22 major reasons to abandon the Premil doctrine

  • 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
Not open for further replies.

CadyandZoe

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2020
7,693
2,630
113
Phoenix
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Porphyry is another heretic who promoted the Premillennial doctrine. He was an enemy of orthodox Christianity and held views that were in conflict with the more-moderate classic early Chiliasm. He was another Judaizer who tried to foist old covenant practices upon New Testament Christianity. He also promoted the full return of the old covenant ceremonial law and festivals.

Jerome strongly refuted him, and exposed his error:

[T]he blasphemer Porphyrius – and who assert that the ceremonies of the old Law should be observed in the Church of Christ by the stock of faithful Israel, those should also look forward to a golden Jerusalem for 1000 years, that they may offer sacrifices and be circumcised, that they may sit on the Sabbath, sleep, become sated, drunk, and to rise to frolic, their amusement being offensive to God (Commentary to Isaiah, Chapter XXIV).​

Jerome was not painting all Chiliasts with the same brush. Quite the opposite! He was specifically exposing this early heretical Premillennialist who advocated the full restoration of the old covenant arrangement in a future thousand years, including the pointless slaughter of countless innocent animals during that period. This was not an opinion that orthodox Chiliasts held, taught or accepted anywhere throughout the early Church.

Apollinarius took up the ancient Premillennial baton from these early heretics. Notably, he too was a prominent heretic who was strongly opposed and renounced by the universal Church of his day. Very little of what he wrote has been passed down to us. Most of it was destroyed as heretical. Most of what we have comes from his theological opponents who were strong in their renunciations.

Gregory, Bishop of Nyssa said of Apollinarius of Laodicea, that his theology taught:

“the Jewish animal-sacrifices shall be restored” (Dogmatic Treatises, Etc.; Letter XVII – To Eustathia).​

Basil the Great describes what Apollinarius believed

Apollinarius [of Laodicea], who is no less a cause of sorrow to the Churches. With his facility of writing, and a tongue ready to argue on any subject, he has filled the world with his works ... What he writes on theology is not founded on Scripture, but on human reasonings. He has written about the resurrection, from a mythical, or rather Jewish, point of view; urging that we shall return again to the worship of the Law, be circumcised, keep the Sabbath, abstain from meats, offer sacrifices to God, worship in the Temple at Jerusalem, and be altogether turned from Christians into Jews. What could be more ridiculous? Or, rather, what could be more contrary to the doctrines of the Gospel? (Letters and Select Works: Letter 263, 4 - To the Westerns).​

Here is an outline of classic Premillennial teaching. Again, noticeably, this was held by an early heretic who was strongly resisted by the orthodox Christian Church. This was foreign teaching to them in the light of what Christ ushered in through the new covenant. Apollinarius taught that Israel would be restored to her previous old covenant place for preference over all other nations.

Gregory the Theologian also criticized Apollinarius in his letter to Cledonius the Priest Against Apollinarius (Epistle CI. (101), highlighting his Premillennial beliefs.

I would they were even cut off that trouble you, and would reintroduce a second Judaism, and a second circumcision, and a second system of sacrifices. For if this be done, what hinders Christ also being born again to set them aside, and again being betrayed by Judas, and crucified and buried, and rising again, that all may be fulfilled in the same order, like the Greek system of cycles, in which the same revolutions of the stars bring round the same events.​

Jerome targets the theology of the early Premillennial heretics, mentioning Apollinaris in particular in his renunciation:

Dionysius the bishop of the church of Alexandria, wrote a fine book mocking the tale of the millennium, as well as the golden and bejeweled earthly Jerusalem, the restoration of the temple, the blood of sacrifices, the idleness of the sabbath, the injury of circumcision, nuptials, child birth, child-rearing, the delights of feasting, and the servitude of all nations, and once again wars, armies, and triumphs, and the slaughter of the vanquished, and the death of the hundred-year-old sinner. Apollinaris responded to him in two volumes, and he is followed not only by men of his own sect, but also by a great multitude of our own, at least in this matter, so that I already perceive with foreboding that the anger of many will be aroused against me (Commentary to Isaiah, Preface to Book 18).​

