Amil, Premil, poster list

[Spiritual Israelite]

 

[TribulationSigns]

Ok there is a book in the Bible that maybe you’re unaware of but many people look at it when they study eschatology. This book is just after the book of Ezekiel, it’s called Daniel. When you read through it stop at chapter 9 verses 26 and 27. There you will see that for the overspreading of abomination he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation.

That’s where you find it in the scriptures. If you need help finding the book of Daniel you can use Biblehub and just do a search for it. I hope this helps.

I have been a Bible teacher for over 40 years and have studied Daniel, evaluating all man-made interpretations of Daniel out there. However, like the premillennialism, I see that the preterism interpretation of Daniel 9:26-27, including yours, concerning Revelation 20, is incorrect. The prophecies has NOTHING to do with physical Jerusalem both groups tend to build doctrine upon. You guys got the wrong Israel, wrong Jersaulem, wrong abomination of desolate, wrong 1,000 years, wrong prince, etc., etc. due to a lack of spiritual discernment (understanding) and wisdom of Christ.

 

[grafted branch]

If you think God still considered Jerusalem to be "the holy city" or "the beloved city" (Rev 20:9) in 70 AD, then why did He destroy it? Surely, God would not have destroyed a city that He considered to be holy. That is not reasonable. He would not have done that. No, earthly Jerusalem was the unholy city by then because of its rejection of Christ and that's why God destroyed it.

The city was beloved but it doesn’t say by whom it was beloved.

It was certainly beloved by those who refused to flee when it was surrounded by armies. They loved the city more than God.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I have been a Bible teacher for over 40 years and have studied Daniel, evaluating all man-made interpretations of Daniel out there. However, like the premillennialism, I see that the preterism interpretation of Daniel 9:26-27, including yours, concerning Revelation 20, is incorrect. The prophecies has NOTHING to do with physical Jerusalem both groups tend to build doctrine upon. You guys got the wrong Israel, wrong Jersaulem, wrong abomination of desolate, wrong 1,000 years, wrong prince, etc., etc. due to a lack of spiritual discernment (understanding) and wisdom of Christ.

You don't have to interpret Daniel 9:26-27 the way you do in order to not be an Amil and not a preterist. It's a false equivalence to say that those who interpret Daniel 9:26-27 as being fulfilled in the past are automatically preterists. An alternative to your view that allows someone to still be Amil, but not a preterist, is to understand that Jesus talked both about a local event in Judea and Jerusalem and a future global event relating to His future second coming at the end of the age in the Olivet Discourse.

I'm not trying to debate you about this here and I won't. If you want to do that in another thread, I'm more than willing to do so. I'm simply pointing out that what you seem to be implying here, which is that anyone who disagrees with your interpretation of Daniel 9:26-27 and sees it as being fulfilled in the past, has to be labeled a preterist. But, I'm Amil, and not a preterist, and I see it that way for the reasons I stated above. So, I guess my point is that you should not lump everyone together into one preterist camp who interprets Daniel 9:26-27 a certain way. I disagree with preterists on many other things besides that.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The city was beloved but it doesn’t say by whom it was beloved.

It was certainly beloved by those who refused to flee when it was surrounded by armies. They loved the city more than God.

Good grief. I'm sorry, but this is clearly a case of you just believing what you want to believe. It also references "the camp of the saints", so the reference to the "beloved city" is clearly a reference to the city that saints are citizens in. According to scripture, the city the saints are part of is the holy city, the new heavenly Jerusalem (Hebrews 12:22, Galatians 4:26, Rev 21:2,9). Earthly Jerusalem was not "the holy city" or "the beloved city" at that time and that is why God had it destroyed.

 

[grafted branch]

Good grief. I'm sorry, but this is clearly a case of you just believing what you want to believe. It also references "the camp of the saints", so the reference to the "beloved city" is clearly a reference to the city that saints are citizens in. According to scripture, the city the saints are part of is the holy city, the new heavenly Jerusalem (Hebrews 12:22, Galatians 4:26, Rev 21:2,9). Earthly Jerusalem was not "the holy city" or "the beloved city" at that time and that is why God had it destroyed.

Are you forgetting that Moses called all the children of Israel saints, collectively, in Deuteronomy 33:2-3?

So yea, when the city was surrounded by armies the saints that didn’t flee formed an encampment in their beloved city of Jerusalem in 70AD.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Are you forgetting that Moses called all the children of Israel saints, collectively, in Deuteronomy 33:2-3?

Are you forgetting that you are talking about Old Testament times here? Who are the saints in New Testament times that began with the death and resurrection of Christ? Christians, of course. Both Jew and Gentile believers.

Romans 1:7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

1 Corinthians 1:2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both their's and our's:

Ephesians 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:

Phillipians 1:1 Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons:

Colossians 1:2 To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ which are at Colosse: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

So yea, when the city was surrounded by armies the saints that didn’t flee formed an encampment in their beloved city of Jerusalem in 70AD.

