22 major reasons to abandon the Premil doctrine

[Spiritual Israelite]

As you have been shown several times, Revelation 20:6 is a future literal event in the resurrection of the just

How can you be an Amil and say this? Those who have part in the first resurrection reign with Christ during the thousand years, so if the first resurrection didn't happen until the future then the thousand years would have to occur afterwards as Premils believe.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

That is all you can do: reference passages. You cannot quote or exegete them because to do so would expose your false teaching.

Yep. That's what he does. He thinks it's enough to just reference chapters and verses, but he does nothing to show how those verses supposedly support his doctrine. Anyone can just list verses, but that means nothing if you can't show how they support your doctrine.

 

[WPM]

How can you be an Amil and say this? Those who have part in the first resurrection reign with Christ during the thousand years, so if the first resurrection didn't happen until the future then the thousand years would have to occur afterwards as Premils believe.

He genuinely does not understand the different views. He is all over the place. Press him on any of his quasi-Premil beliefs and he is ducking and diving.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Yes scripture teaches the (First Resurrection) takes place when the thousand years are finished a future event unfulfilled

Revelation 20:5-6KJV
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

Rev 20:5 is not saying that the first resurrection occurs when the thousand years are finished. The first sentence in verse 5 is a parenthetical statement and has nothing to do with the first resurrection. Instead, it has to do with the resurrection of "the rest of the dead". The rest of the dead do not have part in the first resurrection.

Revelation 20:5 NIV (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection.

The NIV translators understood this. When it says "this is the first resurrection" it's referring back to verse 4 and indicating that the ones mentioned there are the ones who have part in the first resurrection.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

He genuinely does not understand the different views. He is all over the place. Press him on any of his quasi-Premil beliefs and he is ducking and diving.

Agree. His doctrine is completely messed up because it mixes Premil and Amil beliefs together into a unique doctrine all his own.

 

[Truth7t7]

You are sacred to address these many Scriptures because they expose your mentor Scofield.

You can repeat your claim of (Spiritual Resurrection) a thousand times, it's not found in scripture, it's "Your" private interpretation, it's that simple

Jesus Is The Lord

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You can repeat your claim of (Spiritual Resurrection) a thousand times, it's not found in scripture, it's "Your" private interpretation, it's that simple

Jesus Is The Lord

You have nothing to say. You can't be taken seriously at all. You say the first resurrection is future. That would mean the thousand years would have to be future as well because the text indicates that those who have part in the first resurrection reign with Christ for a thousand years, after which Satan's little season occurs. That would all have to occur in the future if the first resurrection is future. So, you're trying to be an Amil and a Premil at the same time. That doesn't work.

 

[WPM]

You can repeat your claim of (Spiritual Resurrection) a thousand times, it's not found in scripture, it's "Your" private interpretation, it's that simple

Jesus Is The Lord

Mr Schofield: your edifice has fallen.

 

[Truth7t7]

Rev 20:5 is not saying that the first resurrection occurs when the thousand years are finished. The first sentence in verse 5 is a parenthetical statement and has nothing to do with the first resurrection. Instead, it has to do with the resurrection of "the rest of the dead". The rest of the dead do not have part in the first resurrection.

Revelation 20:5 NIV (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection.

The NIV translators understood this. When it says "this is the first resurrection" it's referring back to verse 4 and indicating that the ones mentioned there are the ones who have part in the first resurrection.

The scripture below speaks of dead living again, it states when it happens (Thousand Years Finished) and it identifies it as (The First Resurrection)

The KJV translators did a fantastic job below, 412 years and going strong, you aren't going to change this biblical truth before my eyes

Revelation 20:5-6KJV
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

 

[Truth7t7]

You have nothing to say. You can't be taken seriously at all. You say the first resurrection is future. That would mean the thousand years would have to be future as well because the text indicates that those who have part in the first resurrection reign with Christ for a thousand years, after which Satan's little season occurs. That would all have to occur in the future if the first resurrection is future. So, you're trying to be an Amil and a Premil at the same time. That doesn't work.

The words (Thousand Years) does nothing more than teach, that seen in Revelation 20:4-6 is in the Lord's one day is a thousand years "no literal earthly time it's God's eternal"

 

[Truth7t7]

How can you be an Amil and say this? Those who have part in the first resurrection reign with Christ during the thousand years, so if the first resurrection didn't happen until the future then the thousand years would have to occur afterwards as Premils believe.

Rev 20:4 describes the tribulation saints that have been killed, and they enter into the Lord's one day is a thousand years "Eternal" no literal earthly time

Revelation 20:5 shows all the rest of the dead righteous, that arent mentioned as coming out of the future 3.5 year great tribulation

Revelation 20:6 shows all the dead in Christ ruling in the one day is a thousand years, waiting for the future second coming and (First Resurrectiin)

Simple, Clear, Before Your Eyes

Jesus Is The Lord

Revelation 20:4-6KJV
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

 

[Truther]

So, you have moved unto Phase 2 of the Premil process - name-calling and pettiness. Phase 1 is avoidance. Phase 3 is running. Get it off your chest and out of your system.

Avoid literal verses or avoid redefining them as metaphors?

 

[Truther]

Are you even thinking about this? Jesus is a firstfruit in the sense of being the first to rise from the dead unto bodily immortality. The firstfruits in James 1 were the Jewish believers that James was writing to. They were the firstfruits in the sense of being the first Christians.

So, are there Jewish, sub-firstfruits under the firstfuits Jesus?

 

[Truth7t7]

Agree. His doctrine is completely messed up because it mixes Premil and Amil beliefs together into a unique doctrine all his own.

1.) There will be a future AOD, the future human man (The Bad Guy) will make abomination and desolation until the future consummation (The End)

2.) Yes the (Little Horn) (Man Of Sin) (The Beast) represents this very same future literal human man (The Bad Guy)

3.) There will be a literal future great tribulation that starts when (The Bad Guy) is revealed to the world as God Messiah on this earth

4.) The (Two Witnesses) will be literal prophets returned, they will bring literal plagues upon this literal world, they will die and lay physically in a literal street in Jerusalem

5.) Immediately after the future great tribulation, Jesus returns in fire and final judgment as the consummation takes place (The End)

 

[Truther]

LOL. Only a few signs? Wow. This is the problem with Premils. They think most of the book of Revelation is literal with a little bit of signs/symbolism thrown in, but the reality is that it's mostly filled with signs/symbols with some literal text mixed in.

I choose to keep the verses literal and understand the signs as descriptions in deeper meanings.

You choose to read them and discard meanings as metaphors.


This is super simple....

12 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars (NATIONAL ISRAEL)

2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads(SATAN).

4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven(1/3RD OF THE ANGELS), and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon(SATAN) stood before the woman(ISRAEL) which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.

5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron(JESUS): and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne...


Now what is so hard about understanding these SIGNS?

 

[WPM]

Avoid literal verses or avoid redefining them as metaphors?

Your posts are totally bereft of actual biblical substance. There is just a lot of fizz and bubble. Lets see what literal Scripture you have for your opinion of Revelation 20.

1. Where is a millennium mentioned anywhere else in Scripture?
2. Where are your 2 resurrection days separated by a thousand years mentioned anywhere else in Scripture?
3. Where are your 2 judgment days separated by a thousand years mentioned anywhere else in Scripture?
4. Where is an earthly reign of Christ mentioned anywhere else in Scripture?
5. Where is the binding of Satan and the release of Satan and an uprising 1,000 years later to overwhelm your MK mentioned in any of them?

I will not hold my breath. You promote a non-corroborative theory.

 

[Truther]

Good grief. Are you for real? Do you really want to waste time with semantics? I don't and I'm not going to. I don't care what you want to call it. They can be considered metaphors or symbols. Figurative text. Whatever you want to call it. The point is that it's not literal.

Here is one definition of the word metaphor:

a thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else, especially something abstract.

This is abstract to you?...

