelation 20 that Satan will be bound for a time-span of 1000 years after the Second Advent then released for a "little season" to deceive the nations, and then destroyed?

    The answer is: Nothing! That is why I say: Premil is a non-corroborative doctrine.
    "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).

    http://www.evangelicaltruth.com/

    WPM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Information 108 questions that reveal the holes in the Premil doctrine
    By wpm in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 512
    Last Post: Mar 10th 2015, 07:29 PM
  2. A valid reason Premil may not be correct.
    By divaD in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 394
    Last Post: Apr 13th 2014, 01:56 PM
  3. Abandoned Albino Seal Pup
    By Saved7 in forum Christian Fellowship
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Sep 19th 2011, 09:29 PM
  4. Replies: 8
    Last Post: Sep 9th 2009, 06:08 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •