22 major reasons to abandon the Premil doctrine

[Timtofly]

Zechariah 14:1 declares, “Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.”

There are strong grounds for relating this to the great victory that was wrought through Christ’s sinless life, His atoning death and His victorious resurrection. In keeping with the consistent pattern of the book of Zechariah this would seem to be a first Advent passage. It describes the benefits or “spoil” of which He “divided in the midst” of His Church. Christ rescued many from the firm grip of Satan. The devil was stripped of his influence in the lives of millions of sinners. The spoil in Scripture normally referred to the trophies or reward of victory. This must surely refer to the elect that Christ secured through His comprehensive earthly mission.

1 Chronicles 26:27 tells us: “Out of the spoils won in battles did they dedicate to maintain the house of the LORD.”

Are we not the Lord’s spoil from the enemy’s territory? Whilst the Old Testament temple was literal and physical and was so suitably adorned after battle, the New Testament temple is living and spiritual. We are now the spoil of battle – taken from the devil’s dark domain through the shed blood of Jesus at the cross.

Isaiah 53:10-12 confirms this is speaking of Calvary, when he prophesied of Christ’s first Advent and especially Calvary, “it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.”

Here we have further confirmation linking the securing of the spoil with the accomplishment of His redemptive work. His redeeming of the elect is presented here as evidence that He had divided the spoil. It reads: “he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death.”

Isaiah 9:2-6 says of the Gospel going out during the intra-Advent period, and the authority and blessings that now is now bestowed in Gentiles through the victory wrought at Cavalry: “The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined. Thou hast multiplied the nation, and not increased the they joy before thee according to the joy in harvest, and as men rejoice when they divide the spoil. For thou hast broken the yoke of his burden, and the staff of his shoulder, the rod of his oppressor, as in the day of Midian. For every battle of the warrior is with confused noise, and garments rolled in blood; but this shall be with burning and fuel of fire. For unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called wonderful, counsellor, the mighty God, the everlasting father, the prince of peace.”

The spiritual light enveloping the darkened Gentiles through the earthly ministry Of Christ is here associated with the dividing of the spoil. This would seem to support the idea that the spoil is those who were being liberated from the enemy’s prison. Countless devotees of Satan would be released through the victorious advance of the Gospel through the once-deceived nations (ethnos).

Christ confirms the meaning of these Old Testament prophecies in Luke 11, when He alludes to Zechariah 14, whilst speaking of His own assault upon Satan and his dark kingdom. Jesus said, “if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you. When a strong man (Satan) armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace: But when a stronger than he shall come upon him, and overcome him (namely Jesus), he taketh from him all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils” (Luke 11:20-22).

This is speaking of Christ’s victory over Satan through His victorious life, death and resurrection and the great “spoil” which He “divided in the midst” of His Church. Christ’ earthly ministry and the introduction of the kingdom of heaven on earth began heaven’s great assault upon Satan and his kingdom. This short period saw the spoiling of the devil’s goods and the disarming of devil’s enormous remit of influence. At every point Satan was decisively defeated on his own territory. The victory was finally secured with Christ’s death, burial and resurrection. This opened up the Gospel opportunity to the Gentiles. Jesus also said in Mark 3:27 “No man can enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he will first bind the strong man; and then he will spoil his house.”

Calvary was the place where Satan was bound. This resulted in the spoiling of his goods, the liberating of the prisoner and the enlightenment of the darkened nations. The territory that Satan once exclusively controlled has now been massively invaded by the Lord's subjects and His Kingdom. Those that were once in total darkness can now see. Every enemy of heaven has been finally and completely defeated. All we are therefore waiting for is for the final put down. This occurs at the second coming. Colossians 2:14 explains how Calvary saw the “blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.”

