The founding fathers of modern-day Premillennialism were heretics.

[WPM]

Of course your "Partial Preterist" in your eschatology, you believe and teach Matthew 24:15 Daniel's AOD and Matthew 25:21 The Great Tribulation has been fulfilled in the Olivet discourse

You believe Matthew 24:29-30 is future in the second coming

Your eschatology is 100% "Partial Preterist"

If you believed Matthew 24:29-30 in the second coming was fulfilled you would be "Full Preterist" a heretical belief in my opinion

I'm futurist on all three mentioned above, just as scripture teaches "Future Unfulfilled"

I'm not mistaken in my explantation, your ignorant of the facts surrounding "Preterism"

Jesus Is The Lord

I would rather be a "Partial Preterist" than run with Pretrib theology.

 

[WPM]

Reformed Eschatology in 66-70AD Preterist fulfillment is a lie,, no different than a pre-trib rapture or Millennial Kingdom on this earth is a lie

Perhaps your views are aligned with the Jehovahs Witnesses, preterist a fact

You were clearly shown Daniel 9:27 and how the "He" would be present on earth to the "Consummation" or Ultimate End

Your claim that the desolation started in 70AD and continued to this day is laughable, just like dispensationalisms claim of a 70th floating week of Daniel for 2,000 years and waiting

The bad guy below that causes Daniel's AOD seen in Matthew 24:15 will be present on earth to the (Consummation) or (The Ultimate End)

Scripture clearly teaches that the event is future, and didnt take place in 66-70AD in the Roman destruction of Jerusalem, as Preterism claims

Merriam-Webster
Definition of consummation
1: the act of consummating the consummation of a contract by mutual signaturespecifically : the consummating of a marriage
2: the ultimate end : FINISH

Daniel 9:27KJV
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Matthew 24:15KJV
15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand

It is actually you that is promoting Dispensationalism. Very sad!

 

[WPM]

Long response, I disagree

As I stated I believe Isaiah 66:1-4 shows a future temple being built and animal sacrifice renewed, with 2 Thessalonians 2:11 in the delusion being sent by God supporting the claim

It is a long response that you totally avoided! You failed to address all the biblical evidence contained within that post. I will therefore repeat it and make key additions.

There is no 3rd temple mention in Scripture.

One cannot help but see the drastic move away from the physical to the spiritual, from the shadow to the substance, from the imperfect to the true, from the temporal to the eternal, from the earthly to the heavenly under the new covenant. The physical temple is replaced with a spiritual temple, multiple animal sin offerings are replaced by one final sacrifice for sin. Christ and all the NT writers taught the superseding of the old abolished system with the new eternal system. Basically, we move from the type to the anti-type, from the anticipated to the realized, from the inadequate to the true.

After the tearing of the veil, the earthly temple loses its significance and relevance. It becomes a symbol of rebellion and the focus of God’s distain.

Daniel 9:26 says: “the people of the prince that shall come (speaking of the Roman soldiers) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.”

In Daniel 9:27 after predicting that the old covenant would be removed, the angel predicted that God would destroy the temple (the centre-point of the sacrifices) forever. We learn: “for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”

This whole passage is focused upon Calvary and the irreversible affect it had on Israel’s religious sacrifices and the oblations. The first thing we see is that in God’s economy it caused them to cease. In the economy of the religious Jews at the time of Calvary they stubbornly and sinfully continued to practice their sacrifices. The whole focus of Jewish religious worship was centred on the temple. It was here that the Jews came to make their typical atoning sacrifices.

From this passage, it is clear that it is the nature and exercise and of these abominations that causes the desolation to occur. It is evidently the gross wickedness of these abominations that draws God’s wrath upon the temple. Also, for the fury of God to be justly focused on the temple (the centre of Jewish worship), the Jewish people, who this prophecy was primarily directed towards, must perpetrate them. It cannot relate to the practices of others, especially the heathen, who had NO part in or responsible for or to the temple.

The duration of this desolation lasts until the Lord’s glorious Second Advent. This reading declares, “he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation.”

The temple will will be derelict until the consummation at the one final future Coming of Christ. There is no mention of its rebuilding. Your hermeneutics are more akin to Premil - explaining away the clear and repeated New Testament fulfilment with your opinion of the Old Testament predictions.

We see the fulfilment of this in Christ’s words in Matthew 23:37-39: “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 (the consummation, as Daniel predicted).”

Christ continues (to remove any ambiguity as to what He was referring to) in Matthew 24:1-2, “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.”

This couldn’t be clearer.

What was going to replace the old physical Jewish building in Jerusalem was not something that was restricted to one race but a global spiritual temple that embraced all nations equally.

In John 4:19-24 we see Christ addressing this subject, in response to a statement made by the woman at the well. The woman said to Christ, “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 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: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.”

What Christ was teaching here was that a new economy was being introduced through His earthly ministry that would forever replace the old. No longer would the worship of the living God be restricted to a natural geographical land-mass or be centered upon a physical temporal brick building built with hands in earthly Jerusalem, rather, it would now be concentrated in a spiritual eternal temple (the redeemed Church) which is spiritual located within the heavenly New Jerusalem. That temple would not be restricted to one physical nation but would be situated throughout all the nations of the world.

Jerusalem would no longer be the center of divine worship on this earth. Geographical locality becomes irrelevant in worshipping God. One location would be as good as another to worship God. In saying this, Jesus was internationalizing divine worship and the community of Christ.

After Calvary, the temple becomes synonymous throughout the New Testament with (1) Christ, (2) the body of Christ, and (3) the temple in heaven.

Since Christ, the worship of God was no longer restricted to a physical earthly building but rather relocated to an invisible spiritual temple called the Church. The Old Testament tabernacle, as important and powerful as it was, became a deficient temporal type of the more perfect spiritual fulfilment in Christ and in His Church. This teaching about the spiritual manifestation of the temple was clearly an anathema to the unbelieving Jew and was regarded as complete heresy.

The house referred to here is a spiritual house and relates to the Lord Jesus Christ and the building of His spiritual body – the Church. Any Jew interpreting this Old Testament text literally would have mistakenly assumed that the hope for the nations in the last days would arise in the form of the physical temporal earthly temple in Jerusalem rather than a new spiritual temple.

