23 major reasons to reject the Premil doctrine!

[covenantee]

First and foremost a verse has to be interpreted in its direct context before you open it up to the greater Scripture.

That is beyond absurd. Multiple related and relevant Scriptures exist to aid and facilitate the correct and accurate determination and establishment of context. Without their inclusion, exegesis becomes eisegesis, and correct Scriptural interpretation becomes incorrect private interpretation.

This is no surprise coming from a dispensationalist, but it does explain the egregious chaotic interpretive shipwreck that characterizes dispensationalism.

It must also be recognized that grammar supersedes context as the first priority in interpretive analysis, because the rules of grammar are objective, rather than context, which is subjective. This too is frequently flouted in dispensationalism, but is of essential interpretive importance.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

And you are ignoring the whole passage that Isaac is the child of promise. and then it was confirmed to Jacob as well!

First and foremost a verse has to be interpreted in its direct context before you open it up to the greater Scripture. but even understanding this verse in light of greater Scripture, there is but one Israel, and within that Israel is the Israel of God!

And you have twisted these two vewrses terribly. They do not refer to Jew and Gentile but to the law and the people of promise- Isaac versus Ishmael. and we are spiritual children and fleshly children persecute us! That is not Jews persecuting us today but unsaved!

So are you saying you are spiritual Isaac and not spiritual Israel? NOthing is mentioned about spiritual Isaac.

Yes I am! I accept what He says as hew wrote it in the language he wrote it and do not allegorize it as you have.

YOu speak out of
total ignorance. You wish to willy nilly couple verses that should not be coupled together. I showed earthly and heavenly Jerusalem form Scripture!


And you have isolated this verse out of its context to imply it means something it doesn't! IN its context without reinterpreting what Paul wrote, Paul declared that Ishmael was the childof teh flesh and Isaac was the child of promise. Don't believe me? go back to Genesis and reread the promise that Abraham and Sarah would have a child well after their child bearing years! That is coupling Scriptures properly!

And that is why I said yes and no! there is only one people of Israel. teh children of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and within that nation there is the saved Israel which are born of the spirit and not the flesh. They are still Israel, but they and they alone are spiritual Israel! Paul makes that clear in Galatians and Romans. Nowhere does he imply gegntiles can become "spiritual Israel.".

I may spell lousy and not use punctuation properly- those are physical issues., But you grossly violate the rules of grammar for understanding passages. I know you do not do this with other pieces of literature, but you feel you have the right to run rough shod over Gods Word and redefine it as you see fit. god created grammar anbd uses it properly to communicate with mankind!

What you and the others like you do is to use an old gnostic trick that there is a deeper meaning to the bible than what is just written
and you have the key to properly understand it. HOGWASH!!!!!



Well it is speaking of two different groups of living. Teh people of God and the angels of God! this is taking place in heaven and the voice speaks from the throne of God to the inhabitants of heaven which are people and angels. See how simple this is?

Nope He was wishing peace and mercy (two different blessings) to two different groups of peop

Well seeing you wish to nitpick let us look.

The word rule Paul used is the word "KANON" which is singular. It can mean one simple rule or law or it can also mean a complete set of rules or laws bundled into one rule.

If it means just one, then Paul would be referring directly back to verse 15: For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.

It can mean one or a group bundled into one. I accept the scholarship that says it is the entire argument Paul made in Galatians and not just the previous verse. If you want to think otherwise- that is your business.

You ignored everything I said. You didn't specifically address one thing I said. You just brushed it all aside and responded with utter nonsense. You clearly are not interested in learning anything.

 

[WPM]

You ignored everything I said. You didn't specifically address one thing I said. You just brushed it all aside and responded with utter nonsense. You clearly are not interested in learning anything.

He has to. He has no answer. I have noticed, Premil engagement on these forums typically works like this:

Phase 1 - avoidance.
Phase 2 - ad hominem
Phase 3 - run

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

There is not a single instance in Scripture that I can find where the Greek "pas" 3956 [e] or its derivatives is translated to the English "those".

It is always translated "all".

The Greek for "those" is most frequently "ho" or "hé" or "to" 3588 [e] or its derivatives.

I invite you to prove me (and Strong, Thayer, et al) wrong.

It's amazing the lengths some will go to when denying the truth, isn't it? They will even resort to making up new definitions for words. It's sad.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

You ignored everything I said. You didn't specifically address one thing I said. You just brushed it all aside and responded with utter nonsense. You clearly are not interested in learning anything.

