The many errors and contradictions found in Amillennialism.

[ewq1938]

Common it’s says “ all people” and separates them from the army. You are doing exactly what you accuse amils of doing.

The context is all the people of that army. It's a small area. The entire human population cannot fit there.

If rev 19 is the same battle as 16 then how come Babylon the great is destroyed in rev 16 and not mentioned in rev 19?

Because Revelation 19 is not about Babylon?

And rev 17:16 shows us who defeats Babylon the great and it’s not Jesus.

So? No one claimed Jesus destroyed Babylon.

Also the term Armageddon is only used in rev 16 it’s not mentioned in rev 19

Again, so what? It doesn't need to have the name mentioned any further. They go there in Revelation 16 and are still there in Revelation 19.

 

[ewq1938]

You should be able to agree that in all of the history of the Church Age, there were numerous martyrs, and not just in the end time church. Therefore, God is not going to honor any martyr above another.

and I saw the souls of them that
1. were beheaded for the witness of Jesus,
2. and [were beheaded] for the word of God,
3. and [were beheaded] which had not worshipped the beast,

1. The Early church.
2. The Reformation church.
3. The End time church.

LOL, you Amills are hilarious. What horrible exegesis!

 

[ewq1938]

Nothing from Revelation has ever proved anything.

Just further proof of Amills disdain for the book.

"Will rule" is nothing more than an ongoing confirmation of God's kingdom from the time John saw these things in his visions,

That ignores basic grammar. Rule in the future tense means the ruling happens after the events of Armageddon which supports Premillennialism. It proves Amill's "global slaughter" theory to be wrong.

 

[ewq1938]

Well said "Therefore, God is not going to honor any martyr above another.". How true they wouldn't be more honored than those burned to death or fed to lions

Another Amillennial strawman fallacy. No one claims the beheaded saints are more honored than others.

 

[Marty fox]

Another Amillennial strawman fallacy. No one claims the beheaded saints are more honored than others.

Then how come it is only them who come back to life and reign?

 

[Earburner]

There was a resurrection:

"And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years."

And of course from the Amil. view, that is true. All Born Again Christians have been, and are NOW reigning WITH Him as priests and kings FOR the salvation of others into the KoG, and for nothing else.

Through our repentance unto salvation, and upto to our redemption, it is a two stage process.
1. We must first be born again of/receive God's Holy Spirit. That is HOW we are to follow Him.
For all who don't "partake of His divine nature" NOW, while they still have breath, they are "none of his".
Romans 8:8-9.

2. However, for those who do now "partake of His divine nature", they HAVE been given the Gift of Eternal Life within them. John 11:25, 2 Corinthians 4:7, 2 Peter 1:4, 1 John 5:13.
They truly ARE blessed and holy, because they ALREADY have taken PART in the FIRST Resurrection, who is Jesus. Romans 8:19, Colossians 1:18.
Whether we are asleep in Jesus, or are alive at His coming, all of such saints are just waiting to be made immortal upon His Glorious return.

 

[Earburner]

Well said "Therefore, God is not going to honor any martyr above another.". How true they wouldn't be more honored than those burned to death or fed to lions

Amen!

 

[Earburner]

That ignores basic grammar. Rule in the future tense means the ruling happens after the events of Armageddon which supports Premillennialism. It proves Amill's "global slaughter" theory to be wrong.

Then you are pitting yourself against what Jesus firmly described in Luke 17:26-30, with both Noah and Lot's witness and testimony of a "slaughter" in their day.
Are you sure that you want to be holding to your present form of doctrine, in the Day that He is "revealed" (verse 30)?

 

[Keraz]

Then how come it is only them who come back to life and reign?

Revelation 20:4 is God's choice. Who are we to argue it?

Note that those Trib martyrs do not at that time receive immortality. They can die again, but as their names are in the Book of Life; immortality will be theirs at the final Judgment. Rev 20:11-15

 

[GEN2REV]

Just further proof of Amills disdain for the book.

I don't disdain any part of Scripture, I just respect it for what it is. Your team would take Revelation as entirely literal and all the rest of Scripture as symbolic, rubbery, bend-any-way-you-likey, when it suits your case.

That's bass-ackwards.

Rule in the future tense means the ruling happens after the events of Armageddon which supports Premillennialism.

No. It doesn't.

And you couldn't make a case for that if you tried.

 

[GEN2REV]

Another Amillennial strawman fallacy. No one claims the beheaded saints are more honored than others.