Jesus said to the Jews in John 2:18-21, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”

The Jews at the time of Christ, being ignorant and earthly minded, interpreted this statement to mean: He was claiming to destroy and rebuild the physical Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. The reading records, “Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?”

However, the next verse exposed their blindness, saying, “But he spake of the temple of his body” (v 21).

Christ spiritualises the temple here. None could surely dispute this. There were 2 different mind-sets in this picture. Christ’s heavenly mind-set presenting the introduction of the new covenant in the form of Himself and the Jews carnal earthly mind-set hankering towards an old inadequate system.

Christ also declared during His ministry, whilst standing in the actual temple, “I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple” (Matthew 12:6). However, the Jews in the main had No comprehension of that glorious statement. To this spiritual Temple would the nations finally find mercy, thus, fulfilling perfectly what the old temple couldn’t. And thus, through Himself (the living Temple), fulfilling Isaiah 2:2 that “all nations shall flow unto it.”

Granted, the temple was central to the Jewish faith. For anyone to intimate in any way that it would be destroyed was viewed as nothing short of blasphemy. However, Christ was redirecting their eyes from the old temporal building – which was an imperfect shadow and type of Himself – and pointing them towards the new all-sufficient eternal temple – in the form of His person. Through His impending death, the temporal temple and its ceremonies would be done away with.

 

[Truth7t7]

I would rather be a "Partial Preterist" than run with Pretrib theology.

Pre-Trib theology is a lie, are you a Jehovahs Witness, Smiles!

The truth hurts doesn't it, reformed eschatology in 66-70AD fulfillment is a fairy tale, just like a Millennial Kingdom and Pre-Trib rapture is

Don't throw rocks in a glass house because your living in one, "just like them"

Daniel's AOD, And The Great Tribulation Are "Future" and they didn't take place in your "Preterist" 66-70AD as you believe and teach

Jesus Is The Lord

 

[Truth7t7]

It is actually you that is promoting Dispensationalism. Very sad!

It is actually you that is promoting "Preterist" Eschatology, Very Sad!

Your accusations are a lie, just like a pre-trib rapture and Millennial Kingdom are a lie

Your reformed "Preterist" eschatology is in the same format, claims of 66-70AD fulfillment of Daniel's AOD and The Great Tribulation is in the same category of Pinocchio's nose is growing again

Jesus Is The Lord

 

[Truth7t7]

It is a long response that you totally avoided! You failed to address all the biblical evidence contained within that post. I will therefore repeat it and make key additions.

There is no 3rd temple mention in Scripture.

One cannot help but see the drastic move away from the physical to the spiritual, from the shadow to the substance, from the imperfect to the true, from the temporal to the eternal, from the earthly to the heavenly under the new covenant. The physical temple is replaced with a spiritual temple, multiple animal sin offerings are replaced by one final sacrifice for sin. Christ and all the NT writers taught the superseding of the old abolished system with the new eternal system. Basically, we move from the type to the anti-type, from the anticipated to the realized, from the inadequate to the true.

After the tearing of the veil, the earthly temple loses its significance and relevance. It becomes a symbol of rebellion and the focus of God’s distain.

Daniel 9:26 says: “the people of the prince that shall come (speaking of the Roman soldiers) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.”

In Daniel 9:27 after predicting that the old covenant would be removed, the angel predicted that God would destroy the temple (the centre-point of the sacrifices) forever. We learn: “for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”

This whole passage is focused upon Calvary and the irreversible affect it had on Israel’s religious sacrifices and the oblations. The first thing we see is that in God’s economy it caused them to cease. In the economy of the religious Jews at the time of Calvary they stubbornly and sinfully continued to practice their sacrifices. The whole focus of Jewish religious worship was centred on the temple. It was here that the Jews came to make their typical atoning sacrifices.

From this passage, it is clear that it is the nature and exercise and of these abominations that causes the desolation to occur. It is evidently the gross wickedness of these abominations that draws God’s wrath upon the temple. Also, for the fury of God to be justly focused on the temple (the centre of Jewish worship), the Jewish people, who this prophecy was primarily directed towards, must perpetrate them. It cannot relate to the practices of others, especially the heathen, who had NO part in or responsible for or to the temple.

The duration of this desolation lasts until the Lord’s glorious Second Advent. This reading declares, “he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation.”

The temple will will be derelict until the consummation at the one final future Coming of Christ. There is no mention of its rebuilding. Your hermeneutics are more akin to Premil - explaining away the clear and repeated New Testament fulfilment with your opinion of the Old Testament predictions.

We see the fulfilment of this in Christ’s words in Matthew 23:37-39: “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 (the consummation, as Daniel predicted).”

Christ continues (to remove any ambiguity as to what He was referring to) in Matthew 24:1-2, “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.”

This couldn’t be clearer.

What was going to replace the old physical Jewish building in Jerusalem was not something that was restricted to one race but a global spiritual temple that embraced all nations equally.

In John 4:19-24 we see Christ addressing this subject, in response to a statement made by the woman at the well. The woman said to Christ, “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 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: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.”

What Christ was teaching here was that a new economy was being introduced through His earthly ministry that would forever replace the old. No longer would the worship of the living God be restricted to a natural geographical land-mass or be centered upon a physical temporal brick building built with hands in earthly Jerusalem, rather, it would now be concentrated in a spiritual eternal temple (the redeemed Church) which is spiritual located within the heavenly New Jerusalem. That temple would not be restricted to one physical nation but would be situated throughout all the nations of the world.

Jerusalem would no longer be the center of divine worship on this earth. Geographical locality becomes irrelevant in worshipping God. One location would be as good as another to worship God. In saying this, Jesus was internationalizing divine worship and the community of Christ.

After Calvary, the temple becomes synonymous throughout the New Testament with (1) Christ, (2) the body of Christ, and (3) the temple in heaven.

Since Christ, the worship of God was no longer restricted to a physical earthly building but rather relocated to an invisible spiritual temple called the Church. The Old Testament tabernacle, as important and powerful as it was, became a deficient temporal type of the more perfect spiritual fulfilment in Christ and in His Church. This teaching about the spiritual manifestation of the temple was clearly an anathema to the unbelieving Jew and was regarded as complete heresy.

