22 major reasons to abandon the Premil doctrine

[WPM]

If Daniel meant 490 years he would have written

(Four Hundred Ninety Years)

Daniel had no restrictions in "Writing" exact numerology

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.

This is the 96th time you have cut-and-pasted this. That is ridiculous. It shows your responses are not real but robotic.

 

[Timtofly]

Porphyry is another heretic who promoted the Premillennial doctrine. He was an enemy of orthodox Christianity and held views that were in conflict with the more-moderate classic early Chiliasm. He was another Judaizer who tried to foist old covenant practices upon New Testament Christianity. He also promoted the full return of the old covenant ceremonial law and festivals.

Jerome strongly refuted him, and exposed his error:

[T]he blasphemer Porphyrius – and who assert that the ceremonies of the old Law should be observed in the Church of Christ by the stock of faithful Israel, those should also look forward to a golden Jerusalem for 1000 years, that they may offer sacrifices and be circumcised, that they may sit on the Sabbath, sleep, become sated, drunk, and to rise to frolic, their amusement being offensive to God (Commentary to Isaiah, Chapter XXIV).​

Jerome was not painting all Chiliasts with the same brush. Quite the opposite! He was specifically exposing this early heretical Premillennialist who advocated the full restoration of the old covenant arrangement in a future thousand years, including the pointless slaughter of countless innocent animals during that period. This was not an opinion that orthodox Chiliasts held, taught or accepted anywhere throughout the early Church.

Apollinarius took up the ancient Premillennial baton from these early heretics. Notably, he too was a prominent heretic who was strongly opposed and renounced by the universal Church of his day. Very little of what he wrote has been passed down to us. Most of it was destroyed as heretical. Most of what we have comes from his theological opponents who were strong in their renunciations.

Gregory, Bishop of Nyssa said of Apollinarius of Laodicea, that his theology taught:

“the Jewish animal-sacrifices shall be restored” (Dogmatic Treatises, Etc.; Letter XVII – To Eustathia).​

Basil the Great describes what Apollinarius believed

Apollinarius [of Laodicea], who is no less a cause of sorrow to the Churches. With his facility of writing, and a tongue ready to argue on any subject, he has filled the world with his works ... What he writes on theology is not founded on Scripture, but on human reasonings. He has written about the resurrection, from a mythical, or rather Jewish, point of view; urging that we shall return again to the worship of the Law, be circumcised, keep the Sabbath, abstain from meats, offer sacrifices to God, worship in the Temple at Jerusalem, and be altogether turned from Christians into Jews. What could be more ridiculous? Or, rather, what could be more contrary to the doctrines of the Gospel? (Letters and Select Works: Letter 263, 4 - To the Westerns).​

Here is an outline of classic Premillennial teaching. Again, noticeably, this was held by an early heretic who was strongly resisted by the orthodox Christian Church. This was foreign teaching to them in the light of what Christ ushered in through the new covenant. Apollinarius taught that Israel would be restored to her previous old covenant place for preference over all other nations.

Gregory the Theologian also criticized Apollinarius in his letter to Cledonius the Priest Against Apollinarius (Epistle CI. (101), highlighting his Premillennial beliefs.

I would they were even cut off that trouble you, and would reintroduce a second Judaism, and a second circumcision, and a second system of sacrifices. For if this be done, what hinders Christ also being born again to set them aside, and again being betrayed by Judas, and crucified and buried, and rising again, that all may be fulfilled in the same order, like the Greek system of cycles, in which the same revolutions of the stars bring round the same events.​

Jerome targets the theology of the early Premillennial heretics, mentioning Apollinaris in particular in his renunciation:

Dionysius the bishop of the church of Alexandria, wrote a fine book mocking the tale of the millennium, as well as the golden and bejeweled earthly Jerusalem, the restoration of the temple, the blood of sacrifices, the idleness of the sabbath, the injury of circumcision, nuptials, child birth, child-rearing, the delights of feasting, and the servitude of all nations, and once again wars, armies, and triumphs, and the slaughter of the vanquished, and the death of the hundred-year-old sinner. Apollinaris responded to him in two volumes, and he is followed not only by men of his own sect, but also by a great multitude of our own, at least in this matter, so that I already perceive with foreboding that the anger of many will be aroused against me (Commentary to Isaiah, Preface to Book 18).​

