22 major reasons to abandon the Premil doctrine

[CadyandZoe]

(7) Premillennialists ignore the tenses in the original Greek in order to sustain their teaching. That is because the tenses expose Premil. For example, Scripture shows that Jesus is reigning now over creation, His people and all His enemies. It is shown to be in the present ongoing tense. Most Premillennialists reject this as it messes with their belief-system. However, 1 Corinthians 15:25-27 states: “he must reign (present, active infinitive), till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For ‘he hath put’ (aorist active indicative) all things under his feet. “

His reign begins "at his coming", which is the moment of his Triumphal entry into the city of Jerusalem. This is yet to begin.

Ephesians 1:20-22 tells us that God hath “raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 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: And hath put (aorist active indicative) all things under his feet.”

The aorist tense is without a time element. An aorist verb is understood as a statement of fact without regard to time. The phrase "at his right hand" is figurative language intended to indicate preeminence and status, not necessarily dominion. Currently, as we read in 1 Corinthians 15, Jesus Christ is heir-apparent to the throne.

Hebrews 2:7-8 says, “Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands: ‘Thou hast put all things in subjection’ (aorist active indicative) under his feet. For in that ‘he put all in subjection’ (aorist active indicative) under him, he left nothing that is not put under him."

Again, the aorist has no time element. Paul isn't suggesting that Jesus Christ currently has dominion over the earth. Right now, as Paul argues, Satan has dominion over the earth pro tem. He continues to work through the sons of disobedience.

Another example (of many) how Premillennialists reject the tenses in the original Greek, involves the redeemed currently functioning as kings and priests. The Bible shows God’s people reigning now. Ephesians 2:5: “Even when we were dead in sins, ‘hath quickened us together’ (aorist active indicative) with Christ, (by grace ye are saved).”

Ephesians 2 isn't about domination or rulership. The subject is the battle between the forces of darkness and the forces of light and how God, through his mighty power is freeing some from that dark power.

John says in Revelation 1:5-6, “Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, And hath made (aorist active indicative) us kings and priests unto God and his father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever.”

Once again, the aorist tense indicates status not action. We are not currently ruling as a kingdom of priests, but we will some day.

Revelation 5, which is evidently located before the Second Advent, describes the same kingly/priestly reign of the redeemed in heaven, saying, “they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast (aorist active indicative) redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation; And hast made (aorist active indicative) us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign (future article) on the earth” (v. 9).

Aorist = no time aspect. Aorist is NOT past tense. Contrary to what some commentators say, the aorist tense does not describe "simple" action. It indicates action without any time aspect at all.

Revelation 20:4-5 says, “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 (aorist active indicative) and reigned (aorist active indicative) with Christ a thousand years. But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.”

A final matter may prove our point, John is describing a current reality in Revelation 20:6. It says, “Blessed and holy is he ‘that hath part’ (present active particle) in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power.” Our part in the first resurrection, shown throughout the Word to be Christ’s resurrection (Acts 26:23, Colossians 1:18, 1 Corinthians 15:20 and Revelation 1:5).

The question is whether John employed a metonym whereby he indicates the significant benefits of Christ's resurrection with the phrase "first resurrection" or whether John was indicating a subset of humanity that came back to life during the time when John saw thrones. Since John mentions the beheaded martyrs in this context, it seems reasonable to understand "the first resurrection" in contradistinction to those who experience the second death, which John indicates as being thrown into the lake of fire.

The duplicity of this subject is that everywhere else the presence tense is used Premillennialists have no difficulty in applying it to the present tense, when it does not interfere with their pet doctrine. Jesus parallels Revelation 20:6 in John 3:16, teaching: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth (present active particle) in him should not perish, but have (present active subjunctive) everlasting life.”

But so far you have been talking about the aorist tense.

(8) Premil lacks corroboration for all its fundamental beliefs on Revelation 20. Whether you look at the binding of Satan, the release of Satan 1,000 years after the second coming, the restoration of animal sacrifices in an alleged future millennium, a thousand years of peace, perfection and prosperity, two different judgment days, two different resurrection days, the rebellion of the wicked at the end of the millennium, these enjoy no other support in Scripture. I struggle with this, because the only way to authenticate and understand any doctrine is interpret it with other Scripture.

But what if this is what John meant to say?

Premil somehow extrapolates two distinct physical future resurrection days (the first for the righteous, the second for the wicked) separated by a literal 1000 years+ out of Rev 20. Where in Scripture does it even mention "resurrection days" (plural), pertaining to the end? Nowhere!

