Another Premillennial absurdity

[Randy Kluth]

By destroying everything?

As Antichrist said in an Endtimes movie, "Isn't it beautiful?"

 

[Randy Kluth]

Corruption, which is the consequence of sin comes to an end at the second coming. Therefore, death and decay come to an end at the second coming. Perfection arrives with the age to come.

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.

You are conflating things here that do not belong together. You are saying the glorious perfection comes at the 2nd Coming. It does--for the saints of the present age who are caught up to meet the Lord in the air to receive new immortal bodies. Perfection will be their experience from that time on.

You say that one day the universe will wear out, ie it will lose its temporal qualities, in order to achieve perfection and eternal qualities. That also is true. That will take place at the end of the Millennium.

So you are stating two true things, but putting them together that belong in two separate times and two separate events. The glorification, or perfection, of the saints of the present age, begin at the 2nd Coming. But the dawning of the new eternal earth will not take place until a thousand years later.

So all your Scripture quotes go to prove one of the two points. But they fail to separate them into two time periods, as Rev 20 does. Not just Rev 20, but the whole idea of an era in which the glorified saints reign over the mortal world indicates that the world itself will not be perfected until after this rule.

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.”

Becoming like the angels applies only to the resurrected and glorified saints in the Millennium--not to mortals on earth who have not yet died or been glorified. We read in the OT that the blessed state of the Messianic Kingdom will feature marriage, children, and long life.

Isa 54.1 Sing, barren woman,
you who never bore a child;
burst into song, shout for joy,
you who were never in labor;
because more are the children of the desolate woman
than of her who has a husband,”
says the Lord.
Isa 65.20 Never again will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his years; the one who dies at a hundred will be thought a mere child; the one who fails to reach a hundred will be considered accursed.

 

[WPM]

You are conflating things here that do not belong together. You are saying the glorious perfection comes at the 2nd Coming. It does--for the saints of the present age who are caught up to meet the Lord in the air to receive new immortal bodies. Perfection will be their experience from that time on.

You say that one day the universe will wear out, ie it will lose its temporal qualities, in order to achieve perfection and eternal qualities. That also is true. That will take place at the end of the Millennium.

So you are stating two true things, but putting them together that belong in two separate times and two separate events. The glorification, or perfection, of the saints of the present age, begin at the 2nd Coming. But the dawning of the new eternal earth will not take place until a thousand years later.

So all your Scripture quotes go to prove one of the two points. But they fail to separate them into two time periods, as Rev 20 does. Not just Rev 20, but the whole idea of an era in which the glorified saints reign over the mortal world indicates that the world itself will not be perfected until after this rule.

Becoming like the angels applies only to the resurrected and glorified saints in the Millennium--not to mortals on earth who have not yet died or been glorified. We read in the OT that the blessed state of the Messianic Kingdom will feature marriage, children, and long life.

Isa 54.1 Sing, barren woman,
you who never bore a child;
burst into song, shout for joy,
you who were never in labor;
because more are the children of the desolate woman
than of her who has a husband,”
says the Lord.
Isa 65.20 Never again will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his years; the one who dies at a hundred will be thought a mere child; the one who fails to reach a hundred will be considered accursed.

When the clear and repeated teaching of Christ and the NT is presented to you, you normally try to explain it away to fit your faulty opinion of the OT. That is your default. That is your MO. That is because the NT being the fuller revelation forbids your error. Deal with the literal straightforward wording of the text I presented from Christ. Stop fighting it. Then we can address Isa 55 and 65, which do not support your thesis.

You totally sidestepped the rest of my points because they cut across your beliefs. I will repeat:

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.

Let us pause for a moment and consider what is being said here: people marry right up until the second coming, but in the age to come they don’t marry because the saints of God will be adorned with their new glorified eternal bodies. What is more: Christ shows that people die right up until the second coming but in the age to come they don’t die. Why? Because sin, sinners and the wicked are not welcome on the new glorified perfected earth that Christ introduces at the second coming.

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.

This passage strongly cuts across the Premillennialists scheme that envisions a half-way redeemed earth with humans still procreating and still dying.

