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.

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
5,399
2,199
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Im not going to go find and repost but you asked how I fit verses you think are concerning the NHNE into the thousand years of REV 20. I explained how and why. If a verse contains any death at all still existing, I don’t think it can fit the NHNE. And if a verse says there is no more war at all, it doesn’t fit here and now. To me, that’s common sense.

If a verse says no more war, I can’t fit it in past or present. And if it additionally says nations will still have disputes, I can’t fit it in NHNE. So where the heck does it go if it doesn’t fit past, present or NHNE? I refuse to jam it somewhere it can’t fit. To me, that’s shoddy work.

If you would actually take the time to look at the text and detail you would better understand it. There is zero contradiction. I've already showed this on this thread, but you obviously missed it or simply just rejected it.

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


לֹא־
lō-
Not

יִֽהְיֶ֨ה
yih-yeh
Be

מִשָּׁ֜ם
miš-šām
Hence

ע֗וֹד
‘ō-wḏ,
More

ע֤וּל
‘ūl
an infant

יָמִים֙
yā-mîm
[of] days

וְזָקֵ֔ן
wə-zā-qên,
an old man

אֲשֶׁ֥ר
’ă-šer
After

What is this telling us?

Basically: a child will never become old on the new earth.

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


לֹֽא־
lō-
Not

יְמַלֵּ֖א
yə-mal-lê
Fulfill

אֶת־
’eṯ-
Your

יָמָ֑יו
yā-māw;
Days

כִּ֣י

Inasmuch

הַנַּ֗עַר
han-na-‘ar,
a child

בֶּן־
ben-
Old

מֵאָ֤ה
mê-’āh
Hundred

שָׁנָה֙
šā-nāh
Years

יָמ֔וּת
yā-mūṯ,
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 (לֹֽא־ or Lo') longer will an infant become like an old man,
No (לֹֽא־ or 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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spiritual Israelite

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
5,399
2,199
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Im not going to go find and repost but you asked how I fit verses you think are concerning the NHNE into the thousand years of REV 20. I explained how and why. If a verse contains any death at all still existing, I don’t think it can fit the NHNE. And if a verse says there is no more war at all, it doesn’t fit here and now. To me, that’s common sense.

If a verse says no more war, I can’t fit it in past or present. And if it additionally says nations will still have disputes, I can’t fit it in NHNE. So where the heck does it go if it doesn’t fit past, present or NHNE? I refuse to jam it somewhere it can’t fit. To me, that’s shoddy work.

The key question is: is your billions of mortal rebels that inherit and overrun your alleged future millennium going to "learn war anymore" (as you allege) or are they not?

The Premil millennium has been portrayed for years as some Edenic arrangement with unparalleled bliss and wholesale submission to righteousness, when in fact it is simply more of the same. Basically, their millennium is just a mirror of our day with sin abounding and the bondage of corruption prospering. You have continued death, decay, sickness, funerals, crying, hatred, strife and wickedness prospers. This all ends with the biggest rebellion in history.

This whole Premil presentation is a clear bust. It is a debacle. I am sure glad it is not going to happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spiritual Israelite

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
5,399
2,199
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Then the strongman was no more literal than the dragon.

Thus your association means Satan was not literally curtailed ever. Only those symbols were curtailed, not Satan, himself.

Pre-mill point out that Satan was literally set back during the presence of Christ on earth, and will literally be bound in a future 1,000 years. Both accounts are true and literal.

What Amil do is combine both events and totally disregard any future binding of Satan. The problem is that Amil literally have nothing happening to Satan in the future. It is as if Satan currently does not exist, nor ever will again. Satan "being loosed" is just symbolic of the apostasy of the church against the true church. It is just a spiritual movement among the so called believers. Not even billions of believers, that is just hyperbole for Amil to toss at pre-mill adherents.

You are seeing double on every key prediction in Scripture. Premils wrongly see 2 bindings of Satan, 2 last days periods, 2 NHNEs, 2 resurrection days, 2 judgment days, etc, etc. If you would just correlate these up with each you would see these all occur once. All because of your faulty interpretation of one highly-symbolic Scripture in the most obscure setting in Scripture.
 

stunnedbygrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
12,397
12,048
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If you would actually take the time to look at the text and detail you would better understand it. There is zero contradiction. I've already showed this on this thread, but you obviously missed it or simply just rejected it.

