22 major reasons to abandon the Premil doctrine

[Spiritual Israelite]

Satan is BOUND
He is SHUT UP
He is PLACED IN PRISON

That means he can DECIEVE NO ONE.

It actually describes a dragon being chained up in a prison. Satan cannot be literally chained up in a prison. So, the dragon being chained up in a prison is a figurative representation of the spiritual binding of Satan. There is no reason to look at it as if Satan can be literally chained up in a prison that has no access to the earth.

My friend, Satan was just as hindered in the OT as he is in the new. Many gentiles came to christ.

Binding does NOT refer to the gospel. This is proven later in the chapter when satan is released..

Are you suggesting that what Satan has been able to do in NT times is no different than what he was able to do in OT times? If so, what do you make of passages like these:

Hebrews 2:14 Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil— 15 and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death.

1 John 3:8 The one who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work.

Acts 26:16 ‘Now get up and stand on your feet. I have appeared to you to appoint you as a servant and as a witness of what you have seen and will see of me. 17 I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them 18 to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.’

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

And those 22 reason are complete nonsense, that a bunch a people accept. Nonsense is still nonsense even if billions of humans follow after it. Amil is no different than Islam or Mormons who have changed the truth of God's Word to suit their own personal beliefs. That is about all that can be said about Amil.

So, now you are equating Amils with those who are part of false religions and cults. Real nice, buddy. I guess you've never read what Jesus said about judging others?

 

[Timtofly]

The bottomless pit isn't a literal place but a state a circumstance

Yes, the state of the earth in a future 1,000 year reign of Christ.

 

[Timtofly]

The Judean Christians fled in 66 AD. That qualifies as a preterist event.

Josephus was a preterist?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

with god all things are possible.

The dragon, He was satan, a literal being

He is said to be captured and placed in this place called the bottomless pit.

If satan is literal. and can be grabbed, the bottomless pit is a literal place also.

It's actually talking about a dragon being grabbed and put in chains and placed in the bottomless pit, not Satan himself. The dragon, of course, figuratively represents Satan. But, it's not really referring to Satan himself being cast into the bottomless pit. Just like when it talks about a beast with seven heads and ten horns being in the bottomless pit and coming out of it (Rev 11:7, Rev 17:8), it's talking about the symbolic beast being there, not whatever the beast symbolically represents literally being there. It should be obvious that a description of a dragon and a beast being cast into a bottomless pit should not be taken literally, but, somehow, you have decided that is how it should be interpreted.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Its prophecy. Prophecy speaks of LITERAL EVENTS. as PROVEN by the fact that JESUS and GENTILE NATIONS have LITERALLY FULILLED past prophetic events.

I interpret prophecy by precedence. I look at past fulfille dprophecy. I see it was fullfilled to the T exacly as prophesied.

If past prophecy was fulfilled literally (it was)

then I look to this precidence and declare that future prophecy will ALSO be fulfilled literaly (I believe it will.)

So, how will the following be fulfilled literally:

Revelation 17:3 Then the angel carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness. There I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was covered with blasphemous names and had seven heads and ten horns. 4 The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet, and was glittering with gold, precious stones and pearls. She held a golden cup in her hand, filled with abominable things and the filth of her adulteries. 5 The name written on her forehead was a mystery: babylon the great, the mother of prostitutes, and of the abominations of the earth. 6 I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of God’s holy people, the blood of those who bore testimony to Jesus.

 

[covenantee]

Josephus was a preterist?

Josephus didn't flee.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

It's actually talking about a dragon being grabbed and put in chains and placed in the bottomless pit, not Satan himself. The dragon, of course, figuratively represents Satan. But, it's not really referring to Satan himself being cast into the bottomless pit. Just like when it talks about a beast with seven heads and ten horns being in the bottomless pit and coming out of it (Rev 11:7, Rev 17:8), it's talking about the symbolic beast being there, not whatever the beast symbolically represents literally being there. It should be obvious that a description of a dragon and a beast being cast into a bottomless pit should not be taken literally, but, somehow, you have decided that is how it should be interpreted.

2 He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years;

He is satan
And he is bound

Your wrong about it representing satan only, and why is it obvious it should not be taken literally. Please explain

 

[Eternally Grateful]

It actually describes a dragon being chained up in a prison. Satan cannot be literally chained up in a prison.

So God can not bind satan?

Why should I questions Gods power?

So, the dragon being chained up in a prison is a figurative representation of the spiritual binding of Satan. There is no reason to look at it as if Satan can be literally chained up in a prison that has no access to the earth.

Please read again, It says HE IS SATAN

Are you suggesting that what Satan has been able to do in NT times is no different than what he was able to do in OT times? If so, what do you make of passages like these:

Hebrews 2:14 Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil— 15 and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death.

1 John 3:8 The one who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work.

Acts 26:16 ‘Now get up and stand on your feet. I have appeared to you to appoint you as a servant and as a witness of what you have seen and will see of me. 17 I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them 18 to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.’

The power of death was defeated by the cross. In the new as well as the old..

 

[Eternally Grateful]

So, how will the following be fulfilled literally:

Revelation 17:3 Then the angel carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness. There I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was covered with blasphemous names and had seven heads and ten horns. 4 The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet, and was glittering with gold, precious stones and pearls. She held a golden cup in her hand, filled with abominable things and the filth of her adulteries. 5 The name written on her forehead was a mystery: babylon the great, the mother of prostitutes, and of the abominations of the earth. 6 I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of God’s holy people, the blood of those who bore testimony to Jesus.

It represents a literal thing. And what is says she has done she has done.

Once again, Figurative things representing literal events, people, systems, or places.

