22 major reasons to abandon the Premil doctrine

[WPM]

You can do whatever you want. I am not falling for this tactic though. And my objection stands. You do NOT address my posts. Period.

This is another cop-out: avoid the facts because they expose your position. That is convenient! You have to do this because 2 Peter 3 absolutely blows apart Premillennialism. All you can do is try and explain it away. I will repost the evidence that you ducked around and which forbids your doctrine.

2 Peter 3:3-13 couldn't be clearer: “Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming [Gr. parousia]? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”

Peter is directly responding to the wicked in this narrative. That is the context here. He is directly responding to the derision of "the last days scoffers." His whole writing here is a solemn warning to them of the folly of their mocking.

What is the derision of the wicked? This: "Where is the promise of his coming [Gr. parousia]? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation."

Peter responds directly: "beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning his promise." He first addresses the apparent delay by telling them that time is nothing with God - "be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." He then reminds them that "the Lord is not slack concerning his promise." He is indeed faithful. He keeps His Word.

“The Lord is not slack concerning” what “promise”?

The “promise” under discussion in the narrative – “the promise of his coming.” God will assuredly keep His Word

We should remember here that the whole context of this reading zeroes in on the matter of “the promise of his coming.” This promise is what this whole narrative is about. To ignore that would cause us to miss the force and meaning of Peter’s message. In fact there are 3 mentions of this “promise” in 2 Peter 3.

Of course, this is a comfort to the believer. No one would argue with that. Peter assures them, despite this wholesale and climactic destruction at the end, that they will inherit the new heaven and new earth arriving at Christ's return, not some sin-cursed, goat-infested, death-blighted millennium as you allege. This negates your whole paradigm. But that is not the overall thrust here. You are totally missing his warning to the wicked of the awful consequences for foolishly rejecting Christ. That is the main message here. He is warning the scoffers of the folly of their mockings and the consequences of their rebellion.

In the Premil paradigm, the scoffers and scoffing survive the coming of the Lord, largely uncensored. These rebels remain able to continue their irrational sneer “since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.” The reason being, many Premil propel the fiery judgment depicted in this reading forward 1,000+ years. But the actual thing Peter is warning them about in this passage is the impending wide-ranging destruction of the old heavens, elements, earth, and works upon the earth and the wholesale replacement of them with a brand new heavens and a new earth. He is warning them that this will catch them unexpectedly. It will involve the complete destruction of the old arrangement, and the complete replacement with a new arrangement.

We see the last of three references to God’s “promise” in verse 13. In it Peter describes the events that accompany Christ’s return as a thief. Whilst this day brings terror to the wicked, he reassures the believer that Christ’s coming is a day that we should anticipate with hope, as “we, according to his promise (“the promise of his coming”), look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.” God’s people “according to His promise” are going to be ushered unto the new perfected earth when He appears – a hope that should bring joy and comfort to the heart of every believer.

 

[Truth7t7]

I agree that there is going to be a period of intensified tribulation before the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. I also believe that there is coming the day of wrath before which all the righteous are rescued and on which all the wicked are destroyed. But, you are wrong to say: "There is absolutely no way that the wrath of God is on the unbelievers now."

The wrath of God is always upon the wicked (and all wickedness). It is never upon the righteous. If there is a post-second coming seven-year great tribulation, as commonly described by Pretribbers, then the wrath of God is undoubtedly upon the righteous tribulation saints.

Pretribulationists get confused in that they relate the wrath of God, which will be poured out on the day of His wrath (the second coming), to a supposed end-time seven-year tribulation period. Posttribulationists, on the other hand, believe that the wrath of God is continually upon the wicked but that the Church will escape the final “day of his wrath” at the appearing of Christ at the Second coming (after the Church has been rescued).

That is not a reality that is restricted to a supposed end-time period prior to the second coming of the Lord but has been an ongoing reality from the beginning. Nahum 1:2 says, “God is jealous, and the LORD revengeth; the LORD revengeth, and is furious; the LORD will take vengeance on his adversaries, and he reserveth wrath for his enemies.”