The phrase having spoiled is taken from the Greek word apekduomai meaning divested or disarmed. Christ disarmed the demonic realm during His ministry and particularly through the finished work of the Cross. Since Calvary, Satan’s kingdom has been restricted from their previous unchallenged global control – Christ “triumphing over them in it.” New King James Version renders it, “Having disarmed principalities and powers, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it.” Satan was exposed time after time as Christ and His disciples defeated the minions of hell with the authority of heaven. The Gospel was now free to invade the once-darkened Gentile nations. Not that every single Gentile would believe, but that the nations would now be free to receive the Gospel.

Because of verses 4-6

"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. 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. And it shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear, nor dark:"

The Day of the Lord comes as a thief in the night at the Second Coming. This is what Zechariah 14 is proclaiming.

I don't know any pre-mill who denies the change the Cross brought. They are accused of being dispensational. Satan was never given free reign ever, so this curtailing by you seems overblown for some particular reason yet you obviously don't want to be labeled dispensational.

Neither Israel nor the church have been great at being the light of the world, and some periods have been worse than other periods. Yet when Christ the King is on earth, it is like the difference between night and day. So there is no point, even if what you present is the truth, that will prevent the Day of the Lord being the next major event, and it will last 1,000 years.

 

[WPM]

Because of verses 4-6

"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. 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. And it shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear, nor dark:"

The Day of the Lord comes as a thief in the night at the Second Coming. This is what Zechariah 14 is proclaiming.

I don't know any pre-mill who denies the change the Cross brought. They are accused of being dispensational. Satan was never given free reign ever, so this curtailing by you seems overblown for some particular reason yet you obviously don't want to be labeled dispensational.

Neither Israel nor the church have been great at being the light of the world, and some periods have been worse than other periods. Yet when Christ the King is on earth, it is like the difference between night and day. So there is no point, even if what you present is the truth, that will prevent the Day of the Lord being the next major event, and it will last 1,000 years.

Once again, you avoid every point and the biblical evidence. This is a typical Premil response. I refer you back.

 

[Truth7t7]

Yet when Christ the King is on earth, it is like the difference between night and day. So there is no point, even if what you present is the truth, that will prevent the Day of the Lord being the next major event, and it will last 1,000 years.

Many claim Jesus will literally return and rule "On This Earth" In A Millennium this being false in deception

Jesus warned his followers against this teaching, Jesus wont be found anywhere upon this earth as many claim

The Antichrist will be in Jerusalem, claiming to be Messiah Returned, "Beware"!

"Believe It Not" "Go Not Forth"

Matthew 24:23-27KJV
23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
25 Behold, I have told you before.
26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Revelation 13:13-14KJV
13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.

Revelation 19:20KJV
20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

 

[CadyandZoe]

There you go again: more false charges. You cannot seem to help your self. That is your MO. This is my study, as are all my posts. You just have no answer to it.

You say you do not "appreciate it when I do this." Do what? Present hard facts that refute Premil. No wonder: it exposes your claims.

That is one way to duck around post after post. These type of tactics are why so many are abandoning Premil in droves.

Finally, a question. I do not appreciate it when you cut-and-paste an answer that does NOT speak to the objection I raised. You were critical of my short answers earlier and never once asked me why my answers were short. I was giving short answers because you were giving me cut-and-paste answers as if to say, "ASKED AND ANSWERED", which was a lie. You did the same thing to @Timtofly

You are using projection WPM, accusing others of the very thing you are doing. I am not the one ducking around. You asked for OT examples. I presented Zechariah 14 in order to show that the climactic theory is incorrect. Your cut-and-paste answers are what the military used to call "baffling with BS." The tactic is to overwhelm the opponent with so much superfluous information that 1) they give up, and 2) the objection remains unanswered.

Zechariah 14 speaks about the coming of the Lord to rule over the entire earth. Absent is a big woosh, heard when the world is destroyed. In fact, the defeated nations come year-to-year to Jerusalem to celebrate the feast of booths. The earth is not destroyed the moment when the Messiah comes to earth. This fact is established in Zechariah 14. No climatic woosh at the coming of the Lord.

Now, put this fact next to 2 Peter 3:10. Knowing that the coming of the Messiah is NOT attended by the big woosh, it seems reasonable to me that the Day of the Lord is a much longer time span, which includes the big woosh at the end.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Once again, you avoid every point and the biblical evidence. This is a typical Premil response. I refer you back.