It doesn't say their beloved city. It's God's beloved city which is the camp of the saints, not the camp of unbelievers. You continue to try to force the text to fit your doctrine instead of just accepting what it says. You're acting as if the book of Revelation is an Old Testament book.

 

[grafted branch]

Are you forgetting that you are talking about Old Testament times here? Who are the saints in New Testament times that began with the death and resurrection of Christ? Christians, of course. Both Jew and Gentile believers.

No, I’m not forgetting that, John wrote to the circumcision who were still under the old covenant burden. The different burdens between Jew and Gemtile seemed good to the Holy Spirit in Acts 15:28.

It doesn't say their beloved city. It's God's beloved city which is the camp of the saints, not the camp of unbelievers. You continue to try to force the text to fit your doctrine instead of just accepting what it says. You're acting as if the book of Revelation is an Old Testament book.

You are adding to scripture. It doesn’t say “God’s beloved city”. Besides, it is impossible to surround New Jerusalem.

 

[ScottA]

I am starting this thread for everyone's benefit. Please add your name to list of what you are - whether, Amil or Premil. Copy and paste the list from the previous post, so that the list grows as each person adds their name.

Premil
@Douggg
@MA2444
@th1b.taylor
@ewq1938
@rebuilder 454


Amil
@WPM
@Spiritual Israelite
@Marty fox
@grafted branch
@jeffweeder
@TribulationSigns

Is after "before the foundation of the world" amillennial?

 

[ewq1938]

You are adding to scripture. It doesn’t say “God’s beloved city”. Besides, it is impossible to surround New Jerusalem.

It's called the Holy city in Rev 11, at or near the start of the trib. It is not NJ in Rev 20...still the same old city as in Rev 11.

 

[Douggg]

Is after "before the foundation of the world" amillennial?

Scott, I am by passing participation in the discussions in this thread, leaving that up to others.

If want me to place you either as premil or amil in the opening post lists, please let me know, and I will place your name in either of those two categories.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You are adding to scripture. It doesn’t say “God’s beloved city”. Besides, it is impossible to surround New Jerusalem.

I'm not adding to it, I'm giving my interpretation of scripture just like you did when you said it was "their beloved city" in relation to the Jews even though it does not say that. Should I then accuse you of adding to scripture like you did to me? It's a pretty serious accusation to make to say that I'm adding anything to the book of Revelation, so you better think twice about doing that.

Revelation 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

I wonder what God thinks of someone falsely accusing someone else of adding to the prophecy of the book of Revelation which has to do with someone purposely doing that and not anything to do with someone interpreting the book a certain way. If interpreting the book was a case of adding to the book, then we're all doomed.

 

[Timtofly]

Where are you getting the idea that there's at least a 1,954 year time period between the end of Satan's little season and the GWT judgment? That is not indicated in the text whatsoever.

The same place in that chapter you see the New Jerusalem as existing prior to the GWT Judgment - your own imagination.

Since the heavenly Jerusalem is the mother of all, that Jerusalem was in existence from the Flood as being a heavenly place. Your "New Jerusalem" is the oldest Jerusalem, even older than earthly Jerusalem.

So technically it is not "New" as John saw it, but why argue over what is a NHNE? Since you obviously don't think there will be a different creation at all either, as that is when John saw the creation of this New Jerusalem, after the GWT Judgment, that you symbolize as the heavenly Jerusalem that happened after Noah's NHNE.

The GWT is not new either. The GWT has existed since Genesis 1 as part of that NHNE. Since you don't seem fond of the word dispensation, I guess there will be 3 NHNE in Scripture. Genesis 1. Genesis 9. Revelation 21. Since you are arguing the New Jerusalem started in Genesis 9, that heavenly Jerusalem, mother of us all.

If you are going with "all of us", including Abraham who looked for that heavenly Jerusalem, it would have to have existed since at least Noah's NHNE.

So the camp of the saints existed and was surrounded from Abraham's day as well. Some of us see a heavenly Jerusalem as did Abraham, but we never called it the New Jerusalem, because Revelation 21 has not happened yet, as you propose: "That that New Jerusalem was already in existence since at least the Flood, and that NHNE".

But this camp of the saints in Revelation 20 covers only one specific camp of the saints. Those living post the Second Coming. Not necessarily all other camp of the saints throughout history, dispensation or no dispensations.

Seems if you claim a heavenly Jerusalem, then it existed before Abraham as well as representatives on earth, the camps of the saints. Shem lived over 500 years after the Flood. Surely some of his offspring were righteous, besides Abraham? Since you say the attack was ongoing, then it has been ongoing since the establishment of earthly Jerusalem even if you continually avoid any physical aspect to earthly Jerusalem as part of these "spiritual" attacks.

The heavenly Jerusalem nor the earthly Jerusalem started in the first century with the Cross, and surely a New Jerusalem not yet created did not start at the Cross either. Your view seems very narrow, not to include more humans, throughout history, than you do.