From one who thinks they are a mind reader? No! I did address your points by showing you what the bible was actually speaking of and not how you reinterpreted the Word of God ! When you spiritualize these passages all you are doing is taking the word of God, redefining it and making it the Word of Spiritual Israelite in stead.

I answered your opinions with Scripture and there is where I will stay. You have not shown me anything that is should "learn". Maybe it is you who is not interested in learning the Word of god because you have the Word of spiritual Israelite in stead.

 

[WPM]

From one who thinks they are a mind reader? No! I did address your points by showing you what the bible was actually speaking of and not how you reinterpreted the Word of God ! When you spiritualize these passages all you are doing is taking the word of God, redefining it and making it the Word of Spiritual Israelite in stead.

I answered your opinions with Scripture and there is where I will stay. You have not shown me anything that is should "learn". Maybe it is you who is not interested in learning the Word of god because you have the Word of spiritual Israelite in stead.

You have an inabity to address any other argument, outside of what you have been taught. Thankfully, others can think for themselves.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

From one who thinks they are a mind reader? No! I did address your points by showing you what the bible was actually speaking of and not how you reinterpreted the Word of God !

Repeating your own interpretations yet again is not a case of addressing mine. You said nothing specifically in response to what I said but instead just shared what you believe.

When you spiritualize these passages all you are doing is taking the word of God, redefining it and making it the Word of Spiritual Israelite in stead.

This is a ridiculous thing to say. The word of God is spiritual because it is inspired by the Holy Spirit. Why would you want to interpret the word of God no differently than you would read a news article as if everything in it is always literal and straightforward? You know that's not the case. That makes no sense to approach it that way.

I answered your opinions with Scripture and there is where I will stay. You have not shown me anything that is should "learn". Maybe it is you who is not interested in learning the Word of god because you have the Word of spiritual Israelite in stead.

Everything I said came from scripture. I always use scripture to back up my beliefs. If you disagree with my interpretations, then address them specifically. Is that too much to ask? I already know what you believe so there's no point in repeating it. But, tell me why my beliefs can't be true? You do nothing to specifically address them. Why can't you acknowledge that? You completely ignore what I say and just repeat your own beliefs. That's now how discussion should work. Tell me what exactly it is about what I said that you think is wrong. Can you do that? I'm sure you can, but it appears that you don't want to.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You have an inabity to address any other argument, outside of what you have been taught. Thankfully, others can think for themselves.

Exactly. Just repeating one's own beliefs is not a case of addressing someone else's arguments. To basically just say no, you're wrong, and then share your own beliefs doesn't cut it. I'd like to know why exactly he thinks what I said is wrong by addressing it specifically, but he won't do that.

This kind of thing is what makes me weary of posting here. It seems that no Premils here are willing to engage in honest back and forth discussion. It's always them ignoring what we say and just repeating the same things over and over. Meanwhile we consistently specifically address their points and explain exactly why we disagree with them. They never do that in response to our points. It's frustrating.

 

[WPM]

Exactly. Just repeating one's own beliefs is not a case of addressing someone else's arguments. To basically just say no, you're wrong, and then share your own beliefs doesn't cut it. I'd like to know why exactly he thinks what I said is wrong by addressing it specifically, but he won't do that.

This kind of thing is what makes me weary of posting here. It seems that no Premils here are willing to engage in honest back and forth discussion. It's always them ignoring what we say and just repeating the same things over and over. Meanwhile we consistently specifically address their points and explain exactly why we disagree with them. They never do that in response to our points. It's frustrating.

That is it in a nutshell. But the onlooker can read and see the truth. They can also recognize the Premil avoidance. What else can the Premil do when they only have one text to build their speculations upon?

 

[Timtofly]

Why do you act as if there is only one Israel in scripture? That is not biblical truth. Please read post #657 and learn something for once.

Can you tell me how you interpret this passage:

6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 8 In other words, it is not the children by physical descent who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring.

You do realize that many on earth are descendants of Ishmael and not Isaac?

You do realize that God's children is not synonymous with Jacob's descendants?

All those who accept redemption are born into God's family spiritually, that is the second birth.

Being physically resurrected out of Adam's flesh does not make one spiritual either. It makes one no longer in Adam's dead corruptible flesh.

Your spiritual Israel are humans still in bondage to Adam's dead corruptible flesh. Abraham is not currently in Paradise as a spiritual Jew. Abraham is enjoying Paradise as a son of God.