Colossians 3:6 says, “the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience.”

Ephesians 5:5-6 says, “For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.”

John the Baptist said in John 3:36, “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.”

Romans 5:9-10 says, “being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.”

1 Thessalonians 1:9-10 says, “For they themselves shew of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God; And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.”

As Paul says in Romans 1:18, “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against ALL ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness.”

God will therefore recompense the deeds of the wicked on that final day when true, just and holy justice will be finally realized.

1 Thessalonians 5:9 says, “God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ.”

Q. How can the wrath of God be upon the righteous tribulation Jews or tribulation saints when Scripture clearly says it isn’t?

The Churches instruction at the final hour of earth's temptation, just prior to the second coming

Isaiah 26:20-21KJV
20 Come, my people, enter thou into thy chambers, and shut thy doors about thee: hide thyself as it were for a little moment, until the indignation be overpast.
21 For, behold, the Lord cometh out of his place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity: the earth also shall disclose her blood, and shall no more cover her slain.

 

[WPM]

The Churches instruction at the final hour of earth's temptation, just prior to the second coming

Isaiah 26:20-21KJV
20 Come, my people, enter thou into thy chambers, and shut thy doors about thee: hide thyself as it were for a little moment, until the indignation be overpast.
21 For, behold, the Lord cometh out of his place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity: the earth also shall disclose her blood, and shall no more cover her slain.

I agree. What is your point?

 

[Truth7t7]

The consummation is future like I have repeatedly demonstrated. The Abomination and Desolation and Daniel's 70th week are long-fulfilled.

Your In Denial Of Simple Biblical Truth Before Your Eyes!

The Scripture Below Clearly Shows Your Claim Is "False", The Bad Guy Is On Earth To (The End) This Is Future And Didn't Take Place In Your Preterist 66-70AD Jerusalem

"Future" Events Unfulfilled

This "Future" figure will be present on earth making (Abomination & Desolation) to the (Consummation) or (The Ultimate End) "Future" Event(s) Unfulfilled

Merriam-Webster
Definition of consummation

1: the act of consummating the consummation of a contract by mutual signature specifically : the consummating of a marriage
2: the ultimate end

"He Shall Make It Desolate, Even Until The Consummation"

"He Shall Make It Desolate, Even Until The Consummation"

"He Shall Make It Desolate, Even Until The Consummation"

Daniel 9:27KJV
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Who taught you this? The opposite is the truth. Your fight is with clear and repeated Scripture, not Amils.

The central focus of the fight, in this thread, is your rebuttal of premillennialism. One aspect of your rebuttal is the use of a narrative, from which you make your arguments. Any rebuttal of Premillennialism must deal with the Premillennial narrative, without reference to the Amillennial narrative.

The coming of the Lord will be fiery and climactic. There will be no survivors. The evidence for this is overwhelming.

Maybe, maybe not. Before I will examine single verses taken out of context, I will first want to know why such a scenario is necessary. Why do you believe Jesus can't destroy the world from heaven? What necessitates his return? From what I can tell, your view renders the second coming of Christ moot. Christ can destroy the earth from his current location. He doesn't need to return to do that.

Why does he need to fight the enemies of God on earth? No need to do that. Simply destroy the earth and skip the fight.

Does he need to return to earth in order to rule over his followers in the NHNE? No, not really. He simply stays where he is and his people will be brought to him.

Your view renders the concept of a Second Advent unsettled and unresolved because your position is that Christ comes at the Eschaton, which serves no actual purpose.

 

[The Light]

Q. How can the wrath of God be upon the righteous tribulation Jews or tribulation saints when Scripture clearly says it isn’t?

A. God's wrath is not on either tribulation Jews or tribulation saints.

Most pretribulationist see the rapture of the Church before the 70th week of Daniel, which is correct. But they do not understand that the coming of Jesus in Matthew happens at the 6th seal and not at the end of the trumpets or vials. We can see clearly according to the word that the coming of Jesus in Matthew 24 occurs at the 6th seal, before the wrath of God.

