22 major reasons to abandon the Premil doctrine

[covenantee]

No, the international Church is not a single nation!

Debunked by 1 Peter 2:9.

It is a single holy nation.

It is not your geopolitical nation.

 

[Truth7t7]

Nothing could be more unrealistic than unrepentant sinners surviving Jesus coming in the power and great glory of his Father.

I Agree 100%

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

Nahum 1:5KJV
5 The mountains quake at him, and the hills melt, and the earth is burned at his presence, yea, the world, and all that dwell therein.

 

[covenantee]

The Western nations, no matter how much blood is mingled in with them, are not Israel ethnically at all.

The entirety of humanity is Israel.
Established mathematically. Example of ancestral genetic ubiquity:

Charlemagne’s DNA and Our Universal Royalty

Nobody in my past was hugely famous, at least that I know of. I vaguely recall that an ancestor of mine who shipped over on the Mayflower distinguished himself by falling out of the ship and having to get fished out of the water. He might be notable, I guess, but hardly famous. It is much more fun to think that I am a bloodline descendant of Charlemagne. And in 1999, Joseph Chang gave me permission to think that way.

Chang was not a genealogist who had decided to make me his personal project. Instead, he is a statistician at Yale who likes to think of genealogy as a mathematical problem. When you draw your genealogy, you make two lines from yourself back to each of your parents. Then you have to draw two lines for each of them, back to your four grandparents. And then eight great-grandparents, sixteen great-great-grandparents, and so on. But not so on for very long. If you go back to the time of Charlemagne, forty generations or so, you should get to a generation of a trillion ancestors. That’s about two thousand times more people than existed on Earth when Charlemagne was alive.

The only way out of this paradox is to assume that our ancestors are not independent of one another. That is, if you trace their ancestry back, you loop back to a common ancestor. We’re not talking about first-cousin stuff here–more like twentieth-cousin. This means that instead of drawing a tree that fans out exponentially, we need to draw a web-like tapestry.

In a paper he published in 1999 [pdf], Chang analyzed this tapestry mathematically. If you look at the ancestry of a living population of people, he concluded, you’ll eventually find a common ancestor of all of them. That’s not to say that a single mythical woman somehow produced every European by magically laying a clutch of eggs. All this means is that as you move back through time, sooner or later some of the lines in the genealogy will cross, meeting at a single person.

As you go back further in time, more of those lines cross as you encounter more common ancestors of the living population. And then something really interesting happens. There comes a point at which, Chang wrote, “all individuals who have any descendants among the present-day individuals are actually ancestors of all present-day individuals.”

In 2002, the journalist Steven Olson wrote an article in the Atlantic about Chang’s work. To put some empirical meat on the abstract bones of Chang’s research, Olson considered a group of real people–living Europeans.

The most recent common ancestor of every European today (except for recent immigrants to the Continent) was someone who lived in Europe in the surprisingly recent past—only about 600 years ago. In other words, all Europeans alive today have among their ancestors the same man or woman who lived around 1400. Before that date, according to Chang’s model, the number of ancestors common to all Europeans today increased, until, about a thousand years ago, a peculiar situation prevailed: 20 percent of the adult Europeans alive in 1000 would turn out to be the ancestors of no one living today (that is, they had no children or all their descendants eventually died childless); each of the remaining 80 percent would turn out to be a direct ancestor of every European living today.

Suddenly, my pedigree looked classier: I am a descendant of Charlemagne. Of course, so is every other European. By the way, I’m also a descendant of Nefertiti. And so are you, and everyone else on Earth today. Chang figured that out by expanding his model from living Europeans to living humans, and getting an estimate of 3400 years instead of a thousand for the all-ancestor generation.

Things have changed a lot in the fourteen years since Chang published his first paper on ancestry. Scientists have amassed huge databases of genetic information about people all over the world. These may not be the same thing as a complete genealogy of the human race, but geneticists can still use them to tackle some of the same questions that intrigued Chang.

Recently, two geneticists, Peter Ralph of the University of Southern California and Graham Coop of the University of California at Davis, decided to look at the ancestry of Europe. They took advantage of a compilation of information about 2257 people from across the continent. Scientists had examined half a million sites in each person’s DNA, creating a distinctive list of genetic markers for each of them.

You can use this kind of genetic information to make some genealogical inferences, but you have to know what you’re dealing with. Your DNA is not a carbon copy of your parents’. Each time they made eggs or sperm, they shuffled the two copies of each of their chromosomes and put one in the cell. Just as a new deck gets more scrambled the more times you shuffle it, chromosomes get more shuffled from one generation to the next.

This means that if you compare two people’s DNA, you will find some chunks that are identical in sequence. The more closely related people are, the bigger the chunks you’ll find. This diagram shows how two first cousins share a piece of DNA that’s identical by descent (IBD for short).

Ralph and Coop identified 1.9 million of these long shared segments of DNA shared by at least two people in their study. They then used the length of each segment to estimate how long ago it arose from a common ancestor of the living Europeans.

Their results, published today in PLOS Biology, both confirm Chang’s mathematical approach and enrich it. Even within the past thousand years, Ralph and Coop found, people on opposite sides of the continent share a lot of segments in common–so many, in fact, that it’s statistically impossible for them to have gotten them all from a single ancestor. Instead, someone in Turkey and someone in England have to share a lot of ancestors. In fact, as Chang suspected, the only way to explain the DNA is to conclude that everyone who lived a thousand years ago who has any descendants today is an ancestor of every European. Charlemagne for everyone!