For Jerome, the Premillennial scheme was “a tale.” Others would similarly call it “a fable.” The idea of a future age in-between “this age” and “the age to come” was quite fanciful to many of the early Amil writers. When the detail of the heretical Premillennialist heretics were threw into the mix, with their expectation of more ongoing sin, more decay, more sickness, more death, more sin offerings, etc, etc, it was hardly surprising that many found this far-fetched. When you add all the religious actors that populate the millennium and give their feigned allegiance to Christ and then turn on Him when Satan appears 1000 years after the second coming, then you are looking at a doctrine that seems beyond the pale of reality and truth. When they then argued that a future earth will see the mortal wicked interact with the glorified saints for a thousand years then you are looking at a clear non-corroborative doctrine.

In an article Jerome’s Judaizers, Hillel I. Newman argues: “So far as we know, none of these authors maintained … that in the millennial kingdom all would offer sacrifices and keep the sabbath and that all men would be circumcised” (p. 442).

Premil Lyford Paterson Edwards even concedes: “we see the unfortunate fate of Chiliasm in getting mixed up with heresies with which it, as such, had nothing to do. The extraordinary detestation which overtook Apollinaris as arch-heretic par excellence seems to have finally discouraged Chiliasm in the Eastern Church. It was reckoned as a heresy thereafter and though it appears sporadically down to our own day it is of no more interest for our purpose” (The Transformation of Early Christianity from an Eschatological to a Socialized Movement).

The later Jacobite bishop of Dara, in Mesopotamia (Dead: AD 845), John of Dara exposes Apollonarius for his millennialist teaching:

Apollonarius the heretic, with his companions, abandoned the glorious illumination of the living words and became blind to the faith like the Jews. He dared to speak, like the Pharisees, that after the resurrection of the dead, we shall live again for a thousand years in Jerusalem with the Messiah, with bodily pleasures, and childish sacrifices, and earthly libations before him [the Messiah?]. After these things are fulfilled, at that time we shall be taken up into heaven. And he was not shamed by the voice of Paul who said, “The kingdom of God is not of eating or drinking. But of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.” Also in like manner Irenaeus bishop of Lyon in Gaul wandered in these matters, which are in the book of Papias as Eusebius narrates (On the Resurrection of Bodies 2.13).​

John of Dara likens Apollonarius’ Premillennialism to Phariseeism. He rubbishes the idea of Judaic temple ceremonial in Jerusalem for a thousand years in front of the Messiah.
Yawn. Done yet?
 

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
8,622
4,238
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Again. So what? Truth is not decided by chronology or majority rule. Period. Jesus, Paul, the apostles and the prophets wrote inspired scripture and predate the ECF's. The scriptures are our only reliable source of information concerning God's will.

As as general rule, I always ignore the ECF's. They have nothing at all to contribute to my knowledge of doctrine. And I never argue patristics because it is a complete waste of time as many can attest.

Anyone born after 70AD will naturally conclude that God is done with Israel. Anyone born after 1949, won't necessarily have that bias.

That is not true. God has not finished with any nation. But the theocratic favor went with the old covenant. It has gone forever, even though you are trying to resurrect it.
 

CadyandZoe

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2020
7,693
2,630
113
Phoenix
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
That is not true. God has not finished with any nation. But the theocratic favor went with the old covenant. It has gone forever, even though you are trying to resurrect it.
Incorrect. God always keeps his word.
 

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
8,622
4,238
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Incorrect. God always keeps his word.

So, where in the New Testament does it say that the theocratic favor that went with the old covenant will be restored? Where does it say the animal sacrifices will be restored in the future? Can I remind you? We are now in the New Testament time. The old covenant is gone forever.
 

covenantee

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2022
6,407
2,736
113
73
Canada
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Who cares? The truth is not decided by majority rule.

It certainly isn't decided by minority rule.