Matthew 24
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:

30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.


Revelation 6
12 And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood;

13 And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.

14 And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.

15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;

16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:

17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

So, not recognizing that Jesus comes at the 6th seal, causes most dispensationalists to put the tribulation into the wrath of God. This is of course in error as we know that Gods people are not appointed to wrath.

Posttribulationalists also do not understand that Jesus comes at the 6th seal. They also think that the seals and trumpets are the same events which is in total error.

 

[CadyandZoe]

How many wicked survived in Noah's day?
How many wicked survived in Sodom?
Amils take this literal! This is complete, wholesale, and total destruction - for those left behind. There are no survivors!

Lot survived. So did Noah. So what can we conclude from this passage. God will keep for himself a remnant.

I also take the following verses literally.
I Thessalonians 5:2-3 -- Absent is any mention of death, destruction yes, death no.
II Thessalonians 1:7-10 -- Absent is any kind of hint that the Lord's vengeance is ubiquitous. Paul has not focused on everyone; he has directed his focus on "those who afflict you." The judgment is limited to those who are guilty of persecuting Christians.
2 Peter 3:10-13 -- Here the passage is focused on the Eschaton, which takes place at the end of history. Contrary to some, The Day of the Lord is not synonymous with the Coming of the Lord. The Day of the Lord is like a story with a beginning, a middle and an end. The Second Advent takes place in the middle; the Eschaton takes place at the end.
Revelation 19:11-16 -- Jesus does battle with armies. The soldiers are killed, not the entire population of the earth.
Verses 17-18 -- This list includes the soldiers and those who led them into battle.

You skipped over the Millennial period, which is not a fair approach to the topic. Are you ignoring the one passage that blows your theory?

 

[CadyandZoe]

The Greek also exposes your theology. The word "rule" means "shepherd." Christ will shepherd over the nations at the end.

Well, which is it? Is the iron rod used to break pots or to shepherd livestock? Seems like you want to have it both ways.

The coming of Christ is not to high-five sin and mollycoddle sinners.

Strawman.

 

[CadyandZoe]

You understand that Amillennialists believe that as well, don't you?

Postmillennialism believes that Christ will return after Christians have subdued the earth's population, bringing about God's will on earth as it is in heaven. Although I disagree with this interpretation, at least Postmillennialism has a good reason for Christ to return. Amillennialism doesn't seem to have a valid, or practical reason for his return.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Yes, it does. Peter taught it very clearly.

I think you need to take another look at the passage. Peter mentions the Eschaton to make his point. He associates the Eschaton with the Day of the Lord, which is NOT the same thing as the Second Advent. The context is NOT the Second Coming of Christ as you suppose. The Day of the Lord is an era of time with a beginning, a middle and an end. The Second coming of Christ appears in the middle; the Eschaton takes place at the end.

 

[CadyandZoe]

You say the day of the Lord takes place over a thousand years or more. How exactly does 1000+ year time period come unexpectedly like a thief in the night?

The Day of the Lord is an era of time, which has a beginning, a middle and an end. The Beginning comes like a thief in the night. The eschaton comes at the end.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Where are you seeing this in 2nd Peter 3? Where is there any indication that the fire Peter mentions does not affect the entire earth, but is only going to come down in some places for the purpose of announcing "the inauguration of a new era in which righteousness reigns"? Peter indicates that this new era would come in the form of the eternal new heavens and new earth (2 Peter 3:13). Are you somehow missing that? Your new era comes to an end when a number "as the sand of the sea" decides to rebel against Christ. That makes your "new era" a complete failure and makes it seem rather pointless. The Amil view has the return of Christ bringing in eternal righteousness rather than temporary righteousness as Premil believes. Tell me which scenario is more exciting to look forward to. The Premil view makes His second coming rather anti-climactic when you consider what would end up happening later, as described in Revelation 20:7-9.

I was mistaken. I went back and examined the passage further. You and WPM are correct. Peter is focused on the Eschaton in the context of the Day of the Lord. But, Amillennialism is mistaken in that it assumes the DOL and the Second Coming are synonymous.