If you compare two people in Turkey, you’ll find bigger shared segments of DNA, which isn’t surprising. Since they live in the same country, chances are they have more recent ancestors, and more of them. But there is a rich, intriguing pattern to the number of shared segments among Europeans. People across Eastern Europe, for example, have a larger set of shared segments than people from within single countries in Western Europe. That difference may be the signature of a big expansion of the Slavs.

Ralph and Coop’s study may provide a new tool for reconstructing the history of humans on every continent, not just Europe. It will also probably keep people puzzling over the complexities of genealogy.


Corroborated empirically.
By the Jewish community itself.

Abraham lineage
DNA Tests Could Fulfill God’s Promise to Abraham by Revealing Millions of Jews. But How Jewish is Jewish Enough?
Israel in all of Us? Research finds 'Jewish genes' in unusual places
Jewish-Roots Arabs in Israel
Tracing the lost tribes to Jewish communities in Africa
Nigeria's Igbo Jews: 'Lost tribe' of Israel? - CNN
http://www.worldjewishcongress.org/...-africa-has-jewish-roots-genetic-tests-reveal
https://www.jpost.com/Jewish-World/...her-claims-proof-of-tribe-of-Ephraim-in-India
https://www.jta.org/2013/05/23/life...bush-bani-israel-tribe-claims-jewish-heritage

How does God distinguish genetic Jews from genetic Jews?

It matters not one whit.

Because God has only two covenant criteria.

Two spiritual genes.

Faith and obedience.

Abraham's Spiritual DNA.

And nothing else.

 

[Keraz]

f it was God's intention to destroy Israel, it would've been completed in the 1st century. But it wasn't.

There was a remnant saved in 66AD, they escaped to Pella. When the Lord strikes the Middle East, Zephaniah 1:14-18, only a remnant, again of the faithful Christian Jews, will be saved. Romans 9:27

Jesus said that when he returns he will regather his people among the Jews. Just before he ascended into heaven Jesus was asked when this restoration of Israel would take place.

Jewish Israel has regathered in apostasy and their Zionist, communistic beliefs are far removed from Christianity.
Many Prophesies tell of the gathering of the faithful peoples of God. Isaiah 35:1-10, Ezekiel 34:11-16, +

No, the international Church is not a single nation! Nor is anybody but the nation Israel designed to inherit the Holy Land.

You are quite wrong.
Firstly; the Jews only occupy a very small part of the holy Land.
Jesus does call the Christians a holy nation. Matthew 21:43, and God knows where they all are. Amos 9:9

Once Jewish peoples are immersed within another nation until they are no longer recognizable as distinct, they cease to be "Jewish."

This is right and it proves the fact of how the Israelis claim to be the true descendants of Judah, is false. They are Edomites and Kharzas, etc.
They just have no proof of their Jewishness and basically 95% of the citizens of Israel don't care, but deceived Western Christians support them with huge financial and moral help.
The main reason that many Christians do support Jewish Israel, is for an ulterior motive; They go to heaven and the Jews get the Great Tribulation. People who believe this fantastic lie, are at risk of losing any rewards and have built their faith on straw and stubble. 1 Corinthians 3:12-15

 

[CadyandZoe]

I don't make that claim. I don't believe that the church has replaced Israel. I believe they are two separate entities.

Yeah, so? Some spiritual Israelites are ethnic Israelites and some are ethnic Gentiles.

There's nothing logical about accusing me of believing in replacement theology.

You are the one saying spiritual Israel replaces ethnic Israel, not me. Don't tell me what I believe! You don't decide that for me. I will tell you what I believe.

But, you are interpreting Paul wrongly. You think that the decision on who is saved is entirely up to God, yet Paul himself said that God wants to have mercy on all people (Romans 11:32). Yet, He doesn't have mercy on all people. Why is that? Think about it.

How does Romans 11:32 answer Paul's implied rhetorical question? It doesn't. Paul is answering an objection to his gospel based on a promise God made to Israel. Let's review that promise.

Ezekiel 36:26

Moreover, I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; and I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.​

Most people think of salvation in terms of God's response to our plea for mercy. But here in Ezekiel we see that prior to our plea for mercy, God must first prepare the heart. (Refer to the parable of the sower.) Here God promises to give Israel a new heart. He promises to pour out his spirit on them. Not only will this cause them to walk in his statutes and observe his ordinances, it will cause them to repent and mourn because of the past. They will remember their evil ways and the deeds that were not good and they will loathe themselves in their own sight.

If we don't get a grip on the Ezekiel passage, and others like it, and come to terms with what it implies, we won't understand the objection Paul has raised to the gospel. We teach that God will forgive anyone who repents, confesses, mourns, and faces God in prayer with contrition and honesty. Here in Ezekiel 36, God indicates that HE will cause his people Israel to have the kind of heart and spirit that will repent, confess and approach God in honesty and contriteness.

Paul also teaches that God is saving those with a circumcised heart. But like Ezekiel 36, Deuteronomy 30 describes a time in Israel's history when God will circumcise the hearts of his people Israel.

Deuteronomy 30:6

Moreover the Lord your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live. ​

And here again, we see the will and work of God in action. At some point in Israel's history, after she has suffered all of the curses that she deserves, God declares that he will circumcise their hearts.

And so the implied question is this, given that God has NOT circumcised the hearts of Paul's kinsmen of the flesh as the scriptures say, does this represent a failure of God? Does the absence of universal salvation among Paul's kinsmen indicate a broken promise?

