Indisputable proof that the Premillennial theory contradicts Scripture

[amigo de christo]

I am and I have to agree with you. It sure seems like the time that Jesus talked about in Matthew 24:9-13 and that Paul talked about in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12, doesn't it? Which we Amills refer to as Satan's little season. I think this is one reason that some Premills can't understand our view. They think all Amills believe that we're still in the thousand years now and not yet in Satan's little season, so they wonder how we can believe that Satan is bound right now. But, some of us Amills don't believe he is still bound now because of what we see going on in the world in recent years.


Right. There is no shame for sin anymore and it's not hidden anymore. Good point. We now have gay pride month and gay pride parades and nonsense like that. Would that have happened if Satan wasn't loosed? It doesn't seem like it.


Yep. We're on the same page here.


Agree. We're seeing things happening that Jesus said would happen to indicate that His coming was near (Matthew 24:32-33). He talked about many turning away from the faith and an increase in wickedness and such. That's what we're seeing now.

The falling away IS MASSIVE . I have never seen anything like it .
And the decieved dont see it as the falling away , THEY SEE it as love and of GOD .
I never seen anything like this and now it has led them
not only to even honoring certain sins , BUT EVEN HONORING UNBELIEF IN JESUS
as they gather with ALL RELIGOINS beliving we serve the same GOD .
I never seen anything like this . THEY all believe ITS LOVE , THEY ALL BELIEVE ITS OF GOD .
BUT ITS OF SATAN and its NOT the LOVE OF GOD at all .

 

[amigo de christo]

I am and I have to agree with you. It sure seems like the time that Jesus talked about in Matthew 24:9-13 and that Paul talked about in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12, doesn't it? Which we Amills refer to as Satan's little season. I think this is one reason that some Premills can't understand our view. They think all Amills believe that we're still in the thousand years now and not yet in Satan's little season, so they wonder how we can believe that Satan is bound right now. But, some of us Amills don't believe he is still bound now because of what we see going on in the world in recent years.


Right. There is no shame for sin anymore and it's not hidden anymore. Good point. We now have gay pride month and gay pride parades and nonsense like that. Would that have happened if Satan wasn't loosed? It doesn't seem like it.


Yep. We're on the same page here.


Agree. We're seeing things happening that Jesus said would happen to indicate that His coming was near (Matthew 24:32-33). He talked about many turning away from the faith and an increase in wickedness and such. That's what we're seeing now.

take notice of what the all inclusive TRUTH hating sin loving mindset believes now .
THIS IS HUGE too .
Paul spoke of this .
WHAT do these interfaith leaders and those trapped in the lie
NOW believe . A LIE , a lie that trods JESUS RIGHT UNDER FOOT
and its a lie they think is love and this lie , this merger , this unity
this lets be one , THEY BELIEVE ITS THE TOTAL SOLUTOIN for what .
FOR WORLD what .
PEACE AND SAFETY . FOR WHEN THEY SHALL SAY PEACE N SAFETY , SUDDEN DESTRUCTION COMETH upon them all .
THEY BEING LED TO THE DAY OF ARMEGEDDON and have no idea .
THEY have come against GOD , AGAINST TRUTH , against the lambs . Now go read revelation .
WHO do they make war against , CHRIST and the saints . ITS BUILDING RIGHT NOW . RIGHT NOW
and most folks thinks this is years off . OH ITS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW .

 

[covenantee]

Actually no

we look at what God said will happen. and taking it as equal with already fulfilled prophecy. we determine if it has not happened yet, It must still be yet to happen. Just like already fulfilled prophecy has.

its called;literal interpretation If God said in the old testament, A will happen, Then B then C then D.

and we look in history and A and B happened exactly as God said it would we can rest our hope of the fact that C and D will happen the same way.

The difficulty amills have is they do not believe in a future restoration of Israel and a literal reign on earth. so they twist and change the meaning of OT prophets that say they will happen to mean something else. or try to make it appear that it is not Israel but the church (replacement theology) or they spiritualise it away, as if seeing jesus come in the clouds does not literally mean we will see him, It means judgment..

Premil is deficient in its refusal to recognize that the New Testament is also the New Will and Testament.

In God's New Will and Testament, all covenants and promises are fulfilled only in Christ, and in those who are in Christ.

