The founding fathers of modern-day Premillennialism were heretics - see the evidence

[BeforeThereWas]

Do you believe in biblical corroboration?

That depends as to what object(s) at which you are pointing toward as the alleged targets of corroboration.

BTW

 

[Randy Kluth]

It was addressed to the "elect".

In the NT, that describes all, both Jew and Gentile, who are in Christ.

AKA His Church.

Deut 7.6 For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. The Lord your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession.

That was Israel. God has chosen various individuals and nations. Israel was the 1st nation to be chosen/elect of God. Peter was referencing the elect of Israel because he described them as "exiles."

1 Peter 1.To God’s elect, exiles scattered...

This scattering is a reference back to Luke 21 where Jesus said that the Jewish People would be punished and scattered into exile.

Luke 21.22 For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written. 23 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! There will be great distress in the land and wrath against this people. 24 They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

Compare what Peter said with what Moses wrote above...

1 Pet 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. 10 Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.

Deut 7.6 For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. The Lord your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession.

In my view, we are talking about Israel. You're entitled to your own opinion. Whether or not you want to assert it as "fact" is up to you.

 

[WPM]

That depends as to what object(s) at which you are pointing toward as the alleged targets of corroboration.

BTW

Do you believe in the importance hermeneutical principle of supporting Scripture with Scripture?

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Do you believe in the importance hermeneutical principle of supporting Scripture with Scripture?

Of course. I'm a systematic theologian as my approach to scripture. The difference, however, in some of the stuff I've seen in here is the mix-n-match of items that don't belong together for comparison.

A prime example of mix-n-match, based only upon topical similarities, is the gospel preached by Peter in Acts 2:37 compared to the gospel preached by Paul in 1 Cor. 15:1-4. The different elements couched within their respective contexts don't belong together as being comparative to the extreme of trying to call them both the same gospel.

Some have even tried to foist the idea of Paul allegedly "summarizing" rather than recounting precisely what he said that he had preached to them. To say that Paul was merely "summarizing" in written texts that he would reasonably have known were for posterity, the philosophical nonsense some apply to those sections, among others, strains at the outer extremes of credulity as to what their system of hermeneutics actually is and by what identifier it goes by other than subjectivism.

Hope that answers your question.

BTW

 

[covenantee]

Deut 7.6 For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. The Lord your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession.

That was Israel. God has chosen various individuals and nations. Israel was the 1st nation to be chosen/elect of God. Peter was referencing the elect of Israel because he described them as "exiles."

Peter was not writing to OT elect. The OT had already been taken away at Calvary (Hebrews 10:9) some 30 years previously. Peter was writing to NT Elect, they alone sanctified by "the Blood of Jesus Christ".

1 Peter 1:2
Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

1 Peter 1.To God’s elect, exiles scattered...

This scattering is a reference back to Luke 21 where Jesus said that the Jewish People would be punished and scattered into exile.

Luke 21 describes the judgment and destruction prophesied by Christ upon apostate Israel, and fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. That is not the scattering to which Peter refers. Peter wrote his first epistle circa 60-65 AD i.e. 5-10 years before 70 AD. The scattering to which he refers is that resulting from the numerous persecutions of the Church by the Jews and Romans, described throughout the Book of Acts, in the years between Calvary and 70 AD. Those who were scattered were the NT Elect, i.e. those in Christ, His Church, i.e. those to whom Peter wrote.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Peter was not writing to OT elect. The OT had already been taken away at Calvary (Hebrews 10:9) some 30 years previously. Peter was writing to NT Elect, they alone sanctified by "the Blood of Jesus Christ".

Therein lies our difference. I believe the New Covenant was designed to bring the nation Israel to Christ last of all. The nations went in to Christ before Israel.

In the end I think Christ will come to restore both Israel and the Christian nations. Since you are Amillennialist, your position cannot tolerate such an idea, which I think is part of God's eternal Promise to Abraham, to have both Israel and many nations in the faith of Christ.

Have a nice day.

 

[covenantee]

Therein lies our difference. I believe the New Covenant was designed to bring the nation Israel to Christ last of all. The nations went in to Christ before Israel.

In the end I think Christ will come to restore both Israel and the Christian nations. Since you are Amillennialist, your position cannot tolerate such an idea, which I think is part of God's eternal Promise to Abraham, to have both Israel and many nations in the faith of Christ.

Have a nice day.

Only those faithful and obedient to Christ and His New Covenant will be saved.

For Israel, that's but a remnant. Isaiah 10:22; Romans 9:27

Everything to do with Scripture; nothing to do with Amil.

Blessings.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Only those faithful and obedient to Christ and His New Covenant will be saved.

For Israel, that's but a remnant. Isaiah 10:22; Romans 9:27

Everything to do with Scripture; nothing to do with Amil.

Blessings.