Does anyone truly believe that Jesus was teaching that people would marry in the Jewish age but not in the Christian age? Nobody would maintain such folly. This passage definitely leaves no room for the Premillennial and Preterist expectations. If words carry any meaning in Scripture then the whole Premillennial and Preterist schemes falls apart with such a passage. After all, in their paradigm, all the bondage of corruption continues on in the Premillennial and Preterist ‘ages to come’.

 

[Timtofly]

Editing Gods word could have terrible consequences.

Then why do Amil edit Revelation 20 and take it out of context, if doing so has terrible consequences?

The first resurrection is physical, not spiritual.

 

[WPM]

The first resurrection is physical, not spiritual.

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). Amils believe in corroboration. Multiple Scripture proves that the first resurrection of Jesus occurred 2000 years ago.

 

[WPM]

I 100% disagree with you. If I change the context by manipulating the passage that is one thing. But not one thing did I manipulate by leaving certain things out--certainly not in the way I look at things. It may be that way to you, but I don't see things your way, and so did not have to edit for your benefit.

Instead of always voicing your opinions, how about presenting hard Scripture. Your opinions are inadmissible. They normally run contrary to Scripture on end-times.

 

[Timtofly]

That sounds like the NJ/NHNE
The millennium has Millions/ Billions outside the camp of the redeemed who are destroyed and die by fire the last day after the mill. Death is thrown into the fire afterwards.

Not during the Millennium. After the Millennium.

Amil have their sinners during the Millennium. Pre-mill do not.

Jesus does make all things new. Then reigns for a thousand years, and then hands back all of creation to God. Paul says He must reign after the Second Coming, not until the Second Coming.

 

[Timtofly]

Even if Christ was literally standing over sinners with an iron rod for a thousand year they would still sin because they are sinners!!! This is Christianity 101.

• Where in history or Scripture does it say that humans in mortal bodies can become sinless?
• Where in history or Scripture does it show a sinner become sinless outside of salvation?
• Surely glorification is the only means that Scripture shows where a human attains unto that?
• Where in Scripture teaches the concept of wholesale obedience by unregenerate mortals during a future millennium?
• How can billions of sinners enter your supposed future millennium and suddenly be made sinless and then once it hits exactly 1,000 years then instantly become the grossest and most foolish bunch of sinners ever to live as en-mass they become Satan worshipers?
• How can sinners not sin?

None of Adam's dead corruptible flesh will exist in the Millennium. Who are you trying to fool? Yourself or theology that is wrong?

There are no sinners born in the Millennium. The first act of disobedience is death. Not Adam's death were he could live in sin, and enjoy it. Death that removes a soul from physical existence.

A dead sinner is a gone sinner, not a living sinner.

Even before that crowd can sin, they are consumed by fire. You have not provided a verse that claims it is against the law to travel in large groups across the breadth of the earth. God is proactive when it comes to creation. The Lamb was slain even before creation. Those humans you claim are rebellious, are consumed by fire before they can harm any one.

You would have to have God burn up all sinners on earth, even Christians, for this scenario to work for you as a Second Coming event. Even Christians are still sinners in Adam's dead corruptible flesh. Then God would resurrect them out of the ashes. That totally contradicts Paul's point we are caught up to meet the Lord at the Second Coming. Paul never says we are burned to a crisp just prior to that. Alive and remain is not burned to a crisp in Adam's dead corruptible flesh. Those in Revelation 20 are consumed by fire prior to your Second Coming event. Because Satan is cast into the LOF before as well. Then your Second Coming event happens.

Those currently in Paradise are not sinners. They did not take Adam's dead corruptible flesh to Paradise with them. Why are you asking me if sinners currently exist in Paradise? Those in the Millennium do not take Adam's dead corruptible flesh into the Millennium either. Jesus is the Resurrection and the Life. Jesus is not the Resurrection and you get to keep Adam's dead corruptible flesh for all eternity.

Your questions are pointless. Even those in sheol do not take Adam's dead corruptible flesh with them after physical death. Sin only reigns in Adam's dead corruptible flesh. Existing as a soul is pointless to say you take sin with you. It is not a huge frat party down there in sheol. They may think about it, but certainly cannot physically enjoy it.

But you don't seem to understand that those in Paradise currently have a permanent incorruptible physical body. 2 Corinthians 5:1. Paul says it was already there, not available thousands of years in the future.

