Indisputable proof that the Premillennial theory contradicts Scripture
- Thread starter WPM
- Start date
-
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!
dad
Well-Known Member
dad
Well-Known Member
dad
Well-Known Member
By the next verse it is clear what it is talking about
Zechariah 12:8
On that day the Lord will protect the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the feeblest among them on that day shall be like David, and the house of David shall be like God, like the angel of the Lord , going before them.
Did you think that happened already?
dad
Well-Known Member
dad
Well-Known Member
Death is eliminated when Jesus comes. So will sin and sinners. Let us have a literal word-by-word look at the Hebrew pertaining to Isaiah 65:20.
לֹא־יִֽהְיֶ֨ה מִשָּׁ֜ם עֹ֗וד ע֤וּל יָמִים֙ וְזָקֵ֔ן אֲשֶׁ֥ר
Lo'- yihªyeh mishaam `owd `uwl yaamiym wªzaaqeen 'ªsher
Not be hence more an infant [of] days, an old man after
לֹֽא־יְמַלֵּ֖א אֶת־יָמָ֑יו כִּ֣י הַנַּ֗עַר בֶּן־מֵאָ֤ה שָׁנָה֙ יָמ֔וּת
Lo'- yªmalee''et- yaamaayw Kiy hana`ar ben- mee'aah shaanaah yaamuwt
Not fulfill your days inasmuch a child old an hundred years die
What is this telling us?
The exact same thing, only in different terms.
This is called synonymous parallelism. It is telling us that a child will never become old on the new earth. This line reinforces what has just been said. It confirms the thought of the impending reality of no more death in the eternal state for the righteous. In eternity there will be no more aging or dying. It is not going to be like our corrupt age where infants eventually get old. It will not be like the here-and-now where a man could live to be an old person of a hundred years of age and then die.
This passage is actually saying the opposite to what many think. What this is saying is: there will be no more aging, curse or death on the new earth. Every glorified saints will have come to full maturity in Christ with their new perfect eternal bodies. It is the next line of Isaiah 65:20 that has confused many, because the translators have not interpreted it in a literal word-for-word sense. It is not saying there will be more babies, death and old men. It is saying the opposite to what they are alleging. It is saying that there will be no more aging: children getting old, old people and people dying! It is describing eternity to an Old Testament audience in terms they can grasp.
The new heavens and new earth will indeed be a glorious victorious perfect state where death is unknown. God is saying that the eternal state will actually be free of death for young and old alike. This passage is telling us that there will be no more death on the new earth! The Hebrew word Lo' (Strong’s 3808) means “no” or “not.” The word is a simple negation. The word is found twice in this much-debated new heavens and new earth verse.
Debate in Isaiah 65:20 centers in on the use of the original word yaamuw meaning “die” or “death.” What should we relate it to? Is there indeed “death” on the new earth? Also, should the death be related to the “child” in the second phrase or the “sinner” in the third phrase? What is more, in what way should it read? I must admit, if we are to read it in its most natural way it fits perfectly with the context. So why change it? I believe it should be applied to the “child” as it should agree with the first phrase that is simply a reinforcement of the same truth. It then fits perfectly with the whole overall teaching of the prophet on the perfection and bliss of the eternal state.
No (Lo') longer will an infant become like an old man,
No (Lo') longer will a child reach one hundred and die.
This is Old Testament verbiage that describes eternity to the Old Testament listener. It is telling us: no one is going to age! This relates to the new heaven and new earth not some supposed future millennium – that will never happen.
The original Hebrew does not give us any reason to attribute death to the “child” in this second line. In fact, it does not fit the whole context which is evidently speaking of the removal of aging and death on the new earth. Interpreting it as we have, seems to (1) match the original, (2) make sense to its context, and (3) taps into the thrust of what the prophet was trying to relay. We need to remind ourselves that the whole idea here is describing the incredible eternal deliverance from the curse of corruption and the joy that “the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind” on the “new earth.”
dad
Well-Known Member
No. It is called believe that a man will be called a child if he dies at a hundred years old or not. It is belief or unbelief. They are neither synonymous nor parallel.
No it says he dies. It even says his age and sex
Ever met a child that is 100 years old?