The answer is divine determinism.

You quoted Romans 9:6-8, stopping with verse 8, where Paul declares that God regards the "children of promise" as descendants of Abraham. If those mentioned in Ezekiel 36:26 and Deuteronomy 30:6 are not children of promise, then I don't know who is, since a clear marker of being a child is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Once God pours out his spirit onto a person, that person becomes a child of promise. Refer to Romans 5:5 for instance.

Had you read three verses later you might have read verse 11, where Paul argues that God's choice of Jacob over Esau was NOT based on anything these men did, good or bad. God determined that Jacob would be a child of promise before he was born. And even in light of his behavior, God never changed his mind. As Paul says, "It does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs but on God who has mercy." Romans 9:16

Why has God's word not failed? Because God, not man, chooses whom to bless.

 

[Truth7t7]

How does Romans 11:32 answer Paul's implied rhetorical question? It doesn't. Paul is answering an objection to his gospel based on a promise God made to Israel. Let's review that promise.

Ezekiel 36:26

Moreover, I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; and I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.​

Most people think of salvation in terms of God's response to our plea for mercy. But here in Ezekiel we see that prior to our plea for mercy, God must first prepare the heart. (Refer to the parable of the sower.) Here God promises to give Israel a new heart. He promises to pour out his spirit on them. Not only will this cause them to walk in his statutes and observe his ordinances, it will cause them to repent and mourn because of the past. They will remember their evil ways and the deeds that were not good and they will loathe themselves in their own sight.

If we don't get a grip on the Ezekiel passage, and others like it, and come to terms with what it implies, we won't understand the objection Paul has raised to the gospel. We teach that God will forgive anyone who repents, confesses, mourns, and faces God in prayer with contrition and honesty. Here in Ezekiel 36, God indicates that HE will cause his people Israel to have the kind of heart and spirit that will repent, confess and approach God in honesty and contriteness.

Paul also teaches that God is saving those with a circumcised heart. But like Ezekiel 36, Deuteronomy 30 describes a time in Israel's history when God will circumcise the hearts of his people Israel.

Deuteronomy 30:6

Moreover the Lord your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live. ​

And here again, we see the will and work of God in action. At some point in Israel's history, after she has suffered all of the curses that she deserves, God declares that he will circumcise their hearts.

And so the implied question is this, given that God has NOT circumcised the hearts of Paul's kinsmen of the flesh as the scriptures say, does this represent a failure of God? Does the absence of universal salvation among Paul's kinsmen indicate a broken promise?

The answer is divine determinism.

You quoted Romans 9:6-8, stopping with verse 8, where Paul declares that God regards the "children of promise" as descendants of Abraham. If those mentioned in Ezekiel 36:26 and Deuteronomy 30:6 are not children of promise, then I don't know who is, since a clear marker of being a child is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Once God pours out his spirit onto a person, that person becomes a child of promise. Refer to Romans 5:5 for instance.

Had you read three verses later you might have read verse 11, where Paul argues that God's choice of Jacob over Esau was NOT based on anything these men did, good or bad. God determined that Jacob would be a child of promise before he was born. And even in light of his behavior, God never changed his mind. As Paul says, "It does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs but on God who has mercy." Romans 9:16

Why has God's word not failed? Because God, not man, chooses whom to bless.

Ezekiel prophesied to Israel on their return to Jerusalem from the Babylonian Captivity, Ezekiel 36 was fulfilled "Long Ago" when Israel returned and built Zerubabbels 2nd temple

 

[WPM]

No, all you're doing is *saying* that you've proven you're not an RT without actually showing where your beliefs differ from those of RT. You apparently think RT believes something different from you. What do you think that is? And if you're wrong, and RT does *not* believe what you claim it does, then you've proven nothing.

So quit saying you've proved something, and actually prove it! What is your proof? If you've provided that proof so many times, it should be very easy for you to reiterate?

We have showed you for years but you insist on being obnoxious, difficult and inflammatory. You are doing nothing to advance your cause or gain respect.

There has always been a true believing Israel (the Israel of Israel), that which is God's redeemed - His elect. We see this in Romans 9:6-13: “For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, they which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.”

You disagree with the Word of God. For you, not only are Christ-rejecting Jews true Israel, you label them the "people of God," which is utter nonsense. That shows how ignorant you are of God's truth. That is why you

What this is saying is, those who are not saved have no right to consider themselves as true Israel. The apostle here identifies two Israels; one elect and believing, the other lost and unbelieving. One is true spiritual Israel (“the children of God”/“the children of the promise”), the other is unbelieving and merely “children of the flesh.” Basically: national theocratic Israel was a political entity in which a believing spiritual remnant – true Israel – abode. It is only those Jews who belong to the remnant that are true Israelis in God’s eyes.

The house of Israel persistently ignored the voice of God, often complaining and being ungrateful with God’s boundless provision (Exodus 15:24, 16:2, 17:3, Numbers 11:5-7, 14:2-3 and 16:41, Deuteronomy 1:27 Joshua 9:18, Psalm 106:25). They rejected God’s statutes (Leviticus 26:43, 1 Kings 11:11, 2 Kings 17:15, 34, Nehemiah 1:7, Jeremiah 44:10, 23, Ezekiel 5:7, 11:12, 20:21, 24), choosing rather to walk in the statutes of the heathen. God’s name was polluted and profaned among the heathen (2 Chronicles 36:14, Ezekiel 20:9, 14, 22, 23:30, 36:20-23 and 39:7). This wickedness was often found in her prophets, priests and kings, not just the people.