 

[Timtofly]

Denial is in your false teaching that the day of the Lord is 1,000 literal years long

The day of the Lord will take place quickly, like thief in sudden destruction (The End)

So in your logic each day is the first second after midnight. It is a quick second, but to you that is the longevity of a day, just that one second. Prey tell what is the other 23 hours, 59 minutes, and 59 seconds?

The Day of the Lord is 1,000 years. But that introduction will be hard to miss.

I don't deny the whole Day of the Lord. Amil deny it is 1,000 years. Right now their Millennium is almost 2 whole days. Seems they cannot get a grasp on the length of a day.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Instead of always voicing your opinions, how about presenting hard Scripture. Your opinions are inadmissible. They normally run contrary to Scripture on end-times.

False.

 

[Randy Kluth]

When the clear and repeated teaching of Christ and the NT is presented to you, you normally try to explain it away to fit your faulty opinion of the OT. That is your default. That is your MO. That is because the NT being the fuller revelation forbids your error. Deal with the literal straightforward wording of the text I presented from Christ. Stop fighting it.

You confuse the word of God with your own *interpretation* of what it means. The sheep listen to the Shepherd, and not to a stranger. If your interpretation is "strange" I'm not fighting it--I'm rejecting it.

The Shepherd is full of love and grace. I don't find you to be anything akin to this, except manipulative, pressuring, and self-interested. Let the Holy Spirit convict, and let others determine their choices without all of the pressure, without all of the manipulation. That is not the Holy Spirit--that is you!

You act as if you're superior to me--you're not. You're likely younger than me, with less experience in both the Scriptures and God. If you want me to learn from you, you should be prepared to learn from me also. But I think you're too proud for that.

 

[Timtofly]

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). Amils believe in corroboration. Multiple Scripture proves that the first resurrection of Jesus occurred 2000 years ago.

This does not change the fact of my post you quoted.

You are just stating another fact, related to the point.

The first resurrection is physical, along with the first birth and the first death.

 

[WPM]

You confuse the word of God with your own *interpretation* of what it means. The sheep listen to the Shepherd, and not to a stranger. If your interpretation is "strange" I'm not fighting it--I'm rejecting it.

The Shepherd is full of love and grace. I don't find you to be anything akin to this, except manipulative, pressuring, and self-interested. Let the Holy Spirit convict, and let others determine their choices without all of the pressure, without all of the manipulation. That is not the Holy Spirit--that is you!

You act as if you're superior to me--you're not. You're likely younger than me, with less experience in both the Scriptures and God. If you want me to learn from you, you should be prepared to learn from me also. But I think you're too proud for that.

Yah-de-dah-de-dah. Stop your boasting, false charges and avoidance, and address the issue at hand. Since when has age been anything to do with knowing truth? Jesus said to the religious that we should become as a little child.

Why do you constantly explain away the fuller revelation of the New Testament with your mistaken opinion of the Old Testament?

 

[WPM]

None of Adam's dead corruptible flesh will exist in the Millennium. Who are you trying to fool? Yourself or theology that is wrong?

There are no sinners born in the Millennium. The first act of disobedience is death. Not Adam's death were he could live in sin, and enjoy it. Death that removes a soul from physical existence.

A dead sinner is a gone sinner, not a living sinner.

Even before that crowd can sin, they are consumed by fire. You have not provided a verse that claims it is against the law to travel in large groups across the breadth of the earth. God is proactive when it comes to creation. The Lamb was slain even before creation. Those humans you claim are rebellious, are consumed by fire before they can harm any one.

You would have to have God burn up all sinners on earth, even Christians, for this scenario to work for you as a Second Coming event. Even Christians are still sinners in Adam's dead corruptible flesh. Then God would resurrect them out of the ashes. That totally contradicts Paul's point we are caught up to meet the Lord at the Second Coming. Paul never says we are burned to a crisp just prior to that. Alive and remain is not burned to a crisp in Adam's dead corruptible flesh. Those in Revelation 20 are consumed by fire prior to your Second Coming event. Because Satan is cast into the LOF before as well. Then your Second Coming event happens.

Those currently in Paradise are not sinners. They did not take Adam's dead corruptible flesh to Paradise with them. Why are you asking me if sinners currently exist in Paradise? Those in the Millennium do not take Adam's dead corruptible flesh into the Millennium either. Jesus is the Resurrection and the Life. Jesus is not the Resurrection and you get to keep Adam's dead corruptible flesh for all eternity.