5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

 

[WPM]

1.) There will be a future AOD, the future human bad guy will make abomination and desolation until the future consummation (The End)

2.) Yes the (Little Horn) (Man Of Sin) (The Beast) represents this very same future literal human man

3.) There will be a literal future great tribulation that starts when (The Bad Guy) is revealed to the world as God Messiah on this earth

4.) The (Two Witnesses) will be literal prophets returned, they will bring literal plagues upon this literal world, they will die and lay in a literal street in Jerusalem

5.) Immediately after the future great tribulation, Jesus returns in fire and final judgment as the consummation take place (The End)

Every argument you espouse exists because you cannot address the multiple contradictions in it. That is your MO. That is what Scofield doctrine produces.

• The beast has been around for over 2000 years (Revelation 17:8, Revelation 17:11-13, 1 John 2:18-23, 1 John 4:1-3, 5-6, 2 John 1:7, and 2 Thessalonians 2:3-13). No man has lived that long on earth. Only a wicked spirit, an evil empire or a nefarious system could possibly fulfil that portrayal.
• How can a literal human being be literally “in them that perish” (2 Thessalonians 2:10)? This would suggest him being in every single unsaved person. Only a spirit can do that.
• The beast carries the allegiance of all the non-elect. No single human being has or ever or will possess that wholesale allegiance. What possibly human is going to get the allegiance of all false religious, all carnal political parties, every single tribe, ethnic group, culture and nation? Only a broader worldly spirit enjoys all the loyalty of the wicked.
• There is nowhere in Scripture that shows human beings in the abyss (Luke 8:31, Romans 10:7, Revelation 9:1, 2, 11, 11:7, 17:8, and 20:1, 3). Any time it is mentioned, it is shown to be the exclusive abode of Satan and his demons.
• What man possesses 7 heads? These describe 7 wicked kingdoms in history with 7 kings ruling over them. No man can possibly satisfy that.
• According to the original Greek, and in contrast to what many people teach, 666 is the number of “man,” not the number of “a man.”
• Finally, what human being in history lives in, and rises up out of, the sea at the end? Such an idea is nonsensical.

 

[Truther]

Yeah, I see that. What was your point in posting it?


No. That is clearly not the case. How in the world can you think that a book that talks about things like a lamb standing amongst seven golden lampstands, a dragon and a beast who both have seven heads and ten horns, a woman who is also a great city and sits on a beast with seven heads and ten horns on many waters is mostly literal?

This will help my Amil friend...


13 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.(THE ANTICHRIST RISING FROM THE NATIONS OF THE WORLD)

2 And the beast(ANTICHRIST) which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion(CUNNING/POWERFUL PERSON) : and the dragon(SATAN) gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority(AS WORLD RULER).

3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.(PERFOMED A MIRACLE)

4 And they worshipped the dragon(SATAN) which gave power unto the beast(ANTICHRIST) : and they worshipped the beast(ANTICHRIST), saying, Who is like unto the beast(ANTICHRIST)? who is able to make war with him(MALE HUMAN PERSON)?


Amils are baffled by this.

New converts can figure this out their first week of Bible reading.

 

[Truther]

Your posts are totally bereft of actual biblical substance. There is just a lot of fizz and bubble. Lets see what literal Scripture you have for your opinion of Revelation 20.

1. Where is a millennium mentioned anywhere else in Scripture?
2. Where are your 2 resurrection days separated by a thousand years mentioned anywhere else in Scripture?
3. Where are your 2 judgment days separated by a thousand years mentioned anywhere else in Scripture?
4. Where is an earthly reign of Christ mentioned anywhere else in Scripture?
5. Where is the binding of Satan and the release of Satan and an uprising 1,000 years later to overwhelm your MK mentioned in any of them?

I will not hold my breath. You promote a non-corroborative theory.

1: Rev 20

2: Rev 20(I noticed you already knew answer 1)

3: Rev 19-20

4: Zech 14, Isaiah 1 Cor 15 etc.

5: Rev 20.

I thought you read these chapters?

Those are the easiest questions ever asked.