1 Thessalonians 4:13-18

What Scripture (including Revelation 20) teaches there are two distinct future judgement days (that will see all mankind stand before Christ to give account for their lives) separated by a literal 1000 years+?

The rapture, mentioned above, strongly implies a judgment, since it represents an exclusive group of those who are "in Christ." Matthew 25:31-46 suggests another moment of judgment where those living at the time of Christ's return are rewarded or punished solely on the basis of how a person treated Jesus while he was gone. There is another judgment at the end of Revelation 20.

Where in Scripture does it mention "judgement days" (plural), in regard to the end? What Scripture corroborates the Premillennial interpretation of Revelation 20 that Satan will be bound for a time-span of 1000 years after the Second Advent, then released for a "little season" to deceive the nations, and then destroy them? There is no other Scripture that teaches this doctrine. Premils force that upon the sacred text.

Cheep trick to ask for proof and rule out the proof at the same time.

(9) Premils invent an unscriptural three-age theological framework in order to justify their flawed belief system. This consists of “this age, the age to come and another age to come after the age to come.” The only problem is: this paradigm enjoys no scriptural support. Repeated Scripture, including the teaching of Christ, only recognizes two overriding ages – “this world/age” and “the world/age to come.” These terminologies are crucial when trying to understanding biblical eschatology. The dividing point between these two ages is continually shown in the sacred text to be the glorious final future coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The comparison between "this age" and the "age to come" allow for other ages to exist between them. There is no logical reason why there can't be other ages.

(10) Christ (who was "the truth"), Paul the Apostle (that Hebrew of the Hebrews) or none of the other NT writer taught a supposed future 1,000-year temporal visible earthly kingdom after the second coming and before the new heaven and the new earth. Their whole teaching depicted a current spiritual invisible heavenly eternal kingdom that was entered by faith. The final perfect visible manifestation of the kingdom is shown repeatedly in the NT to arrive when Jesus comes and destroys all enemies and banishes all imperfection forever. Premil mistakenly advocates another additional imperfect kingdom age, which is in fact a rerun of our current day, to support their faulty theology.

One does not need to prove what is already commonly understood. Thus, the absence of mention does not prove anything one way or the other.

 

[Truth7t7]

I know. It’s okay.

A Millennial Kingdom on this earth is found no place in scripture, its a fabricated fairy tale of man, the truth

In love, Jesus Is The Lord

 

[Truth7t7]

Woah, steady on mate.

Those born again have passed from death to life....and the time now is. Jn 5


Jn 5
24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life

25 Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.

Do you deny a future bodily resurrection of the believer as seen in John 5:28-29, 1 Corinthians 15:51-54?

 

[Phoneman777]

Exactly. The second coming ushers in the end of sin and sinners, the curse and all corruption, crying and dying, war and terror, Satan and his minions. You force all this into your age to come. You restart all this in your supposed future millennium. Scripture does not recognize such a scenario.

Once again you duck around all my supporting Scripture. You have to.

Of course, the Second Coming brings along with it destruction: islands fleeing away, mountains crashing into the sea, the Earth "reeling to and fro like a drunkard", and "the slain of the Lord...from one end of the Earth even to the other end of the Earth". What else happens at the Second Coming? The Resurrection of the Just. As the righteous are going up, the wicked are dropping down like flies all over the Earth "at the brightness of His coming", agreed?

Question: If before the Resurrection of the Just there was always activity on Earth, and after the Resurrection of the Damned (followed by their eternal demise) 1,000 years later there will be ceaseless ages of life and activity on Earth --- where on the eschatological timeline is the only spot where this "future age of total destruction, desolation, silence, darkness, emptiness" can fit?

You guessed it

 

[CadyandZoe]

Woah, steady on mate.

Those born again have passed from death to life....and the time now is. Jn 5


Jn 5
24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life

25 Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.

I take note of Jesus' mention of Judgment in verse 24. By this we understand that the Lord is talking about condemnation, i.e. condemned to die. When a person passes out of death unto life, he or she is removed from the group of "those who are condemned to die" into the group of "those who stand to inherit eternal life." You can call this a "resurrection" if you want, but the term "resurrection" actually refers to someone who has been brought back from physical death, like Jesus and Lazarus was.

 

[WPM]

Of course, the Second Coming brings along with it destruction: islands fleeing away, mountains crashing into the sea, the Earth "reeling to and fro like a drunkard", and "the slain of the Lord...from one end of the Earth even to the other end of the Earth". What else happens at the Second Coming? The Resurrection of the Just. As the righteous are going up, the wicked are dropping down like flies all over the Earth "at the brightness of His coming", agreed?