I thank you that you've allowed us to peacefully express our differences pretty well. We don't agree but we're brothers in Christ. That's more important.

 

[WPM]

Of course. I'm a systematic theologian as my approach to scripture. The difference, however, in some of the stuff I've seen in here is the mix-n-match of items that don't belong together for comparison.

A prime example of mix-n-match, based only upon topical similarities, is the gospel preached by Peter in Acts 2:37 compared to the gospel preached by Paul in 1 Cor. 15:1-4. The different elements couched within their respective contexts don't belong together as being comparative to the extreme of trying to call them both the same gospel.

Some have even tried to foist the idea of Paul allegedly "summarizing" rather than recounting precisely what he said that he had preached to them. To say that Paul was merely "summarizing" in written texts that he would reasonably have known were for posterity, the philosophical nonsense some apply to those sections, among others, strains at the outer extremes of credulity as to what their system of hermeneutics actually is and by what identifier it goes by other than subjectivism.

Hope that answers your question.

BTW

Why do you always have to make a big speech? Why can you not just answer in a simple way?

 

[Bladerunner]

Why do you always have to make a big speech? Why can you not just answer in a simple way?

why, because it is easier for you to deny the word of GOD if you do not understand the context of what is said.

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Why do you always have to make a big speech? Why can you not just answer in a simple way?

That's it? Just a complaint about the length of the answer? You don't have anything else?

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Notwithstanding, all 4 of these men believed that God has two distinct peoples, with distinct purposes for each. They believed that the Church operates under new covenant promises and natural ethnic Israel operates under old covenant promises.

We do have this from scripture, even though some out there apply grammatical gymnastics to try and make it sound like something OTHER than what it actually says:

Galatians 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

These same people will say about the above verse what they would never say about this:

The truck OF group 1 was committed unto me, as the truck OF group 2 was committed unto Bob.

They would never say that there was only one truck, but rather two if one dares to be intellectually honest.

Meanwhile, when they get in among their circle of friends who don't know the scriptures, their friends will tell them it was one singular (same) gospel all throughout, always at the exclusion of the fact that Jesus did not preach about His death and resurrection for salvation as was true of Peter in Acts 2 when asked. The text betrays these facts bold-faced, and yet the deniers will continue in denials.

Additionally, the prophecies, promises and blessings were always aimed at ethnic Israel (which also included the Gentiles who became Jews), so the above attempt at replacement theology garbage is nothing more than anti-Semitic trash talk because of its suggestion that ethnic Israel has been cast aside forever.

Another problem this replacement theology warp introduces is the idea that God is fickle...that He cannot be trusted to follow through with His promises to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, rooted on the premise that their disobedience was the catalyst for nullification. Those who vomit replacement theology sentiments and narrative should be in fear of their own salvation if God were so fickle and inconsistent because not one of you ever stopped sinning after being saved.

Who here has heard this silliness from their false teaching pastors?

"The Old Testament saints looked forward to the cross just as the New Testament saints look back to the cross..."

Garbage! Those false teachers don't know the scripture:

Mark 9:30-32
30 And they departed thence, and passed through Galilee; and he would not that any man should know it.
31 For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day.
32 But they understood not that saying, and were afraid to ask him.

As an Israeli who was raised with the idea that Messiah will be a powerful political figure rather than to die and be raised up on the third day, no. The ancients knew nothing about the cross itself as the instrument, but prophecy did reveal that He would die and be raised up, which was completely missed, and continues to be missed, by my Judaeo leaning brothers and sisters. If they were all looking forward to the cross of which they knew nothing about, that makes those false teaching pastors men of no renown that anyone should listen to them.

BTW

 

[WPM]

That's it? Just a complaint about the length of the answer? You don't have anything else?

BTW

No. Biblical corroboration is the enemy of Premillennialism. It is the principle that sinks the ship. That is why Premillennialists get nervous when this subject comes up. They cannot corroborate any of their main tenets with other clear and repeated Scripture. They invent an age in between "this age" and "the age to come" that does not exist. Scripture only knows about two. There is no age to come after the age to come. That is ludicrous. That is extra biblical. That contradicts numerous Scripture. They then steal expressly identified "last days" passages and "new heaven and new earth" passages and dump them into their invented age. That is because have nothing.

What is more, multiple Scriptures, depicts the coming of the Lord as climatic. It shows that as a time when all mankind is resurrected, and all mankind is judged. It is the end! Time shall be no more. This is the time when the bondage of corruption is brought to an end. Premillennialism advances another age that is full of sin and sinners, is full of dying, and crying, is full of decay and corruption.

All Premils can do is insult and/or run. They cannot develop this subject.

 

[WPM]

We do have this from scripture, even though some out there apply grammatical gymnastics to try and make it sound like something OTHER than what it actually says:

Galatians 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

These same people will say about the above verse what they would never say about this:

The truck OF group 1 was committed unto me, as the truck OF group 2 was committed unto Bob.