The Day of the Lord does not begin or end with the Second Advent. The Day of the Lord is an era of time, which has a beginning, a middle, and an end. If my interpretation of Joel is correct, the day of the Lord opens with locusts and fires on the land of Palestine. These fires mark the beginning period. The middle period is marked by the Second Advent and the rapture. The Eschaton comes at the end when God establishes the NHNE. Peter has directed our attention to the end of the Day.

 

[WPM]

The central focus of the fight, in this thread, is your rebuttal of premillennialism. One aspect of your rebuttal is the use of a narrative, from which you make your arguments. Any rebuttal of Premillennialism must deal with the Premillennial narrative, without reference to the Amillennial narrative.

Maybe, maybe not. Before I will examine single verses taken out of context, I will first want to know why such a scenario is necessary. Why do you believe Jesus can't destroy the world from heaven? What necessitates his return? From what I can tell, your view renders the second coming of Christ moot. Christ can destroy the earth from his current location. He doesn't need to return to do that.

Why does he need to fight the enemies of God on earth? No need to do that. Simply destroy the earth and skip the fight.

Does he need to return to earth in order to rule over his followers in the NHNE? No, not really. He simply stays where he is and his people will be brought to him.

Your view renders the concept of a Second Advent unsettled and unresolved because your position is that Christ comes at the Eschaton, which serves no actual purpose.

Not so. The reason it will happen is because He says He will. He is coming to rescue all His elect and destroy all the wicked. He is coming to regenerate this sin-cursed world and restore it to its perfected state.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Why can't it be him both warning them and exhorting them?

It can be both I suppose. I am attempting to account for Peter's standpoint and his disposition with respect to his readers. His remarks seem to suggest a close, personal familiarity with his readers, having taught among them in the past. He doesn't "warn" them as those who seem ready to abandon the faith. He reminds them of something they already know and believe as those who seem to need encouragement. But you could be right.

 

[WPM]

Well, which is it? Is the iron rod used to break pots or to shepherd livestock? Seems like you want to have it both ways.

The same Shepherd who tenderly watches over the sheep of His pasture with a rod of care and correction is the same Shepherd who wields the rod of righteous anger against the goats at the end. The same rod that is used to protect and preserve the sheep during their existence is employed at the end to destroy and subdue. Every foe that has come against Christ’s flock will smote with a rod of destruction.

 

[WPM]

Lot survived. So did Noah. So what can we conclude from this passage. God will keep for himself a remnant.

The plain focus of this teaching in Luke 17 (reference Noah and Lot’s day) is the nature and degree of the judgment that befell the wicked in these two familiar Old Testament stories and especially the extent of that particular wrath. The key element and major emphasis of this discourse is the fact (speaking of the ungodly) that God “destroyed them all.” The comprehensive destruction of the wicked in both of these examples is the important lesson of the narrative; both the whole world of Noah’s day and the whole individual city of Sodom in Lot’s day saw the immediate and complete rescue of the entire righteous coupled together with the immediate and complete destruction of the entire wicked.

Christ plainly and purposefully advanced these two days, where the righteous were graciously rescued just prior to the full annihilation of the wicked, in order to vividly portray the nature and scope of the day of His wrath at the second coming. He deliberates and graphically connected the happenings of both these former days of judgment to the day of His return. Jesus succinctly said, “Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed” (Luke 17:30).

I also take the following verses literally.
I Thessalonians 5:2-3 -- Absent is any mention of death, destruction yes, death no.

I Thessalonians 5:2-7 the enormity of this climactic event: “the day of the Lord will come (or appear or arrive) as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober. For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night. But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation. For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ.”

How does anyone left behind survive this? Who is exempt from this description?

The “wrath” of God is here linked with the “sudden destruction” that befalls those that are in the dark when Jesus comes. Significantly the whole context of this reading is the destruction of those who abide in darkness and the rescue of those who are in light. There is no third group that is half enlightened. Despite the destruction that hits all left behind the writers reassures the believer that they will escape this awful fate.