Q. If before the Resurrection of the Just there was always activity on Earth, and after the Resurrection of the Damned (followed by their eternal demise) 1,000 years later there will be ceasely ages of life and activity on Earth --- where is the only spot on the eschatological timeline where this "future age of total destruction, silence, darkness, emptiness, etc., can fit?

You guessed it

Your question is as clear as mud. Please reword it.

 

[Truth7t7]

Of course, the Second Coming brings along with it destruction: islands fleeing away, mountains crashing into the sea, the Earth "reeling to and fro like a drunkard", and "the slain of the Lord...from one end of the Earth even to the other end of the Earth". What else happens at the Second Coming? The Resurrection of the Just. As the righteous are going up, the wicked are dropping down like flies all over the Earth "at the brightness of His coming", agreed?

Question: If before the Resurrection of the Just there was always activity on Earth, and after the Resurrection of the Damned (followed by their eternal demise) 1,000 years later there will be ceaseless ages of life and activity on Earth --- where on the eschatological timeline is the only spot where this "future age of total destruction, desolation, silence, darkness, emptiness" can fit?

You guessed it

Why Do You Disregard The Lord's Dissolving Fire In Judgement Below?

Jesus Christ Returns In Fire And Final Judgement, Dissolving This Existing Earth By Fire, Immediately After The Tribulation

This Existing Heaven And Earth Will Be (Replaced) By The New Heaven, Earth, Jerusalem, A New Creation, At The Return Of Jesus Christ

(Behold, I Make All Things New)

2 Peter 3:10-13KJV
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

Revelation 21:1-5KJV
1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

Matthew 24:29-30KJV
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

1 Corinthians 3:13KJV
13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

Luke 17:29-30KJV
29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.
30 Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.

2 Thessalonians 1:7-9KJV
7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

Malachi 3:2KJV
2 But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap:

Psalm 46:6KJV
6 The heathen raged, the kingdoms were moved: he uttered his voice, the earth melted.

Psalm 50:3KJV
3 Our God shall come, and shall not keep silence: a fire shall devour before him, and it shall be very tempestuous round about him.

Psalm 97:5KJV
5 The hills melted like wax at the presence of the Lord, at the presence of the Lord of the whole earth.

Isaiah 66:15KJV
15 For, behold, the Lord will come with fire, and with his chariots like a whirlwind, to render his anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire.

Zechariah 14:12KJV
12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the Lord will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.

Nahum 1:5-6KJV
5 The mountains quake at him, and the hills melt, and the earth is burned at his presence, yea, the world, and all that dwell therein.
6 Who can stand before his indignation? and who can abide in the fierceness of his anger? his fury is poured out like fire, and the rocks are thrown down by him.

Revelation 20:9KJV
9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.

 

[WPM]

His reign begins "at his coming", which is the moment of his Triumphal entry into the city of Jerusalem. This is yet to begin.



The aorist tense is without a time element. An aorist verb is understood as a statement of fact without regard to time. The phrase "at his right hand" is figurative language intended to indicate preeminence and status, not necessarily dominion. Currently, as we read in 1 Corinthians 15, Jesus Christ is heir-apparent to the throne.



Again, the aorist has no time element. Paul isn't suggesting that Jesus Christ currently has dominion over the earth. Right now, as Paul argues, Satan has dominion over the earth pro tem. He continues to work through the sons of disobedience.



Ephesians 2 isn't about domination or rulership. The subject is the battle between the forces of darkness and the forces of light and how God, through his mighty power is freeing some from that dark power.



Once again, the aorist tense indicates status not action. We are not currently ruling as a kingdom of priests, but we will some day.



Aorist = no time aspect. Aorist is NOT past tense. Contrary to what some commentators say, the aorist tense does not describe "simple" action. It indicates action without any time aspect at all.



The question is whether John employed a metonym whereby he indicates the significant benefits of Christ's resurrection with the phrase "first resurrection" or whether John was indicating a subset of humanity that came back to life during the time when John saw thrones. Since John mentions the beheaded martyrs in this context, it seems reasonable to understand "the first resurrection" in contradistinction to those who experience the second death, which John indicates as being thrown into the lake of fire.



But so far you have been talking about the aorist tense.



But what if this is what John meant to say?



1 Thessalonians 4:13-18



The rapture, mentioned above, strongly implies a judgment, since it represents an exclusive group of those who are "in Christ." Matthew 25:31-46 suggests another moment of judgment where those living at the time of Christ's return are rewarded or punished solely on the basis of how a person treated Jesus while he was gone. There is another judgment at the end of Revelation 20.