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


לֹא־
lō-
Not

יִֽהְיֶ֨ה
yih-yeh
Be

מִשָּׁ֜ם
miš-šām
Hence

ע֗וֹד
‘ō-wḏ,
More

ע֤וּל
‘ūl
an infant

יָמִים֙
yā-mîm
[of] days

וְזָקֵ֔ן
wə-zā-qên,
an old man

אֲשֶׁ֥ר
’ă-šer
After

What is this telling us?

Basically: a child will never become old on the new earth.

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


לֹֽא־
lō-
Not

יְמַלֵּ֖א
yə-mal-lê
Fulfill

אֶת־
’eṯ-
Your

יָמָ֑יו
yā-māw;
Days

כִּ֣י

Inasmuch

הַנַּ֗עַר
han-na-‘ar,
a child

בֶּן־
ben-
Old

מֵאָ֤ה
mê-’āh
Hundred

שָׁנָה֙
šā-nāh
Years

יָמ֔וּת
yā-mūṯ,
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 (לֹֽא־ or Lo') longer will an infant become like an old man,
No (לֹֽא־ or 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.

And the next part of the verse says this: the one who dies at a hundred will be thought a mere child; the one who fails to reach a hundred will be considered accursed.
Do you think on the NHNE that anyone will die before 100? How so if death has been done away with in the lake of fire?
 

stunnedbygrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
12,397
12,048
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The key question is: is your billions of mortal rebels that inherit and overrun your alleged future millennium going to "learn war anymore" (as you allege) or are they not?

After satan is released from where he was bound in the abyss, that’s when this occurs. I’ve found nowhere that it says it’s an army of billions upon billions.
 

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
5,399
2,199
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
After satan is released from where he was bound in the abyss, that’s when this occurs. I’ve found nowhere that it says it’s an army of billions upon billions.

So, they do learn war again? Your doctrine is so contradictory at every turn. It simply doesn't add up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Truth7t7

Truth7t7

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2014
10,760
3,215
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Ok. So, why do you attribute detail pertaining to the NHNE in Isa 65 to your supposed future millennium when it relates to the eternal state (which is after the millennium)?

Where in Revelation 20 does it say "there will be no more war, but there will be disputes, which Jesus will settle. Animals will become peaceful and no longer kill each other and children can play with snakes and not be bitten. If someone dies at 100 they will be considered a youth! Men will outlive the work of their hands, like…if they build a house, they will live longer than the house and have to build another one"? You did not present that.
I Agree, Isaiah 65 is the "Eternal Kingdom" a parallel reading of Revelation 21:1-5, as verse 17 below clearly states the location, as Millennialist disregard this scripture before their eyes, As if it's non-existent

Isaiah 65:17KJV
17 For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.
 

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
5,399
2,199
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
And the next part of the verse says this: the one who dies at a hundred will be thought a mere child; the one who fails to reach a hundred will be considered accursed.
Do you think on the NHNE that anyone will die before 100? How so if death has been done away with in the lake of fire?

Not so! This text is basically telling us that the awful state of the wicked is eternally unchanged. They are damned and doomed eternally. They are forever accursed.

After talking about the righteous and their eternal bliss the prophet then turns to the awful fate of the wicked. Isaiah 65:20 says: “the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed.”

The Hebrew literally reads:

וְהַ֣חֹוטֶ֔א בֶּן־מֵאָ֥ה שָׁנָ֖ה יְקֻלָּֽל׃
wªhachowTe ben- mee'aah shaanaah yªqulaa
the sinner an hundred years old
[shall be] accursed

The Hebrew literally reads:

וְהַ֣חֹוטֶ֔א בֶּן־מֵאָ֥ה שָׁנָ֖ה יְקֻלָּֽל׃
wªhachowTe ben- mee'aah šā-nāh yªqulaa
the sinner an hundred years old [shall be] accursed

וְהַ֣חוֹטֶ֔א
wªhachowTe
the sinner


בֶּן־
ben-
Old


מֵאָ֥ה
mee'aah
an hundred


שָׁנָ֖ה
šā-nāh
years


יְקֻלָּֽל׃
yªqulaa
Cursed


The Hebrew word yªqulaa simply means “is accursed.”
The Hebrew word wªhachowTe simply means "sinner."