How you can separate these two parallel passages by 1,000 yrs+ shows again how you are doing injury to the reading. These mirror each other. I Thessalonians 5:2-7 confirms that it isn’t just Christ’s coming that is sudden but also the destruction that accompanies. Likening Christ’s return to “a thief in the night” capably serves to impress the surprising nature of tHis coming for the lost. It shows that the wicked are caught abruptly in their folly at the apocalypse. The “sudden destruction” is so impactful that none escape. That is explicit in the narrative. Furthermore, we learn that the speed that the pain of childbirth hits a woman will be like the destruction of the wicked. It is not saying that 'the whole child-birth experience is like the coming of the Lord' which would be needed to allow for the Premil understanding. After all, they have to stretch the judgment out over centuries, but it is not found in this text. In doing this they diminish the sudden nature of the destruction.

The coming of Christ is here (as 2 Peter 3) likened to the appearance of “a thief in the night.” Moreover, the narrative demonstrates that the judgment that accompanies this climactic event is instantaneous and that it involves “sudden destruction.” Its focus is directed fully and entirely upon the sum-total of the wicked, not merely a percentage of them. This group that is referred to as “they” who “shall not escape” relates to the aggregate Christ-rejecting community alive at His return. They are later described as those who are “of the night” and “of darkness.” It is they alone that experience immediate and “sudden destruction” which “cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child”; and “they shall [assuredly] not escape.” This climactic event pulls down the curtain on time and concludes the affairs of this life.

II Thessalonians 1:7-10 -- Absent is any kind of hint that the Lord's vengeance is ubiquitous. Paul has not focused on everyone; he has directed his focus on "those who afflict you." The judgment is limited to those who are guilty of persecuting Christians.

II Thessalonians 1:7-10 says, “the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.”

The opposite is the truth! You are living in denial. The Holy Ghost could not have made these more water-tight to forbid Pretrib and Premil. Please show me how mortals can survive this. Amils take this literal! This is complete, wholesale, and total destruction - for those left behind. There are no survivors!

You can see, this passage recognizes only two types of person at Christ's appearing (as all Scripture). Saved or lost, caught up or caught on. In fact, it carefully situates men in one of only two distinct groupings, and conclusively proves that it is only "them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ" that will survive the second coming. The rest are expressly destroyed.

Please note the wicked – to a man - are destroyed from "the presence of the Lord." This couldn't be more water tight.

What unregenerate man is excluded from the description of "them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ"?

 

[WPM]

2 Peter 3:10-13 -- Here the passage is focused on the Eschaton, which takes place at the end of history. Contrary to some, The Day of the Lord is not synonymous with the Coming of the Lord. The Day of the Lord is like a story with a beginning, a middle and an end. The Second Advent takes place in the middle; the Eschaton takes place at the end.

Hello! This is speaking about the impending destruction that is going to catch the mockers unaware. You have ducked around this for days. You refuse to address this. That is because it exposes your narrative. You have just done a U-turn with Spiritual Israelite. You don't seem to know what to do with this passage. Rather than embrace it, you are trying to explain it away or render it meaningless.

2 Peter 3:3-13 couldn't be clearer: “Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming [Gr. parousia]? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”

Peter is directly responding to the wicked in this narrative. That is the context here. He is directly responding to the derision of "the last days scoffers." His whole writing here is a solemn warning to them of the folly of their mocking. Like Christ and the other New Testament writers, Peter points these fools to Noah day where God rescued His people in total and suddenly before He destroyed the wicked in total and suddenly.

What is the derision of the wicked? This: "Where is the promise of his coming [Gr. parousia]? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation."

Peter responds directly: "beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning his promise." He first addresses the apparent delay by telling them that time is nothing with God - "be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." He then reminds them that "the Lord is not slack concerning his promise." He is indeed faithful. He keeps His Word.

Revelation 19:11-16 -- Jesus does battle with armies. The soldiers are killed, not the entire population of the earth.
Verses 17-18 -- This list includes the soldiers and those who led them into battle.