The house referred to here is a spiritual house and relates to the Lord Jesus Christ and the building of His spiritual body – the Church. Any Jew interpreting this Old Testament text literally would have mistakenly assumed that the hope for the nations in the last days would arise in the form of the physical temporal earthly temple in Jerusalem rather than a new spiritual temple.

Jesus said to the Jews in John 2:18-21, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”

The Jews at the time of Christ, being ignorant and earthly minded, interpreted this statement to mean: He was claiming to destroy and rebuild the physical Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. The reading records, “Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?”

However, the next verse exposed their blindness, saying, “But he spake of the temple of his body” (v 21).

Christ spiritualises the temple here. None could surely dispute this. There were 2 different mind-sets in this picture. Christ’s heavenly mind-set presenting the introduction of the new covenant in the form of Himself and the Jews carnal earthly mind-set hankering towards an old inadequate system.

Christ also declared during His ministry, whilst standing in the actual temple, “I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple” (Matthew 12:6). However, the Jews in the main had No comprehension of that glorious statement. To this spiritual Temple would the nations finally find mercy, thus, fulfilling perfectly what the old temple couldn’t. And thus, through Himself (the living Temple), fulfilling Isaiah 2:2 that “all nations shall flow unto it.”

Granted, the temple was central to the Jewish faith. For anyone to intimate in any way that it would be destroyed was viewed as nothing short of blasphemy. However, Christ was redirecting their eyes from the old temporal building – which was an imperfect shadow and type of Himself – and pointing them towards the new all-sufficient eternal temple – in the form of His person. Through His impending death, the temporal temple and its ceremonies would be done away with.

We Disagree

Isaiah 66:1-4 shows a future temple/house being built and renewed animal sacrifice

Jesus Is The Lord

 

[WPM]

We Disagree

Isaiah 66:1-4 shows a future temple/house being built and renewed animal sacrifice

Jesus Is The Lord

You are not addressing the evidence. Notwithstanding, I am not going to get into name-calling with you. We agree on a lot more than we disagree on. Sorry if I offended you. That was not my intent.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Much Scripture proves that Jesus is "the first resurrection" (Acts 26:23 and Revelation 20:6), "the firstborn from the dead" (Colossians 1:18), "the firstfruits of them that slept" (1 Corinthians 15:20), "first begotten of the dead" (Revelation 1:5).

Yes Jesus is the first resurrection from the dead---never to die no more! But context dear lad is critical. Rev. 20:6 is not talking about Jesus first resurrection, but a specific resurrection of a large group of people. Once again you have to have Jesus beheaded for not taking the mark and Jesus being multiple people and Jesus reigning with Jesus for the 1,000 years! Unless you wish to symbolize away all that describes who gets to be in the first resurrection!

For someone who supposedly went or taught in college your grammar is shocking.

Good for him! Hope he never develops severe chronic arthritis.

It is frankly hard to believe your boastings. The fact is: the roots of your theology came from the heretics not the Bible. You advocate a non-corroborative doctrine. Amils have multiple Scripture. Amil is built on safer ground. Amil is built upon corroboration. Multiple strong and repeated Scriptures on each tenet of that position proves that doctrine. Let us discuss some of the water-tight support Amil enjoys for its understanding of Rev 20.

Says you, we know better!

How about giving all your corroboration for your opinion of Revelation 20.

It may be difficult for you to understand! But here it is:

Revelation 20:4-6
King James Version

4 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 and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.



without someone "reinterpreting the Inspired write of Gods Word here is exactrly what John says in plain language:

1. JOhn sees thrones
2. Those on the thrones were beheaded for their witness of Jesus, the Word of God and did not worship teh beast or take his mark
3. they lived and reigned with christ for 1,000 years
4. The rest of the dead did not live until that 1,000 years ended
5. Those who had part in trhe first resurrection are called blessed.
6. On those blessed ones- the second death has no power!

My 10 year old grandson can understand this! You needed someone sometime long ago to reinterpret this passage to make it say what you are saying. Like God needs a decoder for something so simple.


So Peter and Paul lied when they wrote teh Bible according to you.

JOhn did not believe what you believed nor did the 2nd century church for the most part.

Matthew 12:22-29, Mark 3:11, 23-27, Luke 10:18-19, Luke 11:20-22, John 12:31-33 Colossians 2:13-15, Hebrews 2:14-15, I John 3:8, Revelation 9:1-11 and Revelation 20:2 prove Satan was bound, defeated, incapacitated, divested of power, disarmed, brought to naught, undone, stripped and spiritually imprisoned through Christ's sinless life, atoning death and triumphant resurrection. Colossians 2:15 tells us: “having spoiled (or divested or disarmed) principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.” Satan has not been rendered immobile or inoperative but is limited in his power, kingship and influence by being defeated on the cross. He is like a dog on a chain. He is shackled.

Ephesians 6:11-13
King James Version

11 Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.

12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.

Paul believed the devil was still roaming about unchained un-imprisoned etc.

1 Peter 5:8
King James Version

8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:


Peter believed Satan was still roaming about devouring souls! Whom to believe? The inspired writers of Gods Word or Paul Malcomson ? Well I know this is the un-PC answer, but I am going to go with the Bible.

 

[WPM]

Op Note

Whilst ancient and modern Amillennialists share much in common with the earliest Chiliast fathers in regard to the character of the earth, those who inhabit it and the environment produced that follows the return of Christ, they go their separate ways with them on their view of the intermediate state. Despite this large-scale concord between both in regard to the perfect and pristine nature of the world to come, there was a strong passionate underlying divergence on the location of the redeemed after death. This was hotly disputed between both sides. This was indeed a toxic battlefield. To gain favor and diminish the credibility of the other position, each likened the view of the other to heretics or apostates. Ironically, the intermediate state would be an issue of nearly wholesale agreement today between modern-day evangelical Amillennialists and Premillennialists.

Amillennialists believed (and believe) the dead in Christ remain in heaven in a disembodied state to rule with Christ until the second coming. The dead saints then return with Christ in majesty and glory, putting on their new glorified resurrected bodies. They taught that the second coming ushered in the end of time; this would see the removal of this current corrupt earth, sin, sinners and Satan and would usher in the introduction of the new heavens and new earth.