There is no mention here of the word “death” or “die” in the Hebrew!

The inclusion of the phrase “Accursed an hundred years old sinner” is simply a solemn reminder to the reader that the fate of the unbeliever is starkly different to that being depicted for the believer on the new earth. In the midst of his joy at the revelation of the new earth the Old Testament prophet compares the bliss, blessing and perfection of the glorified new earth and the horror of the fate of the wicked in hell. The solemn thought is: the eternal horror and hopelessness that will be the lot of the wicked is not just for a short time, it is forever. There is no sense that the wicked are on the new earth here. Isaiah is not describing more of the same as Premil teaches. The new earth is not a repeat or rehash of this corruptible age. This must be forced into the text.

The writer is simply making a comparison (in the midst of his joy at the thought of the new earth) between the bliss and perfection of the glorified new earth and the horror of the fate of the wicked in the lake of fire. There is no sense that the wicked are on the earth here.

The sinner will indeed be accursed in eternity. Throughout Scripture God concentrates on the elect, and often attaches a postscript in regard to the wicked. That is all we are looking at in the phrase: sinner old hundred years is cursed.” Their condition is eternally sealed and irreversible - it is hopeless.

There is no record of death on the new earth for the elect in the original Hebrew; only for the wicked who are experiencing eternal wrath in the Lake of Fire. Here is a notable difference between Amil and Premil, Amils believe the wicked are all judged when Jesus comes and banished into a lost eternity, Premil on the other hand (amazingly) rewards the wicked at the end (especially those who fight against Jerusalem at the end) by allowing them to inherit the new earth. The gorge between these two views couldn't be further.
 
Last edited:

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
5,399
2,199
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I Agree, Isaiah 65 is the "Eternal Kingdom" a parallel reading of Revelation 21:1-5, as verse 17 below clearly states the location, as Millennialist disregard this scripture before their eyes, As if it's non-existent

Isaiah 65:17KJV
17 For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.

Exactly! Amen!
 

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
5,399
2,199
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
After satan is released from where he was bound in the abyss, that’s when this occurs. I’ve found nowhere that it says it’s an army of billions upon billions.

How would you estimate "the sand of the sea" then?
 

stunnedbygrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
12,397
12,048
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I Agree, Isaiah 65 is the "Eternal Kingdom" a parallel reading of Revelation 21:1-5, as verse 17 below clearly states the location, as Millennialist disregard this scripture before their eyes, As if it's non-existent

Isaiah 65:17KJV
17 For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.

I don’t disregard that scripture. I just don’t think verse 20 is talking about the NHNE.
 

Eternally Grateful

Well-Known Member
Feb 27, 2020
14,470
8,189
113
58
Columbus, ohio
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
And thanks to you too, not everybody can do it as emotions come into play
its why on the one hand I hate these conversations. but on the other hand, I love them, because it is my favorite subject.

Everyone looks to the world and says there is no hope..

I look at prophecy, and see God is quite right now. patient, But he will one day punish evil

And as far as Gods promises go. I can trust God. because when he says he will do something He will. his promises are eternal. and irrevocable as Paul said in Romans 11
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marty fox

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2020
8,284
581
113
Mount Morris
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Where in Revelation 20 does it say "there will be no more war, but there will be disputes, which Jesus will settle. Animals will become peaceful and no longer kill each other and children can play with snakes and not be bitten. If someone dies at 100 they will be considered a youth! Men will outlive the work of their hands, like…if they build a house, they will live longer than the house and have to build another one"? You did not present that.
Why does John have to give every single detail of Jesus as King on earth for 1,000 years?

Your main reason for rejecting the 1,000 years is because you are not given enough information to make an informed decision?

Just don't interpret Revelation 20 at all then. Leave it alone. The same reason you reject Isaiah 65 as post the Second Coming means it cannot be the NHNE, which is also post the Second Coming. You are being disingenuous about Isaiah 65. You interpret it according to your bias that there is no millennium.

Where in Revelation 20 is it stated this is the last 1992 years of the fulness of the Gentiles, ie the church age? Where does it state Jesus died and rose again? Revelation 20 does point out those just recently beheaded are resurrected, but you refuse to show where they are beheaded in the first century. Only John the Baptist was resurrected and reigns with Jesus during the last 1992 years? Instead of you making stuff up about Revelation 20, how about you give us Scripture that explains the events of the Millennium?

