Another Premillennial absurdity

[WPM]

What I've read says they're either asleep, as Lazarus was, or they're in Paradise, as Jesus promised the believing repentant thief beside him during their crucifixion, or the souls of either one, dead wicked or redeemed, have returned to God. The Old Testament doesn't differentiate in Ecclesiastes 12.

That's what I've read at least.

Where is paradise?

Are the wicked in paradise?

 

[Randy Kluth]

Thank you for letting me know that. And I agree.

Why then does he persist do you think? Could we be wrong?

The Scriptures warn us to have nothing to do with quarrelsome arrogant Christians, who enjoy dividing others. I've tried and tried to establish a basis for Christian unity and love with him, but his mission is to promote Amil with reckless abandon. I only respond to issues he brings forward that requires, in my view, correction to keep others from being misled.

Don't get me wrong. I don't think Amill is either unchristian or evil. I just think that some people let certain biblical doctrines, theologies, and beliefs become an idol to them. When they stop caring about loving God and loving others, they've crossed a line.

This is my judgment call. You'll have to discern this for yourself. I don't know if he does this only with those who seriously challenge his beliefs, or not? All I can judge is how he treats me when discussing this.

And, may I add? This guy has been doing this for years, and has undoubtedly infected others with his form of combative, insulting Christianity. His friends believe he's wonderful because he has so promoted himself, and has designed a means of debate that dominates with a bank of quotations he's saved, and stifling others with regular taunts like, "you have nothing," or "where are your scriptures?"

My hope is that some of his fellow Amills will not drink his Kool-aide, and insist on debating their beliefs with spiritual comradery, and not with this quarrelsome, divisive spirit. I would warn you--he only throws back at you what you throw at him. He doesn't rely on Scriptures to regulate his behavior--only to promote his doctrine.

Heb 4.11 Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will perish by following their example of disobedience.

Titus 3.10 Warn a divisive person once, and then warn them a second time. After that, have nothing to do with them.

Acts 20.30 Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. 31 So be on your guard!

1 John 4.20 Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar. For whoever does not love their brother and sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, whom they have not seen.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Awaiting your response.

Until you members of the "Amil clan" become "individuals," and not clones of WPM, I don't think I'll get a sincere question. Let me know when you're not "channeling" WPM and his divisive spirit, and we may get along better than you thought?

 

[covenantee]

Until you members of the "Amil clan" become "individuals," and not clones of WPM, I don't think I'll get a sincere question. Let me know when you're not "channeling" WPM and his divisive spirit, and we may get along better than you thought?

The answer is that universalism is contrary to Scripture, and that "Jewishness" is entirely irrelevant to salvation.

 

[Randy Kluth]

The answer is that universalism is contrary to Scripture.

That's correct: universalism is bad doctrine. God is able to call and choose enough Jews to build a nation around. He certainly does not call and choose to Salvation all who have Jewish DNA. He has promised to form a Christian nation out of Jews--not guarantee Salvation for every individual Jew in that nation.

God's salvation of the nation Israel is a political salvation based on spiritual principles. When Israel, as a nation, repents, then they have set the spiritual conditions for their nation to be blessed. The nation is delivered from outside oppressors, and the nation prospers. This is political deliverance, as God promised Israel under the Law, and as He promised through the Prophets.

Eternal Salvation, however, is a matter for each individual to consider. If they choose to not just embrace Christianity as their political system, but more, choose Jesus as their personal Lord, then they will be saved. Otherwise, all they are doing is contributing to conditions that allow Israeli society to be blessed.

Lawful behavior does bring blessing. Faith in Christ brings Eternal Life. These are 2 separate issues, in my view.

 

[covenantee]

That's correct: universalism is bad doctrine. God is able to call and choose enough Jews to build a nation around. He certainly does not call and choose to Salvation all who have Jewish DNA. He has promised to form a Christian nation out of Jews--not guarantee Salvation for every individual Jew in that nation.

God's salvation of the nation Israel is a political salvation based on spiritual principles. When Israel, as a nation, repents, then they have set the spiritual conditions for their nation to be blessed. The nation is delivered from outside oppressors, and the nation prospers. This is political deliverance, as God promised Israel under the Law, and as He promised through the Prophets.

Eternal Salvation, however, is a matter for each individual to consider. If they choose to not just embrace Christianity as their political system, but more, choose Jesus as their personal Lord, then they will be saved. Otherwise, all they are doing is contributing to conditions that allow Israeli society to be blessed.