For Jerome, the Premillennial scheme was “a tale.” Others would similarly call it “a fable.” The idea of a future age in-between “this age” and “the age to come” was quite fanciful to many of the early Amil writers. When the detail of the heretical Premillennialist heretics were threw into the mix, with their expectation of more ongoing sin, more decay, more sickness, more death, more sin offerings, etc, etc, it was hardly surprising that many found this far-fetched. When you add all the religious actors that populate the millennium and give their feigned allegiance to Christ and then turn on Him when Satan appears 1000 years after the second coming, then you are looking at a doctrine that seems beyond the pale of reality and truth. When they then argued that a future earth will see the mortal wicked interact with the glorified saints for a thousand years then you are looking at a clear non-corroborative doctrine.

In an article Jerome’s Judaizers, Hillel I. Newman argues: “So far as we know, none of these authors maintained … that in the millennial kingdom all would offer sacrifices and keep the sabbath and that all men would be circumcised” (p. 442).

Premil Lyford Paterson Edwards even concedes: “we see the unfortunate fate of Chiliasm in getting mixed up with heresies with which it, as such, had nothing to do. The extraordinary detestation which overtook Apollinaris as arch-heretic par excellence seems to have finally discouraged Chiliasm in the Eastern Church. It was reckoned as a heresy thereafter and though it appears sporadically down to our own day it is of no more interest for our purpose” (The Transformation of Early Christianity from an Eschatological to a Socialized Movement).

The later Jacobite bishop of Dara, in Mesopotamia (Dead: AD 845), John of Dara exposes Apollonarius for his millennialist teaching:

Apollonarius the heretic, with his companions, abandoned the glorious illumination of the living words and became blind to the faith like the Jews. He dared to speak, like the Pharisees, that after the resurrection of the dead, we shall live again for a thousand years in Jerusalem with the Messiah, with bodily pleasures, and childish sacrifices, and earthly libations before him [the Messiah?]. After these things are fulfilled, at that time we shall be taken up into heaven. And he was not shamed by the voice of Paul who said, “The kingdom of God is not of eating or drinking. But of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.” Also in like manner Irenaeus bishop of Lyon in Gaul wandered in these matters, which are in the book of Papias as Eusebius narrates (On the Resurrection of Bodies 2.13).​

John of Dara likens Apollonarius’ Premillennialism to Phariseeism. He rubbishes the idea of Judaic temple ceremonial in Jerusalem for a thousand years in front of the Messiah.

What makes any of these pre-mill? They could also be post mill for all we know. When are you going to point out actual pre-mill where they say after the Second Coming? These just sound like Jewish Chiliast, not pre-mill at all, if none of them include a Second Coming. It is disingenuous to call them pre-mill if they don't even accept a Second Coming.

Why are you accepting the words of a person who lived 500 years later? Give us the writings of Apollinarius. Not some hearsay 500 years after the fact.

 

[Timtofly]

This is a pattern, and a concerning one at that. Every genuine Premil should be supporting us here, but alas none are.

How does a genuine pre-mill who claims Jesus sets up a throne and temple in Jerusalem and reigns for 1,000 years without sin and Satan, support Amil who deny Jesus can even have an earthly kingdom? The only definition of pre-mill is that This Millennium happens after the Second Coming. The Amil in this thread are post mill literally as the Second Coming is post their millennium. There is not a genuine Amil here that declares there is no millennium, period. The only reason you all have to be Amil instead of post mill, is because most post mill think things will keep getting better and better, and that is the only reason the Second Coming has not happened yet. You all should agree to switch your names, although amil is easier to spell out, because post mill literally don't have a millennium, and Amil keep insisting Revelation 20 is the here and now an actual millennium of indefinite length.

 

[Timtofly]

Are you being purposely ridiculous? They were taken captive to all nations that existed at the time back then. Why do you ask?

There were nations in those places way back then. Do you have to be purposely ridiculous, and answer a question with 2 questions along with just a repetitious statement instead of a legitimate answer?

Just curious how exactly did all those nations show up and take away the spoils from the Romans?

 

[Timtofly]

You're asking an Amil who doesn't believe in a future Millennium (as no Amils do) if he has any verses that address the future Millennium. LOL.

About like asking a pre-mill to support Amil?