Cheep trick to ask for proof and rule out the proof at the same time.



The comparison between "this age" and the "age to come" allow for other ages to exist between them. There is no logical reason why there can't be other ages.



One does not need to prove what is already commonly understood. Thus, the absence of mention does not prove anything one way or the other.

Do you even understand what you are arguing? We are not just talking about the aorist as you zoom in on, we are talking about the aorist active indicative, which is used throughout the Word to describe current ongoing realities. Do your research before coming out with this stuff. I know it exposes your position, but deal with that. Reject what you have been taught that is in error. Many of us have had to abandon Premil. These boards are full of such.

 

[Truth7t7]

Do you even understand what you are arguing? We are not just talking about the aorist as you zoom in on, we are talking about the aorist active indicative, which is used throughout the Word to describe current ongoing realities. Do your research before coming out with this stuff. I know it exposes your position, but deal with that. Reject what you have be taught that is in error. Many of us have had to abandon Premil. These boards are full of such.

I was pre-mil for 20+ years, until the scripture was studied to question what I was taught

Pre-trib rapture found no place in scripture, I was wrong for 20+ years, shouting amen from the pew and didn't have a clue. Same applies to a 1,000 year Millennial Kingdom on this earth, its a fabricated fairy-tale of man

 

[CadyandZoe]

Most honest commentators would recognize that Revelation is the most symbolic and obscure book in Scripture. From that location you attempt to explain the whole end-time scenario.

Really, you got all that from what I said? I think you ascribe ideas that I never expressed. If you want to have an honest dialogue, let's respond to what was actually said.

Hello! Read where this belongs! The "last days."

Hello! You assume a definition of "last days" that is controversial. What is this attitude you bring?

These passages are telling us that Messiah would come and bring peace to His subjects. This would be performed through the Word of God going out of Zion to all nations in these last days. Christ did this.

Sorry, you have it reversed. Yes, today the word of God is going forth through all the nations. But THEN, in the last days, the nations come to Jerusalem to hear the word of God -- completely the opposite.

The peace described came with the earthly ministry of Christ. It is spiritual. It pertains to the kingdom of God. It also relates to the last days – the days we are living in.

Have you never read? Jesus said, "I didn't come to bring peace but a sword." Your scenario doesn't fit the facts.

So far you don't seem to have paid much attention. But let's go on.

This Messianic text shows us that Christ is located within Zion.

The New Testament clearly teaches that Jesus Christ is currently sitting at the right hand of the father. And anyone who has visited Zion lately knows that the cornerstone is yet to be placed.

When the New Testament references these Old Testament prophecies and applies them to the new covenant era we see the spiritual sense of Zion (Sion) today.

It seems you have changed your hermeneutic. Rather than attempting to understand what Isaiah and the other prophets were saying, you have given yourself permission to innovate hidden meanings.

 

[Truth7t7]

Really, you got all that from what I said? I think you ascribe ideas that I never expressed. If you want to have an honest dialogue, let's respond to what was actually said.

Hello! You assume a definition of "last days" that is controversial. What is this attitude you bring?

Sorry, you have it reversed. Yes, today the word of God is going forth through all the nations. But THEN, in the last days, the nations come to Jerusalem to hear the word of God -- completely the opposite.

Have you never read? Jesus said, "I didn't come to bring peace but a sword." Your scenario doesn't fit the facts.

So far you don't seem to have paid much attention. But let's go on.


The New Testament clearly teaches that Jesus Christ is currently sitting at the right hand of the father. And anyone who has visited Zion lately knows that the cornerstone is yet to be placed.

It seems you have changed your hermeneutic. Rather than attempting to understand what Isaiah and the other prophets were saying, you have given yourself permission to innovate hidden meanings.

You have been shown your Millennial Kingdom on this earth is non-existent in Revelation 20:1-6 as claimed, and its not found any place in scripture

You give hints and suggestions, without posting scripture to make a claim, waiting?

 

[WPM]

Really, you got all that from what I said? I think you ascribe ideas that I never expressed. If you want to have an honest dialogue, let's respond to what was actually said.

Hello! You assume a definition of "last days" that is controversial. What is this attitude you bring?

It is not "controversial." You make it such to support your belief in a future Premil kingdom. The reality is, 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.

The last day

It is not just that much Scripture depicts the second coming as “the end of the age/world,” it is that it labels it as “the last day” or simply “the end.” The Bible shows the resurrection/judgment of the righteous and the resurrection of the wicked to occur on “the last (or final) day” of “the last days” when Jesus comes. Martha had a full awareness of that truth in the New Testament, when speaking of her brother Lazarus to Christ, in John 11:23-24, “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.”

