26 major reasons to reject the Premillennial doctrine

[Wish-it]

2 Peter 3:10

As discussed previously i consider the there is a gap between the comments and for me the weight of scripturing show that the last part of the passage refers to the destruction of the the earth prior to the creation of new heaven and new earth.

Revelation 19:17

This is the result of a localised battle in that region, the battle of Armageedon. All those involved are killed not the whole world.
Otherwise, in the plain reading of Rev 20, and Rev 5.10, Rev 2.26+ Who are Jesus and the saints ruling over, Theres got be others who aren't killed. Zech 14.16+ indicates a similar result. Then all the survivors of the nations that came against Jerusalem etc.

 

[Wish-it]

More avoidance!

You have to. The Book exposes your doctrine!

Come on, guys, we are discussing scripture, insults shouldn't be part of the discussions, one day we may all meet in the Rev 20 millenium.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

As discussed previously i consider the there is a gap between the comments and for me the weight of scripturing show that the last part of the passage refers to the destruction of the the earth prior to the creation of new heaven and new earth.

But, there is no indication whatsoever in the text that the destruction of the earth occurs long after the arrival of the day of the Lord. How exactly are you coming up with that interpretation? Paul wrote about the same event of the day of the Lord coming as a thief in the night in 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 and said it will bring "sudden destruction" from which those in spiritual darkness "shall not escape". Do you try to say that the "sudden destruction" that Paul referenced in relation to the day of the Lord happens long after the day of the Lord arrives the way you do with 2 Peter 3:10-13?

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up. 11 Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, 12 looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat?

Notice what Peter said after saying that the heavens will be dissolved, the elements will melt with fervent heart and the earth will be burned up. He said in direct relation to that destruction: "Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat?". By saying to his readers to think about what kind of people they are and about their behavior, he was implying that the destruction he described could occur in their lifetimes. Surely, he wasn't just writing to people who would need to heed his words long after Jesus comes as a thief in the night. That would make no sense. No, he was talking to everyone reading his words before Jesus comes as a thief in the night and saying that we need to make sure that His wrath and the destruction He brings when He comes doesn't come against us. So, by having the destruction Peter described not occurring until long after Jesus comes as a thief in the night is a case of taking the passage completely out of context.

This is the result of a localised battle in that region, the battle of Armageedon. All those involved are killed not the whole world.
Otherwise, in the plain reading of Rev 20, and Rev 5.10, Rev 2.26+ Who are Jesus and the saints ruling over, Theres got be others who aren't killed. Zech 14.16+ indicates a similar result. Then all the survivors of the nations that came against Jerusalem etc.

You talk about the plain reading of text in the most highly symbolic book in all of scripture. I don't understand at all why anyone would assume any given text in the book is literal. I'm not saying there is nothing literal in the book, but there is a great deal of symbolism, so why assume any given verse or passage is literal?

You think Armageddon is a literal earthly place. Is that what you think about mystery Babylon as well, that it refers to a literal place on earth? Is that what you think of the reference to Magog in Revelation 20, that it's referring to a literal place somewhere on earth?

 

[Wish-it]

He asked: How are you coming to that conclusion from what is actually written there in 1 Thess 5:2-3 and 2 Peter 3:10-12?

Because there is a conflict between the

But, there is no indication whatsoever in the text that the destruction of the earth occurs long after the arrival of the day of the Lord. How exactly are you coming up with that interpretation? Paul wrote about the same event of the day of the Lord coming as a thief in the night in 1 Thessalonians 5:2-3 and said it will bring "sudden destruction" from which those in spiritual darkness "shall not escape". Do you try to say that the "sudden destruction" that Paul referenced in relation to the day of the Lord happens long after the day of the Lord arrives the way you do with 2 Peter 3:10-13?

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up. 11 Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, 12 looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat?

Notice what Peter said after saying that the heavens will be dissolved, the elements will melt with fervent heart and the earth will be burned up. He said in direct relation to that destruction: "Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat?". By saying to his readers to think about what kind of people they are and about their behavior, he was implying that the destruction he described could occur in their lifetimes. Surely, he wasn't just writing to people who would need to heed his words long after Jesus comes as a thief in the night. That would make no sense. No, he was talking to everyone reading his words before Jesus comes as a thief in the night and saying that we need to make sure that His wrath and the destruction He brings when He comes doesn't come against us. So, by having the destruction Peter described not occurring until long after Jesus comes as a thief in the night is a case of taking the passage completely out of context.


You talk about the plain reading of text in the most highly symbolic book in all of scripture. I don't understand at all why anyone would assume any given text in the book is literal. I'm not saying there is nothing literal in the book, but there is a great deal of symbolism, so why assume any given verse or passage is literal?

You think Armageddon is a literal earthly place. Is that what you think about mystery Babylon as well, that it refers to a literal place on earth? Is that what you think of the reference to Magog in Revelation 20, that it's referring to a literal place somewhere on earth?

I'd be interested whether you spend much time in the Old Testament?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Because there is a conflict between the

What were you saying here? Looks like you didn't finish your thought or something. Can you please address what I said in post #123?

I'd be interested whether you spend much time in the Old Testament?

Sure, but when it comes to doctrine, the New Testament shines light on the Old Testament, so I base my understanding of the Old Testament primarily on what Jesus and the NT authors said about it and how they understood it.

 

[WPM]

Because there is a conflict between the

I'd be interested whether you spend much time in the Old Testament?

Why do you duck around the NT so much? What are you scared of? Why can you not take the Bible literal?

 

[Wish-it]

You talk about the plain reading of text in the most highly symbolic book in all of scripture. I don't understand at all why anyone would assume any given text in the book is literal. I'm not saying there is nothing literal in the book, but there is a great deal of symbolism, so why assume any given verse or passage is literal?

