22 major reasons to abandon the Premil doctrine

[Randy Kluth]

Not sure how you got to here:

from here:

Amils have picked up on Replacement Theology, which is almost as old as the church. Church Fathers, like Justin Martyr, tended to confuse "Israel" with the "Church," because he no longer saw Israel as representative of God's People.

They also believe Paul used the term "Israel" for the Church when he was actually speaking of literal Israel, who Paul believed would eventually come around and become a Christian nation.
Gal 6.16 6 Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule—to the Israel of God.

They also believe Peter used a similar reference to "Israel" for the Church when he was actually speaking of literal Israel as the ideal Christian nation of the future.
1 Peter 2.9 But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. 10 Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Again, I return to Peter's declaration that the devil is wandering around like a lion. In other words, he isn't chained to a stake like a dog. He is loose.

I acknowledge what you say about the effect of Christ. In fact, John calls him the light of the world. And Western Culture has lived by that light for centuries. But it does not follow, therefore, that Satan is bound. Peter says he is loose.

And you completely disregard the very next verse after 1 Peter 5:8 as if 1 Peter 5:8 is the whole story. Ugh.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

No, not all the seven churches did exist when John wrote.

For crying out loud will you please start proving your claims already! You should know by now that I'm not going to just take your word for things like this. What evidence do you have to support this claim?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Amils have picked up on Replacement Theology,

Who are we saying is being replaced? No one! We promote and emphasize Jew and Gentile believers being together as one. No one is replaced. Instead, people are being joined together as one. I'm tired of this nonsense of being accused of promoting "Replacement Theology".

 

[Truth7t7]

You can't get past the idea that the Gospels were written to and about Israel and not the Christian church?

Fact is, "All Scripture" was written to the men and women of faith, you Zionism in dispensationalism has you blinded to this biblical Fact as seen below

2 Timothy 3:16-17KJV
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

From my pov, liberating people from the fear of death is not the same thing as *defeating death."

That isn't even what I was saying. This is futile.

This is the old argument Amils make that the "binding of the strong man" constitutes the "binding of Satan." Similar language, but in my view not the same thing. We can cast out demons, but we cannot cast Satan out of the world.

Who said that binding Satan had to do with casting him out of the world? Again, this is futile. You're arguing with a straw man.

I'm not anticipating all of your questions. I've now answered them, unless you have more?

I'm not convinced that you would answer them in the right context, so it's pointless.

Aren't we saying the same thing here, that Jesus has been doing acts of deliverance from Satan throughout the entire age until Satan is finally defeated at the end of the age?

I don't know, are we?

I never said Jesus hasn't been doing works of deliverance! Acts of grace began with the cross, when Jesus rose from the dead on behalf of our future inheritance, and then distributed his Spirit to his Church to broadcast forgiveness of sin and gifts of redemption to be offered to the entire human race. Saying that is not denying that Jesus has "started" to do acts of grace! I'm only arguing that this is not the final defeat of Satan, but only preliminary acts of grace that precede the final defeat of Satan.

You are apparently equating the binding of Satan with his final defeat, even though even in the Premil view his binding isn't his final defeat. So, I can't figure out what you're talking about. I believe Satan had to be bound in order for the gospel to successfully go out into the world while leading many millions to salvation. You disagree. So be it.

Then we're just saying the same thing, using different verses. In fact, Amils and Premils have basically the same theology

LOL!!!! Randy, you can't be serious here. Yes, that may be true in some cases for certain Amils and Premils, but it's not true in general. My theology is FAR different than dispensationalists, for example. And they are Premils. So, I find your comment to be rather naive.

 

[Truth7t7]

Who are we saying is being replaced? No one! We promote and emphasize Jew and Gentile believers being together as one. No one is replaced. Instead, people are being joined together as one. I'm tired of this nonsense of being accused of promoting "Replacement Theology".

"Replacement Theology" is a false buzzword used within the camp of Zionist dispensationalism

The fact is, these Zionist falsely believe and teach (Dual Covenant Theology) in that God has "Two People" Jews and Church

Yes we know well there is "One People" the Church, comprised of both Jew and Gentile

 

[Truth7t7]

You asked if Thessalonians 4 doesn't talk about a resurrection. You said yes. My Bible says Christians will be "raised." There is nothing there that mentions a resurrection. Revelation talks about two resurrections, but not Thessalonians. God purified every word 7 times. He knows the difference between "raising" and "resurrecting." It's incumbent upon the student of God's word to ferret out that difference.

I might also remind you that the Gospels were not written to the church. They were written to the Jews, a few things about Gentiles as well, but definitely not to the church given that it didn't even exist while Jesus was here.