Your questions are pointless. Even those in sheol do not take Adam's dead corruptible flesh with them after physical death. Sin only reigns in Adam's dead corruptible flesh. Existing as a soul is pointless to say you take sin with you. It is not a huge frat party down there in sheol. They may think about it, but certainly cannot physically enjoy it.

But you don't seem to understand that those in Paradise currently have a permanent incorruptible physical body. 2 Corinthians 5:1. Paul says it was already there, not available thousands of years in the future.

(1) Who are these billions of wicked rebels that overrun your millennium as the sand of the sea and (2) what causes them to wholesale become satanists?

 

[WPM]

You confuse the word of God with your own *interpretation* of what it means. The sheep listen to the Shepherd, and not to a stranger. If your interpretation is "strange" I'm not fighting it--I'm rejecting it.

The Shepherd is full of love and grace. I don't find you to be anything akin to this, except manipulative, pressuring, and self-interested. Let the Holy Spirit convict, and let others determine their choices without all of the pressure, without all of the manipulation. That is not the Holy Spirit--that is you!

You act as if you're superior to me--you're not. You're likely younger than me, with less experience in both the Scriptures and God. If you want me to learn from you, you should be prepared to learn from me also. But I think you're too proud for that.

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.

Let us pause for a moment and consider what is being said here: people marry right up until the second coming, but in the age to come they don’t marry because the saints of God will be adorned with their new glorified eternal bodies. What is more: Christ shows that people die right up until the second coming but in the age to come they don’t die. Why? Because sin, sinners and the wicked are not welcome on the new glorified perfected earth that Christ introduces at the second coming.

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.

This passage strongly cuts across the Premillennialists scheme that envisions a half-way redeemed earth with humans still procreating and still dying.

Does anyone truly believe that Jesus was teaching that people would marry in the Jewish age but not in the Christian age? Nobody would maintain such folly. This passage definitely leaves no room for the Premillennial and Preterist expectations. If words carry any meaning in Scripture then the whole Premillennial and Preterist schemes falls apart with such a passage. After all, in their paradigm, all the bondage of corruption continues on in the Premillennial and Preterist ‘ages to come’.

 

[Randy Kluth]

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.

Let us pause for a moment and consider what is being said here: people marry right up until the second coming, but in the age to come they don’t marry because the saints of God will be adorned with their new glorified eternal bodies. What is more: Christ shows that people die right up until the second coming but in the age to come they don’t die. Why? Because sin, sinners and the wicked are not welcome on the new glorified perfected earth that Christ introduces at the second coming.

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.

This passage strongly cuts across the Premillennialists scheme that envisions a half-way redeemed earth with humans still procreating and still dying.

Does anyone truly believe that Jesus was teaching that people would marry in the Jewish age but not in the Christian age? Nobody would maintain such folly. This passage definitely leaves no room for the Premillennial and Preterist expectations. If words carry any meaning in Scripture then the whole Premillennial and Preterist schemes falls apart with such a passage. After all, in their paradigm, all the bondage of corruption continues on in the Premillennial and Preterist ‘ages to come’.

What you say is reasonable--I just think there is another way to deal with it. When Jesus refers to people of this age, he is generally speaking of people who are following the prince of the power of the air, whether or not they are conscious of that. When he speaks of the children of the Kingdom in this age, he is speaking of those whose reward will be glorious at the time Jesus comes back.

So in the next age, assuming there is one, it is reasonable to assume the Christians in this age will be rewarded, glorified, and in a state of perfection. And those who have made the wrong choices in the present age will be disqualified from entering into that age. Those who have not yet made up their minds will simply continue to live on into the next age, where they will be able to make up their minds.

The glorified saints will be genderless and exist like angels, who seem to come and go at will, not being restricted to their physical frames and spaces. They will not marry and have children.

Those who are not yet glorified, who enter into the future age as survivors of Armageddon, will simply continue to live out their mortal lives. They will not be "rewarded" in the age to come, because they are not yet glorified.

Only those who are glorified will enter into the reward of the age to come. Otherwise, people will enter into the age to come not yet rewarded, and still able to benefit from an improved world.