Even though the early Chiliasts recognized those who believed in a climactic coming of Christ as orthodox brethren, they often repudiated their beliefs by likening them to the heretical Gnostics who believed God’s people went direct into the presence of God upon death. It seems possible that they used the Gnostic card as a weapon to discredit the idea of a heavenly intermediate state and a climactic return of Christ in order to dissuade people away from Amillennialism. From studying the early writers, we can see that the same passion and partiality that exists today within the different camps in regard to eschatology was similarly displayed back then.

These of course were convenient associations to place against either because there was a semblance of truth to the charges, in that each camp did hold similar views to the repudiated groups on the matter of the afterlife. The Jews rejected Christ’s sinless life, atoning death and glorious resurrection. They therefore taught that the faithful went to Abraham’s bosom upon death and stayed there until resurrection day. The Gnostics understood that the faithful ascended straight into the heavenlies upon death. So, these were smart connections to make to discredit their rivals.

Although this may seem strange to us living in our day, this was the chosen battle field that divided the ancient fathers on either side of the millennial debate. This is a prime example of how we must glean the prevailing points of contention back in the day before jumping to rash conclusions. The fact is: we have no right to decide the critical conflict of the ancients. They already chose it. We just have to understand it.

Leading Chiliasts, Justin, Irenaeus and Tertullian all acknowledged that there was a sizeable movement of genuine established orthodox advocates who rejected the Chiliast viewpoint. Their influence must have been significant because they are noted as an establish grouping within the early Church. Irenaeus testifies:

Inasmuch, therefore, as the opinions of certain [orthodox persons] are derived from heretical discourses, they are both ignorant of God’s dispensations, and of the mystery of the resurrection of the just, and of the [earthly] kingdom which is the commencement of incorruption, by means of which kingdom those who shall be worthy are accustomed gradually to partake of the divine nature (capere Deum) (Against Heresies Book V, Chapter 32).​

Essentially, these notable orthodox opponents are rebuked for rejecting the Chiliast blueprint concerning the three-fold gradation experience of believers. They were also criticized for being against the idea of a purgatory-style intermediate state in Hades before the second coming followed by another refining age in between “this age” (time) and “the age to come” (eternity). This period was said to involve a stripping that supposedly equipped the saints to “gradually … partake of the divine nature.” These early Amillennialists also rejected the existence of, and the gradual improvement of, the resurrected saints on a future earth. They rather held that glorification will fully and completely perfect the people of God for all eternity when Jesus comes, whereupon they will populate the new regenerated earth.

Irenaeus saw “the resurrection of the just” ushering in “the [earthly] kingdom which is the commencement of incorruption.” This is notable because Irenaeus later places the judgment of believers after the completion of his future millennium. This phrase “the commencement of incorruption” implies that the saints would continue to undergo enhancement in a future millennium to prepare them for the eternal state.

Irenaeus attacked the Amillennialists who believed that the dead in Christ ascended immediately into the presence of God after their departure from this life. He censured those who opposed his belief that the righteous dead went direct to Hades to be tested upon death and await the second coming. He often likened their views to those of the heretics:

Since … some who are reckoned among the orthodox go beyond the pre-arranged plan for the exaltation of the just, and are ignorant of the methods by which they are disciplined beforehand for incorruption, they thus entertain heretical opinions. For the heretics, despising the handiwork of God, and not admitting the salvation of their flesh, while they also treat the promise of God contemptuously, and pass beyond God altogether in the sentiments they form, affirm that immediately upon their death they shall pass above the heavens and the Demiurge, and go to the Mother (Achamoth) or to that Father whom they have feigned. Those persons, therefore, who disallow a resurrection affecting the whole man (universam reprobant resurrectionem), and as far as in them lies remove it from the midst [of the Christian scheme], how can they be wondered at, if again they know nothing as to the plan of the resurrection? (Against Heresies Book V, Chapter 31:1).​

These “orthodox” Amillennialists that believed the dead in Christ rise immediately in spirit into the presence of God in heaven upon death are strongly criticized by Irenaeus. He likened the view of the disembodied elect entering heaven upon death to the heresy of Gnosticism. However, this seems strange in the light of the biblical teaching that to be absent from the body” is “to be present with the Lord” (2 Cor 5:8). This is a view that is commonly accepted by most sound Premillennialists and Amillennialists today. Saying all this, there is no doubt that there was probably a lot of theological posturing going on here in these comments, in order to discredit “the other side’s beliefs.” Nothing, at this time, would have got believers attention more or had more impact than likening a doctrine to Gnosticism.

Early Amillennialist teaching would obviously have cut across Irenaeus’ elaborate scheme of a “pre-arranged plan for the exaltation of the just” and would have doubtless have caused this top Chiliast proponent to strongly refute this major opposing doctrine.

Irenaeus was not suggesting that the orthodox Amillennial advocates in any way rejected the physical resurrection when Jesus comes, after all, to believe such would immediately nullify their orthodox credentials; it would also invalidate the distinction and comparison between the mainstream and the heretics. It would place them far outside the pale of orthodoxy. He simply disagreed with them dividing up the ascent of the inward man and the physical man in the whole resurrection process. He believed that the soul and spirit would not be perfected until it was clothed with a glorified body. Basically, it was all or nothing. In his estimation, this would only occur at the Second Advent. In his reasoning, he is out of step with most sound Premillennialists today, of whatever shade.

Fellow Chiliast, Justin also acknowledged that there were many sincere brethren among the orthodox who rejected Chiliasm. Justin asked Trypho (his Jewish opponent):

Tell me, do you really admit that this place, Jerusalem, shall be rebuilt; and do you expect your people to be gathered together, and made joyful with Christ and the patriarchs, and the prophets, both the men of our nation, and other proselytes who joined them before your Christ came? or have you given way, and admitted this in order to have the appearance of worsting us in the controversies?" I admitted to you formerly, that I and many others are of this opinion, and [believe] that such will take place, as you assuredly are aware; but, on the other hand, I signified to you that many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise (Dialogue with Trypho: Chapter 80).​

Justin admits that there were “many” sincere non-millennialist believers in his day. The only apparent difference between Justin and Irenaeus’ teaching seems to be that Justin advanced nothing in regard to the just being “disciplined beforehand for incorruption.” That in itself does not suggest that he didn’t believe such. He definitely held to the general format Irenaeus taught. We just do not have any surviving statements on that matter. Justin then speaks about other non-orthodox apostate professors who also rejected this Chiliast theory:

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Other Scripture shows the reigning of the dead in Christ now during the intra-Advent period (Revelation 20:4). See also Hebrews 12:18, 22-23, Revelation 6:9-10, 7:9-17, 15:1-3.