Since you cannot prove from Scripture there will not be a Millennium after the Second Coming, you have not refuted the pre-mill view there is a Millennium after the Second Coming. Revelation 6-20 is all the proof we need, until you can provide Scripture to the contrary.

Just describing the here and now is not proof. All Christians agree that those verses describe the here and now.

 

[Timtofly]

Are you saying that you believe that God was done temporarily with Israel from 70 AD to 1948? The fact of the matter is that God was never done with Israel, not even temporarily.

Romans 11:1 I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew. Don’t you know what Scripture says in the passage about Elijah—how he appealed to God against Israel:

The point is God set Israel aside at the Cross. All of Israel that belonged to Christ was taken from Abraham's bosom and allowed into Paradise. The last 1992 years has been called the fulness of the Gentiles, and did not exclude Israel. As Israel had already beeen scattered for over 700 years among the Gentiles.

Israel has to be brought back as one nation before the Millennium can even start.

The Millennium is for all nations but under the control of Jesus as King from Jerusalem. And Nations are still a recognized phenomenon. There will be no nations in the NHNE. More than likely no more procreation but who knows? Certainly you all cannot rule it out by calling a totally different reality, the next age. Paul already explained to you all, there were ages past and ages to come. You all think there was only one age from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 20:15.

 

[Timtofly]

Jesus gave His disciples a foretaste or glimpse of what was going to happen in the future. That is all it was. He was not permanently transfigured there. It was a foreshadowing of His future glorification.

You were shown a verse where Jesus Himself said He was not yet glorified at that point (John 7:39). Can't you just accept that? You want to instead ignore that verse and still try to keep your false belief alive?

No, it was His ability to show who He was. He was 100% God, and 100% a son of God. Jesus did not have to die, to receive His permanent incorruptible physical body. You are missing the whole point of the virgin birth. Jesus was not a sinner and not genetic from a male descendant of Adam.

He was tempted in all the ways a human can be tempted and He resisted all temptation. Not because He was God, nor a son of God. It was because He had the free will to make His own choices apart from God and the Holy Spirit.

He was not yet glorified because He had not completed the task as the Lamb of God, not because He did not have that ability. His task will not be complete until the end of the next Millennium. Why can't you all accept that? Until Jesus hands back the Kingdom His task is not over yet. Jesus will be glorified in all that He accomplishes.

 

[Timtofly]

This is just unbelievable, bro. Why did God bother replacing the old covenant with the new covenant if He was just going to restore the old covenant again in the future?

For all your denial of replacement theology, you sure use that word a lot.

Jesus did not replace the OT with the NT. Jesus fulfilled and completed the OT, and is still carrying out the NT, until the end of the Millennium, 1,000 years after the Second Coming.

 

[Timtofly]

Hebrews 8:6-13, including verse 10, all relates to the new covenant. So, you're saying the new covenant hasn't been fulfilled (established, placed into effect) yet?

Hebrews 8:10 This is the covenant I will establish with the people of Israel after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.

Do you not understand that when the Holy Spirit comes to dwell in people God puts His laws in their minds and hearts? This verse is about the new covenant and that was established long ago by the blood of Christ. How can you say this is not yet fulfilled?

The Holy Spirit is for the fulness of the Gentiles. Even though Israel is included, you still cannot apply this verse to just any one, not even spiritually. The NT is applied spiritually via the Holy Spirit. Remove the Holy Spirit, and you are literally without a Covenant.

Hebrews 8:10 is a specific promise to Israel and is physically written in their souls, without the need for the Holy Spirit. Unless you are going to acknowledge that the Holy Spirit worked the same way from Seth until now, you cannot just state Hebrews 8:10 is spiritual. God is saying the NT Covenant will be written physically into their minds and hearts, not just a work of the Holy Spirit. There is no need for the Holy Spirit in the Millennium as there is no sin, and no sin nature. This is the point where the NT will be directly in their soul, and no one will have the desire to disobey their own soul. Those who do will be considered cursed, and death will be instant. God will not allow them to have a disconnect between their soul and their actions. Or of a double mind.

 

[CadyandZoe]

There are 2 new covenants?

There are more than two covenants mentioned in the Bible, but with regard to the Jeremiah passage quoted in Hebrews 8, Jeremiah 31:31-34 mentions two distinct covenants.

