22 major reasons to abandon the Premil doctrine

[stunnedbygrace]

look up a chart comparing the two Matthew 24 and revelation 6

Do I need a chart? Let me go compare them.

 

[Marty fox]

Do I need a chart? Let me go compare them.

It’s just easier to see side by side I’m away so I can’t send mine

 

[WPM]

Yes guys, I meant 2 Peter, thank you for the correction. :)

· Unquestionably, the focus of this message is directed to the end-time-cynics who question God.
· These fools question God keeping His “promise.” What promise? It is “the promise of his coming.”
· The scorn and derision of these foolish last days scoffers and mockers are directed specifically towards the reality and occurrence of Christ’s future Advent in glory.
· It is not in any way concentrated upon a supposed group of ‘millennial scoffers’ 1,000 years later. If this is supposed to be a collection of ‘millennial scoffers’ 1,000 years after the second coming, why would they be saying, “Where is the promise of his coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation”? Such a notion is a complete absurdity as Christ’s coming (or parousia) is long past.
· This text shows us that today is the only day of salvation. Peter responds to the mockers scoffing at the apparent delay in Christ's return: “the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation” (2 Peter 3:15). Romans 2:4 reaffirms that salvation is limited to this side of the second coming.
· The actual wrath described by the Holy Spirit comes suddenly and unexpectedly upon these foolish last days scoffers and mockers. There is no escape. They are the recipients of total destruction.
· We also see in this reading that “the day of the Lord will arrive (or heko) as a thief in the night; in the which (en heé)” or literally translated “in which” (the word “the” being absent from the original). The detail described arrives with Jesus.
· What happens to creation when Jesus arrives? 1. The heavens shall pass away / perish with a great noise. 2. The elements shall be ‘loosed by being set on fire’, 3. The earth shall be ‘burned up utterly / consumed wholly. 4. The works that are within the earth shall be ‘burned up utterly / consumed wholly. The Premillennialist claims to be a literalist, so there is no spiritualization that can explain this away. It is water-tight.
· The description of the destruction could not be more comprehensive. It is undoubtedly the end. It involves wholesale and unavoidable annihilation for the wicked. It embraces the full gamut of fallen creation.
· What is this replaced with? A future millennium filled with sin and sinners, crying and dying? No. The Holy Spirit tells us that it the “new heavens and a new earth” that follows Christ’s return.
· The arrival of the “new heavens and a new earth” are here significantly connected to “his promise.”
· The Holy Spirit then assures the last days elect that their lot is not wrath or destruction. They experience the new heavens and new earth at His appearing.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Okay, so I see similarities. Like…I see that wars and rumors of wars could be the red horse. And He talks of famine, which could be the black horse.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

· Unquestionably, the focus of this message is directed to the end-time-cynics who question God.
· These fools question God keeping His “promise.” What promise? It is “the promise of his coming.”
· The scorn and derision of these foolish last days scoffers and mockers are directed specifically towards the reality and occurrence of Christ’s future Advent in glory.
· It is not in any way concentrated upon a supposed group of ‘millennial scoffers’ 1,000 years later. If this is supposed to be a collection of ‘millennial scoffers’ 1,000 years after the second coming, why would they be saying, “Where is the promise of his coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation”? Such a notion is a complete absurdity as Christ’s coming (or parousia) is long past.
· This text shows us that today is the only day of salvation. Peter responds to the mockers scoffing at the apparent delay in Christ's return: “the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation” (2 Peter 3:15). Romans 2:4 reaffirms that salvation is limited to this side of the second coming.
· The actual wrath described by the Holy Spirit comes suddenly and unexpectedly upon these foolish last days scoffers and mockers. There is no escape. They are the recipients of total destruction.
· We also see in this reading that “the day of the Lord will arrive (or heko) as a thief in the night; in the which (en heé)” or literally translated “in which” (the word “the” being absent from the original). The detail described arrives with Jesus.
· What happens to creation when Jesus arrives? 1. The heavens shall pass away / perish with a great noise. 2. The elements shall be ‘loosed by being set on fire’, 3. The earth shall be ‘burned up utterly / consumed wholly. 4. The works that are within the earth shall be ‘burned up utterly / consumed wholly. The Premillennialist claims to be a literalist, so there is no spiritualization that can explain this away. It is water-tight.
· The description of the destruction could not be more comprehensive. It is undoubtedly the end. It involves wholesale and unavoidable annihilation for the wicked. It embraces the full gamut of fallen creation.
· What is this replaced with? A future millennium filled with sin and sinners, crying and dying? No. The Holy Spirit tells us that it the “new heavens and a new earth” that follows Christ’s return.
· The arrival of the “new heavens and a new earth” are here significantly connected to “his promise.”
· The Holy Spirit then assures the last days elect that their lot is not wrath or destruction. They experience the new heavens and new earth at His appearing.

oh gosh, I’m really sorry but I didn’t follow you at all here.

