Amils don't dispute that these are meaning mortals. But not mortals after the 2nd coming followed by after the thousand years, but mortals after the thousand years followed by the 2nd coming. Their dispute is with the millennium being after the 2nd coming. It would be different if they agreed that the thousand years follow the 2nd coming. In that case I'm pretty sure they would be agreeing they are mortals still remaining after the 2nd coming because this would then make them Premil rather than Amil if they agreed the millennium is after the 2nd coming.
No mortals will survive the second coming of Christ
- Thread starter Spiritual Israelite
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
- Status
Amils don't dispute that these are meaning mortals. But not mortals after the 2nd coming followed by after the thousand years, but mortals after the thousand years followed by the 2nd coming. Their dispute is with the millennium being after the 2nd coming. It would be different if they agreed that the thousand years follow the 2nd coming. In that case I'm pretty sure they would be agreeing they are mortals still remaining after the 2nd coming because this would then make them Premil rather than Amil if they agreed the millennium is after the 2nd coming.
What? Do you disagree that those that are of the synagogue of Satan belong to the devil and are going to hell?
You're responding to the topic with complete nonsense about having to travel east from Canada to the kingdom of heaven and other nonsense like that. You have no discernment whatsoever and take everything out of context. And you deny what the scriptures I showed teach. You can't be taken seriously.
tailgator
Well-Known Member
Who do they believe resurrects the beheaded saints at the beginning of the millinium?
Do they believe they just pop up out of the ground all by themselves?
Which comes first, for example? What is recorded in the days of Joshua or what is recorded in Ezekiel 37?
What does the latter say.
Ezekiel 37:21 And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold , I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land
22 And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all:
23 Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions: but I will save them out of all their dwellingplaces, wherein they have sinned, and will cleanse them: so shall they be my people, and I will be their God
24 And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them.
25 And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt ; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever : and my servant David shall be their prince for ever.
Was or was not Ezekiel a prophet? Do prophets typically prophesy about past events or do they typically prophesy about future events? Who lived first? Joshua or Ezekiel?
Can't dwell there forever unless they are in the land first. Some of you must think that Christ is going to be ruling the planet from Dallas, Tx or something. Or maybe Chicago. God forbid that Jesus ever set foot back in the promised land He was born in, then take up residence there. From the beginning of time through when Christ was born, the promised land remained significant. One reason for the dispersion in 70 AD was so that the gospel could spread worldwide eventually.
But once that is accomplished there is no reason for the promised land not to be where Christ will be living and dwelling in. He has to dwell some place when He returns, doesn't He? Does somewhere in the USA, or maybe Canada, or maybe Mexico, sound like valid options? Was He born in any of those places? Did He ever live and dwell in any of those places, or at least visited them when He walked the earth 2000 years ago? There you go then. But let's just ignore all of that, right?
tailgator
Well-Known Member
Jesus is the one who said many will come from.the west who will sit down with Abraham in the kingdom of heaven.
If they do not come from.the west as Jesus said ,then they would never arrive at the feast in the kingdom of heaven.
Jesus makes perfect sense when you learn where the kingdom of heaven is.
They don't believe anyone does. Keeping in mind the beginning of their millennium is not the beginning of our millennium. Their millennium began 2000 years ago. Our millennium is yet to begin and won't begin until Christ returns first. Therefore, 2000 years ago there was not yet any beheaded saints to resurrect. They take the first resurrection in a spiritual sense involving being born again. Except Revelation 20 only mentions 2 resurrection events, not 3 or more. And the most important resurrection of all other than Christ's, meaning the bodily resurrection of the saved, Amils have that resurrection missing altogether in Revelation 20 and have replaced it with a spiritual resurrection pertaining to being saved during the here and now.
Your lack of discernment is truly stunning. He was figuratively making a reference to how the kingdom of heaven/God would become open to the Gentiles in the rest of the world because of the preaching of the gospel. Up to that point, God's word was only known in Israel (for the most part), so people thought the kingdom of heaven/God was only available to those in Israel. Jesus was making it known that was not going to be the case any longer.
You say we have the second most important resurrection resurrection missing altogether in Revelation 20, but you premils have the most important resurrection missing altogether in Revelation 20. So, if determining the truth of Revelation 20 is based on something like that, then you just proved that Amil is true. Good job.
tailgator
Well-Known Member
tailgator
Well-Known Member
No,he was not being figurative.