Your version of Amil is consistent with postmill, more than declaring there is no millennium at all. You still say there is a Millennium that ends at the Second Coming. You avoid the fact it is full of death and sin, while making that assumption about Revelation 20. Where is sin and death mentioned in Revelation 20 as happening during the millennium? Where does it state it takes hundreds of years for Satan to gather an army? Where does it state any where in Scripture that people secretly plot to overthrow the authority of Jesus as King, and can keep their evil thoughts secret from Jesus and God? Are there both sheep and goats in your version of the Millennium, and where does it state they rule side by side?

Since you are an Amil that holds to a post mill 1,000 year reign, where are your corroborated Scriptures defining this type of reign with Christ where no one dies until the end? That is one fact undisputed in Revelation 20, that once resurrected they cannot die again. Where are all your resurrected humans who cannot ever die again?
 

stunnedbygrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
12,397
12,048
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
How would you estimate "the sand of the sea" then?

Mmm…I think it means a lot of people are deceived when he’s released again and gather around Jerusalem but fire comes and destroys them all. It reads like they don’t even begin a war but just gather for it and then are destroyed.
 
Last edited:

Ronald Nolette

Well-Known Member
Aug 24, 2020
12,505
3,696
113
69
South Carolina
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
He rules from the right hand of the Father in heaven, as scripture clearly teaches. Have you never read this:

Ephesians 1:19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, 20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: 22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,

This couldn't possibly be any more clear. He rules at the right hand of the Father in heaven "far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named" in this world/age (Greek: aion). And the Father has "put all things under his feet".

You are making the same mistake that the Pharisees made by thinking that the Messiah's kingdom would be an earthly one. Not so. Jesus said His kingdom "is not of this world" (John 18:36) and "does not come with observation" (Luke 17:20). Why can't you accept that? When He returns at the end of the age He will be delivering His kingdom to the Father (1 Cor 15:22-28, Matthew 13:36-43).

Sitting at the right hand makes Him subordinate to the Father. History will teach you that.

Jesus rules the church without doubt. but He has not begun His earthly reign yet.

all you have to do is compare the Scriptures that describe what earth will look like wqhen He is ruling and look at one news broadcast and see they are not congruent.

Unless you lean towards the Watchtower and imply Jesus hasn't been able to defeat Satan yet.
 

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2020
8,284
581
113
Mount Morris
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The millennium is not the beginning of the last days. The earthly ministry of Christ is. The last days are now and the last day is the climactic second coming. The Old Testament prophecies of “the last days” relate to the period following the Messiah’s first appearance when He introduced the kingdom of God to this earth and opened up the Gospel to the nations. Christ’s earthly ministry ushered in the period of the last days. This is confirmed in different New Testament passages.

Hebrews 1:1-2 declares, “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son.”

The last days commenced with the earthly ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ of which this passage provides indisputable proof. The Incarnation inaugurated the final era of God’s great plan of salvation for mankind.

Hebrews 9:26 also says, “now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.”

1 Peter 1:19-20 also confirm that, “Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world … was manifest in these last times for you.”

Peter declared in Acts 2:16-17, alluding to the happenings on the day of Pentecost,this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams.”

John twice testified in I John 2:18, “it is the last time (eschatos hōra or last hour).”

2 Timothy 3:1-9 highlights the stark decline that exists before the Second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is certainly not speaking of period following the return of Christ. 2 Timothy 3:1 testifies:in the last days perilous (or hard to bear, troublesome, dangerous, harsh, fierce, savage) times shall come.” Christ’s return brings an end to all this rebellion and wickedness. He comes to ushering eternal righteousness.

2 Peter 3:3-13 speaks of the sceptics who are mocking and scoffing as to the actuality of the Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. It reads: “there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming?” (v4). If the last days relate to a future millennium, why would they be scoffing at an event that already occurred? They are mocking an impending future event. They are mocking the very idea of the second coming. Manifestly the “last days” occur before the coming of Jesus. It relates to the period we are now in.

James 5:3 also alludes to the last days and places that period before Jesus return. He to shows the last days to be a time of greed and folly. The return of Christ brings an end to such rebellion.