To make it as clear as I can, the church has a radically different end than that of the Jews and Gentiles. Paul tells us what happens to Christians. John (and others) tells us what happens to the Jews and the Gentiles. The two ends are not identical in any way, shape, or form. Ours is much better!

BTW, you accused me of my reply not dealing with some thing or another. You are probably right about that, but I dare say the same could be said for everyone that posts here.

But in any case, I think I've now addressed Thessalonians. I actually have done that about a hundred times, but I guess not to you specifically. Now I have. But I suppose you could come up with something else I've avoided, ostensibly because I have no answer. But it's just me that does that...c'mon get real!

Your claim is outright dishonest to the scripture before your eyes!

"The Dead In Christ Shall Rise First"!

1 Thessalonians 4:15-17KJV
15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

 

[Keraz]

Where does it refer to God the Father? You keep making claims without backing them up. If you're going to make claims like this then stop being lazy and quote the text and show it.

I posted 1 Corinthians 15:24, where we are told how Jesus will hand back the Kingdom and His authority to God the Father, at the end of the Millennium. I did quote this text and I have proved you wrong: God will be the Judge of everyone who has ever lived, as per Revelation 20:11-15.

Not sure how you got to here:

from here:

I showed how the House of Israel is a separate entity from the House of Judah. Over 160 Bible verses confirm this continuing division.
Your difficulty in knowing this truth is understandable, as it is God's secret; how He has kept Judah intact as the visible entity of ancient Israel and how He has blessed and prospered the descendants of the 10 Northern tribes of true Israel; who are now the Christian peoples. As is perfectly evident in the Western nations.
They are still scattered but are prophesied to gather into all of the holy land soon after the Lord has cleared and cleansed that entire area. Deuteronomy 32:34-43, Zephaniah 1:14-18, +

 

[Keraz]

We are raised and changed and ascend into the air to be with Jesus. Jews and Gentiles go through the tribulation and then there are two resurrections. The church is the subject of neither of those resurrections. We will have been with Jesus for some time before either of those occur.

Also, if you look you can find at least two places where Paul specifically said we are saved from the wrath to come. In the Greek it is even more plain. It basically says we will be far away from the wrath to come.

This belief is wrong.
There is no general resurrection until after the Millennium. Only the GT Martyrs are resurrected when Jesus Returns. Rev 20:4.
The 'raising' of the faithful people when Jesus Returns, as described in 1 Thess 4:17, is just a transportation, NOT a transformation. It is the gathering as Matthew 24:31 says, to where Jesus will be, that is Jerusalem. Proved by Zechariah 14:4

During the forthcoming 'wrath of the Lord', the Sixth seal worldwide disaster, we will all still be here to experience it. It will be our test of faith as 1 Peter 4:12 says. We must stand firm in our faith and trust in the Lord for His protection. Isaiah 42:2 and many other scriptures like; we must endure until the end. Matthew 24:13, Revelation 13:10

 

[Randy Kluth]

That isn't even what I was saying. This is futile.

Who said that binding Satan had to do with casting him out of the world? Again, this is futile. You're arguing with a straw man.

I'm not convinced that you would answer them in the right context, so it's pointless.

I don't know, are we?

You are apparently equating the binding of Satan with his final defeat, even though even in the Premil view his binding isn't his final defeat. So, I can't figure out what you're talking about. I believe Satan had to be bound in order for the gospel to successfully go out into the world while leading many millions to salvation. You disagree. So be it.

No, the final defeat of Satan is in the Lake of Fire at the end of the Millennium.

LOL!!!! Randy, you can't be serious here. Yes, that may be true in some cases for certain Amils and Premils, but it's not true in general. My theology is FAR different than dispensationalists, for example. And they are Premils. So, I find your comment to be rather naive.

I was raised in Amil from childhood, and I became a Premil in adolescence. No notable difference in my soteriology. That's what I'm talking about when I say we have the same basic theology. Amils and Premils hold to the same basic creeds. The eschatological system is the major difference.

You need to have an energy drink or something. You are so all about how "futile" everything is!

 

[Randy Kluth]

Who are we saying is being replaced? No one! We promote and emphasize Jew and Gentile believers being together as one. No one is replaced. Instead, people are being joined together as one. I'm tired of this nonsense of being accused of promoting "Replacement Theology".

I really don't care how "tired" you are of anything. You simply need to understand terms if you are going to use them or try to negate them. Replacement Theology doesn't require that anybody deny the existence of either Jew or the nation Israel. It simply "replaces" the value of the Jewish nation in the economy of God's plans for salvation.