Lawful behavior does bring blessing. Faith in Christ brings Eternal Life. These are 2 separate issues, in my view.

By what criteria does God choose the Jews that He will build a nation around?

 

[Randy Kluth]

By what criteria does God choose the Jews that He will build a nation around?

Faith and obedience. I believe God starts with a faithful remnant, and then wins over the nation to comply with spiritual principles. The objective is to bring to Salvation as many individuals as are willing, and also to create an environment where people can be blessed for their adherence to divine principles.

When a nation is in decline, and the number of those opposed to Christ increases, then judgment from God must fall to start the nation all over again. This principle we see in effect in the OT era with Israel, I believe. In the NT, the same spiritual principles apply, I believe.

Mal 3.6 I the Lord do not change. So you, the descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed.

 

[covenantee]

Faith and obedience. I believe God starts with a faithful remnant, and then wins over the nation to comply with spiritual principles. The objective is to bring to Salvation as many individuals as are willing, and also to create an environment where people can be blessed for their adherence to divine principles.

So a nation identified by faith and obedience already exists, and has existed for more than 2,000 years.

It is the Church. 1 Peter 2:9

 

[Randy Kluth]

So a nation identified by faith and obedience already exists, and has existed for more than 2,000 years.

It is the Church. 1 Peter 2:9

I understand that you believe the international Church is a "nation." I find that to be a contradiction, even though I understand it and recognize that as a common Christian belief.

To me, an *international* group cannot be, at the same time, a *national* group. And the only place where the Scriptures remotely seem to suggest this is in 1 Peter 2, where he is referring to believing Jews, who may very well be looking at Israel as the "nation" in reference.

1 Peter 2.9 But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.

But this is something that you have to decide for yourself.

 

[covenantee]

I understand that you believe the international Church is a "nation." I find that to be a contradiction, even though I understand it and recognize that as a common Christian belief.

To me, an *international* group cannot be, at the same time, a *national* group. And the only place where the Scriptures remotely seem to suggest this is in 1 Peter 2, where he is referring to believing Jews, who may very well be looking at Israel as the "nation" in reference.

1 Peter 2.9 But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.

But this is something that you have to decide for yourself.

Scripture decides it for me, using construction metaphors which are applied exclusively to the Church, never to Israel.

Jesus said, "I will build my Church". Matthew 16:18

1 Peter 2:5
Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

Ephesians 2
19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Scripture decides it for me, using construction metaphors which are applied exclusively to the Church, never to Israel.

Jesus said, "I will build my Church". Matthew 16:18

1 Peter 2:5
Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

Ephesians 2
19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

I agree with all those Scriptures, but don't see where the international Church is called a "nation?"

 

[covenantee]

I agree with all those Scriptures, but don't see where the international Church is called a "nation?"

Ye is the Church. The Church is international. Acts 10:34-35

1 Peter 2:5
Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

1 Peter 2:9
But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light;

 

[Randy Kluth]

Ye is the Church. The Church is international. Acts 10:34-35

1 Peter 2:5
Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

1 Peter 2:9
But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light;

I agree. But where is the International Church called a "nation?" I'm not asking where it is called "international." Rather, I'm asking where the Church is called a "nation?"

I hasten to say that I do believe there have been Christian nations such that they can be called a '"nation." But I don't see in Scriptures where the International Church is called a "nation?" There is just that one passage in 1 Peter 2, which is, for me, controversial, because it could be referring to Israel.

 

[covenantee]

I agree. But where is the International Church called a "nation?" I'm not asking where it is called "international." Rather, I'm asking where the Church is called a "nation?"

I hasten to say that I do believe there have been Christian nations such that they can be called a '"nation." But I don't see in Scriptures where the International Church is called a "nation?" There is just that one passage in 1 Peter 2, which is, for me, controversial, because it could be referring to Israel.

You quoted 1 Peter 2:9 yourself, with emphasis on nation.

Per 1 Peter 2:5, it refers to the Church, not Israel.

1 Peter 2:9
But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light;

 

[covenantee]

I agree. But where is the International Church called a "nation?" I'm not asking where it is called "international." Rather, I'm asking where the Church is called a "nation?"

I hasten to say that I do believe there have been Christian nations such that they can be called a '"nation." But I don't see in Scriptures where the International Church is called a "nation?" There is just that one passage in 1 Peter 2, which is, for me, controversial, because it could be referring to Israel.

The Church, of course, includes true believers in Christ who are within the geopolitical nation of Israel.

But is not limited to them.