God’s holy prophets admonished Israel for her incessant sin, to no avail. These sins were a great offence to God and were the focus of His ongoing judgment. The consequences for this were immense and sobering at times. Israel came under heavy punishment for large swathes of the Old Testament. God stopped speaking at times. He hid His face from the visible camp of Israel. He removed His protection. He let Israel’s enemies invade and overcome her. The nation also spent long periods under foreign control. They were evicted from the land and scattered throughout the nations. They had their cities ransacked and their place of worship desecrated.

Israel’s propensity to go after false gods, worship idols, sacrifice their children to the fire and embrace devils, even when God was moving in their midst, is breathtaking. It is hard to view the special favor that rested upon natural Israel, including the blessing and truth they incessantly enjoyed, and then understand their habitual determination to do their own thing and follow Satan. It simply doesn’t make sense. It is only when we realize that ultimate favor with God only came through knowing Him personally and walking in obedience with Him. To this end, the majority of Israelites are customarily portrayed as not knowing real union and communion with God. Notwithstanding, God always had an enlightened people within the camp of Israel. They were a believing “remnant” that lived in the midst of an oft apostate nation. This was normally a small company of faithful Israelis.

This is all summed up in Isaiah 1:9, where we learned: “Except the LORD of hosts had left unto us a very small remnant, we should have been as Sodom, and we should have been like unto Gomorrah.” If God didn’t have an elect seed, Israel would have been wiped off the face of the map like Sodom. Graciously, there was always an ongoing elect people within Israel that had eyes to see and ears to hear. They were God’s true chosen covenant people.

The remnant congregation can be found throughout Scripture and relates to God’s true redeemed people throughout time. This is the invisible spiritual grouping among the visible congregation of God in both testaments. We are looking at the people of God (both Hebrew and Gentile) in both covenant economies. This is the household of faith in history. The true people of God are all those who know God and enjoy a personal covenant relationship with Him. Since the fall, God has dealt with man on the same basis throughout human history. From Adam to the end of time, salvation has always been by grace through faith.

True Israel has been expanded, not replaced

· We have shown you for years that we have been grafted into the true Israeli spiritual good olive tree (Romans 9-11).
· We have shown you for years that we who were once aliens from the citizenship of Israel have now been brought in through the blood of Christ to that privileged place (Ephesians 2).
· We have shown you for years that Jew and Gentile alike, have now been graciously merged together into the one harmonious spiritual Israel of God – the New Testament Church. This spiritual body recognizes no dispensational or ethnic separation at all (Galatians 6:15-16).

Under the new covenant, Gentile believers are being integrated into the citizenship of Israel. God’s promises and blessings have been extended beyond the righteous remnant of Israel to believing Gentiles who accept Christ as Lord and Savior. They are being grafted into the good Israeli olive tree by way of salvation throughout this intra-Advent period. Gentiles are being added to the household of Israel through faith in Israel’s Messiah. Under this Jewish umbrella, Gentiles enjoy favor with God and intimacy with Christ. They are now living stones in the New Testament temple. This renewed and expanded Israel includes countless Gentiles from all the nations of the world. The elect of God has grown from one single small physical nation in the Old Testament to incorporating millions of believers throughout the world today.

This geographical expansion to the nations was not some innovative New Testament revelation but was foretold to Abraham (the father of the faithful) right back in the book of Genesis (12:1-3, 17:3-8, 18:18 and 22:16-18). That revelation is found throughout the Old Testament narrative. Prophet after prophet foresaw this impending global expanse. When we get into the New Testament, we see its maturity and realization. That growth continues until today.

 

[WPM]

The "first" resurrection as in the first one that happens chronologically, or the "first resurrection," as in the event mentioned in Rev 20? Jesus was the first resurrection to happen with respect to the New Covenant. But the "first resurrection" mentioned in Rev 20 is a general resurrection, quite distinct from Jesus' own resurrection. Obviously, they are related, but they don't take place at the same time.

I see a distinct, troubling and ongoing pattern in your (and Premil) theology: when the evidence in Scripture blatantly negates, contradicts and exposes your thesis you conveniently invent a second additional entity, event or period to allow your teaching to fit. Premil does this all the time. They have to.

• You invent 2 peoples of God, when the Bible says there is 1.
• You invent 2 bindings of Satan, when the Bible says there is 1.
• You invent 2 last days' periods, when the Bible says there is 1.
• You invent 2 individual last days, when the Bible says there is 1.
• You invent 2 the end's, when the Bible says there is 1.
• You invent 2 judgment days for man, when the Bible says there is 1.
• You invent 2 physical resurrection days for man, when the Bible says there is 1.
• You invent 2 future glorifications for man and creation, when the Bible says there is 1.
• You invent 2 raptures (Pretribbers 3), when the Bible says there is 1.
• You invent 2 new heavens and new earth, when the Bible says there is 1.

There are no safe solid trustworthy consistent hermeneutics with Premillennialism. Premils method of interpretation is fluid. It is ad-hoc. It is horrible! Anything goes! Whatever it takes to facilitate their opinion of Revelation 20 or fit it into the rest of Scripture is employed. They are all over the place! Premils have to wing it on each passage.

On this matter (of the first resurrection), like the others, there is obviously just one and only "first resurrection." But you invent a second "first resurrection." Think about that! That is ridiculous. That doesn't make sense! It negates the whole meaning of "first." Talk about not taking Scripture literally. You completely obliterate the meaning of "first" and "last." You obliterate the meaning of "the beginning" and "the end." They are totally meaningless in Premil.

