22 major reasons to abandon the Premil doctrine

[Spiritual Israelite]

How is it that something which you consider to be of such significance as "the kingdom that God promised Israel" is not in the NT?

Great question. It simply makes no sense whatsoever that such a significant prophecy would not be mentioned in the NT if it was actually going to happen. But, there's nothing in the NT at all about some supposed earthly, physical kingdom that God promised to Israel.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

By spiritualizing scripture I meant looking for the "hidden" meaning that only the "initiated" can understand. That's the essence of Gnosticism.

No one here is doing that, so please don't waste any more of your time talking about this.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

[QUOTE="CadyandZoe, post: 1388952, member: 8753"]Sure I do. But you asked for a New Testament Reference, which is strange. The New Testament doesn't supersede the Old Testament. Bear in mind, the New Testament authors had no reason to repeat or defend any idea from the Old Testament among folks who accepted the inerrancy of the Old Testament. With regard to promises God made to Israel, one would expect to find those promises in the Old Testament.[/QUOTE]The New Testament shines light on the Old Testament for us. Many Old Testament prophecies are referenced and explained in the New Testament. So, why would that not be the case in relation to a supposed earthly kingdom for Israel as well

 

[jeffweeder]

The new heavens and new earth is introduced during the millennium? How do you figure? How does that line up with what John taught about the new heavens and new earth? He said this regarding what the new heavens and new earth will be like:

Revelation 21:1 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.

When the new heaven and new earth are ushered in, the first heaven and first earth will have passed away. Do you think this current heaven and earth will pass away during the millennium? Also, John said "there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain" at that point. Do you think that describes the millennium?

Certainly hope CadyandZoe answers this question.

 

[jeffweeder]

LOL. Taking them for what they plainly say? No wonder you want to just ignore 1 Corinthians 2:9-16. It doesn't support your approach to interpreting scripture. Your approach doesn't require any spiritual discernment which means the Holy Spirit doesn't have to teach or reveal anything to anyone using your approach.

Right. He who has an ear let him Hear what the SPIRIT is saying to the Churches.

Hear is a good example when we are just left with our own understanding....,


Matt 17


10 And His disciples asked Him, “Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?”

11 And He answered and said, “Elijah is coming and will restore all things; 12 but I say to you that Elijah already came, and they did not recognize him, but did to him whatever they wanted. So also the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.” 13 Then the disciples understood that He had spoken to them about John the Baptist.

How on earth did they not know that JTB/ Elijah had already come to prepare the Lords first coming?

 

[Rich R]

LOL. Taking them for what they plainly say? No wonder you want to just ignore 1 Corinthians 2:9-16. It doesn't support your approach to interpreting scripture. Your approach doesn't require any spiritual discernment which means the Holy Spirit doesn't have to teach or reveal anything to anyone using your approach.

Well, how much spiritual "insight" does it take to interpret John 11:35, "Jesus wept?" About 98% of the scriptures are just like that.

I want to ignore Corinthians? What gave you that idea? I'll handle it right now:

You are taking 1 Corinthians 2:9-16 out of context. It's talking about how the Corinthians couldn't go beyond the basics of Jesus crucified because they were being extremely carnal in their behavior. On the other hand, those who walked by the spirit, i.e. did what God said in the scriptures, were able to understand a bit more. It's got nothing to do with some kind of "special understanding" that only "the initiated" can get.

BTW, do you know what the mystery was that had the princes of this world known, they would not have crucified Jesus (1 Cor 2:8)? That's a pretty bold statement, so we ought to know what it was that was so important.

Getting back to, "I want to ignore..." It's really amazing to me how so many here think they are expert mind readers or something. They're always telling me what I think, what I want, what I believe, etc. I wonder if I'll ever get that gift.

 

[Rich R]

I don't really care what you think is odd, I care what scripture teaches.

So, you think Jesus will be on earth slaying people with a literal sword coming out of His mouth then?

I would think an Israelite, particularly a spiritual Israelite, would understand Jewish idioms.

BTW, there you go telling me what I think again. But it's OK, I still love you! Nonetheless you ought to be more careful in what you aver about other folks.

 

[Rich R]

All that means is that it was His intention for the gospel to first be preached in Israel before going to the Gentiles, as He indicated in verses like Acts 1:8. You seem to read a lot more into it than that.

So somehow the folks to whom Jesus spoke in Matthew were supposed to know what he'd say sometime later? They should have known that Jesus didn't really mean that he came only for Israel, and that they really should have gone into the way of the Gentiles?

Could it be that after Jesus rose from the dead, something changed? The directive in Matthew was superseded by a new directive in Acts? You might want to consider that. I mean, surely something changed with Jesus' death and resurrection. Yes, no?

 

[Rich R]

All that means is that it was His intention for the gospel to first be preached in Israel before going to the Gentiles, as He indicated in verses like Acts 1:8. You seem to read a lot more into it than that.

I don't see nothing about Jesus saying in Matthew that although they were not to preach to the Gentiles just, yet, they would later on. Seems to me like that's adding something that isn't there. Jesus said in no uncertain terms, A) he came only for Israel, and B) the apostles at that time were to avoid the Gentiles. Leave it at that, and figure out something else about the significance of Acts 1:8.

 

[covenantee]

You attempted to argue that Moses was speaking about the church when he called Israel "a holy nation and a kingdom of priests"

Provide a copy/paste verbatim quote of your claim.

 

[Rich R]

Right. He who has an ear let him Hear what the SPIRIT is saying to the Churches.

Hear is a good example when we are just left with our own understanding....,


Matt 17


10 And His disciples asked Him, “Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?”

11 And He answered and said, “Elijah is coming and will restore all things; 12 but I say to you that Elijah already came, and they did not recognize him, but did to him whatever they wanted. So also the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.” 13 Then the disciples understood that He had spoken to them about John the Baptist.