He is being very literal.At the same time many come from the east and west to the kingdom of heaven,the subjects in that kingdom are cast out.
The tares are cast into a furnace while the wheat is gathered into the barn.
Mathew 8:11-12
I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven.
But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
You have a problem comprehending where the kingdom.is.You have no clue where it is.
And I'm sure that despite creating two posts, you most likely will not actually specifically address anything I said in my original post if you do what you normally do. Let's see if I'm right. I haven't read anything beyond this yet.
Not necessarily, but I do believe everything we need to know about this topic can be found in the NT. Regardless, you should not believe in a doctrine that contradicts anything in the NT. But, you do.
Never said that. But, you should not interpret anything in the OT that contradicts what is taught in the NT. But, you do.
Do you want to be taken seriously or not, David? Tell me. I can't take you seriously if you make comments like this.
So, don't say things like that. It serves no purpose. I can say that your expectation of what the Messiah's kingdom should be like is much like what the Pharisees were expecting. Should we talk about that? Or should we leave things like that out of this?
The NT shines light on the OT prophecies. There is no question about that. You have to be completely biased to not acknowledge that. The NT quotes OT prophecies and explains them, not the other way around. That doesn't mean we shouldn't look at the OT, but we should use the NT to interpret the OT whenever possible.
Yes. All people will either be dwelling on the new earth or will be in the lake of fire at that point.
Those outside of it will be in the lake of fire, wherever that will be. That is very clear.
Scripture says that ALL whose names are not written in the book of life worship the beast (Revelation 13:8). Do you not accept what that verse says? My view is based on scripture. What is yours based on?
Scripture says that "ALL people, free and slave, great and small" will be killed when Jesus returns (Rev 19:17-18). Of course ,that doesn't include believers, which goes without saying. Do you not accept what Revelation 19:17-18 says? It's interesting how you normally take things so literally, but then when it comes to verses like Revelation 13:8 and Revelation 19:17-18, your throw your literal approach out the window.
How about this. Can you please address what I said in the OP first? What I predicted is turning out to be true. Nothing you're saying is actually addressing what I said in my original post. So, please do that and then I will address the rest of what you said in this post and the post following it. I've told you many times that I'm not interested in a one way discussion where I address your points, but you don't address mine.
Last edited:
You have no clue. Period. That's obvious. I don't need to take someone like you, who undermines Paul's teachings on prophecy, seriously. So, I won't.
tailgator
Well-Known Member
At least I know where the land of the Lord is and who reigns with Christ in it.
Isaiah 14:2
And the people shall take them, and bring them to their place: and the house of Israel shall possess them in the land of the LORD for servants and handmaids: and they shall take them captives, whose captives they were; and they shall rule over their oppressors.
Do you just ignore this passage that also mentions them coming from the north and south?
Luke 13:28 “There will be weeping there, and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrown out. 29 People will come from east and west and north and south, and will take their places at the feast in the kingdom of God. 30 Indeed there are those who are last who will be first, and first who will be last.”
Let the New Testament interpret the Old! The bottom line is, the New Testament shines light and detail on the Old Testament prophecies. It gives greater clarity and perspective. It is the fuller revelation. You are fixated with twisting the Old Testament and the book of Revelation. You totally explain away and negate the teaching of Christ and the New Testament writers. You pitch your tent in the obscure, and use that to twist the truth.
In all the debates I've seen you engage in, I've never seen you win one single one so far. You lose them all because you cannot address the multiple holes in your arguments. You simply deflect, avoid and run.
Address the Op. Avoid a habit of a lifetime.
tailgator
Well-Known Member
This has not been fulfilled yet.
The Jews in Israel do not go into exile till Christ comes and the saints with him.
It takes place on the day of the Lord.
Zech 14
14 Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.
2 For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.
3 Then shall the Lord go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.
5 And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the Lord my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.
You do what you want, but I'm looking forward to what Peter said we should be looking forward to.
2 Peter 3:13 But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells.
He expects me to specifically address all of his points even though he did not specifically address any of mine. That isn't reasonable. I'm not into one way discussions like that. If he wants to be taken seriously, then he should be able to show how his view can be reconciled with the NT.
tailgator
Well-Known Member
- Status
Similar threads