Revelation 1:5-6: “And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.”

Revelation 20:6 mirrors this. It describes the same first resurrection (that of Christ) and it shows the same result (God’s people ruling and reigning as priest kings in and through Christ).

Revelation 20:6: “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.”

Premillennialists may be confused by who or what the first resurrection was and is, but that was not the case with the first century Church. They knew without any doubt that the resurrection of Christ was the first in time, order and importance. It was the central victorious element of the Christian faith. Without it the cross would have meant nothing.

Our spiritual position “in Christ” since Calvary and since the resurrection qualifies the believer to partake in the fruit of His victory over every single enemy.

Acts 26:23 declares, “Christ should suffer, and that He should be the first resurrection from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles (ethnos)."

The first resurrection opened up the Gospel to the nations!

We should note in this passage, the enlightening of the Gentiles (or) ethnos is carefully connected to the first resurrection of Christ. It is only through this powerful event that the deception that smothered the Gentiles was lifted. Moreover, the binding of Satan is expressly connected to the enlightenment of the Gentiles (or) ethnos.

Revelation 20:2 makes clear, "And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years. And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations (ethnos) no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.”

Scripture often makes broad general sweeping statements. When Scripture tells us that the Gentiles would no longer be deceived it does not mean every single one of them, or even most of them, would be saved, just that the ignorance would be finally lifted from the darkened Gentiles.

Just like blindness and darkness are attributed to the Gentiles (without qualification) prior to the cross, it didn’t mean that every single Gentile was blind and in darkness. Scripture often described the Gentiles as a collective whole. That did not mean the Gentiles were all the same. Scripture, like us, makes generalities. Prior to Christ’s earthly ministry the heathen nations were viewed as being in wholesale ignorant and therefore outside of God’s plan of salvation. Could I suggest this was simply a general observation about the overall condition of the Gentiles as a broad mass, not an attempt to represent every single Gentile? The strongman was bound so that those in his darkness could come to the light.

 

[WPM]

You keep saying this, but I'll keep denying it. The corroboration are the Jewish Prophets who foretold of Israel ultimate success as a national theocracy. This doesn't prevent many other nations from entering the fray, as well. Abraham was promised not just Israel, but many nations, who will subscribe to a Christian theocracy. The Kingdom of God is coming to bring this kind of fulffillment to many nations.

So where is your evidence? Your MO is to imagine that if you state something then that makes it a fact. Seriously! You obviously think too highly of yourself. Scripture overrides your faulty opinions all the time. The Bible forbids your claims. That is because you have zero corroboration in the Old Testament. In fact, you have nowhere in the New Testament to support your opinion of Revelation 20. You admit that. That is damning for your doctrine!

What you force into your imaginary future millennium pertains to the here-and-now. The Gospel has gone out from Jerusalem as the prophets predicted. It has enveloped the nations. Jesus defeated every enemy of righteousness at his First Advent. He is now seated at the right hand of majesty on high. He holds all power and authority in heaven and on earth. Christ is currently reigning over His enemies.

1. Which OT prophets, if any, do you consider definitely corroborate the Premillennial interpretation of Revelation 20 that there are two distinct physical resurrection days (the first for the righteous, the second for the wicked) separated by a literal 1000 years+?
2. Where in the OT does it mention "resurrection days" (plural), pertaining to the end?
3. What OT Scripture do you consider definitely teaches there are two distinct future judgement days (that will see all mankind stand before Christ to give account for their lives) separated by a literal 1000 years+?
4. Where in the OT does it mention "judgement days" (plural), in regard to the end?
5. What Scripture, if any, do you consider definitely corroborates the Premillennial interpretation of Revelation 20 that Satan will be bound for a time-span of 1000 years after the Second Advent, then released for a "little season" to deceive the nations, and then destroy them?

 

[CadyandZoe]

Ezekiel prophesied to Israel on their return to Jerusalem from the Babylonian Captivity, Ezekiel 36 was fulfilled "Long Ago" when Israel returned and built Zerubabbels 2nd temple

No way. Not at all. In fact, the books of Ezra and Nehemiah tell you that it wasn't. The people were just as evil as before. Nothing at all changed after the captivity.

 

[Randy Kluth]

So where is your evidence?

Jesus preached that the Kingdom of God was near. He was preaching that to Israel.

Israel had been promised final deliverance in the way ancient judges and kings had delivered Israel from their enemies. The Prophets foretold a *final deliverance,* which has not yet happened for Israel. I'm not going to teach here a course on Israel's *final deliverance.*

The Gospel has gone out from Jerusalem as the prophets predicted. It has enveloped the nations. Jesus defeated every enemy of righteousness at his First Advent. He is now seated at the right hand of majesty on high. He holds all power and authority in heaven and on earth. Christ is currently reigning over His enemies.

God has *always* reigned over His enemies. And yet Jesus said His Kingdom is not yet here.

So what will be here? Israel will experience a final deliverance from her enemies. In the same way, the fallen Christian nations will also experience a final deliverance from their enemies. Many nominal Christians who have fallen away from the faith will return to the faith and restore their nations.

What Christ did at the cross is only preparatory for this event. He provided the legal means for people to become Christians now, and for people in the future to return to him.

This is the gospel of Grace. It has not yet been completed. The ministry of the Gospel is designed to lead up to the establishment of God's Kingdom on the earth. This has not yet happened since Satan is still on the rampage.

