The absurdity of Pretrib logic

[CadyandZoe]

You're talking about Revelation 14, right? Again, it talks about them being before the throne of God and that is in heaven.

John visualizes a scene depicting two venues: Jesus and 144K on Earth, and a "voice" from heaven. This is notably similar to Revelation chapter 7. The voice from heaven sings a new song, and the 144K learn the new song while on earth.

And it talks about them being redeemed "FROM the earth". So, they are not on the earth.

Jesus isn't talking about their location, he is talking about their affiliation. The Greek word for "earth" here is also understood as "land" and the Hebrew people are known as the people of the land, being direct descendent of Abraham. God promised the land to Abraham and his seed and for this reason, they are recognized as the people of the land.

The throne of God depicted in the book of Revelation is always in heaven.

Try reading chapter 11.

To be redeemed "FROM the earth" means you're not on the earth at that point. You are missing the obvious. You do know that there is not just an earthly Mt. Zion and Jerusalem, but also a heavenly Mt. Zion and heavenly Jerusalem, don't you (Hebrews 12:22)?

Paul's discussion of a "heavenly Jerusalem" is a discussion of a city located on the earth, which has heavenly qualities. In that discussion, the term "heavenly" is an adjective, not a noun.

LOL. Nonsense.

From now on, when you say that something is "nonsense" I will interpret you to mean, "I have no valid answer to your point."

 

[CadyandZoe]

That only makes sense from the words of Zacharias if the millennial period of time began with the birth of John, born to prepare the way for the advent of Christ, whose name would be declared in the spirit of Elijah. Zacharias speaks as though the prophecy he long awaited to be fulfilled began to come to pass with the supernatural birth of his child, John. Do you really believe Zacharias believed the prophecy being fulfilled to Israel of faith through the miraculous birth of his son was not then a reality?

Luke 1:15-17 (KJV) For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb. And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God. And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

I doubt that Zacharias knew that Jesus would die for his sins and the sins of many. Instead, Zacharias hoped for Jesus to fulfill the role of the deliverer of Israel. Even Jesus' apostles shared this expectation when they asked him, "Lord, is it at this time You are restoring the kingdom to Israel?" He replied, "It is not for you to know the times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority..."

 

[CadyandZoe]

I support what I allege from the Word of God.

We all do, except earlier in this thread, I refused. Why? I spent hundreds of hours debating WPM many months ago without any indication from him that he was willing to change his mind in light of the evidence. Contrary to what he might say, the sole reason for this thread is so that he can accuse people, presumably to satisfy a desire to feel superior.

The problem with your method or style of study is that you are forever taking verses out of context to prove what you think, wish, or perhaps hope is true, but unfortunately you're never able to prove what you allege.

If you read my posts, I doubt you would say this.

 

[CadyandZoe]

I see it as being related to that, yes. I believe the strong man represents Satan and the one binding the strong man is Jesus. Do you not believe that the strong man represents Satan?

I see it differently because Jesus wasn't using allegory to make his point. If he was, then we would be left to ask about the meaning of the other elements of his analogy. For instance, what does the "house" represent?

Instead, Jesus' analogy depends on the entire story taken as a whole. We are invited to ponder the similarities between subduing a strong man in order to plunder his house and casting a demon out of a man.

"The analogy Jesus uses is not meant to imply that he has actually bound Satan. Instead, it aims to refute the Pharisaical belief that Jesus was driving out demons with the power of Beelzebub. The key point is that while the power of Beelzebub causes demon possession, the power of Jesus overcomes it. In this analogy, the 'strong' man refers to the demon, and the 'house' represents the person."

 

[CadyandZoe]

Yea, right? Premil are willing, biblical and open. Amils are not. This is the usual foolish mantra of Pretribbers and Premils. Yet, when it comes to clear, explicit Scripture. Premils explain the sacred text away, manipulate and butcher it, at every turn. It gets old after a while. It is a joke.

Debating religious beliefs is not a sport where you root for your favorite team. It's about engaging in respectful dialogue. My previous discussion about productive dialogue wasn't about the overall amillennial or premillennial stance. It was specifically addressing the individuals in this conversation who were challenging me to prove my position. They were asking for proof without genuinely valuing what I was saying.

People who value evidence are willing to suspend their own view, listen attentively, consider the evidence, and are willing to change their minds when evidence compels them to reconsider. I don't see this.

 

[rwb]

The gospel was preached to Abraham before Israel existed.

Are we to assume the gospel was preached to non-Jews up until Israel and then the gospel became exclusively for the Jews only?

Israel did not exist in the days of Abraham. Yes, God Himself preached the Gospel to Abraham, a non-Jew and Abraham became the father of faithful saints whether they are Jew or Gentile. It was through this man who believed God that the nation of Israel would come, and through Israel the Messiah/Savior/the Lord Jesus Christ would be born.

 

[rwb]

It is on Earth. I don't need to assume it. I can find it on a map. We understand that passage in light of the epistle as a whole. Paul's contrast is not a comparison between the heavenly Zion and the earthly Zion; he compares Mt. Zion with Mt. Sinai. Hebrews 12:18ff describes the day Moses came down from Mt. Sinai and the fact that Israel begged Moses out of fear to keep God away.

Paul isn't suggesting that another Zion exists in heaven. He speaks about a time when Mt. Zion, which is the city of David, will become the city of God and Jerusalem will be heavenly rather than earthly through Jesus Christ.