If God planned for the salvation of the nation Israel in the past, is He still doing so now, or is that plan "replaced" by a plan of salvation not for any particular nation but only for a collection of peoples from all nations? The latter is called "Replacement Theology," because it "replaces" Plan A with Plan B.

Dispensationalists and Futurists of other brands believe that God has retained His covenant with the nation Israel, while adding on a covenant with many other nations. As a result of these covenants we do have a collection of peoples from many nations, the international Church. But the endgame is for God to return Israel to being a "nation of God" along with many other "nations of God."

The way I put it may be a little different from how others put it, however. I'm just putting it how I believe it.

But the basic matter involves whether God is still holding on to promises He made with Abraham regarding the continuing use of the nation Israel or not? Replacement Theology sends Israel away packing because presently the Jews do not hold to the New Covenant and never will. Only a small remnant of Jews will ever do this, and certainly not an entire nation of Jews. (This is what Replacement Theology advocates believe.)

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I posted 1 Corinthians 15:24, where we are told how Jesus will hand back the Kingdom and His authority to God the Father, at the end of the Millennium. I did quote this text and I have proved you wrong: God will be the Judge of everyone who has ever lived, as per Revelation 20:11-15.

You proved nothing, as usual. And you are completely ignoring the proof I provided to show that Jesus will be on the great white throne. You are stubborn and unteachable. When your view is clearly refuted, as I did, you won't even acknowledge it. I showed you in Daniel 7:9-10 how the description of the One on the throne matches the description of Jesus in Revelation 1 and you completely ignore that.

Also, you lied and acted as if it explicitly states that the Father is said to be on the throne in Revelation 20:11, when the truth of the matter is that He is not mentioned there.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I really don't care how "tired" you are of anything.

And I don't care if you don't care about that. You continue to make false accusations even after being corrected. You don't seem to care about making false accusations about what others believe.

You simply need to understand terms if you are going to use them or try to negate them.

Why do you use terms like that without explaining what they mean then? Especially when your definition of the term is different than how most understand it.

Replacement Theology doesn't require that anybody deny the existence of either Jew or the nation Israel. It simply "replaces" the value of the Jewish nation in the economy of God's plans for salvation.

How so? God provided a way for every Israelite to be saved by way of His Son's sacrifice. So, in light of that, how was their value replaced?

If God planned for the salvation of the nation Israel in the past, is He still doing so now, or is that plan "replaced" by a plan of salvation not for any particular nation but only for a collection of peoples from all nations?

Say what now? God desires for all people from all nations to be saved and He made the way for that to happen. What more do you want?

The latter is called "Replacement Theology," because it "replaces" Plan A with Plan B.

Nonsense. God's plan is to provide the opportunity for all people to be saved and He accomplished that by way of sending His Son to die for the sins of the whole world so that whoever believing in Him will not perish but have eternal life.

Dispensationalists and Futurists of other brands believe that God has retained His covenant with the nation Israel, while adding on a covenant with many other nations. As a result of these covenants we do have a collection of peoples from many nations, the international Church. But the endgame is for God to return Israel to being a "nation of God" along with many other "nations of God."

The way I put it may be a little different from how others put it, however. I'm just putting it how I believe it.

How do you think the theology of Amils and Premils is the same when we don't view salvation the way Premils like you do in terms of salvation having anything to do with one's nationality?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

No, the final defeat of Satan is in the Lake of Fire at the end of the Millennium.

Obviously, so I can't figure out why you were talking about his final defeat in relation to his binding. At least, that's how it came across to me.

I was raised in Amil from childhood, and I became a Premil in adolescence. No notable difference in my soteriology.

That's just you. Do you represent all Amils and Premils?

That's what I'm talking about when I say we have the same basic theology.

LOL. So, you do think you represent all Amils and Premils. Hardly.

Amils and Premils hold to the same basic creeds. The eschatological system is the major difference.

Have you read Rich R's posts at all? I don't feel like I hold to the same basic creeds as a Premil like him.

You need to have an energy drink or something. You are so all about how "futile" everything is!

Our discussions seem futile sometimes because they often go nowhere. I can't even understand what you're trying to say half of the time and when I can understand what you're saying, I disagree with it probably 90% of the time.

 

[Truth7t7]

I really don't care how "tired" you are of anything. You simply need to understand terms if you are going to use them or try to negate them. Replacement Theology doesn't require that anybody deny the existence of either Jew or the nation Israel. It simply "replaces" the value of the Jewish nation in the economy of God's plans for salvation.