So then teh beast and the mark and the beheading of those reigning saints all occurred before Jesus" death and resurrection to you. Can you please show me in history when this occurred?

Christ appears with His holy angels (Matthew 13:41-43, 49 16:27 24:29-31 25:31-32, Mark 13:25-27, Luke 9:26, Revelation 14:14-20) and the New Jerusalem (John 14:1-3, Hebrews 11:8-10, 13-16, 13:14. Revelation 3:11-12, 21:1-4).

Amils force these together, because they abandon all the OT unfulfilled promises God made.

There is a climactic conflagration (Job 14:12-14, Isaiah 13:9-11, Isaiah 34:1-4, 8, Isaiah 65:17-21, Isaiah 66:22-24, Joel 2:3, Joel 2:10-11, Malachi 4:1-3, Matthew 24:29-30, Matthew 24:35-44, Mark 13:24-26, Luke 21:25-27, Romans 8:18-23, 1 Corinthians 15:23-24, 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10, 2 Peter 3:10-13, Hebrews 1:10-12, Revelation 6:13-17, Revelation 16:15-20, Revelation 19:11-16 and Revelation 20:11-15).

If you read teh bible like the book it is, and not like a bowl of spagetti, and used the rules of Grammar God gave us to understand language, you would clearly see you are quoting several different "conflagrations

Perfection arrives with the age to come (Luke 20:27-36, Romans 8:19-23, 1 Corinthians 15:50-55, 2 Peter 3:3-13 Philippians 3:20-21, 1 Peter 4:3-7, Hebrews 1:10-12 and Revelation 20:11-15, 21:1-5).

The age to come possesses no mortals. The wicked are destroyed at His appearing (2 Samuel 22:9, Job 41:20-21, Psalm 18:7-8, 37:9-11, 50:1-6, 68:1-3, 97:3-5, Isaiah 11:4-5, 13:9, 30:33, 66:15-17, Joel 2:1-3, 2:10-11, Nahum 1:1, 5-6, Malachi 4:1, Luke 17:26-30, 20:34-36, Romans 8:19-23, 1 Corinthians 6:9, 13:8-13, 15:50-55, 1 Thessalonians 4:15-5:3, II Thessalonians 1:4-10, Revelation 16:15-21, 19:11-18, Revelation 21-22).

1 Corinthians 13:12, Ephesians 4:13 and Revelation 10:5-7 show that the curtain coming down on the mystery of God, thus confirming we are at the end of time and entering into eternity when all will finally be revealed.

We agree here, except for when the next age arrives. I say aftger the 1,000 years literally with the tribulation period that lasts 7 years (Daniels 70th week) you disagree and make much of the language of the bible highly symbolic. Why should I accept your symbolisms as correct over premil covenant theologians, even several dispensational theologians of the Mormons or JW's or dozens of others who have reinterpreted simple passages with highly philosophical arguments like you do?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I do not know what you're trying to say. Your grammar is terrible.

Look slower and forgive my arthritic hands. If you can't then put me on your ignore list as being too handicapped to deal with one of your stature. But you sepnd more time with teh church fathers and hitting me for grammar and spelling than you do defending you rposition biblically.

And no just throwing together a mass amount of verses like you did for "chaotic conflagrations" and saying they are all one is not defense, just using a concordance and placing verses together that have some typoew of battle together in one post.

 

[WPM]

So then teh beast and the mark and the beheading of those reigning saints all occurred before Jesus" death and resurrection to you. Can you please show me in history when this occurred?



Amils force these together, because they abandon all the OT unfulfilled promises God made.




If you read teh bible like the book it is, and not like a bowl of spagetti, and used the rules of Grammar God gave us to understand language, you would clearly see you are quoting several different "conflagrations



We agree here, except for when the next age arrives. I say aftger the 1,000 years literally with the tribulation period that lasts 7 years (Daniels 70th week) you disagree and make much of the language of the bible highly symbolic. Why should I accept your symbolisms as correct over premil covenant theologians, even several dispensational theologians of the Mormons or JW's or dozens of others who have reinterpreted simple passages with highly philosophical arguments like you do?

The problem is: you invent 3 ages when Scripture only recognizes 2. Christ and the New Testament writers only recognize two overriding ages in their teaching – “this world/age” and “the world/age to come.” One is current, corrupt and temporal and the other is impending, perfect and eternal. One refers to mortal life on earth in the here-and-now, and the other refers to our eternal state. These terms are commonly used in the New Testament when contrasting the toil and trouble of our day with the glory and rest of the hereafter. These two common phrases are found in different places in the New Testament, along with several other similar expressions, referring to time and eternity. Basically, there is now and there is then – there is no in-between. The pivotal event that divides these two diverse ages is the glorious climactic return of Jesus Christ.

Scripture makes it abundantly clear that there is no intervening time-period or temporal age in between “this age” and “the age to come.” It is within the bounds of this juxtapose alone that we understand the whole eschatological arrangement, with its two unique diverse worlds. Kim Riddlebarger explains: “the two-age model is very simple in its structure and is based on texts that can only be described as clear and straightforward” (A Present or Future Millennium?).

Let us see what the Bible attributes to the oft-mentioned time-period “this age” [Gr. aion]. Galatians 1:4 tells us that Christ “gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world [Gr. aion or age], according to the will of God and our Father.”

According to this passage, what is “this age” particularly known for? What sets it apart from the age to come?

It is “evil”! The Greek word for evil is poneros! The meaning of this word is: “hurtful in effect or influence.” The word indicates ‘degeneracy from original virtue’. We do not need to look too far to realize that it is talking about our current age. In fact, evil has been with us since the fall, and will be with us to the second coming. This gives us immediate insight into the starting and finishing point of “this age.”