The OT covenants and promises are the promissory clauses of God's Old Will and Testament, and they are both revoked and fulfilled in the promissory clauses of His New Will and Testament, written in the Blood of His Son Jesus Christ, the Divine Testator, coming into full force and effect upon His death.

If you have made your own Will and Testament, you will see that the very first clause states the following or its equivalent:

"I HEREBY REVOKE all former Wills and other testamentary dispositions by me at any time therefore made and declare this to be my Last Will and Testament."

This means that all former wills and testaments, and all of their promissory clauses in their entirety, are completely null and void. In their place, the promissory clauses of the current last new will and testament are the only ones in force and effect. Any promissory clause which appeared in the old will and testament, but does not appear in the new will and testament, is irrevocably null and void unless yet another new will and testament is made which re-includes it.

Thus we see:

Hebrews 9
15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

Hebrews 10
9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.

Hebrews 8
13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

God`s New Will and Testament is everlasting:

Hebrews 13
20 Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant.

There is none greater.

We see other new promissory clauses of the New Will and Testament in:

Matthew 21:33-45
In this parable, the son, who is identified as the heir, typifies Christ.

Galatians 3:16
Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

2 Corinthians 1:20
For all the promises of God in him are yea, and in him Amen, unto the glory of God by us.

Hebrews 1:1,2
1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

In them, we see that the Heir and Beneficiary is Christ alone, that all of the promises are affirmed and confirmed in Him, and that He is Heir of all things. All includes the OT land promises, the restoration promises, the blessings promises, and all else. There are no exceptions.

God has appointed His Son alone as heir of all things. Unbelieving Israel is not an heir. Galatians 4:30-31.

His New Will and Testament contains even better promises:

Hebrews 8
6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

Such as:

Hebrews 11
16 But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.

Additional promissory clauses in...:

Romans 8:16-17
16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

Galatians 3:29
And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

...declare that those who are in Christ are joint heirs with Him.

But it is indisputable:

There are no promissory clauses for anyone, Jew or Gentile...

Who is not in Christ.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Great job of missing the point. The point is, if he doesn't believe in the deity of Christ, then who do you think is teaching him things like that? Not the Holy Spirit.

You don't know that.

 

[KUWN]

Great job of missing the point. The point is, if he doesn't believe in the deity of Christ, then who do you think is teaching him things like that? Not the Holy Spirit.

I didn't think of Christ being God when I accepted him as Savior. In other words, nowhere do we read that a person must accept the deity of Christ to be a believer.

You've nothing to bring to the table but insults. Where is your Scripture?

I was just making a point. I didn't think you would get it.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Don't play dumb. You know that's not what he's saying.

The implication in his statement is quite clear. If an individual asserts that the New Testament (NT) is essential for fully grasping the Old Testament (OT), it suggests a belief that the OT lacks clarity or completeness without the guidance of the NT. This perspective raises significant theological concerns, as it challenges the foundational concept that God's word is eternal and unchanging. Moreover, such an assumption may lead to a skewed interpretation of the NT itself, as it fosters a framework where the NT is viewed as a necessary lens through which to understand the OT, potentially distorting the original messages and intentions of both Testaments. This approach can create a cycle of misunderstanding that undermines the holistic comprehension of scripture as a unified revelation from God.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Obviously, I don't believe that it is. You certainly have done nothing to refute it.

We all believe that our interpretation of the New Testament (NT) is correct; otherwise, we wouldn't hold that belief. I also want to clarify that I am not questioning your interpretation of the NT. Additionally, I am not trying to instill any doubts about your interpretation at this moment. I posed a rhetorical question to initiate a discussion about our individual approaches to interpretation.

In my examination of the relationship between the New Testament and the Old Testament, I hold the view that these two collections of scripture are fundamentally in harmony and support one another. If we accept this premise, it becomes essential for my approach to interpreting the passages that reference the Old Testament to consider the intentions and perspectives of both the New Testament and Old Testament authors. This dual focus allows for a more nuanced understanding of the texts, as it honors the context and message intended by each writer while exploring how they dialogue with and build upon one another's themes and teachings.

I approach the interpretation of the New Testament with a careful understanding that it is essential to first grasp the perspective and intent of the Old Testament authors. I do not take it for granted that my comprehension of the New Testament aligns with the original meaning intended by its authors unless I have thoroughly examined and understood the Old Testament context. If I encounter what appears to be a disagreement or inconsistency between the two, I recognize that my study requires further investigation and refinement. This commitment to a deep and nuanced understanding ensures that I engage with the texts in a thoughtful and informed manner.