How on earth did they not know that JTB/ Elijah had already come to prepare the Lords first coming?

Well, you yourself said the only reason they knew about Elijah and JTB was that Jesus told them. Exactly! No need for special discernment of some sort. Jesus told them something and then they knew it. We do that all the time.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

We must consider the whole scope of scripture and avoid building a doctrine a a few isolated verses.

1 Pet 1:1,

Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
​

1 Pet 2:11-12,

11 Dearly beloved, I beseech [you] as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul;

12 Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may by [your] good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation.​

Peter was talking to born again Jews. He used language and images with which they would be especially familiar. There are places in the OT where God called Israel, a chosen people, a peculiar people and that they'd be a nation of priests. But, since the mystery was hidden in the OT, they can't be talking about the church.

Paul, who received the mystery, never calls born again people priests.

You are mistaken. The "holy nation" and "royal priesthood" includes Jew and Gentile believers. John wrote about this, too.

Revelation 1:5 and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth.To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, 6 and has made us to be a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father—to him be glory and power for ever and ever! Amen.

John was speaking in the present tense here and was surely not only talking about Jewish believers being made "a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father". We know he was talking about Jew and Gentile believers there because he was addressing believers in seven churches in the ancient Roman province of Asia.

 

[Rich R]

No one here is doing that, so please don't waste any more of your time talking about this.

If you had read everything that everyone here has said to me (and others), you'd know that is a patently false statement.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

So the secret God kept secret until He revealed it to Paul was actually revealed to Matthew before Paul? How do you know the "nation" in Matt 21:43 is the church?

It wasn't revealed explicitly until He revealed it to Paul, but it was certainly hinted at before that. Such as in Matthew 21:43 as well as when Jesus referred to His "other sheep" in John 10:16.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

If you had read everything that everyone here has said to me (and others), you'd know that is a patently false statement.

Give me even one example of someone here doing that.

 

[Rich R]

You are mistaken. The "holy nation" and "royal priesthood" includes Jew and Gentile believers. John wrote about this, too.

Revelation 1:5 and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth.To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, 6 and has made us to be a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father—to him be glory and power for ever and ever! Amen.

John was speaking in the present tense here and was surely not only talking about Jewish believers being made "a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father". We know he was talking about Jew and Gentile believers there because he was addressing believers in seven churches in the ancient Roman province of Asia.

Ah...the seven churches. The word "church" is the Greek word "ekklesia" and there are more ekklesias in the scriptures than the Christian church. Acts calls a riotous mob an ekklesia.

Revelations deals mostly with Israel with some things about Gentiles. Nothing in it about the Christian church though. Revelation is Jewish in character from start to finish.

BTW, do you know that some of the churches in Revelation didn't exist when John wrote. Must have been prophetic and not talking about Christianity at all.

 

[Rich R]

It wasn't revealed explicitly until He revealed it to Paul, but it was certainly hinted at before that. Such as in Matthew 21:43 as well as when Jesus referred to His "other sheep" in John 10:16.

OK. We need to adjust Ephesians a bit:

Eph 3:9,

And to make all [men] see what [is] the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world WAS ONLY HINTED AT BY God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:
​

For your edification here's what Paul thought God said,

And to make all [men] see what [is] the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world HATH BEEN HID IN God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:​

 

[Rich R]

Give me even one example of someone here doing that.

And then you'd believe everything I say?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Well, how much spiritual "insight" does it take to interpret John 11:35, "Jesus wept?" About 98% of the scriptures are just like that.

Not 98% of prophetic scriptures. Not even close. You have to be kidding me.

I want to ignore Corinthians? What gave you that idea?

The fact that you seem to think that reading scripture is no different than reading a news article.

I'll handle it right now:

You are taking 1 Corinthians 2:9-16 out of context. It's talking about how the Corinthians couldn't go beyond the basics of Jesus crucified because they were being extremely carnal in their behavior. On the other hand, those who walked by the spirit, i.e. did what God said in the scriptures, were able to understand a bit more. It's got nothing to do with some kind of "special understanding" that only "the initiated" can get.

That is not what Paul was saying. This reveals your own lack of spiritual discernment. And what is this "special understanding" stuff that you're talking about? If that's what you want to call it when the Holy Spirit gives us insight into what scripture is saying, then so be it. But, there's nothing wrong with it when the Holy Spirit helps us to understand scripture. You seem to think it's just all spelled out for us and straightforward. That is not the case.

BTW, do you know what the mystery was that had the princes of this world known, they would not have crucified Jesus (1 Cor 2:8)? That's a pretty bold statement, so we ought to know what it was that was so important.

Of course I do. Why do you ask? Paul spelled it out in Ephesians 3:4-6. Does this somehow mean that the entire Bible is all spelled out for us? If that was God's intention, then why is there so much symbolism in the book of Revelation?

Getting back to, "I want to ignore..." It's really amazing to me how so many here think they are expert mind readers or something. They're always telling me what I think, what I want, what I believe, etc. I wonder if I'll ever get that gift.

We're going by the impression you give by what you say. Maybe you need to learn to communicate more clearly if the things you say don't illustrate what you actually believe.

 

[covenantee]

Negative. Paul asks "Did Israel stubble so as to fall?" The answer is no.

Paul is talking about ethic Israel. "Did Israel stubble so as to fall?" The answer is no.

The words you want are "stumble" and "ethnic".

Israel was comprised of multiethnic Gentiles and Jews from its birth and throughout its history.

There never was an "ethic" Israel.

This is the condition they must meet to avoid falling:

Romans 11:23
And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.