They would never say that there was only one truck, but rather two if one dares to be intellectually honest.

Meanwhile, when they get in among their circle of friends who don't know the scriptures, their friends will tell them it was one singular (same) gospel all throughout, always at the exclusion of the fact that Jesus did not preach about His death and resurrection for salvation as was true of Peter in Acts 2 when asked. The text betrays these facts bold-faced, and yet the deniers will continue in denials.

Additionally, the prophecies, promises and blessings were always aimed at ethnic Israel (which also included the Gentiles who became Jews), so the above attempt at replacement theology garbage is nothing more than anti-Semitic trash talk because of its suggestion that ethnic Israel has been cast aside forever.

Another problem this replacement theology warp introduces is the idea that God is fickle...that He cannot be trusted to follow through with His promises to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, rooted on the premise that their disobedience was the catalyst for nullification. Those who vomit replacement theology sentiments and narrative should be in fear of their own salvation if God were so fickle and inconsistent because not one of you ever stopped sinning after being saved.

Who here has heard this silliness from their false teaching pastors?

"The Old Testament saints looked forward to the cross just as the New Testament saints look back to the cross..."

Garbage! Those false teachers don't know the scripture:

Mark 9:30-32
30 And they departed thence, and passed through Galilee; and he would not that any man should know it.
31 For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day.
32 But they understood not that saying, and were afraid to ask him.

As an Israeli who was raised with the idea that Messiah will be a powerful political figure rather than to die and be raised up on the third day, no. The ancients knew nothing about the cross itself as the instrument, but prophecy did reveal that He would die and be raised up, which was completely missed, and continues to be missed, by my Judaeo leaning brothers and sisters. If they were all looking forward to the cross of which they knew nothing about, that makes those false teaching pastors men of no renown that anyone should listen to them.

BTW

Who do you think Amils think they have replaced?

 

[BeforeThereWas]

No. Biblical corroboration is the enemy of Premillennialism. It is the principle that sinks the ship. That is why Premillennialists get nervous when this subject comes up. They cannot corroborate any of their main tenets with other clear and repeated Scripture. They invent an age in between "this age" and "the age to come" that does not exist. Scripture only knows about two. There is no age to come after the age to come. That is ludicrous. That is extra biblical. That contradicts numerous Scripture. They then steal expressly identified "last days" passages and "new heaven and new earth" passages and dump them into their invented age. That is because have nothing.

What is more, multiple Scriptures, depicts the coming of the Lord as climatic. It shows that as a time when all mankind is resurrected, and all mankind is judged. It is the end! Time shall be no more. This is the time when the bondage of corruption is brought to an end. Premillennialism advance another age that is full of sin and sinners, is full of dying, and crying, is full of decay and corruption.

All Premils can do is insult and/or run. They cannot develop this subject.

None of what you're proposing here at all makes me nervous in relation to "corroboration." This current "age," as you call it, is not referred to as an age in what Paul references to this time we are in right now. He called it "dispensation" That's one of two game changers to your contrived bomb that you think would ever be effective against Premillennialism...or whatever other identifier you may choose for it. This dispensation is one of the mysteries of which Paul spoke that was not revealed until Christ revealed it to him, and had the "princes" of this world known, they would not have crucified the "Lord of glory," as it is written. So, when dealing with what was a mystery, trying to throw into the mix some contrived requirement for corroboration, that's just a straw man argument that has no solidity in the realm of any hermeneutic rule.

So, and this is not about you personally, but I'm sure there are some followers Steve Anderson whacko-ism followers out there who puff out their chests in pride at what they think is in scripture, but to no avail. Similarly, those who follow "The Bible Answer Man" whacko nonsense, that too is easily dispensed...not to them, of course, because they will stay the course in order to avoid admitting the truth, but all will play out just as scripture states.

BTW

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Who do you think Amils think they have replaced?

Oh, it's not just Amils. Gospel reality exists in various forms of corruption in almost every eschatological camp in existence.

BTW

 

[WPM]

Oh, it's not just Amils. Gospel reality exists in various forms of corruption in almost every eschatological camp in existence.

BTW

Can you please answer my question?

 

[BeforeThereWas]

Can you please answer my question?

You didn't ask a question that had the precision for me to answer. It's too broad. What about MY post before that? You jumped to the second reply of mine.

BTW

 

[covenantee]

Can you please answer my question?

Evidently he's another one-man cult, unable to answer the simplest question, but a self-proclaimed oracle of all truth for all time.

And nothing but a waste of time.

 

[WPM]

You didn't ask a question that had the precision for me to answer. It's too broad. What about MY post before that? You jumped to the second reply of mine.

BTW

What are you scared of? You're the one that was on the attack. You seem to know it all. Yet, when you're asked you cannot even answer a simple question.