Christ did not rebuke this understanding of the last day. In fact, Christ taught in complete agreement in John 6:39.

Jesus said in John 6:39: “all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.”

Resurrection day is the last day. It is the final day of history.

Jesus said in John 6:39: “every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.”

Jesus said in John 6:44: “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.”

Jesus said in John 6:54: “Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood (speaking spiritually and figuratively), hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.”

Premils are unable to take Scripture after Scripture literally (and at face value) because it interferes with their mistaken opinion. They must therefore dismiss the "last day" being the "last day" because they have to squeeze thousands of additional days after history's last day. This is blatantly unbiblical. Amils are happy to let the Bible speak for itself.

Whilst, we are plainly in the last days there is an actual day coming which will conclude this scene of time and will see the final operation of God’s judgment upon sin, Satan and the wicked. That individual day is frequently known as “the last day.”

The sum total of God’s elect will be gloriously raised at this concluding final day. The resurrection of the righteous like that of the wicked is therefore for the purpose of judgment and happens on that great last or final day of salvation. That is how Paul could say with all assurance in 2 Timothy 4:8, “there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.”

Moreover, this concluding last day is not just a day of resurrection and judgment for the righteous but also for the wicked. This is confirmed by Christ in John 12:48, when He said, “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.”

Here the wicked are judged on the same day that the righteous are judged, namely, the “last day” of the “last days.” Judgment day is therefore the last day. The term “the last day” is quoted different times in the New Testament without any form (or undoubted requirement) of qualification or any hint that there are two separate last days, as the Premillennialist would try and argue. When Christ or any other person referred to that final day in the New Testament it was always constantly in the context of its all-consummating nature, each time referring to the matter of the resurrection/judgment of both the wicked and the righteous. The references expressly refer to the last day of this age (the Gospel age) – the day that ushers in the new heaven and the new earth. There are absolutely no grounds for believing that the last day refers to a future millennium, and therefore lasts for a literal 1,000 years. Such a suggestion only emanates out of the Premillennialist camp in order to support their flawed view of Revelation 20.

Significantly, in all the above references, the wording in the original for “last day” is always identical – 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. The “last day” is just that, there are no more days following it.

 

[WPM]

Have you never read? Jesus said, "I didn't come to bring peace but a sword." Your scenario doesn't fit the facts.

So far you don't seem to have paid much attention. But let's go on.

It is called: current kingdom reality. It occurs after entering the kingdom of God. It has already come. Those who are truly born again have entered into it. They have experienced the peace of God. When a Christian enters into the kingdom of God the antagonism toward former enemies is lifted. They have a love for the people of God. That is how the wicked know we are the Lord's.

Christ is our peace - now! A major difficulty I have with Premillennialism is that it postpones so much current blessing and projects it into a supposed period in the future that (I believe) will never be. It therefore totally nullifies countless ongoing fulfilments. This is a disturbing factor engrained within the doctrine. This passage under review is a case-in-point.

Because Christ is peace, He imparts that peace to us upon salvation. When we receive Him we receive peace. We get the full package. Jesus said in John 16:33, “in me ye might have peace.” Colossians 3:15 consequently instructs us: “let the peace of God rule in your hearts.”

Many that live in nations that would be viewed in an earthly sense as peaceful or free are in reality filled with strife, hatred and turmoil. Scripture makes it clear: “There is no peace, saith the LORD, unto the wicked” (Isaiah 48:22). Conversely, Scripture after Scripture repeatedly depicts entry into the kingdom of God and a relationship with Christ as man’s only true peace. In fact Romans 14:17 tells us "the kingdom of God is ... peace."

Peace only comes through salvation. Jesus said in that wonderful passage in John 14:27 during His earthly ministry, “Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.” If someone is redeemed then they have entered into the peace of God through the Prince of Peace. Here was the fulfilment of this reading in operation. Here was the “Prince of Peace” in operation. Peace is not merely a future hope, it is a present reality. It’s an intimate relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ. Philippians 4:7 says, “the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.”

The redeemed of all nations that come into the kingdom of God no longer “lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more." They have experienced true peace and have been reconciled unto a holy God. As a consequence, their weapons of war have been made redundant; they now operate with the tools of peace. Former enemies are miraculously reconciled “in Christ” through the blood of Jesus. The prince of peace has affected a supernatural change by way of conversion. Out goes the old and in comes the new. What was once used to destroy others has been supernaturally changed to bless others. Ancient enemies are unified within God’s great spiritual kingdom. They enter into heaven's peace.

