22 major reasons to abandon the Premil doctrine

[Spiritual Israelite]

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:​

You missed the point completely. I'm seeing that you are good at that. I'm saying it was hinted at, yet no one caught it. They didn't understand what Jesus was saying. It wasn't made clear until Paul revealed it. Is this too hard for you to understand what I'm saying here? By saying it was hinted at, I'm not saying it wasn't hidden. We know now that Jesus was already hinting at it and He knew that they wouldn't get it at the time. I'm not saying He revealed it before Paul did. But, He referenced it in a way that they didn't understand at the time.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

And then you'd believe everything I say?

Translation: You are not able to even give me one example. So, I have no reason to believe anything you say since you can't even do that.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

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.

This is utter nonsense. You couldn't possibly be more wrong. The book of Revelation is all about Jesus Christ and His church. Just like most of the rest of the New Testament.

Nothing in Revelation about the Christian church? You have to be kidding me. Look at this verse, for example.

Revelation 12:17 Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring—those who keep God’s commands and hold fast their testimony about Jesus.

Who are those "who keep God's commands and hold fast their testimony about Jesus"? Those who are in the church. And there's much in Revelation about this war between Satan and his armies against Jesus and His church.

BTW, do you know that some of the churches in Revelation didn't exist when John wrote.

What are you talking about? Of course they did. You keep getting deeper and deeper into complete nonsense here. I don't think I will be able to take you seriously at all after reading this post.

Must have been prophetic and not talking about Christianity at all.

What are you talking about?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

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.

Maybe you should be more careful about what you say. I can only go by what you say. I guess you don't always say what you mean?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

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?

No, I don't think they were expected to understand what He was saying at the time. The understanding of a lot of things He said would come later when the Holy Spirit came to help people understand what Jesus taught.

Could it be that after Jesus rose from the dead, something changed?

Obviously. What in the world are you trying to say here?

The directive in Matthew was superseded by a new directive in Acts?

No, I never said that. Can you stop playing games and just get to the point?

You might want to consider that. I mean, surely something changed with Jesus' death and resurrection. Yes, no?

Of course it did. What is your point here? You just felt like saying a bunch of obvious things for no reason or do you have some other point?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

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

Apparently, according to our friend Rich R, we have no need to be able to hear what the Holy Spirit is saying because it's just all spelled out for us. Even an unbelievers can understand what the Holy Spirit is saying since it's all spelled out for everyone, right? Or not? Clearly, Paul didn't think so (1 Cor 2:9-16). If everything was so clear and straightforward as Rich R thinks it is then we'd all agree on these things that we talk about in this forum. But, that is far from being the case.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Let me explain. The term "holy" means "set apart" and in the Bible, "holy" indicates those whom God set apart for his purpose. His purpose may be salvation of the individual, and it that case, the New Testament refers to the one whom God is saving as a "saint". which comes from the Latin sanctus holy.

In addition, the Old Testament speaks about the people who came out of Egypt as "holy ones" and "a holy people". These people are holy, not because God is granting the eternal life; not because they are eminent for piety and virtue; not because they are redeemed. No, they are holy because God consecrated Israel to suit his purpose.

Expand your thinking.

I don't want to expand my thinking to be like yours, that's for sure. Your explanation here is about as weak of an argument as I can imagine. Peter was clearly only referring to believers when he talked about the "holy nation" in 1 Peter 2. That you want to include unbelievers in that "holy nation" shows a complete lack of discernment. He also called it a "royal priesthood" which is similar to what John wrote about in Revelation 1:5-6. And John was also only talking about believers.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

There is no time element in that passage. You are assuming that the two Israels are contemporaneous, but that is not the most logical assumption here. Why? Because the promise remains unfulfilled.

No, the reason you're saying that is only because of doctrinal bias. And your lack of willingness to acknowledge what the word "ARE" means. It's not a word used to refer to the future. It's clearly present tense. You deny even the most obvious things spelled out in scripture. You interpret everything with extreme doctrinal bias and you don't seem to have any objectivity at all.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Anyone whom God is saving is a child of promise. But there is also a nation of promise, which God will save sometime in our future.

Where is that taught in scripture? If you try to say Romans 11:25-26, then explain to me why Paul would teach that there after previously saying that he hoped some of them (his fellow Israelites) could be saved (Romans 11:14? He went from saying that to saying all of them would be saved a few verses later? Of course not. That would be ridiculous. But, of course, you don't consider things like this.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Is Jesus literal or spiritual? I take him to be a real, actual, flesh and blood guy. I guess that would make him literal. At least that's how I'd take it.

Is He not spiritual as well? Does He not dwell within each of us spiritually? Sure, He does. You make the same mistake that I've seen others here make, which is acting as if something spiritual can't be literal. Satan is a spirit being, right? Does that make him not a literal being? No. He literally exists. It's physical things that can be contrasted with spiritual things, not literal things. Literal things can be either physical or spiritual (or both).

 

[jeffweeder]

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.