Everyone who recognizes and understands the faith, vision, and sacrifice of the historical defenders of the true faith, cares.
 

covenantee

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2022
6,407
2,736
113
73
Canada
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Incorrect. God always keeps his word.
God's Word is found in His Old Will and Testament, and in His New Will and Testament.

The owner/testator of a will and testament has the unilateral and exclusive right to change it as he desires.

God has told us that the promises of the former are replaced by the better promises of the latter. (Hebrews 8:6)

Did God have the right to change His Will and Testament?
 

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
8,622
4,238
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Again. So what? Truth is not decided by chronology or majority rule. Period. Jesus, Paul, the apostles and the prophets wrote inspired scripture and predate the ECF's. The scriptures are our only reliable source of information concerning God's will.

As as general rule, I always ignore the ECF's. They have nothing at all to contribute to my knowledge of doctrine. And I never argue patristics because it is a complete waste of time as many can attest.

Anyone born after 70AD will naturally conclude that God is done with Israel. Anyone born after 1949, won't necessarily have that bias.

While we are not led by Church tradition or bound by historic views of a given truth, we should carefully consider what the great Bible scholars over the years have gleaned from their studious in-depth findings.
 

CadyandZoe

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2020
7,693
2,630
113
Phoenix
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So, where in the New Testament does it say that the theocratic favor that went with the old covenant will be restored? Where does it say the animal sacrifices will be restored in the future? Can I remind you? We are now in the New Testament time. The old covenant is gone forever.
I already showed you.
 

CadyandZoe

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2020
7,693
2,630
113
Phoenix
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It certainly isn't decided by minority rule.

Everyone who recognizes and understands the faith, vision, and sacrifice of the historical defenders of the true faith, cares.
Why? I am a man of faith and you don't accept my word for anything. Why would you accept the word of someone living in the fifth century that you don't know? Makes no sense at all to me. There is no such thing as Early Church Fathers. These men were not special; they were like us.
 

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
8,622
4,238
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I already showed you.

No, you have not, and you know it. Time to produce. We know that you have avoided multiple posts here full of much crystal-clear Scripture that forbids your error, but you choose to avoid them. You have to. To acknowledge them would force you to admit you are wrong.

What is more, you have proved yourself not to keep your word. Why would we believe you on any other subject?
 

CadyandZoe

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2020
7,693
2,630
113
Phoenix
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
God's Word is found in His Old Will and Testament, and in His New Will and Testament.

The owner/testator of a will and testament has the unilateral and exclusive right to change it as he desires.

God has told us that the promises of the former are replaced by the better promises of the latter. (Hebrews 8:6)

Did God have the right to change His Will and Testament?
First of all, bear in mind that the epistle is called "to the Hebrews." The subject matter pertains to issues unique to the Hebrew people. Some of the epistle has universal application, but not all of it. Hebrews 8:10, for instance, applies to Israel and hasn't been fulfilled yet.
 

CadyandZoe

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2020
7,693
2,630
113
Phoenix
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
While we are not led by Church tradition or bound by historic views of a given truth, we should carefully consider what the great Bible scholars over the years have gleaned from their studious in-depth findings.
Great Bible scholars are not inspired.
 

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
8,622
4,238
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
First of all, bear in mind that the epistle is called "to the Hebrews." The subject matter pertains to issues unique to the Hebrew people. Some of the epistle has universal application, but not all of it. Hebrews 8:10, for instance, applies to Israel and hasn't been fulfilled yet.

Wow! So, you do not just reject biblical corroboration - which allows you to promote your error, you are now denying the cross of Christ. That is heresy! That explains why you refuse to engage with Amils.
 

CadyandZoe

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2020
7,693
2,630
113
Phoenix
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No, you have not, and you know it. Time to produce. We know that you have avoided multiple posts here full of much crystal-clear Scripture that forbids your error, but you choose to avoid them. You have to. To acknowledge them would force you to admit you are wrong.

What is more, you have proved yourself not to keep your word. Why would we believe you on any other subject?
You must have a short memory.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.