The argument here cannot be resolved on the language alone. It really has to do with whether there will be an age to come with mortals in it. This makes all the difference.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Yah-de-dah-de-dah. Stop your boasting, false charges and avoidance, and address the issue at hand. Since when has age been anything to do with knowing truth? Jesus said to the religious that we should become as a little child.

Why do you constantly explain away the fuller revelation of the New Testament with your mistaken opinion of the Old Testament?

I'm just trying to get along and converse on the basis of mutual respect for the respective opinions we hold to. I have zero interest in boasting. I'd just like to get along and maintain a horizontal relationship, and not a vertical relationship. God is Lord--not us. We should let others have their opinions, right or wrong, and let the Holy Spirit convict, rather than shame those we disagree with.

 

[jeffweeder]

I'm surprised that you think your "millionth proof" is proof of anything at all in this debate?? We all agree that Christ is coming back to bring vengeance against the Antichrist and the world that follows him. But it is not at all clear from this that there are "no survivors." Where do you get this from this passage?

As a matter of fact, we are told by Paul that there *will be survivors* who are caught up to meet the Lord at his Coming.

1 Thes 4. 17 After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.

I think you know what I was trying to say Randy.
Of course, those in Jesus who are alive will be saved.
Those who do not know God and except the gospel will not survive. Rather they suffer eternal separation from the Lord's presence. The passage could not be any clearer as to what transpires when the Lord appears a second time to Glorify us. Nobody is left to populate a future millennium.

 

[WPM]

What you say is reasonable--I just think there is another way to deal with it. When Jesus refers to people of this age, he is generally speaking of people who are following the prince of the power of the air, whether or not they are conscious of that. When he speaks of the children of the Kingdom in this age, he is speaking of those whose reward will be glorious at the time Jesus comes back.

So in the next age, assuming there is one, it is reasonable to assume the Christians in this age will be rewarded, glorified, and in a state of perfection. And those who have made the wrong choices in the present age will be disqualified from entering into that age. Those who have not yet made up their minds will simply continue to live on into the next age, where they will be able to make up their minds.

The glorified saints will be genderless and exist like angels, who seem to come and go at will, not being restricted to their physical frames and spaces. They will not marry and have children.

Those who are not yet glorified, who enter into the future age as survivors of Armageddon, will simply continue to live out their mortal lives. They will not be "rewarded" in the age to come, because they are not yet glorified.

Only those who are glorified will enter into the reward of the age to come. Otherwise, people will enter into the age to come not yet rewarded, and still able to benefit from an improved world.

The argument here cannot be resolved on the language alone. It really has to do with whether there will be an age to come with mortals in it. This makes all the difference.

You are inventing 3 peoples in life when the Bible only recognized 2. This is a major flaw in your theology and highlights the danger of swallowing man-made doctrine. Premil forces you to promote one false teaching with more false teaching. That is what Premillennialists must do with the faulty hand they have been dealt.

Your 3 groups are supposedly: (1) “the Christians,” (2) “those who have made the wrong choices in the present age” and (3) “those who have not yet made up their minds.”

Who writes your script for you? What do you mean by describing your 2nd group as “those who have made the wrong choices in the present age”? Where do you get that? They have names. Your fluffy liberal definition is extra-biblical. That is what you do. You try to invent your human terms to support your error and replace God’s terms. Why not stick to Scripture? They are “wicked.” They are “ungodly.” They are “unjust.” They are “children of the devil.”

Your 3rd group may exist in your head but not in God’s. They do not exist in reality. Who are “Those who have not yet made up their minds”? Where do you get this in Scripture? Nowhere. It is complete and utter nonsense from you.

Not to decide is to decide. These are also “wicked,” “ungodly,” “unjust” and “children of the devil.”

John the Baptist said in John 3:36, “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.”

If a man loves Christ He is saved. He will escape the wrath of God, if he doesn't he is under the wrath of God. Simple!!!

Jesus said in Matthew 12:30, “He that is not with me is against me.”

The only chosen people that God knows and accepts are those that accept His Son. The rest are of their father the devil.

Jesus said in John 5:23b-24, “He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.”

Christ-rejecting Jews and Gentiles are under condemnation and are therefore of their father the devil.

 

[Truth7t7]

False.

WPM is spot on, you ramble on in novel sized responses without scripture to support your claims, because there isn't any