There is no evidence that Satan is presently bound and that the Kingdom of God has already been fixed upon the earth. Israel has not yet experienced a final deliverance from their enemies, nor has their punishment come to an end.

And the knowledge of God has not yet been established across the world in many nations on a permanent basis. There is no evidence that this has already been accomplished. I'm not going to keep repeating the same proof texts. But I will continue to repeat the arguments.

 

[Randy Kluth]

I see a distinct, troubling and ongoing pattern in your (and Premil) theology: when the evidence in Scripture blatantly negates, contradicts and exposes your thesis you conveniently invent a second alternative event or period to allow your teaching to fit. Premil does this all the time. They have to.

You invent 2 physical resurrection days for man, when the Bible says there is 1.

I "invented" Rev 20? I was, in effect, quoting Rev 20!!

 

[WPM]

Jesus preached that the Kingdom of God was near. He was preaching that to Israel.

Israel had been promised final deliverance in the way ancient judges and kings had delivered Israel from their enemies. The Prophets foretold a *final deliverance,* which has not yet happened for Israel. I'm not going to teach here a course on Israel's *final deliverance.*



God has *always* reigned over His enemies. And yet Jesus said His Kingdom is not yet here.

So what will be here? Israel will experience a final deliverance from her enemies. In the same way, the fallen Christian nations will also experience a final deliverance from their enemies. Many nominal Christians who have fallen away from the faith will return to the faith and restore their nations.

What Christ did at the cross is only preparatory for this event. He provided the legal means for people to become Christians now, and for people in the future to return to him.

This is the gospel of Grace. It has not yet been completed. The ministry of the Gospel is designed to lead up to the establishment of God's Kingdom on the earth. This has not yet happened since Satan is still on the rampage.

There is no evidence that Satan is presently bound and that the Kingdom of God has already been fixed upon the earth. Israel has not yet experienced a final deliverance from their enemies, nor has their punishment come to an end.

And the knowledge of God has not yet been established across the world in many nations on a permanent basis. There is no evidence that this has already been accomplished. I'm not going to keep repeating the same proof texts. But I will continue to repeat the arguments.

Please stop avoiding:

1. Which OT prophets, if any, do you consider definitely corroborate the Premillennial interpretation of Revelation 20 that there are two distinct physical resurrection days (the first for the righteous, the second for the wicked) separated by a literal 1000 years+?
2. Where in the OT does it mention "resurrection days" (plural), pertaining to the end?
3. What OT Scripture do you consider definitely teaches there are two distinct future judgement days (that will see all mankind stand before Christ to give account for their lives) separated by a literal 1000 years+?
4. Where in the OT does it mention "judgement days" (plural), in regard to the end?
5. What Scripture, if any, do you consider definitely corroborates the Premillennial interpretation of Revelation 20 that Satan will be bound for a time-span of 1000 years after the Second Advent, then released for a "little season" to deceive the nations, and then destroy them?

 

[WPM]

I "invented" Rev 20? I quoted Rev 20!!

Again, you cannot help but twist what others say to you because for you to address what they said would expose your beliefs. No one said or belives you invented Rev 20, you invented your understanding of it. I will repeat what you avoided - namely my whole post. That is what you do!

I see a distinct, troubling and ongoing pattern in your (and Premil) theology: when the evidence in Scripture blatantly negates, contradicts and exposes your thesis you conveniently invent a second alternative event or period to allow your teaching to fit. Premil does this all the time. They have to.

• You invent 2 peoples of God, when the Bible says there is 1.
• You invent 2 bindings of Satan, when the Bible says there is 1.
• You invent 2 last days' periods, when the Bible says there is 1.
• You invent 2 individual last days, when the Bible says there is 1.
• You invent 2 the end's, when the Bible says there is 1.
• You invent 2 judgment days for man, when the Bible says there is 1.
• You invent 2 physical resurrection days for man, when the Bible says there is 1.
• You invent 2 future glorifications for man and creation, when the Bible says there is 1.
• You invent 2 raptures (Pretribbers 3), when the Bible says there is 1.
• You invent 2 new heavens and new earth, when the Bible says there is 1.

There are no safe solid trustworthy consistent hermeneutics with Premillennialism. Premils method of interpretation is fluid. It is ad-hoc. It is horrible! Anything goes! Whatever it takes to facilitate their opinion of Revelation 20 or fit it into the rest of Scripture is employed. They are all over the place! Premils have to wing it on each passage.

On this matter (of the first resurrection), like the others, there is obviously just one and only "first resurrection." But you invent a second "first resurrection." Think about that! That is ridiculous. That doesn't make sense! It negates the whole meaning of "first." Talk about not taking Scripture literally. You completely obliterate the meaning of "first" and "last." You obliterate the meaning of "the beginning" and "the end." They are totally meaningless in Premil.

Revelation 1:5-6: “And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.”

Revelation 20:6 mirrors this. It describes the same first resurrection (that of Christ) and it shows the same result (God’s people ruling and reigning as priest kings in and through Christ).

Revelation 20:6: “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.”

Premillennialists may be confused by who or what the first resurrection was and is, but that was not the case with the first century Church. They knew without any doubt that the resurrection of Christ was the first in time, order and importance. It was the central victorious element of the Christian faith. Without it the cross would have meant nothing.

Our spiritual position “in Christ” since Calvary and since the resurrection qualifies the believer to partake in the fruit of His victory over every single enemy.