If God planned for the salvation of the nation Israel in the past, is He still doing so now, or is that plan "replaced" by a plan of salvation not for any particular nation but only for a collection of peoples from all nations? The latter is called "Replacement Theology," because it "replaces" Plan A with Plan B.

Dispensationalists and Futurists of other brands believe that God has retained His covenant with the nation Israel, while adding on a covenant with many other nations. As a result of these covenants we do have a collection of peoples from many nations, the international Church. But the endgame is for God to return Israel to being a "nation of God" along with many other "nations of God."

The way I put it may be a little different from how others put it, however. I'm just putting it how I believe it.

But the basic matter involves whether God is still holding on to promises He made with Abraham regarding the continuing use of the nation Israel or not? Replacement Theology sends Israel away packing because presently the Jews do not hold to the New Covenant and never will. Only a small remnant of Jews will ever do this, and certainly not an entire nation of Jews. (This is what Replacement Theology advocates believe.)

You continue to use the term "Replacement Theology"?

Call it whatever you want, when Jesus Christ shed his blood upon Calvary the Jewish system was "Abolished", with all the covenants and promises being fulfilled in Jesus Christ

It's your eschatology that is way out in left field, teaching God has a future plan for a "National Israel" in (Dual Covenant Theology) in two peoples of God, (Jew/Church)

There is one future plan for the world, and that's salvation through the shed blood upon Calvary "Period"!

Jesus Christ returns in fire and final judgement, dissolving this earth by fire (The End), there won't be a future Millennial Kingdom on this earth, being ruled from Jerusalem, it's a Zionist fairy tale!

Jesus Is The Lord

 

[Truth7t7]

Obviously, so I can't figure out why you were talking about his final defeat in relation to his binding. At least, that's how it came across to me.

That's just you. Do you represent all Amils and Premils?

LOL. So, you do think you represent all Amils and Premils. Hardly.

Have you read Rich R's posts at all? I don't feel like I hold to the same basic creeds as a Premil like him.

Our discussions seem futile sometimes because they often go nowhere. I can't even understand what you're trying to say half of the time and when I can understand what you're saying, I disagree with it probably 90% of the time.

Randy represents the perfect picture of Zionist (Dual Covenant Theology) in two peoples of God

Teaching "National Israel" has a future plan with God, and a future Millennial Kingdom on earth Ruled from Jerusalem, (Zionism) straight from the schools of John N. Darby and C.I. Scofield known as Dispensationalism, it's that simple

 

[Randy Kluth]

Randy represents the perfect picture of Zionist (Dual Covenant Theology) in two peoples of God

Teaching "National Israel" has a future plan with God, and a future Millennial Kingdom on earth Ruled from Jerusalem, (Zionism) straight from the schools of John N. Darby and C.I. Scofield known as Dispensationalism, it's that simple

I'm not a Dispensationalist, but some of Darby's thoughts were correct and are in the Bible. I call it "the Jewish Hope."

 

[Randy Kluth]

You continue to use the term "Replacement Theology"?

Call it whatever you want, when Jesus Christ shed his blood upon Calvary the Jewish system was "Abolished", with all the covenants and promises being fulfilled in Jesus Christ

Paul taught that God's promises were not negated by Jesus. Rather, the promises are fulfilled by Jesus. What God promised Abraham, the nation of Israel and a multitude of nations with faith, are fulfilled not by the Law but by Jesus Christ. If you don't accept this, you don't accept Paul.

Rom 4.13 It was not through the law that Abraham and his offspring received the promise that he would be heir of the world, but through the righteousness that comes by faith.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Obviously, so I can't figure out why you were talking about his final defeat in relation to his binding. At least, that's how it came across to me.

That's just you. Do you represent all Amils and Premils?

LOL. So, you do think you represent all Amils and Premils. Hardly.

Have you read Rich R's posts at all? I don't feel like I hold to the same basic creeds as a Premil like him.

Our discussions seem futile sometimes because they often go nowhere. I can't even understand what you're trying to say half of the time and when I can understand what you're saying, I disagree with it probably 90% of the time.

Your futility is evident not just on this subject but everywhere you go. What happened to your Christian love? What happened to "do everything to edify?" What happened to "rejoice in the Lord always," or "sing always a melody to the Lord?" You are extremely gloomy, and don't hold up well under trial. You can't seem to handle differences of opinion. What is wrong with you? I don't want to criticize you--I'd rather try to help you. But there's something wrong with a few people here who are extremely provocative in their style. By contrast there are others who act like true Christians, who get irate sometimes but always come back to being sensible and Christ-like. I say this just to stir you up to self-awareness, to keep you from heading in the wrong direction.