These passages demonstrate that we are in the end times since Christ’s first Advent and that the last days don’t relate to another age after Christ’s appearing, as Premillennialism imagines. The “last days” clearly relate to the intra-Advent period and find their conclusion at the “last day” – Christ’s Coming. I see the “last day” (singular) of the “last days” (plural) as the all-consummating appearing of Christ, which witnesses the total destruction of the world/wicked and a general resurrection / judgement. I believe Scripture shows that the “last days” (plural) terminate at the “last day” (singular) with the raising and judging of both the righteous (John 6:39-44, 54, 11:23-24) and the wicked (John 12:48). In all these references, the wording in the original for “last day” is always the same – eschatee heemara. The Greek word eschatee used here comes from the root word eschatos, from where we get our word English eschatology, and simply means end, last, farthest or final.

Whilst this prophecy was initially given to Judah and Jerusalem, which at the time was the exclusive place of God’s favour on this earth, I do not believe this prophecy is restricted to them. In fact, the detail embodied within this passage proves the contrary and the fact that Isaiah was speaking of a time when the Gentiles would join the Jews in the house of God. I believe that period started with the commission of the disciples nearly 2,000 years ago.

Of the many other passages mentioning “the last days" in Scripture, there is not one "last days" passage that is identified with the period after the second coming. They all relate to the Church in the here-and-now.

What happens on the final day?

John 11:21-27 records: “Then said Martha unto Jesus, Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died. But I know, that even now, whatsoever thou wilt ask of God, God will give it thee. Jesus saith unto her, Thy brother shall rise again. Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day. Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this? She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world.”

Christ did not rebuke this understanding of the last day. In fact, it was in complete agreement with what Christ had previously taught in John 6:39-44, 54, where He said, “And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day …No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day ... Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.”

The righteous are resurrected! When does this happen? When Jesus Comes. This is clear and simple (to those who not have a man-made school of thought to defend.

That is not all.

Christ tells us in John 12:48, He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.”

There you have it! The same day that the righteous are raised is the same day the wicked are judged. Please note there is no mention of some imaginary period of 1,000 years separating this. Not here or in any other passage in Scripture.
Then there were 3 last days. Two last days until the Second Coming. Then the last day is the millennium reign of Christ for 1,000 years. Are you that strict to your own teaching, that you can not see that the last 1992 years since the Cross has been the last 2 days?

The same day? Sure, but the righteous at the beginning of the day, and the dead after the Day has been declared finished. If you declare the GWT as part of time, you are not paying attention that Jesus is not bound by time. Your own point about Isaiah 65 and 2 Peter 3 is that time is not relative at all, yet you want a resurrection of the lost placed into time? That is very hypocritical to your own "theory of time".

Revelation 20:5

"But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished."

That word finished is a big issue for you. Revelation 20:11-15 is not part of time nor created reality. So where is your last hour resurrection in Revelation 20:1-10? There is no heaven and earth in verse 11. There is only the GWT and the LOF. That is not your last hour, because there is no time at all.
 

stunnedbygrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
12,397
12,048
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So, they do learn war again? Your doctrine is so contradictory at every turn. It simply doesn't add up.

For the thousand years, no, I don’t believe there is war. I believe that only comes at the end of the thousand years when he is released for a short while to again deceive the nations.
 

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
5,399
2,199
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Mmm…I think it means a lot of people are deceived when he’s released again and gather around Jerusalem but fire comes and destroys them all. It reads like they don’t even begin a war but just gather for it and then are destroyed.

Your answers always seem framed to allow Premil even though the text contradicts your claims.
 
Last edited:

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
5,399
2,199
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Mmm…I think it means a lot of people are deceived when he’s released again and gather around Jerusalem but fire comes and destroys them all. It reads like they don’t even begin a war but just gather for it and then are destroyed.

So, this army rises up in their billions (as the sand of the sea) and surround the camp of the saints in order to destroy them and you do not think that constitutes learning war? That does make sense.
 

WPM

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2022
5,399
2,199
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
For the thousand years, no, I don’t believe there is war. I believe that only comes at the end of the thousand years when he is released for a short while to again deceive the nations.

Oh, so they do learn war again. Hmmmm. That contradicts your text and previous statements.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.