 

[covenantee]

This perspective raises significant theological concerns, as it challenges the foundational concept that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Were the animal sacrifices in God's OT Word eternal and unchanging?

 

[CadyandZoe]

It also continued to happen after the death of Christ until 70 AD when Titus destroyed the temple.

You, I, and most people in this forum understand that Jesus's death on the cross is both sufficient and effective for the forgiveness of sins. I doubt you are arguing otherwise, just as I am not either.

Remember when Jesus submitted to John for baptism? John said, "I need to be baptized by you." Jesus responded, "Let it be done for the sake of righteousness." The key point at that moment was Jesus' endorsement of John's mission and his faithfulness. His actions demonstrated to the crowds that they should repent and be baptized, just as John preached, and that they should heed John's message. This stood in stark contrast to the behavior of the Pharisees, who refused to repent and be baptized.

If I am right, the prophets see an eschatological purpose for them, which is mainly for the sake of the Tribe of Levi during a time when God is proving himself among his people, Israel. Just as Jesus endorsed John through baptism, the Levites will endorse Yahweh through the sacrifices in stark contrast to the behavior of the servants of Allah.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The implication in his statement is quite clear. If an individual asserts that the New Testament (NT) is essential for fully grasping the Old Testament (OT), it suggests a belief that the OT lacks clarity or completeness without the guidance of the NT.

For some of the OT, that's true, but not all of it. No one is saying that nothing in the OT can be understood without the NT. But, some things in the OT were purposely made obscure because God intended them to be revealed or made more clear in the NT. For example, where is it made clear in the OT that God's promises that He made to Abraham and his seed were to Christ and those who belong to Christ (Galatians 3:16, 29)? Nowhere, right? So, things like that are what he was talking about. The concept of Gentile believers being fellow heirs of God's promises with Jewish believers was purposely obscured in the OT because God didn't want that to be revealed until NT times (Ephesians 3:1-6).

This perspective raises significant theological concerns,

What perspective exactly? No one is saying that nothing in the OT can be understood without the NT, so of course that perspective would raise concerns. Thankfully, no one is claiming that.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

We all believe that our interpretation of the New Testament (NT) is correct; otherwise, we wouldn't hold that belief. I also want to clarify that I am not questioning your interpretation of the NT. Additionally, I am not trying to instill any doubts about your interpretation at this moment. I posed a rhetorical question to initiate a discussion about our individual approaches to interpretation.

In my examination of the relationship between the New Testament and the Old Testament, I hold the view that these two collections of scripture are fundamentally in harmony and support one another. If we accept this premise, it becomes essential for my approach to interpreting the passages that reference the Old Testament to consider the intentions and perspectives of both the New Testament and Old Testament authors. This dual focus allows for a more nuanced understanding of the texts, as it honors the context and message intended by each writer while exploring how they dialogue with and build upon one another's themes and teachings.

I approach the interpretation of the New Testament with a careful understanding that it is essential to first grasp the perspective and intent of the Old Testament authors. I do not take it for granted that my comprehension of the New Testament aligns with the original meaning intended by its authors unless I have thoroughly examined and understood the Old Testament context. If I encounter what appears to be a disagreement or inconsistency between the two, I recognize that my study requires further investigation and refinement. This commitment to a deep and nuanced understanding ensures that I engage with the texts in a thoughtful and informed manner.

When Jesus or the NT authors referenced OT prophecies and explained their meaning, do you think they did that for no reason? Do you think they should have known that we can understand them just fine on our own without their help? You don't think that the New Testament sheds light on OT prophecies at all?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You don't know that.

I do know that. But, how can I explain how I know that to someone with no spiritual discernment? I can't, really.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Answering a question with a question?

Yes, aren't you aware of this technique?

Or is this your answer? I asked you to tell us what those reasons are that sacrifices will be performed again and what scriptures you use to support your opinion about that.

I can't do this as long as you see me as your opponent and automatically reject everything I say. All I can do, at this point, is to ask thought-provoking questions. Think of it this way, I arrived at my conclusions after a long journey through the Scriptures. I mentioned the Lord's prayer because that is where I began the journey.