This age is constantly depicted throughout Scripture as being plagued by the existence of sin, decay and death. It is never portrayed as a pleasant, pristine or lasting state. In fact, Galatians 1:4 describes this age as “this present evil age;” one that Christ came to “deliver” us from through His death. Evil marks the period of time in-between the fall and the second coming of Christ. We can therefore confidently conclude that “this age” that we are looking at is still with us.

Paul the apostle tells us in Ephesians 5:16 that we should be: “redeeming the time, because the days are evil.”

This is a present ongoing reality on planet earth.

The age to come has completely different, unique and elevated qualities that this age does not possess. It is characterized by incorruption, eternal life and perfection. It is a glorified existence that forbid any form of sin, mortality and corruption. Repeated Scripture tells us that the curse upon man will only last until Christ returns. It also tells us that the current heavens and earth will one day be replaced by a new regenerated heavens and earth. That is because the current arrangement has been corrupted by sin. As a consequence, our universe is finite and deteriorating, and its history will one day come to an end. All chronology currently sits in between creation and the consummation of all things. The whole of Scripture (Old Testament and New Testament) looks forward to the glorious day of restoration and perfection with expectancy. All creation waits with eager anticipation for that glorious moment when depravity and decay will finally be banished from creation forever.

Luke 20:27-33 records: “Then came to him certain of the Sadducees, which deny that there is any resurrection; and they asked him, Saying, Master, Moses wrote unto us, If any man's brother die, having a wife, and he die without children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. There were therefore seven brethren: and the first took a wife, and died without children. And the second took her to wife, and he died childless. And the third took her; and in like manner the seven also: and they left no children, and died. Last of all the woman died also. Therefore in the resurrection whose wife of them is she? for seven had her to wife.”

Christ replies in Luke 20:34-36: “The children of this world [Gr. aion or age] marry, and are given in marriage: But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world [Gr. aion or age], and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.”

Luke adds more meat on the bones compared to what Matthew shares in his parallel account. Luke shows Christ rebuking the cunningness of the Sadducees and their attempt to deny a future physical resurrection at His return. Luke 20:27-36 clearly demonstrates that the defining moment of change between this age and the age to come is the time of the Lord’s return and the physical resurrection, not AD70 as Preterists claim. It is nowhere shown to be the change from the old covenant to the new covenant, as they argue.

It is impossible to miss the constant scriptural comparison between “this world” and “that world” or “this age” and “that age.” There is no additional age recognized. In text reinforces that repeated biblical truth. Those who live in this current evil age are described here as “the children of this world/age” but those who are depicted as being “worthy to obtain that age” to come are described exclusively as “the children of God, being the children of the resurrection” and are said to be “equal unto the angels.” There is no other way of reading this.

One must be appropriately qualified in order inherit the new world to come. They must be glorified on the day of redemption. Those that are worthy to obtain that age are not mortals and not sinners; they are rather glorified saints – who incidentally never marry or die.

The contrast here moves from: ‘marriage’ to ‘no marriage’, ‘death’ to ‘no death’. Marriage disappears! Death disappears! The turning point is the glorious coming of Christ and the resurrection that accompanies it.

Jesus outlines in clear tones the incorruptibility and the glory of the future state. This is not the case with the Premillennial and Preterist age to come; marriage, divorce, funerals and mourning continue unabated. This passage forbids both the Premillennial and Preterist theories.

 

[WPM]

Look slower and forgive my arthritic hands. If you can't then put me on your ignore list as being too handicapped to deal with one of your stature. But you sepnd more time with teh church fathers and hitting me for grammar and spelling than you do defending you rposition biblically.

And no just throwing together a mass amount of verses like you did for "chaotic conflagrations" and saying they are all one is not defense, just using a concordance and placing verses together that have some typoew of battle together in one post.

I have no interest in insulting you. It is you that threw out the ad hominem and refuse to withdraw it or apologize for it.

You are cleopatra!

as with all others here who subtly practice divination- you SUCK AT IT!!!!!

Is your real name cleopatra? for you truly are teh Queen of Denial

The hard thing with engaging with you is that you viciously attack the character of anyone that questions you and you also refuse to address the rebuttals that challenge your claims.

It is you that is boasting of your credentials. You used your academic prowess as an argument against me, so I felt it was fair to challenge you with that. I apologize if I offended you. That was not my intent.

And, no, my overriding focus on these forums is Scripture, not the ECFs. So, that is another false charge.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

The problem is: you invent 3 ages when Scripture only recognizes 2. Christ and the New Testament writers only recognize two overriding ages in their teaching – “this world/age” and “the world/age to come.” One is current, corrupt and temporal and the other is impending, perfect and eternal. One refers to mortal life on earth in the here-and-now, and the other refers to our eternal state. These terms are commonly used in the New Testament when contrasting the toil and trouble of our day with the glory and rest of the hereafter. These two common phrases are found in different places in the New Testament, along with several other similar expressions, referring to time and eternity. Basically, there is now and there is then – there is no in-between. The pivotal event that divides these two diverse ages is the glorious climactic return of Jesus Christ.

No you falsely accuse me of creating three ages! Teh bible shows three ages, if you bothered reading all the scriptures I posted. But you won't and just cling to your phony arguments.

Scripture makes it abundantly clear that there is no intervening time-period or temporal age in between “this age” and “the age to come.” It is within the bounds of this juxtapose alone that we understand the whole eschatological arrangement, with its two unique diverse worlds. Kim Riddlebarger explains: “the two-age model is very simple in its structure and is based on texts that can only be described as clear and straightforward” (A Present or Future Millennium?).

and I agree. But the Scriptures do show a clear change of conditions on earth during the last 1,000 years of human history before eternity rolls around. And I could care less what Kim Ruddlebarger says. They did not write Scripture. Maybe be they have reinterpreted Scriptures but they didn't write it.

Let us see what the Bible attributes to the oft-mentioned time-period “this age” [Gr. aion]. Galatians 1:4 tells us that Christ “gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world [Gr. aion or age], according to the will of God and our Father.”