Different from parabolic language where figurative things represent spiritual truths.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

What does that even mean? Do you think there are no prophecies about spiritual things? What about Joel 2:28-32, which began to be fulfilled on the day of Pentecost (see Acts 2:16-21).

Joel spoke of a literal event, which as you said started on pentecost.

So you just supported my case, thank you

Yes, and sometimes He does it with symbolism and sometimes it's literal.

Can an event not occur if it's described symbolically? I don't understand the way you think.

If the event does not occur. The prophet is a false prophet.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

That just means he saw that vision after seeing the previous vision. That does not mean what he saw in that vision had to occur after what he had seen in the previous vision. If that's how it worked then we'd have to conclude that what he described in Revelation 12 followed what he described in Revelation 11 chronologically, but we know that Christ wasn't born after the seventh trumpet.

What?

The whole thing was a vision, He saw this, THEN that event happen

He did not say THEN he saw another vision. He said THEN something happened.

Why are you adding to the word of God?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

2 He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years;

He is satan
And he is bound

Your wrong about it representing satan only, and why is it obvious it should not be taken literally. Please explain

I already did explain. You never understand the explanations you're given. That's not our fault. But, let me try again.

Notice it first says "he laid hold of the dragon". Yes, the dragon obviously symbolically represents the devil, Satan, but what John actually saw was a dragon being physically chained up in a prison. And that vision symbolically represents the spiritual binding of the spirit being Satan.

In Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 17:8 it talks about the beast ascending from the bottomless pit/abyss. Clearly, it's not talking about a literal beast ascending from a literal place, so that shouldn't be taken literally. So, a dragon being in the bottomless pit/abyss shouldn't be taken literally, either.

And then there is Revelation 9 where it portrays locusts as being there. That's obviously not literal. They represent real beings (fallen angels) but the binding of those beings is described figuratively as locusts being in a bottomless pit/abyss.

 

[marks]

2 He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years;

He is satan
And he is bound

Your wrong about it representing satan only, and why is it obvious it should not be taken literally. Please explain

It seems to me the only real argument presented is that no, you obviously should not believe what this passage says.

He's bound, he's sealed into the abyss. He has no access to earth! What should we suppose that seal is about? Some half-hearted leaking gate, like a corrupt prison guard? Or like those whom God Almighty has set under seal, not to be opened until He Himself allows?

Much love!

 

[Christian Gedge]

I already did explain. You never understand the explanations you're given. That's not our fault. But, let me try again.

Notice it first says "he laid hold of the dragon". Yes, the dragon obviously symbolically represents the devil, Satan, but what John actually saw was a dragon being physically chained up in a prison. And that vision symbolically represents the spiritual binding of the spirit being Satan.

In Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 17:8 it talks about the beast ascending from the bottomless pit/abyss. Clearly, it's not talking about a literal beast ascending from a literal place, so that shouldn't be taken literally. So, a dragon being in the bottomless pit/abyss shouldn't be taken literally, either.

And then there is Revelation 9 where it portrays locusts as being there. That's obviously not literal. They represent real beings (fallen angels) but the binding of those beings is described figuratively as locusts being in a bottomless pit/abyss.

Ive been asking Admin for a better 'like' variety on the reply bar. In the meanwhile bro >>>

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

It seems to me the only real argument presented is that no, you obviously should not believe what this passage says.

And, of course, absolutely NO ONE is saying that. Do you think it makes you look good to lie like this? We all believe what it says, but we don't all agree on what it says. EVERYONE believes what it says.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

What?

The whole thing was a vision, He saw this, THEN that event happen

He did not say THEN he saw another vision. He said THEN something happened.

Why are you adding to the word of God?

I'm not adding to the word of God and I don't appreciate that false accusation at all. I believe I was clear in what I was saying. That you have trouble with reading comprehension is not my fault.

Let me try one more time to get you to understand the point. The same Greek word that starts Revelation 20 (kai - Strong's G2532) is used here:

Revelation 12:1 And (Greek: kai) 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: 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. 4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman 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: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.

This followed the description of the seventh trumpet at the end of Revelation 11. And this talks about Christ's birth and His ascension. Using the logic you're using to interpret Revelation 20, we would have to conclude that Christ was born after the seventh trumpet sounded. Which obviously is not the case. So, to assume that the Greek word "kai" can only be used to describe an event that happens after what was just described is a false assumption. Do you understand my point now?

 

[Timtofly]

Please do not speak on behalf of Amils. You do not have a clue what we believe. Posts like this prove it. Every time you do you twist what Amils believe. That is why I normally ignore your posts. Read up on Amil before engaging on these forums, then you might understand what we believe. I am not going to waste my time. You obviously do not want to know that because it would challenge your beliefs. All you can do is misrepresent.

Just going by your own words. Not twisting them at all.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Joel spoke of a literal event, which as you said started on pentecost.

So you just supported my case, thank you

If the event does not occur. The prophet is a false prophet.

My goodness, are you even trying to understand? Who is saying anything about an event described in scripture not happening? NO ONE. You keep wasting your time arguing with non-existent straw men. Pentecost was a spiritual event, was it not? You have been equating spiritualizing things with making them non-literal. That's ridiculous. An event can be spiritual and still literal and what happens on the day of Pentecost is an example of that. Why can't you even understand the most simple things like this?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

It represents a literal thing. And what is says she has done she has done.

Once again, Figurative things representing literal events, people, systems, or places.

Do you think anyone is saying otherwise? NO! So, why are you acting as if anyone is saying otherwise? You're wasting a lot of time by doing that. Those are called straw man arguments because you're making arguments against things that no one even believes.