Isaiah 2 and Micah 4 fit perfectly with the Amillennial concept of the kingdom but totally contradicts the Premillennial idea. Firstly, there are no wicked in our kingdom and there are no physical wars involved or allowed in our kingdom. It is a spiritual kingdom that is inhabited solely by God’s people and who eternally enters into the peace of God. Secondly, Amils believe Jesus ushered "the last days" 2000 years ago through the earthly ministry of Christ and will continue until "the last day" when Jesus comes. Premils invent another last days that suits their theology after the last day is finished.

The New Testament clearly teaches that Jesus Christ is currently sitting at the right hand of the father. And anyone who has visited Zion lately knows that the cornerstone is yet to be placed.

It seems you have changed your hermeneutic. Rather than attempting to understand what Isaiah and the other prophets were saying, you have given yourself permission to innovate hidden meanings.

Wrong Zion, as I demonstrated, and as you have carefully avoided. Your fight is plainly with the Scriptures.

 

[CadyandZoe]

In the New Testament, Christ rules over spiritual Zion.

Zion is a place, not a group of people. Christ, the stumbling stone came to Jerusalem (Mt. Zion) and it was their that he caused offense, which is why he was put to death.

I don't agree with Barnes. According to Paul, Israel did NOT fall into ruin. Refer to the paragraph beginning with Romans 11:11.

Gentile believers unite with Jewish believers in inhabiting Zion.

Allegorical Zion of course. As I said earlier, the Amillennial position redefines terms to suit.

Paul makes a slight alteration to Isaiah’s prophecy in order to show the fulfilment of this glorious prophecy. Instead of saying that the Redeemer would “come to Zion” he significantly says Christ would “come out of Sion.” Is there a reason for this? The reason for this significant amendment was obviously because this Old Testament prophecy was no longer unfulfilled but was perfectly fulfilled in Christ’s earthly ministry.

Negative. The subject matter of Romans 11 is God's promise to Israel, the real, actual Israel. He tells you that Israel, not the church, has been partially hardened. The fulfillment of Isaiah is yet to happen.

Many Dispensationalists will highlight the last part of Romans 11:26, which promises unbroken favor upon ethnic Israelites, but seem to miss, ignore or conveniently overlook the actual company in view. It is not all natural Israelites. It is not an unqualified statement. Scripture is careful to attribute eternal favor to only those that are redeemed (whether Jew or Gentile). The reading outlines a conditional clause: “And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the LORD.” “Sion” in reference to “Jacob” relates to the kingdom of God. Christ the Messiah (the deliverer) will come out from among true Israel, not natural Israel (Jacob).

Again, Paul is answering an objection to his gospel, predicated on the mistaken interpretation of his gospel, which seems to suggest that God's promises to Israel have failed. Your interpretation doesn't take this into account. Paul isn't offering his readers a bate-and-switch explanation. He isn't suggesting that God didn't actually make a promise to "natural Israel" but instead, was talking about "spiritual Israel." You don't seem to understand.

An essential feature of God's promise to Israel is that God himself would cause them ALL to become spiritual Israel. (Refer to Jeremiah 31:33-34) This is why Paul mentions that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fulness of the Gentiles has come in. In other words, Isaiah's prophecy was not fulfilled yet. Fulfillment awaits the moment when all the Gentiles have come in. Then and only then will God pour out his spirit on ALL flesh, meaning "all Jewish flesh."

Peter does not relate Sion (Zion) to the natural realm and to ethnicity.

That's right. But neither does he allegorize Zion as you have done. The chief cornerstone was laid in the real, actual Zion. It was placed before the Sanhedrin and the rest of the people and they rejected it. This is an historical event, from which Peter draws to make his own point concerning his own people, the Jews. Peter is not talking generally about the church here. He is talking to his own people the Jews, who are the chosen generation and the royal priesthood. His people were the ones who killed Jesus, they were the ones who took offence, they were the ones who stumbled at the word, their leaders were the ones who disallowed the stone and etc. And all of this took place in a real place called Zion.

It does not apply without salvation to natural Jews or to the physical nation of Israel, as modern-day Dispensationalists do.

Of course not. But then, at the right time, he will graft them in again.

Physical Jerusalem is no longer considered true Sion (Zion).

You must really love allegory.

 

[Phoneman777]

Your question is as clear as mud. Please reword it.

I realize you are fighting against a brand of Premill I do not subscribe to.