 

[CadyandZoe]

In your previous post #5368 you said "Yes" that you believe Ezekiel 40-48 relates to the future temple and animal sacrifices you believe in. So, you seem to be contradicting yourself here. Honestly, you're making yourself look really bad and making it completely impossible for me to take you seriously.

Remember? I told you that my view is NOT based on controversial passages. I honestly believe that Ezekiel 40ff is yet to be fulfilled. I could change my mind about that, and if I did, it would not affect my understanding of Premillennial doctrine.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Why is that not indicated in Hebrews 8:6-13 where that passage is quoted only in relation to the new covenant then? You continue to make things up that are not taught in scripture.

Bear in mind that Paul is writing to the Hebrews. He expects his readers to be intimately familiar with the Hebrew scriptures. In order for Gentile readers to understand this epistle, we need to catch up to our Hebrew brothers and sisters. As Paul says in Romans chapter 3, they have an advantage because they were given the oracles of God. They had access to the scriptures a lot longer than we. Unless we read and study the referenced passages, we will fail to grasp his point.

As Gentile Christians, many of us, myself included, miss the fact that Jeremiah 31:31-34 mentions two distinct covenants. I must have read that passage hundreds of times and argued from that passage on message boards for many years. I didn't notice two covenants in that section until someone point it out to me, but once he pointed it out, it immediately jumped out at me.

 

[Truth7t7]

Remember? I told you that my view is NOT based on controversial passages. I honestly believe that Ezekiel 40ff is yet to be fulfilled. I could change my mind about that, and if I did, it would not affect my understanding of Premillennial doctrine.

Many Claim Ezekiel Chapters 40-46, Represents A Future Temple In A Millennium On Earth, Is This True?

As clearly shown, Ezekiel Chapter 43 showed the temple "Pattern" to the House of Israel in the Babylonian Captivity let "Them" measure, Ezekiel was instructed to write the ordinances and law in "Their" sight, that "They" keep them, not some future generation as many "Falsely" claim

The temple seen in Ezekiel Chapters 40-46 is nothing more than the 2nd Zerubbabel Temple built 536BC after the Babylonian Captivity, where animal sacrifice for "Sin" was was instructed by "God", prior to the shed blood of Jesus Christ on Calvary, don't be deceived

Ezekiel 43:10-11 & 19-21KJV
10 Thou son of man, shew the house to the house of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities: and let them measure the pattern.
11 And if they be ashamed of all that they have done, shew them the form of the house, and the fashion thereof, and the goings out thereof, and the comings in thereof, and all the forms thereof, and all the ordinances thereof, and all the forms thereof, and all the laws thereof: and write it in their sight, that they may keep the whole form thereof, and all the ordinances thereof, and do them.

19 And thou shalt give to the priests the Levites that be of the seed of Zadok, which approach unto me, to minister unto me, saith the Lord God, a young bullock for a sin offering.
20 And thou shalt take of the blood thereof, and put it on the four horns of it, and on the four corners of the settle, and upon the border round about: thus shalt thou cleanse and purge it.
21 Thou shalt take the bullock also of the sin offering, and he shall burn it in the appointed place of the house, without the sanctuary.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Well, it didn't come from scripture. You make that clear by your obvious inability to support your view with scripture. So, where else does it come from?

Don't mistake unwillingness with inability. There are two reasons why I don't prove my position to you from scripture: 1) your intractable insistence that the OT must be understood through NT lenses, and 2) It takes hours of typing to fully explicate relevant passages. I am talking to people who seemingly have but a cursory experience with the OT. In addition, I am speaking to people who don't intend to take advantage of my answer for their own benefit and enlightenment; all they want is a target to shoot at.

Finally, as all can attest, people don't like to read long posts, which is why I decided to make videos. I mistakenly thought that I would be able to give brief answers here, and for further detail, refer people to my video. I never imagined that people would flat out refuse to watch a 15 minute video.

 

[Truth7t7]

Don't mistake unwillingness with inability. There are two reasons why I don't prove my position to you from scripture: 1) your intractable insistence that the OT must be understood through NT lenses, and 2) It takes hours of typing to fully explicate relevant passages. I am talking to people who seemingly have but a cursory experience with the OT. In addition, I am speaking to people who don't intend to take advantage of my answer for their own benefit and enlightenment; all they want is a target to shoot at.