 

[Timtofly]

Then how do you make sense of Paul saying "For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel"? If there is only one Israel then that statement would make no sense whatsoever. Obviously, all who are physically descended from the physical nation of Israel are Israel, yet Paul said that "NOT ALL who are descended from Israel are Israel". So, he was clearly referring to another Israel besides just the physical nation of Israel there. Why can't you be honest and acknowledge that?

According to the verse, that would make you Abrahamites, not Israelites.

You would be spiritual Abraham, not spiritual Israel.

Of course Paul is contrasting Israel with Ishmael. Then contrasting Israel with Edomites would be the next logical step. And many Edomites were mixed in with Israel claiming to be descendants of Israel.

It would be a foolish thing to take Paul in these verses to claim not all of Israel is descendant of Israel, if they were. But Paul was saying the spiritual blessing was in Abraham, and not in Israel at all. Israel was the lost sheep of Israel scattered around the world.

The reason being is that many were of Jacob, buy not of Israel, because being of Jacob was being of the earth descendancy, without the attached spiritual blessing passed down from Abraham.

Why would you equate being of Jacob is the same as being the spiritual part of Abraham? If you are not Israel, you are Jacob, not a Gentile. That would be Paul's point. Not that the Gentiles are now spiritual Abraham and that means spiritual Israel.

Gentiles are the direct children of God, just like Abraham’s descendants who are Israel, are the direct children of God.

Of course now, being Israel has no spiritual connotation. At the Second Coming, Israel will once again be directly chosen as the sheep out of Jacob the goats. Once again on earth the sheep and the goats will be who Paul is talking about. Not all of Israel will be of Israel. Some will be goats, probably the majority. Many see Matthew 25 as being 50/50. But some can point out a remnant perhaps only a third will be sheep. Of course you rip off this chapter as being the church itself, when it is not the church nor the division of saved and lost.

Matthew 25 is the same theme as Romans 11. In Paul's day it was his people rejecting the blessing. At the Second Coming it will be God rejecting the goats. Both are about people living on the earth, not past dead people. The OT church was already settled in Paradise when Paul wrote Romans. The NT church will already be settled in Paradise, when Jesus sits as King separating the sheep of Israel from the goats of Jacob.

 

[Timtofly]

They never do that in response to our points. It's frustrating.

Because all you give in reply is "that is your opinion" or "nonsense".

We feel the same way about your private interpretations as well, but we don't get upset at the lack of communication, Iike you do.

Your points are not Scripture. They are your private interpretation, even if thousands of humans agree with you.

We give our opinions and you give yours. No one has a handle on the mind of God. Many Amil here cut and paste the same doctrine over and over again, relentlessly, without having a decent conversation.

All Amil do is complain premil are not at some advanced level of "human evolution" in regards to "human theology".

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Because all you give in reply is "that is your opinion" or "nonsense".

We feel the same way about your private interpretations as well, but we don't get upset at the lack of communication, Iike you do.

Your points are not Scripture. They are your private interpretation, even if thousands of humans agree with you.

LOL! I know nonsense when I see it and I see it with everything you say. Such as your last statement. Everyone here would agree with me that calling an interpretation that MANY people agree with a private interpretation is utter nonsense.

We give our opinions and you give yours. No one has a handle on the mind of God. Many Amil here cut and paste the same doctrine over and over again, relentlessly, without having a decent conversation.

All Amil do is complain premil are not at some advanced level of "human evolution" in regards to "human theology".

You are by far the most nonsensical person on this entire forum. Nothing you ever say makes any sense. You can't be taken seriously. I can't even figure out what you're saying half of the time and the other half of the time when I can, I just scratch my head as to how you come up with the things you believe that no one else does. Honestly, I believe you are a clown. You're here just to play games and try to see if you can get a rise out of people by saying the most ludicrous things that anyone has ever seen. I'm not interested in that.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

According to the verse, that would make you Abrahamites, not Israelites.

You would be spiritual Abraham, not spiritual Israel.

Of course Paul is contrasting Israel with Ishmael. Then contrasting Israel with Edomites would be the next logical step. And many Edomites were mixed in with Israel claiming to be descendants of Israel.

It would be a foolish thing to take Paul in these verses to claim not all of Israel is descendant of Israel, if they were. But Paul was saying the spiritual blessing was in Abraham, and not in Israel at all. Israel was the lost sheep of Israel scattered around the world.

The reason being is that many were of Jacob, buy not of Israel, because being of Jacob was being of the earth descendancy, without the attached spiritual blessing passed down from Abraham.

