22 major reasons to abandon the Premil doctrine

[dad]

The Atonement of the Cross covered all of the time of creation not just 7 years. That was my point. You have this covenant made and broken during a mere 7 year period.

The length of the Tribulation is given repeatedly. It is in that time that the covenant exists.

The point about Satan's 42 months in Revelation 13, is that for this 3.5 year period, there is no grace nor Atonement available.

Completely false. No grace or salvation?? What a horrible thing to make up whole of cloth and preach as if it had the slightest semblance to truth.

Not that the Atonement Covenant was broken. It was completely removed. Hence the the removal of the daily sacrifice, ie the Atonement of the Cross.

So you think basically that as far as a number of years in the final week, that the cross of Christ was vain.

The only way out of these 42 months is either receive the mark and removed from the Lamb's book of life

That is a dark nightmare fantasy that has no basis in reality. Lots of people get saved all through that last seven years. They have a name. They are called saints.

, or chop your head off. That is the only choice.

You do realize that no one ir removed from the book of life once saved? The ones removed are the ones who would not receive His gift.

Only those who have their head chopped off are covered by the Atonement Covenant.

Sounds like a marvel comic

That is not martyrdom. One is a sinner until the point they remove their head.

Quite a works trip there. Basically, to get to heaven you simply need to have your head removed! What nonsense.

Once the head is removed, they no longer experience Adam's dead corruptible flesh.

More made up false doctrine.

 

[Truth7t7]

Other people have their gods also. Saying "god of his fathers" doesn't automatically mean the true God.

Much love!

The Future Human Man, The Antichrist Seen Below In (Daniel) 11:37 Will Be A Hebrew/Jew In Decent, His Fathers Worshipped The True Hebrew (God Of His Fathers), and he won't desire women

(Daniel) 11:37KJV
37 Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all.

 

[marks]

The Future Human Man, The Antichrist Seen Below In (Daniel) 11:37 Will Be A Hebrew/Jew In Decent, His Fathers Worshipped The True Hebrew (God Of His Fathers), and he won't desire women

(Daniel) 11:37KJV
37 Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all.

Asked and answered. This does not specify the Hebrew's God.

Much love!

 

[Truth7t7]

Explain why if he was say, from a Catholic heritage, and rejected the God of his fathers, that wouldn't work? How does the verse say exclusively Jewish?

Your were given two examples, (God of his fathers) is used exclusively with the Jew/Hebrew in the old testament

Jesus Is The Lord

 

[quietthinker]

I can’t see the amount of views either !

On the right hand side of the thread listed.
It even tells me what you had for breakfast .....sorry, just kidding

 

[Truth7t7]

On the right hand side of the thread listed.
It even tells me what you had for breakfast .....sorry, just kidding

That's what I see, replies and date posted, no views?

 

[Timtofly]

How else are we to obtain this?
I have been a Christian long enough to know I'll never ever achieve this on my own. I need him 24/7.

You don't think Noah or Abraham did not need the same thing? No human ever did it on their own. God already had the Atonement Covenant prepared in eternity. From our perspective of earth history it only happened once. But from God's perspective it has always been.

 

[Randy Kluth]

That the beast is from the sea indicates to me it will be gentile.

Much love!

Good point. I would agree with that. Typically, in the ancient land of Israel, the "sea" would refer to the Mediterranean, inferring people from overseas. The "land" would refer to the land of Israel. I know there are two beasts. I don't know that the 2nd Beast will come from Israel either, but do you have any thoughts on it?

 

[marks]

Good point. I would agree with that. Typically, in the ancient land of Israel, the "sea" would refer to the Mediterranean, inferring people from overseas. The "land" would refer to the land of Israel. I know there are two beasts. I don't know that the 2nd Beast will come from Israel either, but do you have any thoughts on it?

I think the 2nd beast will be Israeli. It seems "the land" always refers to the Promised Land in that kind of context. And on my own thinking, this being the False Prophet, I don't know that the Jews would accept a prophet who wasn't Jewish.

Much love!

 

[Timtofly]

Stop avoiding the obvious. Where is earth mentioned here?

People "living" is symbolism for earth. You don't claim any one lives in heaven, so where else would they live?

Don't you live on earth, or do you remote into the internet from a different dimension?

If it specified earth, you would still claim that was symbolic of any place other than earth.

 

[marks]

On the right hand side of the thread listed.
It even tells me what you had for breakfast .....sorry, just kidding

You made me choke on my coffee!!

 

[Truth7t7]

Good point. I would agree with that. Typically, in the ancient land of Israel, the "sea" would refer to the Mediterranean, inferring people from overseas. The "land" would refer to the land of Israel. I know there are two beasts. I don't know that the 2nd Beast will come from Israel either, but do you have any thoughts on it?

False "Sea" represents multitudes of people, not oceans of water as you claim

Revelation 13:1KJV
And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.

Revelation 17:15KJV
15 And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.

 

[dad]

Your were given two examples, (God of his fathers) is used exclusively with the Jew/Hebrew in the old testament

In other words the bible uses the phrase twice and it is referring to Jews each time? Well, I would say it seems quite possible. However I would say we do not know. The phrase could apply in many situations as well today.

 

[quietthinker]

That's what I see, replies and date posted, no views?

Ohhh, yeah....it is limited in comparison to my view. Maybe I'm living in a raptured state with other worldly privileges!

 

[quietthinker]

Could it be a setting you have control over? Could it be the Southern Hemisphere has better access to God? Could it be diet related or marriage status? maybe it's living in the jungle that helps?
Here's what I see

 

[Truth7t7]

Here's what I see
View attachment 26452

Thanks for the responses thinker, I guess you are privileged?

 

[Truth7t7]

I think the 2nd beast will be Israeli. It seems "the land" always refers to the Promised Land in that kind of context. And on my own thinking, this being the False Prophet, I don't know that the Jews would accept a prophet who wasn't Jewish.

Much love!

The Jews won't accept the future false Messiah, AKA the Antichrist as being anything other than a Jew, claiming to be in the lineage of King David, Judaism 101

 

[jeffweeder]

You don't think Noah or Abraham did not need the same thing? No human ever did it on their own. God already had the Atonement Covenant prepared in eternity. From our perspective of earth history it only happened once. But from God's perspective it has always been.

Tim, you really need to think about what you are saying before you open your mouth.

From Gods perspective it was always going to be up to him to save us. He did this for us because he is the essence of love itself.
It has NOT always been this way as you say.
It took Jesus to endure the cross and shed his blood for us before it became a reality for us. How dare you so carelessly overlook this.

 

[Timtofly]

Rev 20 applies to those who do not come under judgement. Jesus had previously taught this to the Apostle John. It was a concept already enjoyed for those who believed and had passed from death to life in the here and now. Clearly then it is a figurative concept in Rev 20 ...unless Jesus changed his mind.

Jn 5
24 I assure you, most solemnly I tell you, the person whose ears are open to My words [who listens to My message] and believes and trusts in and clings to and relies on Him Who sent Me has (possesses now) eternal life. And he does not come into judgment [does not incur sentence of judgment, will not come under condemnation], but he has already passed over out of death into life.

25 Believe Me when I assure you, most solemnly I tell you, the time is coming and is here now when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear it shall live.

A resurrection is always literal. Why would you want to be figuratively resurrected?

 

[jeffweeder]

A resurrection is always literal. Why would you want to be figuratively resurrected?

Ask Jesus why he preached Jn 5 as being in the here and now.

Tell me Tim, do you expect to come into the judgment of the second death if it happened right now? Is what Jesus did for you enough for you to escape before any bodily resurrection.???