Finally, as all can attest, people don't like to read long posts, which is why I decided to make videos. I mistakenly thought that I would be able to give brief answers here, and for further detail, refer people to my video. I never imagined that people would flat out refuse to watch a 15 minute video.

I'm waiting for your clip, post it?

 

[CadyandZoe]

But, you can't even tell me what that purpose is. How can I possibly take you seriously when you can't even tell me what the purpose of these supposed future animal sacrifices would be? You have speculated on it, but you can't show me anything in scripture to back up your speculations.

I showed you from scripture. Now, if you didn't agree with my interpretation, that is one thing. But to claim I didn't show you is another thing.

So many words, but no scripture. Why are you not understanding that giving me your opinions without providing any scriptural support is meaningless to me?

Isaiah 29:11-12
11 The entire vision will be to you like the words of a sealed book, which when they give it to the one who is literate, saying, “Please read this,” he will say, “I cannot, for it is sealed.” 12 Then the book will be given to the one who is illiterate, saying, “Please read this.” And he will say, “I cannot read.”

 

[CadyandZoe]

Still no answer. What's the problem?

I gave you an answer.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Are you saying that you believe that God was done temporarily with Israel from 70 AD to 1948? The fact of the matter is that God was never done with Israel, not even temporarily.

Romans 11:1 I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew. Don’t you know what Scripture says in the passage about Elijah—how he appealed to God against Israel:

No, I'm speculating that Christian theologians were blind to Premillennialism because they were forced to account for the fact that Israel no longer existed after 70AD. Granted, Paul wrote that God was not done with Israel prior to that. As of the time of writing, Israel still existed. But after 70AD Israel no longer existed. If I was living in the third or fourth century AD, I would have become a proponent of Amillennialism, telling people that since God allowed Israel to be destroyed and his people taken captive, one must reinterpret various passages of the OT to account for this. After 1948, Christians were forced to re-examine the Amillennial position.

 

[RLT63]

Many Claim Ezekiel Chapters 40-46, Represents A Future Temple In A Millennium On Earth, Is This True?

As clearly shown, Ezekiel Chapter 43 showed the temple "Pattern" to the House of Israel in the Babylonian Captivity let "Them" measure, Ezekiel was instructed to write the ordinances and law in "Their" sight, that "They" keep them, not some future generation as many "Falsely" claim

The temple seen in Ezekiel Chapters 40-46 is nothing more than the 2nd Zerubbabel Temple built 536BC after the Babylonian Captivity, where animal sacrifice for "Sin" was was instructed by "God", prior to the shed blood of Jesus Christ on Calvary, don't be deceived

Ezekiel 43:10-11 & 19-21KJV
10 Thou son of man, shew the house to the house of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities: and let them measure the pattern.
11 And if they be ashamed of all that they have done, shew them the form of the house, and the fashion thereof, and the goings out thereof, and the comings in thereof, and all the forms thereof, and all the ordinances thereof, and all the forms thereof, and all the laws thereof: and write it in their sight, that they may keep the whole form thereof, and all the ordinances thereof, and do them.

19 And thou shalt give to the priests the Levites that be of the seed of Zadok, which approach unto me, to minister unto me, saith the Lord God, a young bullock for a sin offering.
20 And thou shalt take of the blood thereof, and put it on the four horns of it, and on the four corners of the settle, and upon the border round about: thus shalt thou cleanse and purge it.
21 Thou shalt take the bullock also of the sin offering, and he shall burn it in the appointed place of the house, without the sanctuary.

A future temple. Even the folks at Wikipedia know this Ezekiel 40 - Wikipedia

 

[Truth7t7]

A future temple. Even the folks at Wikipedia know this Ezekiel 40 - Wikipedia

Ezekiel Chapters 47-48 Is The (Eternal Kingdom)

(The Eternal Kingdom) Same River And Tree Of life, Same Fruit On The Tree, Same Leaves Of The Tree For Healing/Medicine

(The Eternal Kingdom)

Ezekiel 47:12KJV
12 And by the river upon the bank thereof, on this side and on that side, shall grow all trees for meat, whose leaf shall not fade, neither shall the fruit thereof be consumed: it shall bring forth new fruit according to his months, because their waters they issued out of the sanctuary: and the fruit thereof shall be for meat, and the leaf thereof for medicine.

(The Eternal Kingdom)

Revelation 22:1-2KJV
1 And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.