Why would you equate being of Jacob is the same as being the spiritual part of Abraham? If you are not Israel, you are Jacob, not a Gentile. That would be Paul's point. Not that the Gentiles are now spiritual Abraham and that means spiritual Israel.

Gentiles are the direct children of God, just like Abraham’s descendants who are Israel, are the direct children of God.

Of course now, being Israel has no spiritual connotation. At the Second Coming, Israel will once again be directly chosen as the sheep out of Jacob the goats. Once again on earth the sheep and the goats will be who Paul is talking about. Not all of Israel will be of Israel. Some will be goats, probably the majority. Many see Matthew 25 as being 50/50. But some can point out a remnant perhaps only a third will be sheep. Of course you rip off this chapter as being the church itself, when it is not the church nor the division of saved and lost.

Matthew 25 is the same theme as Romans 11. In Paul's day it was his people rejecting the blessing. At the Second Coming it will be God rejecting the goats. Both are about people living on the earth, not past dead people. The OT church was already settled in Paradise when Paul wrote Romans. The NT church will already be settled in Paradise, when Jesus sits as King separating the sheep of Israel from the goats of Jacob.

What you said here is completely incomprehensible. I guarantee that no one in the world could make any sense out of what you're saying here. How do you come up with your ridiculous ideas? Can you explain that?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You do realize that many on earth are descendants of Ishmael and not Isaac?

You do realize that God's children is not synonymous with Jacob's descendants?

All those who accept redemption are born into God's family spiritually, that is the second birth.

Being physically resurrected out of Adam's flesh does not make one spiritual either. It makes one no longer in Adam's dead corruptible flesh.

Your spiritual Israel are humans still in bondage to Adam's dead corruptible flesh. Abraham is not currently in Paradise as a spiritual Jew. Abraham is enjoying Paradise as a son of God.

Complete nonsensical gibberish. That's all you have to offer. Do you even understand anything that you say? I guarantee no one else does.

 

[WPM]

Hello,
This world is not our home, we are ambassadors on this earth, and Apostle Paul says "do not be conformed to this World" Romans 12:2.

Jesus preached the Kingdom of Heaven, and Jesus told Pilate that "His kingdom was not of this World" John 18:36

Acts 1:6 - The apostles asked Jesus if at this time will He restore the Kingdom to Israel.

Israel is an earthly Kingdom from its beginning, The predicted coming of the Messiah was interpreted to restore the earthly Kingdom and destroy Israel's enemies. Tribulation is an earthly tribulation, a time of Jacob's trouble, Jeremiah 30:7

The Body of Christ is a Heavenly Kingdom and the tribulation is an earthly event. The two do not mix. God's Grace cannot be connected to punishment of the earth. A removal of the Body of Christ must happen before tribulation.

Israel's king and kingdom has already come. Those who had eyes to see embraced Him/it. Sadly, those who had an temporal earthly ethnic territorial expectation missed it. That should be a warning to the many end-times "experts."

 

[WPM]

What you said here is completely incomprehensible. I guarantee that no one in the world could make any sense out of what you're saying here. How do you come up with your ridiculous ideas? Can you explain that?

I totally agree. There are numerous questions left unanswered. To answer them honestly would blow his theology out of the water.

 

[Timtofly]

LOL! I know nonsense when I see it and I see it with everything you say. Such as your last statement. Everyone here would agree with me that calling an interpretation that MANY people agree with a private interpretation is utter nonsense.


You are by far the most nonsensical person on this entire forum. Nothing you ever say makes any sense. You can't be taken seriously. I can't even figure out what you're saying half of the time and the other half of the time when I can, I just scratch my head as to how you come up with the things you believe that no one else does. Honestly, I believe you are a clown. You're here just to play games and try to see if you can get a rise out of people by saying the most ludicrous things that anyone has ever seen. I'm not interested in that.

You never address my points any way, so why bother even responding?

Calling people names helps your case how?

 

[Timtofly]

What you said here is completely incomprehensible. I guarantee that no one in the world could make any sense out of what you're saying here. How do you come up with your ridiculous ideas? Can you explain that?

And your private interpretation is just as nonsensical in light of God's Word.

I read God's Word is how I get my ideas.

 

[WPM]

And your private interpretation is just as nonsensical in light of God's Word.

I read God's Word is how I get my ideas.

Not true! You cannot support your wild speculations with hard Scripture. One just has to read back on any thread and they will see reams of private interpretation.