You skipped over the Millennial period, which is not a fair approach to the topic. Are you ignoring the one passage that blows your theory?

We have been in the millennial period since the first resurrection.

There are two armies in Revelation 19: Christ's and the beast's. This is a spiritual depiction of the two overall camps in this world. The beast's army commands the allegiance of all the wicked. Christ's army commands the allegiance of all the righteous. What is more, this also fits with repeated Scripture that shows all the wicked are destroyed when Jesus comes.

I have showed you many times the impossibility of humans surviving the total destruction of Christ's return when it clearly shows "the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great" (Revelation 19:18) are consumed. You dismiss a literal reading, and are forced to localize every single global destructive passage. Amils reject such a liberal approach to Holy Writ.

 

[covenantee]

All of which is "Biblical Truth" before your eyes, your claim of 66-70AD fulfillment of Daniel's AOD is Pinocchio's nose is growing again

Daniel's AOD is future, and the bad guy causing the Abomination and Desolation will be present on earth to the "Consummation" Ultimate End

"Future" Events Unfulfilled

This "Future" figure will be present on earth making (Abomination & Desolation) to the (Consummation) or (The Ultimate End) "Future" Event(s) Unfulfilled

(The Future Consummation)

2 Peter 3:10KJV
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

Merriam-Webster
Definition of consummation

1: the act of consummating the consummation of a contract by mutual signature specifically : the consummating of a marriage
2: the ultimate end

Daniel's AOD (Even Until The Consummation) "Future"!

Daniel 9:27KJV
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

You claim that dispensationalism is a farce, but what you espouse here is as dispensational as it gets.

Darby and Scofield embrace you with open arms.

The dispensational camp reads your posts and rejoices.

You're their comrade steadfastly purveying their message.

Your "farce" claim is merely a camouflage.

Your "farce" claim is a farce.

 

[jeffweeder]

II Thessalonians 1:7-10 -- Absent is any kind of hint that the Lord's vengeance is ubiquitous. Paul has not focused on everyone; he has directed his focus on "those who afflict you." The judgment is limited to those who are guilty of persecuting Christians.

You have got to be kidding.

I have Bolded the hints...,


5 This is a positive proof of the righteous judgment of God [a sign of His fair verdict], so that you will be considered worthy of His kingdom, for which indeed you are suffering. 6 For after all it is only just for God to repay with distress those who distress you, 7 and to give relief to you who are so distressed and to us as well when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in a flame of fire, 8 dealing out [full and complete] vengeance to those who do not [seek to] know God and to those who ignore and refuse to obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus [by choosing not to respond to Him]. 9 These people will pay the penalty and endure the punishment of everlasting destruction, banished from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, 10 when He comes to be glorified in His saints on that day [that is, glorified through the changed lives of those who have accepted Him as Savior and have been set apart for His purpose], and to be marveled at among all who have believed, because our testimony to you was believed and trusted [and confirmed in your lives].

God has reserved a day for his final righteous judgment that will deal out full and complete and EVERLASTING destruction on the ungodly.
Those deemed righteous inherit everything on this day


Act 17
0 Therefore God overlooked and disregarded the former ages of ignorance; but now He commands all people everywhere to repent [that is, to change their old way of thinking, to regret their past sins, and to seek God’s purpose for their lives], 31 because He has set a day when He will judge the inhabited world in righteousness by a Man whom He has appointed and destined for that task, and He has provided credible proof to everyone by raising Him from the dead.”

2Pet 3
7 But by His word the present heavens and earth are being reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly people.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Peter did not teach the idea of a thousand year day at all. That is not at all the context of this passage:

2 Peter 3:
8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

In order to understand the meaning of 2 Peter 3:8, verse 9 needs to be taken into account as well. Along with the context of "his promise" referenced in verse 9.

So, what was Peter saying here in 2 Peter 3:8-9? That one day equals one thousand years to the Lord? Not at all. Peter said that one day is AS a thousand years AND a thousand years is AS one day to the Lord. You are reading it as if it says one day is equal to a thousand years and a thousand years is equal to a day. No, that is not what it says. What Peter was saying is that, to the Lord, one day is no different than a thousand years and a thousand years is no different than one day. That's very different than saying one day equals a thousand years to the Lord.