WPM, We ignore your points and your verses because they are NOT relevant to the issue at hand. As I pointed out in my previous post, you need to deal with the objection at hand.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Its my opinion the very clear and simple scripture seen blow is denied

The river of life is flowing in Zechariah 14:8, it's eternal, in the eternal kingdom :)

Zechariah 14:8KJV
8 And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.

Revelation 22:1KJV
And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.

I'm not denying either scripture. I simply don't think these are talking about the same situation or occasion. I take note of Zechariah's word that the nations will go up to Jerusalem to celebrate the feast of booths. By contrast, if my interpretation of Revelation 21-22 is correct, all of his holy ones will live together in a large city, which makes travel unnecessary. No one will need to "go up" to tabernacle with the Lord, because the New Jerusalem will witness a permanent state of tabernacle.

 

[CadyandZoe]

There is no doubt, the phrase “the day of the Lord” normally relates to the second coming in Scripture, but Zechariah 14:1 does not state that in the original. We cannot therefore, with any certainty, insist upon the fact that this verse is referring to the day of the Lord.

While I might agree with your observation concerning the wording of the text, the meaning and the significance of the text is understood from the paragraph wherein it is found.

Whilst the wording of Zechariah 14:1 doesn't prevent it referring to the second coming of the Lord Jesus, the phrase ‘a day is coming for the Lord’ and ‘the day of the Lord’ are definitely

not synonymous. It is therefore reasonable for us to question Premils identification of it with the second coming of the Lord and to consider the possibility that it relates to Christ’s first advent.

One's interpretation of a particular passage should not remain focused on a particular phrase or stay parked on the first verse. One should continue to read, study and meditate on the entire chapter and sometimes, the larger context also. In fact, Zechariah's presentation of this situation and circumstance begins in chapter 12 and includes chapter 13 also. These three chapters are all of one piece.

Nonetheless, if we are looking for the answer you raised, whether Zachariah speaks of the First Advent or the Second, one can ask whether the Mount of Olives split in half when Jesus set foot there. The answer is obviously no.

 

[Truther]

Close isn't sufficient. If they're not 100% pure like your KJV, they don't qualify.

So no one before your KJV has gone to heaven, because there was no 100% pure word of God.

This is not about heaven or hell if you don't have or read a certain translation.

The trouble is with the one that misrepresents God's word.

That entails the translator.

Folks can be saved with no Bible as long as their instructor tells them the truth.

 

[Truther]

You don't know which couple.

Geneva and Bishops were used.

More...Printed English Bibles Before the King James Version

 

[WPM]

Finally, a question. I do not appreciate it when you cut-and-paste an answer that does NOT speak to the objection I raised. You were critical of my short answers earlier and never once asked me why my answers were short. I was giving short answers because you were giving me cut-and-paste answers as if to say, "ASKED AND ANSWERED", which was a lie. You did the same thing to @Timtofly

You are using projection WPM, accusing others of the very thing you are doing. I am not the one ducking around. You asked for OT examples. I presented Zechariah 14 in order to show that the climactic theory is incorrect. Your cut-and-paste answers are what the military used to call "baffling with BS." The tactic is to overwhelm the opponent with so much superfluous information that 1) they give up, and 2) the objection remains unanswered.

Zechariah 14 speaks about the coming of the Lord to rule over the entire earth. Absent is a big woosh, heard when the world is destroyed. In fact, the defeated nations come year-to-year to Jerusalem to celebrate the feast of booths. The earth is not destroyed the moment when the Messiah comes to earth. This fact is established in Zechariah 14. No climatic woosh at the coming of the Lord.

Now, put this fact next to 2 Peter 3:10. Knowing that the coming of the Messiah is NOT attended by the big woosh, it seems reasonable to me that the Day of the Lord is a much longer time span, which includes the big woosh at the end.