Acts 26:23 declares, “Christ should suffer, and that He should be the first resurrection from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles (ethnos)."

The first resurrection opened up the Gospel to the nations!

We should note in this passage, the enlightening of the Gentiles (or) ethnos is carefully connected to the first resurrection of Christ. It is only through this powerful event that the deception that smothered the Gentiles was lifted. Moreover, the binding of Satan is expressly connected to the enlightenment of the Gentiles (or) ethnos.

Revelation 20:2 makes clear, "And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years. And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations (ethnos) no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.”

Scripture often makes broad general sweeping statements. When Scripture tells us that the Gentiles would no longer be deceived it does not mean every single one of them, or even most of them, would be saved, just that the ignorance would be finally lifted from the darkened Gentiles.

Just like blindness and darkness are attributed to the Gentiles (without qualification) prior to the cross, it didn’t mean that every single Gentile was blind and in darkness. Scripture often described the Gentiles as a collective whole. That did not mean the Gentiles were all the same. Scripture, like us, makes generalities. Prior to Christ’s earthly ministry the heathen nations were viewed as being in wholesale ignorant and therefore outside of God’s plan of salvation. Could I suggest this was simply a general observation about the overall condition of the Gentiles as a broad mass, not an attempt to represent every single Gentile? The strongman was bound so that those in his darkness could come to the light.

 

[WPM]

Jesus preached that the Kingdom of God was near. He was preaching that to Israel.

Israel had been promised final deliverance in the way ancient judges and kings had delivered Israel from their enemies. The Prophets foretold a *final deliverance,* which has not yet happened for Israel. I'm not going to teach here a course on Israel's *final deliverance.*



God has *always* reigned over His enemies. And yet Jesus said His Kingdom is not yet here.

So what will be here? Israel will experience a final deliverance from her enemies. In the same way, the fallen Christian nations will also experience a final deliverance from their enemies. Many nominal Christians who have fallen away from the faith will return to the faith and restore their nations.

What Christ did at the cross is only preparatory for this event. He provided the legal means for people to become Christians now, and for people in the future to return to him.

This is the gospel of Grace. It has not yet been completed. The ministry of the Gospel is designed to lead up to the establishment of God's Kingdom on the earth. This has not yet happened since Satan is still on the rampage.

There is no evidence that Satan is presently bound and that the Kingdom of God has already been fixed upon the earth. Israel has not yet experienced a final deliverance from their enemies, nor has their punishment come to an end.

And the knowledge of God has not yet been established across the world in many nations on a permanent basis. There is no evidence that this has already been accomplished. I'm not going to keep repeating the same proof texts. But I will continue to repeat the arguments.

One of the biggest difficulties many of us have with Premil, and which was one of the reasons for some of us abandoning it was its mistaken fixation with natural apostate Christ-rejecting Israel, restoring the old covenant, and with real estate in Middle East (that is about to go up in smoke). Premils fail to see that Christ fulfilled all this. The old covenant was only a temporal conditional imperfect signpost, shadow and type of the new covenant – the substance, fulfilment and the reality.

There is not one single teaching from Christ, Paul, Peter or any of the New Testament writers that remotely suggests the Old Testament land promises, ordinances or traditions lasted any longer than the cross. There is no instruction on the Jews being brought back to the land. Whilst they may be fixated with real estate none of the new covenant writers were. Amil stands with them and the eternal covenant, not an abolished one that is shown even today to be long-defunct.

Remember, the Pharisees made the same mistake as Premils make today in regard to natural Israel. The Pharisees were filled with racial pride, consumed with a sense of national superiority, obsessed with religious rituals and temple ordinances and fixated with earthly real estate instead of the heavenly kingdom. They were looking to an earthly Davidic throne, with Messiah ruling over the Gentiles with a rod of iron. They believed in racial division and superiority. This obsession with the wrong city, land, Kingdom, consequently caused them to reject Christ and nail Him to a tree as an impostor. They missed the heavenly spiritual kingdom He brought.

The prophets were fixated with Christ (thee hope of Israel), redemption (deliverance from sin), His majestic kingdom (a spiritual edifice) and eternal glory (being delivered from every enemy - natural and spiritual). Messiah's appearance was the ongoing perpetual hope for every true Israelite (believing Israel). It was the Pharisees that were fixated with the land. They wanted to lord over the nations in a show of racial superiority. They were captivated with the natural, physical, earthly, visible and temporal whereas the elect were captivated with the supernatural, spiritual, heavenly, invisible and the eternal.

Many today mistakenly elevate Israel to the place that belongs alone to Christ. In doing this they undermine the Scriptures and depose Christ of His rightful place. I hear American believers frequently claim: "God blesses America because they support Israel." That is nonsense! God's blessing revolves around how people treat Christ! The fact is, all the old covenant promises, all the Old Testament covenants, the law, Moses and the prophets all had their sight and end in Christ. If one’s interpretation of Scripture does not point to Christ, exalt Him and see the realization of God’s blueprint for redemption in His final sacrifice for sin then it is in error. The Bible is undermined by the many false theories that exist today about Israel and the mistaken expectation that some Christians have of the rebuilding of a Judaic temple, the instigation of a failed Israeli priesthood, and the return to useless animal sacrifices. This unhealthy fixation with natural Israel and physical real estate in the Middle East where Israel would enjoy racial superiority over all the nations is wrong, misplaced and contrary to repeated New Testament Scripture. That will never again happen; it has gone forever. All nations today are equally chosen and the boundaries of Israel have been extended outward to embrace the whole world (the Gentile nations). The Gospel many preach today is a flawed gospel that diverts people away from Christ to man and land that is about to go up in a puff of smoke when Jesus comes. Christ is the focus of all Scripture Old and New. He was the anticipated fulfilment of every Old Testament hope.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Please stop avoiding:

1. Which OT prophets, if any, do you consider definitely corroborate the Premillennial interpretation of Revelation 20 that there are two distinct physical resurrection days (the first for the righteous, the second for the wicked) separated by a literal 1000 years+?
2. Where in the OT does it mention "resurrection days" (plural), pertaining to the end?
3. What OT Scripture do you consider definitely teaches there are two distinct future judgement days (that will see all mankind stand before Christ to give account for their lives) separated by a literal 1000 years+?
4. Where in the OT does it mention "judgement days" (plural), in regard to the end?
5. What Scripture, if any, do you consider definitely corroborates the Premillennial interpretation of Revelation 20 that Satan will be bound for a time-span of 1000 years after the Second Advent, then released for a "little season" to deceive the nations, and then destroy them?

You're just substituting your points for my points, completely failing to disprove my claims. I'm not going to teach a course here on Israel's Hope, as given in the Prophets.

In effect, the Prophets confirmed the Abrahamic Covenant, which guaranteed Israel's permanent placement in Canaan, with a final deliverance from their enemies. As well, the promise reaches out to the nations to create other nations like Israel, called and chosen of God.

I've told you this repeatedly, which you ignore. Instead, you continue to pose your same old questions. You try to cover over my points with your own points. But the real issue here is: what do we do with the Abrahamic Covenant?

 

[WPM]

The Day of the Lord marks a new era in human history when God will begin to "have his day." That new era will serve God's desire to prove himself among the nations, and restore his holy name. For this reason, in anticipation of that new era, Jesus taught his disciples to pray, "Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven."

hallowed be thy name:
This phrase, in the King James English, should be read as a request such as "make your name holy." This petition looks ahead to the day when God will vindicate himself among human beings.

Thy kingdom come:
This petition presupposes that the kingdom has not yet come. But the kingdom of light has come in a sense, since Jesus rules over his followers now. So in some sense, the kingdom is now and the kingdom has yet to come.

thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven:
Here Jesus qualifies the earlier petition. In what sense has the kingdom yet to come? The kingdom will be fully realized when God's will is done on earth as it is in heaven. God's will is not being done now. But in the day of the Lord, this aspect of the kingdom will come to fruition.

The Day of the Lord begins with warnings and judgments, which climax at the Second Advent, when Jesus gathers his people to himself and begins to rule from Jerusalem. The run up to the Second advent is filled with darkness, smoke, fire, doom, devastation and such things. During the run-up to the return of Jesus, God sends his "armies" on Israel, which are fires that burn every thing.

The Day comes like a thief in the night in that it surprises those that are asleep. Paul says that it won't surprise those that are awake.

The Day of the Lord is longer than a day. The day lasts for at least a thousand years, maybe longer. At the end of that era, the heavens and earth pass away as it says in Revelation 20.


I think it means what it literally says. This aspect of the Day of the Lord takes place at the end of that day.

Where does it say the DOTL is anything other than a climactic day that no wicked survives and which ushers in the NHNE?

 

[Randy Kluth]

One of the biggest difficulties many of us have with Premil, and which was one of the reasons for some of us abandoning it was its mistaken fixation with natural apostate Christ-rejecting Israel, restoring the old covenant, and with real estate in Middle East (that is about to go up in smoke). Premils fail to see that Christ fulfilled all this. The old covenant was only a temporal conditional imperfect signpost, shadow and type of the new covenant – the substance, fulfilment and the reality.

Yes, we've covered this many times now. I do believe the New Covenant supersedes the Old Covenant of Law. But I do *not* believe God's promises to Abraham concerning Israel and the nations has been revoked. These are two distinct issues.

So we agree that Dispensationalism is wrong in their belief that Israel is on a separate track from the Church, eventually returning to OT rites. I agree with you on this.

But not all Premil is Dispensational. I do agree with Dispensationalists that Israel is still alive and well in God's economy. They have experienced an age-long setback, but it isn't over yet. The fat lady hasn't yet sung.

 

[WPM]

You're just substituting your points for my points, completely failing to disprove my claims. I'm not going to teach a course here on Israel's Hope, as given in the Prophets.

In effect, the Prophets confirmed the Abrahamic Covenant, which guaranteed Israel's permanent placement in Canaan, with a final deliverance from their enemies. As well, the promise reaches out to the nations to create other nations like Israel, called and chosen of God.

I've told you this repeatedly, which you ignore. Instead, you continue to pose your same old questions. You try to cover over my points with your own points. But the real issue here is: what do we do with the Abrahamic Covenant?

Simple! It is being fulfilled today with the NT Church. The relationship between the Old Testament saints and the New Testament saints is always depicted as a unitary whole, even though these two groupings possess very unique characteristics. We must remember, they are seen at different stages of growth (in time) despite being one developing spiritual organism. They are often portrayed in a progressive growth, in the same way as the development occurs between the caterpillar and the butterfly. They are described in Scripture as the initial foundation which the building is built upon, or the root of a plant that the branches finally appear.

 

[WPM]

Whether any of that is true or not, it isn't relevant to the issue.

Maybe not to you, but it is to all Bible-believing truth-seekers.