No it describes a man dying and being considered almost a child at 100
The child aged 100 years. Get over it
No, you simply try to redefine death and dying to mean 'living forever'! Absurd unbelief.
Interlinear Search for 'Isaiah 65:20' - NAS with the BHS and NA26 - StudyLight.org
Interliner Search for 'Isaiah 65:20' within 'New American Standard Bible' with the 'Biblia Hebrica Stuttgartensia (1967/77)' and 'Nestle-Aland 26' on StudyLight.org
www.studylight.org
The message in the verse is clear
dad
Well-Known Member
Zechariah 12:8 is the next verse after Zechariah 13:7?
Only in dispenland.
Zechariah 13:6
And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.
Zechariah 13:7
Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the Lord of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.
Zechariah 13:8
And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the Lord , two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein.
Zechariah 13:9
And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The Lord is my God.
The context for the timing is found in the previous verses in chapter 12
(getting desperate trying to score a point with typos eh?)
Romans 9
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God:
Is that "flesh" imaginary?
He identifies who "all Israel" is in Romans 9, and declares that "all Israel" will be saved in Romans 11.
Salvation is not a spiritual event??
Tell that to any born again Messianic Jew.
Tell us what he/she says.
God removes ungodliness from Jacob in the same manner as He removes it from everyone else:
Ephesians 2
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith...
There is no other "manner".
He has not broke His promise to save His believing elect faithful remnant.
His choice is the individuals of faith and obedience in His remnant.
He declares that God will save His faithful remnant.
It didn't change His mind about His promise to save His remnant.
God's Israel is a spiritual Israel saved by faithfulness and obedience to Him and His Son.
Your Israel is a racialized Israel whom you claim is saved by DNA.
God is not a racist.
Nor can He be contorted into one.
I don't get my definition from a dictionary.
I get it from Scripture.
If seeking understanding cultifies you, then by no means should you ever seek understanding.
Last edited:
Zechariah 13:7
Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the Lord of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.
Matthew 26
31 Then saith Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad.
The timing is immediately prior to Jesus' crucifixion. The scattering of His disciples that night was a portent of what would occur within a generation, when at the destruction of Jerusalem, the sheep of the flock of Israel were both scattered in exile abroad (Zechariah 13:7), and slain in large numbers (Zechariah 13:8).
If you don't want to be scored on, then don't make typos.
Last edited:
dad
Well-Known Member
After that it jumps to the futureZechariah 13:7
Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the Lord of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.
Matthew 26
31 Then saith Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad.
The timing is immediately prior to Jesus' crucifixion. The scattering of His disciples that night was a portent of what would occur within a generation, when at the destruction of Jerusalem, the sheep of the flock of Israel were both scattered in exile abroad (Zechariah 13:7), and slain in large numbers (Zechariah 13:8).
If you don't want to be scored on, then don't make typos.
Zechariah 13:8
And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the Lord , two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein.
Zechariah 13:9
And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The Lord is my God.
Can you name the time before He died that 2/3 of Israel died? Ha
My last post refutes this. I refer you back to it.No. It is called believe that a man will be called a child if he dies at a hundred years old or not. It is belief or unbelief. They are neither synonymous nor parallel.
No it says he dies. It even says his age and sex
Ever met a child that is 100 years old?
No it describes a man dying and being considered almost a child at 100
The child aged 100 years. Get over it
No, you simply try to redefine death and dying to mean 'living forever'! Absurd unbelief.
Interlinear Search for 'Isaiah 65:20' - NAS with the BHS and NA26 - StudyLight.org
Interliner Search for 'Isaiah 65:20' within 'New American Standard Bible' with the 'Biblia Hebrica Stuttgartensia (1967/77)' and 'Nestle-Aland 26' on StudyLight.org
The message in the verse is clear
RLT63
Well-Known Member
dad
Well-Known Member
You chose to wave away the meaning with an interpretation attempt. It did not fit the spirit of the passage. You have to make the guy who died not real. You have to make any dying not real. You have to make the age he died not real. You have to make his sex not real. You have to make the people looking at the dead guy and saying he was still but a child not real.
A better way to view the passages is that it is the millennium where people are still able to die
The plants will grow fast (a hand full of corn planted high on a mountain will grow lots of fruit) We also know there will be no war. So yes it is quite fine to refer to that time as a paradise.
Similar threads