 

[WPM]

oh gosh, I’m really sorry but I didn’t follow you at all here.

You need to grasp the context in order to see the meaning. Peter is refuting the folly of the end-time mockers who are questioning the reality of Christ's appearing. He is basically telling them that time is nothing with the Lord. Their scoffing is misplaced and delusional.

The whole thrust is the mocking at the promise of His coming and how that is exposed when He comes. The mockers are immediately destroyed. It catches them unexpectedly.

 

[Marty fox]

Okay, so I see similarities. Like…I see that wars and rumors of wars could be the red horse. And He talks of famine, which could be the black horse.

Check and compare these verses

 

[stunnedbygrace]

You need to grasp the context in order to see the meaning. Peter is refuting the folly of the end-time mockers who are questioning the reality of Christ's appearing. He is basically telling them that time is nothing with the Lord. Their scoffing is misplaced and delusional.

The whole thrust is the mocking at the promise of His coming and how that is exposed when He comes. The mockers are immediately destroyed. It catches them unexpectedly.

Yes, I can see that he is saying these mockers will come “in the last days” who say Jesus is never coming again. I doubt they think He even came a first time. I doubt that they believe in God at all.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Check and compare these verses
View attachment 24886

Yes, I can see this.
I can’t see complete fulfillment occurred though in 67-70 a.d. but I do see an overlay.

 

[Timtofly]

No it only applies if they are alive that’s why it’s an act of faith. We confess in faith that God will save us thus we are saved by grace through faith.

The question isn’t will they repent or not it’s can they repent. The issue is what the mark is it’s something that doesn’t contradict scripture.

There is no contradiction in the fact that some reject God and are removed from the Lamb's book of life. A reprobate soul/mind can never be reconciled back to God. That does not negate John 3:16. That only means they rejected John 3:16 and at the GWT it will be as if God never even knew they existed. Matthew 7:23

"And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

Those who willingly embrace the mark will be those who do wicked, and have rejected God totally.

 

[Marty fox]

Yes, I can see this.
I can’t see complete fulfillment occurred though in 67-70 a.d. but I do see an overlay.

If you check history or even historians like Josephus or Taticus you will see what happened in that time.

 

[Marty fox]

There is no contradiction in the fact that some reject God and are removed from the Lamb's book of life. A reprobate soul/mind can never be reconciled back to God. That does not negate John 3:16. That only means they rejected John 3:16 and at the GWT it will be as if God never even knew they existed. Matthew 7:23

"And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

Those who willingly embrace the mark will be those who do wicked, and have rejected God totally.

It’s not a matter of if they will buy can they.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

I am not interested in outside links and unresponsive pages that also refuse to address the literal reading of Scripture. I will take this as an example that you have no rebuttals to this thread.

Thanks for the conversation.

Of course you aren't interested in anything outside of your view. It doesn't matter what any of us say, you will hold to your view. And so that is why I just left you with a sign.
You are unable to recognize any prophetic signs in the world today, such as a New World Order/ One World Government . You will recognize when billions die within a short period of time - that should wake you?

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

Let's just post links to articles on external sites back and forth. That's how forum discussions are supposed to work, right?

It is a futile discussion. Most of us are laymen so yes a more scholarly outside teaching is needed. Take it or not - I just don't care to spend much time refuting Amillennialism anymore.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

Calm down. Where did he deny Christ's second coming? Nowhere.

Oh, so He will just return for judgment, leave the earth in ruins and just return back up to heaven?
All righty then.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

If you check history or even historians like Josephus or Taticus you will see what happened in that time.

oh yes, I’ve read what flavius wrote. I don’t see it as a tribulation that came on the whole world though. I haven’t read taticus. Was he a historian also?

 

[Marty fox]

oh yes, I’ve read what flavius wrote. I don’t see it as a tribulation that came on the whole world though. I haven’t read taticus. Was he a historian also?

Yes he was Roman.

The gospels use the term the whole word to mean Israel so it is biblical language

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Yes he was Roman.

The gospels use the term the whole word to mean Israel so it is biblical language

I can’t buy that the whole world means Israel. That’s a leap my mind can’t see. I accept that you think it though.

 

[Marty fox]

I can’t buy that the whole world means Israel. That’s a leap my mind can’t see. I accept that you think it though.

What I was meaning is that the verse below used Israel as the whole world so the bible gives it permission to in other verses as well

John 12:19
So the Pharisees said to one another, “See, this is getting us nowhere. Look how the whole world has gone after him!”

 

[stunnedbygrace]

oh yes, I’ve read what flavius wrote. I don’t see it as a tribulation that came on the whole world though. I haven’t read taticus. Was he a historian also?

And actually, I don’t know if you were one of those who was saying you guys get accused of not taking scripture literally when you do, but what you say about the whole world meaning Israel strikes me as not taking it literally. But if you weren’t one of those men, disregard this post.

oops sorry, I quoted myself rather than Marty. Lol.