22 major reasons to abandon the Premil doctrine

[Spiritual Israelite]

Okay, you see no reason they are not talking about the same event and I see a reason that they can’t be talking about the same event.

Okay, fine. Agree to disagree then. But, do you have any thoughts about my question about there being parallels in the book of Revelation rather than it all (or mostly all) being chronological from beginning to end? Have you ever considered this?

 

[WPM]

Maybe the thing to do is examine where you find what seems a contradiction, and find the interpretation that preserves the meanings of both places, and doesn't overthrow one of them.



You shouldn't try to put words in my mouth, you do not do so correctly.



Nonsense because you've written a Straw Man.

Revelation 20:4-5 LITV
4) And I saw thrones, and they sat on them. And judgment was given to them, and the souls of the ones having been beheaded because of the witness of Jesus, and because of the Word of God, and who had not worshiped the beast nor its image, and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand. And they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5) But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection.

Simply stated.

Much love!

1. What Scripture, if any, do you consider definitely corroborates the Premillennial interpretation of Revelation 20 that there are two distinct physical resurrection days (the first for the righteous, the second for the wicked) separated by a literal 1000 years+?
2. Where in Scripture does it mention "resurrection days" (plural), pertaining to the end?
3. What Scripture (including Revelation 20) do you consider definitely teaches there are 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+?
4. Where in Scripture does it mention "judgement days" (plural), in regard to the end?
5. 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 destroy them?

 

[stunnedbygrace]

But, Jesus indicated that Matthew 13:36-43 will happen "at the end of the age". Don't you believe that Jesus will return at the end of the age (Matt 24:3)?

Actually that passage doesn’t have Jesus returning. It has Him sending out angels.

 

[marks]

There is a big difference between love and respect. Trust and respect are earned, not automatic and universal. God never tells us to trust and respect everyone. We give honor to where it is due!

4 Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous or boastful or proud 5 or rude. It does not demand its own way. It is not irritable, and it keeps no record of being wronged. 6 It does not rejoice about injustice but rejoices whenever the truth wins out. 7 Love never gives up, never loses faith, is always hopeful, and endures through every circumstance.

Much love!

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Please back up your opinions with scripture. Thanks.

which one's would you like?

Please do not tell me you do not know of OT scriptures concerning Christ regathering Israel and setting up his kingdom as he rules the nations with a rod of Iron.

how about the dry bones (Ezek 37)

Or how about Dan 2 and Dan 7 and the return of Christ to crush and put an end to the time of the gentile as mentioned by Paul in romans 11. when all Israel is saved when the redeemer comes

or how about the resurrected saints already in the throne room praising the lamb before he opens the first seal of the time of Gods wrath (rev 4)

or how about the promise when Christ returns he will bring those who were already resurrected and they will rule the earth with him? (Rev 20: 4)

 

[WPM]

Actually that passage doesn’t have Jesus returning. It has Him sending out angels.

Please list your rapture passages so that we can examine your opinion?

 

[marks]

There is a big difference between love and respect. Trust and respect are earned, not automatic and universal. God never tells us to trust and respect everyone. We give honor to where it is due!

Philippians 2:3-4 KJV
3) Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves.
4) Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.

It's a mindset.

Much love!

 

[WPM]

4 Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous or boastful or proud 5 or rude. It does not demand its own way. It is not irritable, and it keeps no record of being wronged. 6 It does not rejoice about injustice but rejoices whenever the truth wins out. 7 Love never gives up, never loses faith, is always hopeful, and endures through every circumstance.

Much love!

And where exactly does it say to trust and respect everyone?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified.

Does this mean that at that time of that day? Does it refer to that the events were set in motion? Is it when He is sentenced? When He submits to being crucified? When He died? When He rose? When He ascended as was glorified? All of these?

The hour has come . . .

Regardless of exactly when He was glorified, is it referring to a long period of time for Him to be glorified as you think "the hour" in John 5:28-29 does? No. So, I don't see that you're proving anything here.