So, what does it mean that one day is AS a thousand years and a thousand years is AS one day to the Lord? And why is Peter pointing this out? I'll answer the second question first. This is where verse 9 comes in. He's pointing this out in order to show that the Lord is NOT being slow to fulfill His promise as some think. What promise is that? The promise of His second coming that Peter referenced previously in verse 4 which is what he said scoffers in the last days scoff at.

How do we know that the Lord is not being slow to keep His promise? Because one day equals exactly one thousand years to Him as you think it's saying? No. It's because no amount of time makes any difference to the Lord, whether it's one day, a thousand years, five thousand years or any amount of time. Why is that? Because He created time. He exists outside of time. To say that one day is equal to a thousand years to Him would imply that He is confined within the realm of time, but just in a different way than we are. Not so! He is God and is eternal! He created time. So, no amount of time has any effect on Him. Therefore, it's not possible for Him to be too slow to fulfill His promise. He can take as much time as He wants since time is not an issue for Him at all. That is what 2 Peter 3:8-9 means. It has absolutely nothing to do with a thousand year day and has no relationship at all to Revelation 20.

I don't think your explanation goes far enough to explain why Peter said what he said. I understand that a simile isn't the same thing as a metaphor. I get that.

But how does the simile answer the mockers? I don't think it does. The Mockers will say, "Ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation." This objection isn't a matter of slowness; its a matter of inactivity. Not only is God's promise "slow" in coming; according to the mockers, we have no basis on which to conclude that it will ever come. Nothing is happening at all. If God is doing something to bring about his promise it isn't evident to anyone.

For this reason, I don't think Peter gave his simile as a response to the mockers. Rather, Peter offers the mockers the Flood Event as proof that history does not always help us predict the future because God can intervene at any time he wishes. Peter's answer to the mockers is found in 2 Peter 3:5-7.

Beginning in verse 8, Peter intends to make a new but related point. One can readily understand Peter's first point and agree that his reasoning is sound and correct. The Mockers are wrong to suggest that history necessitates the future. But what about an extended delay? The promise might be fulfilled, but how do we interpret the delay? Why doesn't God start eternity right now. Why wait? It seems to me that Peter wants to address that question also.

He begins his answer with a double simile, which illustrates a concept that might escape the notice of some, had Peter not mentioned it: " with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day." What concept does this double simile convey other than the idea that God is time challenged? I don't think Peter means to say that God is outside of time, though I think he is. And I don't think Peter is suggesting that God doesn't experience time, since he also mentions the fact that God is patient. God is capable of accepting delay and so we should also accept delay with equanimity.

God is capable of living with a delay, but he is not subject to slowness. Why? Because to admit slowness is to admit that things aren't happening when expected or as planned. But for God, everything happens when he plans it to happen: not sooner, not later. Humanly speaking, the basis of slowness is human limitation, but God has no such limitation. No matter what duration he assigns to a particular task, we understand that the duration is not predicated on finitude.

Consider the possible ways that one might count slowness. There seems to be more than one way to count slowness: 1) taking or requiring a long time or 2) taking more time than expected, 3) registering a time or rate that is behind or below the correct one, and a few other ways to measure slowness that aren't worth mentioning here. In any case, human activity is typically limited to a human life span and one typically makes plans for a future in which one is still alive.

Peter's simile gives expression to the idea that God has no limit on the duration of a project or the amount of time something is expected to take. If we perceive a delay, we can rest assured that the delay is not the result of a contingency, or exigency but it is a planned interval of time suitable for his purpose, e.g time to repent.

All that being said, I find it fascinating that Peter chose to compare a day with a thousand years. If he had chosen to compare an hour with a thousand years, his central point would still be the same. It's possible that he compared a day with a thousand years because he was thinking of the Day of the Lord at the time of writing.

Have a great day.