Another perspective emerges. The idea of converts being transported into heaven is not seen here. Instead, we see 144k Hebrews, marked by God for protection, presumably because of their fear of the Lord and their avoidance of arrogance and evil deeds, as per Malakai chapter 4. They gather to Mt. Zion to meet with Jesus, as per Zechariah 14. There, they are taught the new song, eternal salvation in Jesus Christ.

I cannot find spiritual discernment in anything you post! But a vivid, wild imagination can certainly be gleaned from your replies.

 

[rwb]

Debating religious beliefs is not a sport where you root for your favorite team. It's about engaging in respectful dialogue. My previous discussion about productive dialogue wasn't about the overall amillennial or premillennial stance. It was specifically addressing the individuals in this conversation who were challenging me to prove my position. They were asking for proof without genuinely valuing what I was saying.

People who value evidence are willing to suspend their own view, listen attentively, consider the evidence, and are willing to change their minds when evidence compels them to reconsider. I don't see this.

Meaningful dialog comes only from faithful saints being led by the Spirit of truth! You can't prove what you allege from the Scripture because the Spirit of Christ is not guiding you, you are being led by doctrines from the imagination of man.

 

[rwb]

I see it differently because Jesus wasn't using allegory to make his point. If he was, then we would be left to ask about the meaning of the other elements of his analogy. For instance, what does the "house" represent?

Instead, Jesus' analogy depends on the entire story taken as a whole. We are invited to ponder the similarities between subduing a strong man in order to plunder his house and casting a demon out of a man.

"The analogy Jesus uses is not meant to imply that he has actually bound Satan. Instead, it aims to refute the Pharisaical belief that Jesus was driving out demons with the power of Beelzebub. The key point is that while the power of Beelzebub causes demon possession, the power of Jesus overcomes it. In this analogy, the 'strong' man refers to the demon, and the 'house' represents the person."

WOW!!!

 

[CadyandZoe]

I cannot find spiritual discernment in anything you post! But a vivid, wild imagination can certainly be gleaned from your replies.

What do you mean by spiritual discernment? And why do it matter?

 

[CadyandZoe]

Meaningful dialog comes only from faithful saints being led by the Spirit of truth! You can't prove what you allege from the Scripture because the Spirit of Christ is not guiding you, you are being led by doctrines from the imagination of man.

How is any of that a rebuttal of what I said? Stop making this about me.

 

[CadyandZoe]

WOW!!!

Is that a question?

 

[rwb]

What do you mean by spiritual discernment? And why do it matter?

Do you believe I am God? Oh I forgot, you don't even believe Jesus is God! Unless God the Holy Spirit in believers guides you to discern His Word, no man is able to do that which only God the Holy Spirit can! That is give you eyes to see and ears to hear beyond your physical capabilities!

 

[rwb]

Is that a question?

Not at all!

 

[rwb]

How is any of that a rebuttal of what I said? Stop making this about me.

Oh, you want a rebuttal for what you actually say! Why? I mean you seldom, perhaps never actually rebut replies to you. Instead, you go off on some new made-up analogy, or what you believe and think that proves why you have properly understood Scripture.

 

[WPM]

You and your SI buddy, are classic demonstrators of how the Lord locks people into their false beliefs. Isaiah 29:9-12

I caution all who vehemently promote their beliefs, as you do, be very sure of what is said, as Judgment is coming and teachers of wrong beliefs will be brought to justice. As we all will be.

More projection! That is all you have now. You cannot engage in healthy Christian discussion. All Premils have now is their insults, name-calling and avoidance. None of us are going to take lectures from you.

 

[WPM]

We all do, except earlier in this thread, I refused. Why? I spent hundreds of hours debating WPM many months ago without any indication from him that he was willing to change his mind in light of the evidence. Contrary to what he might say, the sole reason for this thread is so that he can accuse people, presumably to satisfy a desire to feel superior.

If you read my posts, I doubt you would say this.

Not true! You have nothing of credence to bring to the table. You are a heretic. You deny the deity of Christ. Shame on you! You are an expert at twisting the Word of God.

 

[WPM]

Debating religious beliefs is not a sport where you root for your favorite team. It's about engaging in respectful dialogue. My previous discussion about productive dialogue wasn't about the overall amillennial or premillennial stance. It was specifically addressing the individuals in this conversation who were challenging me to prove my position. They were asking for proof without genuinely valuing what I was saying.

People who value evidence are willing to suspend their own view, listen attentively, consider the evidence, and are willing to change their minds when evidence compels them to reconsider. I don't see this.

You do not bring evidence to the table. You avoid the biblical evidence. All you have in response is your unscriptural analogies.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Do you believe I am God? Oh I forgot, you don't even believe Jesus is God! Unless God the Holy Spirit in believers guides you to discern His Word, no man is able to do that which only God the Holy Spirit can! That is give you eyes to see and ears to hear beyond your physical capabilities!

I understand that God gives us eyes to see and ears to hear. The point is that when I write a post to you, you require discernment to understand me, right?

 

[CadyandZoe]

Oh, you want a rebuttal for what you actually say! Why? I mean you seldom, perhaps never actually rebut replies to you. Instead, you go off on some new made-up analogy, or what you believe and think that proves why you have properly understood Scripture.

And why is that a problem? Don't we all do that?