• 2 Peter 3:10 relates to the second coming and is climactic.
• Zechariah 14 relates to the First Advent, and also refers to AD70, and the awful result of Israel's rejection of Christ.

What is more, the details pertaining to these two different events have no correlation whatsoever. This is a classic case of forcing a square peg into a round hole. That is what Premil produces. It is so wrong! These texts are saying two completely opposite things. How you can present this with a serious face is beyond my comprehension. I see no objectivity here.

1. Where is the second coming in Zechariah 14?
2. Where in Zechariah 14 is a thousand years mentioned?
3. Where in Zechariah 14 is the new earth mentioned?
4. Where in Zechariah 14 are the glorified saints mentioned?
5. Where in Zechariah 14 is Jesus shown to be on earth?
6. Where in Zechariah 14 is the binding of Satan?
7. Where in Zechariah 14 are the 2 resurrections/judgments?
8. Where in Zechariah 14 is the release of Satan and an unparalleled global uprising 1,000 years after the second coming?

Premils will not answer these simple questions because they relate to different periods and events.

 

[WPM]

WPM, We ignore your points and your verses because they are NOT relevant to the issue at hand. As I pointed out in my previous post, you need to deal with the objection at hand.

This is just a smokescreen to justify your avoidance.

 

[WPM]

While I might agree with your observation concerning the wording of the text, the meaning and the significance of the text is understood from the paragraph wherein it is found.



One's interpretation of a particular passage should not remain focused on a particular phrase or stay parked on the first verse. One should continue to read, study and meditate on the entire chapter and sometimes, the larger context also. In fact, Zechariah's presentation of this situation and circumstance begins in chapter 12 and includes chapter 13 also. These three chapters are all of one piece.

Nonetheless, if we are looking for the answer you raised, whether Zachariah speaks of the First Advent or the Second, one can ask whether the Mount of Olives split in half when Jesus set foot there. The answer is obviously no.

I believe there are multiple reasons to reject your thesis. Let me give some of the main ones.

(1) Please remember, this is Premil's No 2 proof-text and, yet, they cannot give us any compelling or reasonable correlation between Zechariah 14 and Revelation 20. There is therefore not the slightest support for what Premils attribute to either Zechariah 14 and Revelation 2. Premils typically skip around any request to identify the main Premil events in Zechariah 14. The question is: where does Zechariah 14 make the remotest allusion to any of the detail described at the end of Revelation 20 and therefore the millennium, including the gathering of Gog and Magog to fight the camp of the saints, the destruction of the wicked in total, the destruction of the old earth and heavens and the replacement with the new, the resurrection of the wicked and “Great White Throne Judgement of sinners” 1,000 years after the judgement of the righteous?

Until you do that we have the right to dismiss your claims.

(2) With an obscure passage like Zechariah 14, it is incumbent upon all of us to interpret it in the light of the clearer and more-detailed NT, especially non-symbolic passages.

(3) A helpful pointer that should aid the open-minded reader dissect the book of Zechariah is the phrase “in that day.” It connects the whole book together. It is mentioned 20 times in this Old Testament prophecy. It is extremely notable that reference after reference to “in that day” actually refers to the 1st Advent. Zechariah 14 also describes AD 70 and the spread of the Gospel to the darkened nations. The frequent usage of this statement throughout the whole book reveals a harmonious theme, proves its unity and shows how it looked forward to “that day” when the Messiah would finally appear.

(4) I believe Amils are strong in interpreting Scripture with Scripture, especially if we are dealing with a challenging OT passage. The gospels quote from Zechariah, explaining how it explicitly relates to the First Advent and specifically the cross.

 

[Truther]

• 2 Peter 3:10 relates to the second coming and is climactic.
• Zechariah 14 relates to the First Advent, and also refers to AD70, and the awful result of Israel's rejection of Christ.

What is more, the details pertaining to these two different events have no correlation whatsoever. This is a classic case of forcing a square peg into a round hole. That is what Premil produces. It is so wrong! These texts are saying two completely opposite things. How you can present this with a serious face is beyond my comprehension. I see no objectivity here.