Matthew 26:44 So he left them and went away once more and prayed the third time, saying the same thing. 45 Then he returned to the disciples and said to them, “Are you still sleeping and resting? Look, the hour has come, and the Son of Man is delivered into the hands of sinners. 46 Rise! Let us go! Here comes my betrayer!”

How long was the hour that had come for "the Son of Man" to be "delivered into the hands of sinners"? Not long at all, right? He was handed over to them just moments later.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Philippians 2:3-4 KJV
3) Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves.
4) Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.

It's a mindset.

I guess we're playing scripture tag now.

Titus 1:12 One of Crete’s own prophets has said it: “Cretans are always liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons.” 13 This saying is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, so that they will be sound in the faith 14 and will pay no attention to Jewish myths or to the merely human commands of those who reject the truth.

 

[WPM]

Philippians 2:3-4 KJV
3) Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves.
4) Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.

It's a mindset.

Much love!

Is the following the mindset you are talking about? Is this love and respect in your estimation? This is just one day of insults on this forum from you and your Premil colleagues towards us Amils.

“You are a fake.”

“Vanity.”

“The Amill position is in support of Satan's working of a one-world government.”

“I have countered the baloney your Amill false believes.”

“This is hilarious.”

"Hogwash -- all of it!"

"Balderdash!”

"more hot air!"

"You need to repent to Jesus and ask Him forgiveness for denying His Word."

“What you're asking is just silly.”

“you need to get real, and stop those silly vague questions that only serve as attempted traps, like "are you still beating your wife?"

“I ain't easy prey like you're used to.”

“why not admit the charlatans you heed failed to prepare you for that”

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Again, this is plainly stated in that chapter itself:

Revelation 20:4-5 KJV
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.
5) But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

Plainly stated prophecy.

What exactly is the passage that tells you that you should not accept this for what it says? These lived, then, 1000 years later, the others lived?

Why should we not accept this as true?

So, does this response mean that you don't have any other scripture you can reference which supports your interpretation of Revelation 20:4-5? That is what he was asking for. If you don't, then please just say so.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

You are not answering my question.

Is the following love and respect in your estimation? This is just one day of insults on this forum from you and your Premil colleagues towards us Amils.

“You are a fake.”

“Vanity.”

“The Amill position is in support of Satan's working of a one-world government.”

“I have countered the baloney your Amill false believes.”

“This is hilarious.”

"Hogwash -- all of it!"

"Balderdash!”

"more hot air!"

"You need to repent to Jesus and ask Him forgiveness for denying His Word."

“What you're asking is just silly.”

“you need to get real, and stop those silly vague questions that only serve as attempted traps, like "are you still beating your wife?"

“I ain't easy prey like you're used to.”

“why not admit the charlatans you heed failed to prepare you for that”

These arguments are sad. and uncalled for. it does not help anyone

sadly. Anytime I have tried to enter a millenium type discussion. I see this from both sides.. Would be nice if we just discussed the word

 

[Eternally Grateful]

So, does this response mean that you don't have any other scripture you can reference which supports your interpretation of Revelation 20:4-5? That is what he was asking for. If you don't, then please just say so.

not sure why he would need any other scripture

why would we not just take what John said at his word?

1. those who died during this time of wrath will rule with christ for 1000 years
2. The rest will not be resurrected until the 1000 years are finished.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Actually that passage doesn’t have Jesus returning. It has Him sending out angels.

And when exactly do you think that will happen? When do you believe the end of the age will come?

Honestly, this is getting to be a little frustrating. I asked you if "you believe that Jesus will return at the end of the age (Matt 24:3)?" and, for some reason, you didn't answer it. Should I assume your answer to the question is no then? If so, then what is your understanding of the question the disciples asked in Matthew 24:3? That they were asking about two different events, with His coming being one event and the end of the age occurring at a completely separate time than His coming? If so, where do you think Jesus talked about the end of the age in the Olivet Discourse?