 

[Randy Kluth]

You quoted 1 Peter 2:9 yourself, with emphasis on nation.

Per 1 Peter 2:5, it refers to the Church, not Israel.

1 Peter 2:9
But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light;

My personal belief is that Peter is referring to Israel in her original calling, presenting her in her ideal state. I know we disagree. Different interpretations result in different eschatological systems.

 

[Randy Kluth]

The Church, of course, includes true believers in Christ who are within the geopolitical nation of Israel.

But is not limited to them.

The Abrahamic Promise guarantees Abraham an international posterity not limited to a single ethnicity, yes. The house Christ is building consists of not just one nation, but many nations. But it is critically important to the promise that the nation originally descended from Abraham, Israel, be a part of the Church.

Many Christians today and throughout history believe the Church has consisted only of small remnants within nations, and not nations themselves. This is an interpretative difference I have with them, since I don't believe God is yet rendering judgment against every individual in nominal Christian nations. He has called entire nations to be Christian and is offering every individual the opportunity to properly display their Christianity.

So in my view, the Church is viewed today on a tentative basis, until each individual is able to determine where they truly stand with Christianity. In the meantime, we call a nation "Christian." But in the end we know there will be only small remnants within these nations who truly live Christian lives.

God did not guarantee to Abraham that the nations He was promising him would consist solely of faithful Christians. What He did guarantee him is that these nations would adopt a Christian platform, allowing for the development of Christian peoples until each individual has had an opportunity to be faithful to that ideal or not.

In other words, I believe there has been, from the beginning, a distinction between the temporal Church and the eternal Church. The temporal state of the Church is transitory, allowing for a Christian State with individuals who both succeed and fail. True Christianity is faithful, however, and so there is also the eternal Church consisting solely of those who faithfully embrace Christ as their Savior and Lord.

 

[WPM]

My personal belief is that Peter is referring to Israel in her original calling, presenting her in her ideal state. I know we disagree. Different interpretations result in different eschatological systems.

How can unregenerate people have entered into Christ and His marvelous light if they are in darkness? That is ridiculous.

 

[Randy Kluth]

How can unregenerate people have entered into Christ and His marvelous light if they are in darkness? That is ridiculous.

I don't find it ridiculous at all! But it's your prerogative to believe whatever you choose to believe. Some of this is semantics. In the language I use, which I hope is biblical, the unregenerate person can indeed operate in the power of Christ. Judas Iscariot is one example. The author of Hebrews also indicate that people sometimes leave the faith after having known God and after having experienced His power.

I've personally known people who embraced Christ as Lord on a temporary basis. It truly looked like a life decision, and to some degree it was. But it devolved into an "appearance" game, with application to God's power when it suited the person, and not only when God led.

I believe we must call people in church "the Church," even though we know many there are only "half way there," in terms of Salvation. It is only honorable to give them a chance to start, to grow, and to endure.

We must call Christian nations "Christian nations," if that is the intention of the people to as a majority adopt the Christian faith and Christian morality for the people of that nation. But it certainly doesn't mean every citizen of a Christian State will be sincere or will last.

Heb 6.4 It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age 6 and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance.

What this appears to be saying is that when people come to a full knowledge of Christ as Savior and Lord they don't always confirm that decision by making a complete transition to Christianity. They accept the blessings, the power, and the love of Christ, but they don't completely submit to the lordship of Christ.

And so, when they turn away from that, from all that they know about Christ, what on earth can bring them back? They've already rejected all that Christ is--his love, and his offer of eternal fellowship with him. If they don't like that, then they never will!

And so, yes, I believe the Bible teaches that unregenerate people can know God and Christ, and experience His power. God is impartial, and when people meet certain conditions He blesses them with His presence and prosperity.

But it is the choice of people to make a complete transition or not. Until they've completed their decision, we should allow them the dignity of being called a "Christian," in my opinion. Otherwise, we will be driving them away.

I think the problem here is that some Christians--perhaps many, equate "regeneration" with experiencing the power of God, or verbal acknowledgment that Christ is Savior and Lord. I don't believe that to be the case personally.

We can experience God's power *before* regeneration. Regeneration happens only when there is a *complete* commitment to Christ as Savior and Lord. Only God knows when that commitment rises to the level of a "regeneration" experience.

 

[covenantee]

My personal belief is that Peter is referring to Israel in her original calling, presenting her in her ideal state. I know we disagree. Different interpretations result in different eschatological systems.

Thanks for your comment.

But given the grammar and metaphors, how could these Scriptures not be referring to the Church?