1. Where is the second coming in Zechariah 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.

 

[CadyandZoe]

• 2 Peter 3:10 relates to the second coming and is climactic.
• Zechariah 14 relates to the First Advent, and also refers to AD70, and the awful result of Israel's rejection of Christ.

What is more, the details pertaining to these two different events have no correlation whatsoever. This is a classic case of forcing a square peg into a round hole. That is what Premil produces. It is so wrong! These texts are saying two completely opposite things. How you can present this with a serious face is beyond my comprehension. I see no objectivity here.

1. Where is the second coming in Zechariah 14?
2. Where in Zechariah 14 is a thousand years mentioned?
3. Where in Zechariah 14 is the new earth mentioned?
4. Where in Zechariah 14 are the glorified saints mentioned?
5. Where in Zechariah 14 is Jesus shown to be on earth?
6. Where in Zechariah 14 is the binding of Satan?
7. Where in Zechariah 14 are the 2 resurrections/judgments?
8. Where in Zechariah 14 is the release of Satan and an unparalleled global uprising 1,000 years after the second coming?

Premils will not answer these simple questions because they relate to different periods and events.

Your questions are ridiculous. It represents an unsophisticated understanding of the prophetic witness, suggesting that each prophet on every occasion must give all the details. This is not true at all.

 

[CadyandZoe]

This is just a smokescreen to justify your avoidance.

Projection. You accuse others of the very thing you are doing. You are avoiding the question.

 

[CadyandZoe]

I believe there are multiple reasons to reject your thesis. Let me give some of the main ones.

(1) Please remember, this is Premil's No 2 proof-text and, yet, they cannot give us any compelling or reasonable correlation between Zechariah 14 and Revelation 20.

I don't agree with this premise. One should not expect every prophet and every prophetic word to give all the details, using the same wording or vocabulary.

(2) With an obscure passage like Zechariah 14, it is incumbent upon all of us to interpret it in the light of the clearer and more-detailed NT, especially non-symbolic passages.

There is nothing obscure or unclear about Zechariah 14.

(3) A helpful pointer that should aid the open-minded reader dissect the book of Zechariah is the phrase “in that day.” It connects the whole book together. It is mentioned 20 times in this Old Testament prophecy. It is extremely notable that reference after reference to “in that day” actually refers to the 1st Advent.

Unproven and highly unlikely. Anytime the phrase "in that day" is used by the author, the author expects his readers to understand the meaning from the immediate context. "What day? The day I just mentioned." The premise that an expression has the same meaning every time it is used is bogus and harmful.

Zechariah 14 also describes AD 70 and the spread of the Gospel to the darkened nations. The frequent usage of this statement throughout the whole book reveals a harmonious theme, proves its unity and shows how it looked forward to “that day” when the Messiah would finally appear.

Wrong direction. When the gospel is spread, it is delivered by apostles and itinerant preaches who go out to the nations where they live. Zechariah 14 describes nations that "go up" to Jerusalem instead.

(4) I believe Amils are strong in interpreting Scripture with Scripture, especially if we are dealing with a challenging OT passage. The gospels quote from Zechariah, explaining how it explicitly relates to the First Advent and specifically the cross.

Interpreting scripture with scripture is a faulty, unreliable, hermeneutic, leading to all sorts of erroneous doctrines. I would never recommend such a worthless pursuit.

 

[Truther]

Zech 14 is Rev 19. Same scene. They both describe the 2nd coming of Christ with the saints. Rev 19 describes the destruction of antichrist and false prophet, inculding 1st resurrection scene and Zech 14 further describes the takeover of the world's inhabitants by Jesus Christ, even forming one belief system of God.

 

[WPM]

Your questions are ridiculous. It represents an unsophisticated understanding of the prophetic witness, suggesting that each prophet on every occasion must give all the details. This is not true at all.

Not so. You arbitrarily force text after text into your so-called future millennium regardless of the wording of the inspired text, context and consistent meaning. Rev 20 is a dumping ground for all types of events and texts that are totally unrelated. Your failure to corroborate any Premil tenet in Zech 14 is damning.