 

[WPM]

These arguments are sad. and uncalled for. it does not help anyone

sadly. Anytime I have tried to enter a millenium type discussion. I see this from both sides.. Would be nice if we just discussed the word

I agree. This is just what has been hurled our way today by Premils. I find it grievous. It is fine attacking Amil but dismissing Amils as unsaved because of their end-time views is out of order.

 

[marks]

1. What Scripture, if any, do you consider definitely corroborates the Premillennial interpretation of Revelation 20 that there are two distinct physical resurrection days (the first for the righteous, the second for the wicked) separated by a literal 1000 years+?
2. Where in Scripture does it mention "resurrection days" (plural), pertaining to the end?
3. What Scripture (including Revelation 20) do you consider definitely teaches there are 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+?
4. Where in Scripture does it mention "judgement days" (plural), in regard to the end?
5. 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 destroy them?

We're going in circles here.

1. What Scripture, if any, do you consider definitely corroborates the Premillennial interpretation of Revelation 20 that there are two distinct physical resurrection days (the first for the righteous, the second for the wicked) separated by a literal 1000 years+?
2. Where in Scripture does it mention "resurrection days" (plural), pertaining to the end?

Aren't these really the same question?

Revelation 20:4-5 KJV
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.
5) But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

Your answer is right there.

3. What Scripture (including Revelation 20) do you consider definitely teaches there are 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+?
4. Where in Scripture does it mention "judgement days" (plural), in regard to the end?

These are also the same thing, aren't they? Regardless, this doesn't really have anything to do with how I understand things. Jesus will judge the gentile survivors of the great tribulation sorting wicked and righteous. At the great white throne, Jesus will judge the wicked, all of them. The dead.

5. 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 destroy them?

Again, no interpretation needed, only translation as that is the plain statement made. Rather, the question is, why not believe the plain sayings of the Bible, and use the less ambiguous to interpret the more ambiguous?

If you think a passage contradicts these, quote it. Put them side by side and lets examine them together.

Much love!

 

[Eternally Grateful]

I agree. This is just what has been hurled our way today by Premils. I find it grievous. It is fine attacking Amil but dismissing Amils as unsaved because of their end-time views is out of order.

good God I hope no one is doing that. This is not a salvation issue. the gospel is not when will the ressurection be or will God rull in the future or is he ruling now..

Its sad. Like I said this is my favorite subject (next to history) yet the most heated and hateful subject I have ever encountered in any christian chat room I have been a part of.

I have been called unsaved by Amill's also. so I feel your pain

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

not sure why he would need any other scripture

Because that helps to confirm that his interpretation of that passage is correct. It's not the only passage that speaks of Christ reigning, or of His people reigning with him as priests of Him and His Father, or of Satan's binding, or of the resurrection of the dead, or of the judgment. So, why would it be the only passage in scripture to teach that there is a long period of time between the bodily resurrection and the judgment of the saved and the bodily resurrection and judgment of the lost?

why would we not just take what John said at his word?

1. those who died during this time of wrath will rule with christ for 1000 years
2. The rest will not be resurrected until the 1000 years are finished.

Because that contradicts a lot of other scripture. Is it important to you to interpret Revelation 20 in such a way that doesn't contradict any other scripture?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

And when exactly do you think that will happen? When do you believe the end of the age will come?

Honestly, this is getting to be a little frustrating. I asked you if "you believe that Jesus will return at the end of the age (Matt 24:3)?" and, for some reason, you didn't answer it. Should I assume your answer to the question is no then? If so, then what is your understanding of the question the disciples asked in Matthew 24:3? That they were asking about two different events, with His coming being one event and the end of the age occurring at a completely separate time than His coming? If so, where do you think Jesus talked about the end of the age in the Olivet Discourse?

Not sure who this is directed to. I think Jesus gave us the answer No one knows. not even the son of man.