You claim that by default when you say that the verses in Rev. that depict the beheaded saints can't be from a previous time period - as in all saints ever martyred since Christ's First Advent.

 

[ewq1938]

Then how come it is only them who come back to life and reign?

It's not only them that resurrect, all the dead in Christ rise at the same time. Revelation 20 just focuses upon that one group kinda like it does in the 5th seal when a certain group of the dead are wanting justice and are told to wait awhile.

 

[ewq1938]

Then you are pitting yourself against what Jesus firmly described in Luke 17:26-30, with both Noah and Lot's witness and testimony of a "slaughter" in their day.

lol, Lot's witness was not a global slaughter so why bring up something that doesn't support your view? Revelation 19 is also a localized slaughter at a very small place.

Are you sure that you want to be holding to your present form of doctrine, in the Day that He is "revealed" (verse 30)?

Grow up and stop using scripture to attack other people.

 

[ewq1938]

Your team would take Revelation as entirely literal

For those who are reading, this is as false as it can get. Premillennialism does not view Revelation as entirely literal. This person is intentionally misrepresenting Premillennialism. This is dishonest. It's a very common tactic. You will see misrepresentations, and personal attacks as has been seen all throughout this thread. Sadly, this bad behavior is very normal.

But a congrats is in order for Marty. He is always nice and friendly. I have known him for years from a now defunct forum.

 

[ewq1938]

You claim that by default when you say that the verses in Rev. that depict the beheaded saints can't be from a previous time period - as in all saints ever martyred since Christ's First Advent.

The context is a group of people were beheaded in the Great Tribulation because they refused the mark of the beast and had the testimony of Christ. That's a specific group being killed for specific reasons at a specific time. Your view of it does not match the wording.

Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

These also die from beheading not other ways of dying like so many of the saints being murdered in various ways. Amillennialism tends to change beheading into any form of death. Changing what the text says is at the heart of Amillennialism.

 

[Earburner]

It's not only them that resurrect, all the dead in Christ rise at the same time. Revelation 20 just focuses upon that one group kinda like it does in the 5th seal when a certain group of the dead are wanting justice and are told to wait awhile.

In the 5th seal many would like to think that it is speaking of NT saints, but it definitely is not. It is speaking of ALL the OT. Saints who had died in faith, looking for the "promise" of the Messiah to come in His 1st appearance. Their names were written in the "book of Remembrance" Malachi 3:16.
In their death, they died without the Gift of the Holy Spirit (Eternal Life), and were still in waiting for that promise.
However, the "promise" could not come until the shedding of the Blood of Christ, for the remission of sin, and after His Ascension.
Therefore, in the Day of Pentecost, all the OT saints, who died in faith, did then also receive God's Holy Spirit, as symbolized by each one being given "a white robe", which is the Righteousness of God Himself.

 

[ewq1938]

In the 5th seal many would like to think that it is speaking of NT saints, but it definitely is not.

They aren't identified so we cannot say who they are except they are dead saints. They could be OT or NT saints. The little while they must wait is the Great Tribulation so it's near. So this would be taking place just before the Great Tribulation starts.

 

[ewq1938]

20. Saints in heaven not reigning with Christ on thrones?

Rev 6:9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:
Rev 6:10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?
Rev 6:11 And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.


The souls of dead saints in the 5th seal should be on thrones reigning in heaven if Amillennialism is correct, but they aren't. They are under the altar, which means reigning with Christ on thrones is a future event. That's Premillennialism.

 

[Earburner]

The context is a group of people were beheaded in the Great Tribulation because they refused the mark of the beast and had the testimony of Christ. That's a specific group being killed for specific reasons at a specific time. Your view of it does not match the wording.

Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

These also die from beheading not other ways of dying like so many of the saints being murdered in various ways. Amillennialism tends to change beheading into any form of death. Changing what the text says is at the heart of Amillennialism.

What about John the Baptist? Is he not the first witness to who Christ is? Revelation 20:4
Are you saying that John is not a beheaded martyr?

And what about Stephen, who was stoned to death, declaring the vision given to him of seeing Christ at the right hand of the Father. Acts 7:55-60?

Are the Premils saying that John and Stephen won't be reigning in the KoG on earth, as you all believe?
Or is it that the martyrdom of Stephen is not worthy enough for God, but John's martyrdom is, because he was "beheaded"?
I suggest that you are still thinking as a man.
Isaiah 55:8-9.

 

[ewq1938]

Talk about perfect timing! We just talked about the 5th seal and the next on the list speaks of it also!