Hi Rich nice to meet you.
Not all do it all the time.
When it comes to the millennium occurring when he comes he taught the opposite by teaching us that judgment will happen.

 

[Phoneman777]

It happens just after that. Jesus will physically destroy all His enemies when He returns and the judgment occurs after that.

Yes, the wicked will run to the rocks and mountains and be crushed to death...then claw their way to the surface like in some post-apocalyptic zombie fest and bow down and worship Jesus. Got it.

Wrong, bro - they will sleep in the dust of the Earth for 1,000 years while the planet is dark, silent, empty, destroyed, devoid of all life, until the Resurrection of the Damned which happens 1,000 years after the Resurrection of the Just, accorcdng to Revelation 20:3-9 KJV.

 

[Truth7t7]

Look at all the OT quotes in Romans 9-11. Now keep in mind that the Christian church was a secret that God kept to Himself until He revealed it to Paul. That means that all those OT quotes in Romans are not talking about the church. They're talking about something else, which I covered in my last post.

It's important to keep times and peoples straight, to whom God spoke and when He spoke it, if we want to avoid confusion.

Non response, of course Romans 11 shows the elect remnant Jew saved and added to the church on earth, the rest of the Jews are blinded

 

[Truth7t7]

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.

Only the chosen remnant elect Jew will be saved, the rest are blinded

Romans 11:7KJV
7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.

 

[Truth7t7]

Sorry to keep hammering the same point, but nobody knew about the mystery, this present age of grace, until God revealed it to Paul. Since Paul came some time after Jesus spoke these words, they can in no way refer to the Christian church. You have to look elsewhere for the answer as to whom God will give the kingdom. While Gentiles are often referred to as the "nations," the church is never called that.

The church is not the kingdom God promised Israel. The kingdom God promised Israel is always spoken of as a real, physical land with a real, physical king reigning on a real throne. We simply don't see that yet and we won't see it until Jesus comes back and defeats the devil at Armageddon.

Your response is purely based upon your opinion and assumption,scripture clearly teaches the kingdom was taken away from Israel

There isnt going to be a future kingdom upon this earth as you and many other zionust claim

Jesus returns in fire and final judgment, dissolving this earth by fire (The End)

 

[Truth7t7]

The descendants of the one's God led our of Egypt. The people who Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekial, etc addressed.

Isa 1:1,

The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, [and] Hezekiah, kings of Judah.
​

Jer 2:2,

Go and cry in the ears of Jerusalem, saying, Thus saith the LORD; I remember thee, the kindness of thy youth, the love of thine espousals, when thou wentest after me in the wilderness, in a land [that was] not sown.
​

Ezek 2:3,

And he said unto me, Son of man, I send thee to the children of Israel, to a rebellious nation that hath rebelled against me: they and their fathers have transgressed against me, [even] unto this very day.
​

Neither Isaiah, Jeremiah, nor Ezekiel talked about the Christians church since the only one who did know about the church at that time was God, and He kept it to Himself until much later than these guys all wrote.

I used the term "National Ethnic Israel" Jews, and you respo ded as if you didn't knowwhatI was talking about

I will use the term "Ethnic Israel" to describe you Israel above

As you have been shown several times, there isn't a future kingdom for these ethnic people you describe, Jesus Christ fulfilled the promises and covenants, it's salvation in the blood period

Galatians 3:16KJV
16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

 

[covenantee]

Again, Luke is not suggesting that Satan is a type of anything.

No type involved.

You've told us in post 1740 that the serpent is Satan.

So when Satan entered Judas, the serpent entered Judas, because you've told us that the serpent is Satan.

Luke 22:3
Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve.

Which applying your interpretation says:

Then entered the serpent into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve.

How did the serpent enter Judas? Did he bore some kind of hole in him? Of use one of Judas's orfices? Which one?

 

[CadyandZoe]

Do you think this current heaven and earth will pass away during the millennium?

Yes, in the way John means it. The question is, what does John mean to say? As I pointed out earlier, John indicated what would happen to the current heavens in chapter 6 of Revelation.

 

[CadyandZoe]

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.

Race is not the sole criteria for ethnicity, which also includes common history, language, culture, religion, mores, taboos, and commonly accepted social dynamics. God made a promise to the nation of Israel, which shared a common history with God, in what the Bible describes as a marriage relationship, she had a covenant relationship with him based on the law of Moses, which not only prescribed morality and ethics, it also prescribed holidays, mores, and cultural practices.

And it isn't a matter of "if" but "when". She will not abide in unbelief. She will come to saving faith.

 

[CadyandZoe]

I don't want to expand my thinking to be like yours, that's for sure. Your explanation here is about as weak of an argument as I can imagine. Peter was clearly only referring to believers when he talked about the "holy nation" in 1 Peter 2. That you want to include unbelievers in that "holy nation" shows a complete lack of discernment. He also called it a "royal priesthood" which is similar to what John wrote about in Revelation 1:5-6. And John was also only talking about believers.

If you have no reason to expand your thinking, then why are you here?