Yep, that is called heaven. We will go there at the rapture (and for those who died be reunited with their souls and spirits). We are in heaven in REv. 20 for our wedding to Jesus.

Christ replies in Luke 20:34-36: “The children of this world [Gr. aion or age] marry, and are given in marriage: But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world [Gr. aion or age], and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.”

Yes that is in heaven, not the millenial earth as the Scriptures clearly show in numerous places I posted to SI

It is impossible to miss the constant scriptural comparison between “this world” and “that world” or “this age” and “that age.” There is no additional age recognized. In text reinforces that repeated biblical truth. Those who live in this current evil age are described here as “the children of this world/age” but those who are depicted as being “worthy to obtain that age” to come are described exclusively as “the children of God, being the children of the resurrection” and are said to be “equal unto the angels.” There is no other way of reading this.

Well as you create the third age straw man and beat that, I agree.

One must be appropriately qualified in order inherit the new world to come. They must be glorified on the day of redemption. Those that are worthy to obtain that age are not mortals and not sinners; they are rather glorified saints – who incidentally never marry or die.

I agree, and that occurs after teh 1,000 years expire, just like the bible says. But all humans are glorified in teh sense that all become immortal. The lost live forever in torment in the lake of fire.

You are cleopatra!

as with all others here who subtly practice divination- you SUCK AT IT!!!!!


Is your real name cleopatra? for you truly are teh Queen of Denial


Well when you pretend tro read my mind or tell me what I believe and I tell you you are wrong and keep pursuing the lie- don't be surprised you get called for it not so subtly!

If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen. You have no problem calling me a heretic for believing in premillenialism. YOu called teh belief heresy that makes me a heresy in your mind. and please do not deny it.

It is you that is boasting of your credentials. You used your academic prowess as an argument against me, so I felt it was fair to challenge you with that. I apologize if I offended you. That was not my intent.

Now you sound just like the fools who attacked Paul (though I am not comparing myself to him).

YOu falsely accuse me of boasting, when ALL I DID WAS SIMPLY PRESENT MY CREDENTIALS SO YOU COULD SEE THAT YOU WERE TALKING TO SOMEONE WHO HAS A DEPTH OF EXPERIENCE. iT IS YOU WHO COMMITTED THE SIN OF PRESUMPTIOUSNESS BY ACCUSDING ME OF BOASTING.

Then yo0u digfs about my spelling and grammar. We both know those were insults on your part.

And, no, my overriding focus on these forums is Scripture, not the ECFs. So, that is another false charge.

Well I only judge by the interactions we have and so far you are far more obsessed with teh ECF's instead of possessed by the Word of God so far.
I could go to teh other thread we tangled on and show you the massive amount of postings you did demanding proof from trhe ECF's. So please until your scripture postings match you recf fixation- the charge stands- at least with you and me.

 

[Truth7t7]

Yes Jesus is the first resurrection from the dead---never to die no more! But context dear lad is critical. Rev. 20:6 is not talking about Jesus first resurrection, but a specific resurrection of a large group of people. Once again you have to have Jesus beheaded for not taking the mark and Jesus being multiple people and Jesus reigning with Jesus for the 1,000 years! Unless you wish to symbolize away all that describes who gets to be in the first resurrection!



Good for him! Hope he never develops severe chronic arthritis.




Says you, we know better!



It may be difficult for you to understand! But here it is:

Revelation 20:4-6
King James Version

4 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 and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.



without someone "reinterpreting the Inspired write of Gods Word here is exactrly what John says in plain language:

1. JOhn sees thrones
2. Those on the thrones were beheaded for their witness of Jesus, the Word of God and did not worship teh beast or take his mark
3. they lived and reigned with christ for 1,000 years
4. The rest of the dead did not live until that 1,000 years ended
5. Those who had part in trhe first resurrection are called blessed.
6. On those blessed ones- the second death has no power!

My 10 year old grandson can understand this! You needed someone sometime long ago to reinterpret this passage to make it say what you are saying. Like God needs a decoder for something so simple.


So Peter and Paul lied when they wrote teh Bible according to you.

JOhn did not believe what you believed nor did the 2nd century church for the most part.



Ephesians 6:11-13
King James Version

11 Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.

12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.

Paul believed the devil was still roaming about unchained un-imprisoned etc.

1 Peter 5:8
King James Version

8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:


Peter believed Satan was still roaming about devouring souls! Whom to believe? The inspired writers of Gods Word or Paul Malcomson ? Well I know this is the un-PC answer, but I am going to go with the Bible.

The First Resurrection, On The Last Day Explained?

There are (Two) resurrections on this (Last Day) the righteous are blessed to be in the (First Resurrection) to eternal life, on such the (Second Death) resurrection has no power.

1.) (First Resurrection) To Life
2.) (Second Death) Resurrection To Damnation

Revelation 20:6KJV
Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

The (Last Day) Resurrection Of All Below

John 5:28-29KJV
28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

John 6:39-40KJV
39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

1 Corinthians 15:21-24KJV
21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.
24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

The (Last Day) Judgement

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

 

[WPM]

No you falsely accuse me of creating three ages! Teh bible shows three ages, if you bothered reading all the scriptures I posted. But you won't and just cling to your phony arguments.





and I agree. But the Scriptures do show a clear change of conditions on earth during the last 1,000 years of human history before eternity rolls around. And I could care less what Kim Ruddlebarger says. They did not write Scripture. Maybe be they have reinterpreted Scriptures but they didn't write it.



Yep, that is called heaven. We will go there at the rapture (and for those who died be reunited with their souls and spirits). We are in heaven in REv. 20 for our wedding to Jesus.


Yes that is in heaven, not the millenial earth as the Scriptures clearly show in numerous places I posted to SI




Well as you create the third age straw man and beat that, I agree.



I agree, and that occurs after teh 1,000 years expire, just like the bible says. But all humans are glorified in teh sense that all become immortal. The lost live forever in torment in the lake of fire.

You are cleopatra!

as with all others here who subtly practice divination- you SUCK AT IT!!!!!


Is your real name cleopatra? for you truly are teh Queen of Denial


Well when you pretend tro read my mind or tell me what I believe and I tell you you are wrong and keep pursuing the lie- don't be surprised you get called for it not so subtly!