 

[WPM]

Projection. You accuse others of the very thing you are doing. You are avoiding the question.

This is why it is impossible to engage with you. Name calling and avoidance are your MO. Sad!

 

[WPM]

I don't agree with this premise. One should not expect every prophet and every prophetic word to give all the details, using the same wording or vocabulary.

Hello! But none of them describe what you attribute to Rev 20. That is because it is false teaching.

There is nothing obscure or unclear about Zechariah 14.

Unproven and highly unlikely. Anytime the phrase "in that day" is used by the author, the author expects his readers to understand the meaning from the immediate context. "What day? The day I just mentioned." The premise that an expression has the same meaning every time it is used is bogus and harmful.

First of all, Zechariah 14 makes absolutely no allusion to a future 1,000 years after the second coming, or does Zechariah 14 compare with any of the detail outlined in Revelation 20 (start, middle or finish). The detail occurring at the end of Revelation 20 only compares with the many passages relating to Christ’s one final future all-consummating Second Advent – there we see the destruction of every enemy of Christ and righteousness.

Second, as you study the New Testament you see that the wicked are all destroyed when Jesus comes, this disallows the placing of this after the second coming. There will be no mortals or no sinners to populate the new earth, what is more, they are prohibited from inheriting it (Matthew 25:34 &25:46, 1 Corinthians 6:9, and 1 Corinthians 15:50).

Thirdly, the keeping of the Judaic sacrificial system that Premils take from this passage has been eternally abolished (see Galatians 4:9-10, Colossians 2:14, 16, 20-22 ). Many of the place names in Jerusalem don't exist anymore. Localized worship in a brick temple in Jerusalem has gone forever. We now worship God in spirit and in truth John 4:21).

Wrong direction. When the gospel is spread, it is delivered by apostles and itinerant preaches who go out to the nations where they live. Zechariah 14 describes nations that "go up" to Jerusalem instead.

AD 70 is referenced in Zechariah 13 and 14 but generally it is a symbolic looking at Christ's ministry. There are a mixture of events relating to the life and ministry of Christ, Jerusalem's judgment (AD 70), the going out of the Gospel to the Gentiles. Notwithstanding, these are all tied together in Christ – and cannot be divorced one from another. Jerusalem was destroyed because of their rejection of Christ. The Gentiles came against the city, but the Gospel in turn went out among the Gentiles with great success.

Interpreting scripture with scripture is a faulty, unreliable, hermeneutic, leading to all sorts of erroneous doctrines. I would never recommend such a worthless pursuit.

This is one of the most alarming (and reprehensible) statements I have ever read from "a Christian" on an online discussion forum. It is scandalous, especially purporting to come from a Pastor. Shame on you for saying this! This is an elementary core hermeneutic principle that you trash. Notwithstanding, this uncovers what all Amils already know about your school of thought - Premil enjoys no biblical support. You just wing it! This statement embodies exactly what Premillennialism is. Your hermeneutics are all over the place. They are inconsistent and contradictory. You make it up as you go. That is why you believe what you do. Amillennialists have a different approach. They work from the core principle of supporting Scripture with Scripture.

Imposing your bias school of thought on a Scripture text is wrong. That is private interpretation. It should be supported by other clear and repeated Scriptures. After all, there is a harmony to all truth. Scripture does not contradict Scripture. If we employ this interpretive rule, I believe, one cannot but arrive at any other conclusion than the coming of Christ is climactic and ushers in eternity.

2 Corinthians 13:1 highlights a divine evidential imperative, which if ignored will bring Bible students into all forms of false teaching. It states, “In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.”

This important principle was decreed of God throughout the Old Testament in order to corroborate evidence in the case of witnesses - to prove matters of evidence. It is also presented in the New Testament time as the criteria for establishing truth. 1 Corinthians 2:13 says, “the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.”

God expects us to compare Scripture with Scripture – the spiritual with the spiritual. Scripture is the supreme and absolute means for interpreting other Scripture.