I firmly believe humanity's chance to get saved ends at the Second Coming. What you and I disagree about is you think there's a seamless Earthly transition from the here and now to the Earth made new - an unbroken, constant period of life and activity on Earth from Adam to eternity, and is why you are Amillennial.

Where in your scenario can be fitted the prophesied period of destruction, desolation, darkness, emptiness, silence, where a suffocating atmosphere leaves the planet devoid of humanity and the animal kingdom?

The only place this period fits is during the thousand years which separate the two resurrections, while the saints reign with Jesus in heaven, after which the capital of the universe is moved from there to here and as the City touches down, the wicked shall rise for Judgment, and the rest will be history.

 

[jeffweeder]

Do you deny a future bodily resurrection of the believer as seen in John 5:28-29, 1 Corinthians 15:51-54?

No of course not. I call this Glorification day , having a body like Jesus glorious body. Inheritance day.

 

[WPM]

I realize you are fighting against a brand of Premill I do not subscribe to.

I firmly believe humanity's chance to get saved ends at the Second Coming. What you and I disagree about is you think there's a seamless Earthly transition from the here and now to the Earth made new - an unbroken, constant period of life and activity on Earth from Adam to eternity, and is why you are Amillennial.

Where in your scenario can be fitted the prophesied period of destruction, desolation, darkness, emptiness, silence, where a suffocating atmosphere leaves the planet devoid of humanity and the animal kingdom?

The only place this period fits is during the thousand years which separate the two resurrections, while the saints reign with Jesus in heaven, after which the capital of the universe is moved from there to here and as the City touches down, the wicked shall rise for Judgment, and the rest will be history.

First, please do not talk on my behalf. I can tell you what I believe and why I am an Amil.

Are you saying that your future millennium is "destruction, desolation, darkness, emptiness, silence, where a suffocating atmosphere leaves the planet devoid of humanity and the animal kingdom?"

 

[WPM]

Zion is a place, not a group of people. Christ, the stumbling stone came to Jerusalem (Mt. Zion) and it was their that he caused offense, which is why he was put to death.

I don't agree with Barnes. According to Paul, Israel did NOT fall into ruin. Refer to the paragraph beginning with Romans 11:11.

Allegorical Zion of course. As I said earlier, the Amillennial position redefines terms to suit.

Negative. The subject matter of Romans 11 is God's promise to Israel, the real, actual Israel. He tells you that Israel, not the church, has been partially hardened. The fulfillment of Isaiah is yet to happen.

Not so! That is obviously what you have been taught. Zionists are so besotted with natural Israel and earthly Christ-rejecting Jerusalem that they miss the new covenant change that occurred and how the old is gone forever. When we get into the New Testament, and as we get to the end of our Lord’s earthly life, we see a marked turning away of the focus of God from natural earthly Jerusalem to spiritual heavenly Jerusalem. Jerusalem and her inhabitants are viewed in the New Testament as an apostate city; it stands in total contrast to the holy heavenly city, which is above, and is true. God’s blessing and presence is no longer rested upon the earthly capital of Israel, but rather dwells wherever men and women submit to Christ in salvation.

Christ highlighted that the cities of Israel, who heard the Gospel and rejected the same, were under greater damnation than those cities who had never heard the truth. In fact, He said that they were in a worse place than Sodom and Gomorrah. He rebuked them in Matthew 10:15: “Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.” This was a damning indictment upon the religious Jews of Christ’s day.

This whole sea-change can be observed at the time when the woman of Samaria declared unto Jesus, in John 4:19-24, “Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet. Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.”

Christ revealingly responded, “Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth.”

Here we see the movement away from a central geographical worship (and location), to the nations of the earth. This change came with the earthly ministry of Christ and the willful rejection of Him by the Jews. The theocratic nation was removed and replaced by a spiritual nation throughout all nations. Today we have no need to look for a brick temple in Jerusalem because we have entered into a spiritual edifice found throughout the world. God’s chosen people are “they that worship him [God] ... in spirit and in truth” (John 4:24). God’s people are a spiritual people who are spiritually circumcised.

Before His death, in Matthew 23, we see Christ condemning the Jews rejection of Himself (and His impending atonement). He thus pronounced eight ‘woes’ upon them, and declared, “ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?”

He continued, “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! behold, your house is left unto you desolate. For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.”

This was a prologue to what He was going to say, in Matthew 24. After all, there is no chapter divisions in the original. The next verses and chapter – Matthew 24:1-2 – then significantly commences, “And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple. And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? Verily I say unto you, there shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”

Luke’s account embodies both the end of Matthew 23 and the beginning Matthew 24, saying, “And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it” (Luke 19:41). The disciples asked two important questions in response, in Matthew 24. Christ then said, “if thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! But now they are hid from thine eyes” (Luke 19:42).