If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen. You have no problem calling me a heretic for believing in premillenialism. YOu called teh belief heresy that makes me a heresy in your mind. and please do not deny it.



Now you sound just like the fools who attacked Paul (though I am not comparing myself to him).

YOu falsely accuse me of boasting, when ALL I DID WAS SIMPLY PRESENT MY CREDENTIALS SO YOU COULD SEE THAT YOU WERE TALKING TO SOMEONE WHO HAS A DEPTH OF EXPERIENCE. iT IS YOU WHO COMMITTED THE SIN OF PRESUMPTIOUSNESS BY ACCUSDING ME OF BOASTING.

Then yo0u digfs about my spelling and grammar. We both know those were insults on your part.




Well I only judge by the interactions we have and so far you are far more obsessed with teh ECF's instead of possessed by the Word of God so far.
I could go to teh other thread we tangled on and show you the massive amount of postings you did demanding proof from trhe ECF's. So please until your scripture postings match you recf fixation- the charge stands- at least with you and me.

Give me the links on the other threads where I demanded proof from the ECF's? You claim such nonsense but have zero evidence for it. That is blatant lies. What is more, I did not call you a heretic or what you believe heresy. That is more lies. I said the roots of your beliefs are found among the heretics.

Premil is totally preoccupied with, and dependent upon, one chapter in the Bible – Revelation 20. It interprets the rest of Scripture in the light of its opinion of one lone highly-debated chapter located in the most figurative and obscure book in the Bible. All end-time Scripture is viewed through the lens of Revelation 20. This is not a very wise way to establish any truth or doctrine. Take this passage out of the equation and Premillennialism has nothing in the inspired pages to support their main tenets. Amils have a problem with, and very much disagree with this form of hermeneutics and exegesis of many Scriptures.

Premil hangs its doctrine on a very precarious frayed thread: that of Revelation 20 following Revelation 19 chronologically in time. To hold this, it has to dismiss the different recaps (or different camera views pertaining to the intra-Advent period) that exist throughout the book of Revelation, divorce it from repeated Scripture on this matter and also explain away the clear and explicit climactic detail that pertains to Revelation 19. Premil is dependent upon the dubious premise that Revelation 20 is chronological to Revelation 19. That is it! Disprove that and Premil falls apart.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Premil is totally preoccupied with, and dependent upon, one chapter in the Bible – Revelation 20. It interprets the rest of Scripture in the light of its opinion of one lone highly-debated chapter located in the most figurative and obscure book in the Bible. All end-time Scripture is viewed through the lens of Revelation 20. This is not a very wise way to establish any truth or doctrine. Take this passage out of the equation and Premillennialism has nothing in the inspired pages to support their main tenets. Amils have a problem with, and very much disagree with this form of hermeneutics and exegesis of many Scriptures.

Another lie from you! Premils are preoccupied with all of the Scripture as my post to SI with all those bible verses show. We focus on Rev. 20 because it is the only passage in Scripture that gives the length of time Jesus physically reigns on earth after His physical return after what3 is dubbed "the battle of Armageddon".

Give me the links on the other threads where I demanded proof from the ECF's? You claim such nonsense but have zero evidence for it. That is blatant lies. What is more, I did not call you a heretic or what you believe heresy. That is more lies. I said the roots of your beliefs are found among the heretics.

Yes you said the roots of belief in premil is found among heretics (wrong as that is) but you called pre mils heretics which means you called me one. Stop it Cleopatra!

As for your obsession with the ECF's you have several here.

But I will do the work and post the name of the thread and th e number of your posts. Then I will expect you to repent or we will end this foolishness.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You can do whatever you like, brother.

Of course I can.

I'm just touting the principles of interpretation.

You're touting your own principles of interpretation which I believe are flawed.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You are "out of control" emotional, which makes for an impossible discussion.

LOL. You can't be serious. Here you go again acting like you know me personally or something. You don't know me at all. Not one bit. So, you have no place telling me I'm "out of control". I think you're using that as an excuse to not address my arguments.

When you calm down, maybe we can discuss things in a friendly way.

Randy, you are such a hypocrite. You try to come across as if you're this friendly guy. Are you being friendly when you completely ignore my requests to stop using terminology that offends me, such as replacement theology?

You apparently think you're defending God's word. But if you were, you wouldn't be so high-strung. Is God in a panic? No.

LOL. God's Word is a serious thing, Randy. Maybe you don't understand that. So, yes, I take it seriously. If you don't then I suppose I'm wasting my time talking to you.

I'm just asking you where Amil gets the biblical basis for allegorizing Rev 20. And you suggest it just doesn't fit in with other Scriptures. That is hardly a biblical basis for interpreting Rev 20 allegorically!

Why not? Should I not interpret Revelation 20 in such a way that agrees with the rest of scripture?

I should think if God wanted to ensure we take Rev 20 allegorically that there would be something much more explicit about having to do this in the passage itself!

Says you. This is the problem with the approach of many Premils. They want everything to be spelled out to them and not have to make any effort to discern what scripture is saying. But, that's not how it works. There's a lot of symbolism in the book of Revelation for a reason. Clearly, God was not interested in just spelling everything out to us in that book.

I have no idea why you and PM are so angry, and so contemptuous of opposing opinions on the Millennium? And I have to wonder: Don't you see yourselves in how you're dealing with this? You're utterly failing to act like Christians when you act this way!

Get off your high horse, you hypocrite. You have nothing to refute our arguments, so you resort to this nonsense instead. Are you acting like a Christian when you repeatedly ignore my requests to stop using terminology like "replacement theology" when talking to me? Please stop your holier than thou act, Randy. If the Amil vs. Premil debate is just a joke to you and not something to take seriously, then why do you spend so much time defending Premil?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Give me the links on the other threads where I demanded proof from the ECF's? You claim such nonsense but have zero evidence for it. That is blatant lies. What is more, I did not call you a heretic or what you believe heresy. That is more lies. I said the roots of your beliefs are found among the heretics.

Just on this thread:

your posts 12,22,28,30,31,40,42,71,1105,1106,1111,1113,1114,1115,1094 As yo0u can see I skipped alot of pages.