The Lord's Prayer begins with "Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name." Why does Jesus want us to pray this prayer? Is God's name not already holy? The answer is yes, God's name is indeed holy. This leads us to explore the deeper meaning behind the prayer. What message is Jesus conveying through it?

In my study of the book of Romans, I encountered Paul's argument with the Jewish teachers, where he points out that the Jewish people blasphemed God's name while among the Gentiles (Romans 2:24). To further explore this, I referred to the Old Testament to find instances where God accused Israel of blaspheming His name in the presence of the Gentiles (Isaiah 52:5).

Next, read Ezekiel 36 where God tells Israel how he will restore his holy name.

 

[CadyandZoe]

When Jesus or the NT authors referenced OT prophecies and explained their meaning, do you think they did that for no reason? Do you think they should have known that we can understand them just fine on our own without their help? You don't think that the New Testament sheds light on OT prophecies at all?

When did NT authors explain the meaning this is very rare if at all.

 

[CadyandZoe]

The Old Testament prophets looked through a glass darkly and described things in terms their listeners could understand.

So you agree that they didn't know what they were saying? Where does it say that the OT prophets were looking through a glass darkly, whatever that means?

 

[CadyandZoe]

it is possible . i dont say it aint either .
But this i do know . ITs all in vain friend .

I disagree. The sacrifices will not be in vain because they will not be for the expiation of sins. Jesus is the only efficacious and sufficient sacrifice for sins. The sacrifices will serve another purpose during that time.

 

[CadyandZoe]

I do know that. But, how can I explain how I know that to someone with no spiritual discernment? I can't, really.

You falsely presume to know who guides me and what is in my heart. Also, you continually mention the Deity so that the thread will get locked. You can't help it I guess.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Yes, aren't you aware of this technique?

Yes, and I don't like it. Just tell me what you believe and get to the point. I don't like playing games.

I can't do this as long as you see me as your opponent and automatically reject everything I say.

I don't automatically reject everything you say. It just so happens that I disagree with you about seemingly everything.

All I can do, at this point, is to ask thought-provoking questions.

Why can't you just tell me what you believe and which scriptures your beliefs are based on? It comes across as though you are hiding something when you can't just answer simple questions such as what the reasons would be for future animal sacrifices. You can tell me what those reasons are and which scriptures you base them on. Why is that so difficult for you?

Think of it this way, I arrived at my conclusions after a long journey through the Scriptures.

That's fine, but you don't have to explain that whole journey. Just tell me what your conclusions are and the main scriptures that you base them on. If the truth is so complicated that you can't even explain it, then it's not likely the truth.

I mentioned the Lord's prayer because that is where I began the journey.

The Lord's Prayer begins with "Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name." Why does Jesus want us to pray this prayer? Is God's name not already holy? The answer is yes, God's name is indeed holy. This leads us to explore the deeper meaning behind the prayer. What message is Jesus conveying through it?

In my study of the book of Romans, I encountered Paul's argument with the Jewish teachers, where he points out that the Jewish people blasphemed God's name while among the Gentiles (Romans 2:24). To further explore this, I referred to the Old Testament to find instances where God accused Israel of blaspheming His name in the presence of the Gentiles (Isaiah 52:5).

Next, read Ezekiel 36 where God tells Israel how he will restore his holy name.

When will you get to the part where scripture teaches that God will want animal sacrifices to be performed again with an explanation of why that will be? I don't know how you can be expected to be taken seriously if your view is so convoluted that you have to write a book to explain it. Surely, if God wants animal sacrifices to be performed in the future, there would be scripture explicitly stating a such, including the reasons why. So, do you believe there is such scripture or not? If so, please tell me what it is.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I disagree. The sacrifices will not be in vain because they will not be for the expiation of sins. Jesus is the only efficacious and sufficient sacrifice for sins. The sacrifices will serve another purpose during that time.

And what purpose is that and why? This is a simple question that you should be able to answer simply.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You falsely presume to know who guides me and what is in my heart

I know what I know and won't apologize for it.

. Also, you continually mention the Deity so that the thread will get locked. You can't help it I guess.

No, it will not. It was mentioned many times in other threads where we talked to you about this and those were either not locked at all or not locked until they were open for a long time. People deserve to know the heretical beliefs that you have so they know where you are coming from and now that they can't trust anything you say.