And continues, “for the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, and shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation” (Luke 19:43-44).

Christ’s denunciations are in full keeping with the New Testament’s view of earthly Jerusalem. Old Jerusalem is likened in this new covenant period unto Sodom and Egypt in Revelation 11. Revelation 11:8 describes physical Jerusalem today as: “the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.” This description was definitely not intended to be a commendation of Jerusalem, but to describe it for exactly what it was/is. Many modern pro-Israel commentators today would probably throw the charge of anti-Semitic at such a charge, however, this indictment came from the Holy Spirit.

Jerusalem, Sodom and Egypt are three very prominent biblical places, all of which are notable for their great rebellion against Almighty God and His repeated warnings. Notwithstanding, they are all especially remembered for the terrible judgment that befell them as a consequence of their iniquitous transgressions. All, significantly, stand to this day as a solemn and perpetual warning of how God deals with the wicked and their gross disobedience against His precepts.

As you get into the New Testament you quickly realize that physical Jerusalem is no longer considered true Zion (or Sion). Under the new covenant, Zion is heavenly, spiritual and eternal not worldly, material and provisional. Natural Jerusalem was decimated because of the rejection of their Messiah in AD70. Christ-rejecting Israel was stripped of its favored position by rejecting its Messiah. It is depicted in Scripture as an example of religious apostasy and stubborn rebellion.

Paul (that Hebrew of the Hebrews) says of earthly Jerusalem, in Galatians 4:25, “Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.”

We see the two Jerusalems compared and contrasted here, representing two different distinct peoples – God’s elect and the lost. The earthly city is a symbol of bondage, ruin and rebellion, whereas the heavenly city is used as a picture of freedom and spiritual prosperity. Unfortunately, many today look to the wrong Jerusalem and elevate the wrong Israel. They seem to forget: the old temporal earthly type has been replaced by the new heavenly eternal reality.

Paul continues, “Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son [Jerusalem below and her offspring]: for the son of the bondwoman shall NOT be heir with the son of the freewoman [those who belong to Jerusalem above]. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman [Jerusalem below], but of the free [Jerusalem above]” (Galatians 4:28-31).

The offspring of the bondwoman relates to the natural progeny of Abraham “after the flesh.” The Holy Spirit instructs: “Cast out the bondwoman and her son.” Why? “For the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.” The fact is, they are not the children of promise. Under the new covenant, natural Jerusalem is no longer the Zion of God. That city and its children (natural Israelis) are considered to be in religious bondage. Those who belong to true Jerusalem (heavenly Jerusalem) are all those that know Christ. Those who do not know Christ are in bondage and are of their father the devil.

 

[Timtofly]

I have never said that all the lions wolves ect are converted only some of them are thus they are apart of the church

Why enjoy the thousand years to have it all fall apart at the end when we will enjoy eternity forever?

Because Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15 that there would be three gatherings each in their order. The OT redeemed at the first coming. Those alive at the second coming. Then those after Jesus reigns on earth as king. Paul never said 2,000 years from now, and then 1,000 years later. We know it has already been 1992 years since the Cross. Or whenever you want to place the Cross. But if there was 1992 years since the Cross, what is another 1,000 years to God? Why not just get it all over in 100 years?

You can say, well that is what Preterist claim. Then you are living in Isaiah 65 now, and this is the best it will ever get for all eternity. How is that better than stating a future Second Coming, and another 1,000 years? That 1,000 years either never mattered by 50AD, or it was over by 1050 AD. You don't see the New Jerusalem as being a literal 1200 square mile complex. Some of us do, and it is not taking up the whole of Europe and parts of Asia. Death has not been eradicated, and people still sin and get away with it. How is that everlasting righteousness?

 

[jeffweeder]

I take note of Jesus' mention of Judgment in verse 24. By this we understand that the Lord is talking about condemnation, i.e. condemned to die. When a person passes out of death unto life, he or she is removed from the group of "those who are condemned to die" into the group of "those who stand to inherit eternal life." You can call this a "resurrection" if you want, but the term "resurrection" actually refers to someone who has been brought back from physical death, like Jesus and Lazarus was.

The time now is to partake of Jesus own resurrection and therefore not come into judgment.
Physical death is not required in order to enjoy the blessed hope of not coming into judgment and passing from death to life.

Jn 5 and Rev 20.

Jn 5
24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life


REV 20
6 Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years