You think Armageddon is a literal earthly place. Is that what you think about mystery Babylon as well, that it refers to a literal place on earth? Is that what you think of the reference to Magog in Revelation 20, that it's referring to a literal place somewhere on earth?

Yes I tend to think when scripture says all the nations surrounding is Israel, i think they will be literal nations surrounding literal Israel. We see it now on TV. Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Turkey. All desiring literal Israel's removal from the map. This has been going on since 1948 and prior. These nations are the same nations represented in Daniel 2. Babylon (Iraq), Mede Persia (Iran), Javan (Turkey)
4th Beast (Iron)(Islamic Coalition arising from) See Dan 8.8, 22, Dan 11.4.
Mixed with clay (Israel) Lam 4.2, Isaiah 64.8, Jer 18,19, Ezek 4.1-3.

 

[Wish-it]

Why do you duck around the NT so much? What are you scared of? Why can you not take the Bible literal?

I read all scripture. To try and gain an understanding. Obviously both are inspired and profitable. With eschatology there's a tendency to use Genes, Exodus, The major and minor prophets, The NT gospels Matt 24 Luke etc plus Thess, Rev more specifically. But love them both and all.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Yes I tend to think when scripture says all the nations surrounding is Israel, i think they will be literal nations surrounding literal Israel. We see it now on TV. Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Turkey. All desiring literal Israel's removal from the map. This has been going on since 1948 and prior. These nations are the same nations represented in Daniel 2. Babylon (Iraq), Mede Persia (Iran), Javan (Turkey)
4th Beast (Iron)(Islamic Coalition arising from) See Dan 8.8, 22, Dan 11.4.
Mixed with clay (Israel) Lam 4.2, Isaiah 64.8, Jer 18,19, Ezek 4.1-3.

For some reason you don't answer some of my questions. I asked you if you also think mystery Babylon is a literal place on earth and if the Magog mentioned in Revelation 20 is a literal place on earth, despite it indicating that the reference to "Gog, and Magog" represents the nations or heathen on the entire earth. You should consider whether those references should be taken literally or not, especially when it causes your interpretation of Revelation 19 to not line up with other passages like 1 Thess 5:2-3, 2 Thess 1:7-9 and 2 Peter 3:10-12.

 

[WPM]

I read all scripture. To try and gain an understanding. Obviously both are inspired and profitable. With eschatology there's a tendency to use Genes, Exodus, The major and minor prophets, The NT gospels Matt 24 Luke etc plus Thess, Rev more specifically. But love them both and all.

Speak for yourself.

Amils see a climactic return of Christ all over the Word.

 

[Wish-it]

For some reason you don't answer some of my questions. I asked you if you also think mystery Babylon is a literal place on earth and if the Magog mentioned in Revelation 20 is a literal place on earth, despite it indicating that the reference to "Gog, and Magog" represents the nations or heathen on the entire earth. You should consider whether those references should be taken literally or not, especially when it causes your interpretation of Revelation 19 to not line up with other passages like 1 Thess 5:2-3, 2 Thess 1:7-9 and 2 Peter 3:10-12.

The answer is there. Babylon, Iraq, the capital was Nineveh.
Gog is leader of Magog, a son of Japheth, who settle in literal Turkey, all good clues for us.

 

[WPM]

The answer is there. Babylon, Iraq, the capital was Nineveh.
Gog is leader of Magog, a son of Japheth, who settle in literal Turkey, all good clues for us.

Mystery Babylon is not Iraq. Do you think Jerusalem is Sodom and Egypt?

Do you not get the symbolic nature of revelation?

1. Do you believe Satan and his minions are physical beings?
2. Is the dragon in Revelation 20:2 a literal physical dragon?
3. Is the serpent in Revelation 20:2 a literal physical serpent?
4. Is the key mentioned in Revelation 20:1 a literal metal door key?
5. Is the chain mentioned in Revelation 20:1 a literal metal chain?
6. Is the prison mentioned in Revelation 20:7 a literal brick prison?
7. Do you believe demons need to be detained in a literal physical prison with literal metal chains in order to be restrained?
8. Does imprisonment mean immobility?
9. Does it mean a prisoner cannot do harm?
10. Can a dog on a chain walk or roam about?
11. Can a prisoner in a prison walk or roam about?
12. Does a prisoner have the ability to kill, steal, destroy, rape and embezzle in prison?
13. Do you believe Satan has 7 literal heads and 7 literal necks (Revelation 12:3)?
14. Do you believe Satan has 10 literal horns poking out of his 7 literal heads (Revelation 12:3)?

 

[Wish-it]

Speak for yourself.

Amils see a climactic return of Christ all over the Word.

Mystery Babylon is not Iraq. Do you think Jerusalem is Sodom and Egypt?

Do you not get the symbolic nature of revelation?

1. Do you believe Satan and his minions are physical beings?
2. Is the dragon in Revelation 20:2 a literal physical dragon?
3. Is the serpent in Revelation 20:2 a literal physical serpent?
4. Is the key mentioned in Revelation 20:1 a literal metal door key?
5. Is the chain mentioned in Revelation 20:1 a literal metal chain?
6. Is the prison mentioned in Revelation 20:7 a literal brick prison?
7. Do you believe demons need to be detained in a literal physical prison with literal metal chains in order to be restrained?
8. Does imprisonment mean immobility?
9. Does it mean a prisoner cannot do harm?
10. Can a dog on a chain walk or roam about?
11. Can a prisoner in a prison walk or roam about?
12. Does a prisoner have the ability to kill, steal, destroy, rape and embezzle in prison?
13. Do you believe Satan has 7 literal heads and 7 literal necks (Revelation 12:3)?
14. Do you believe Satan has 10 literal horns poking out of his 7 literal heads (Revelation 12:3)?

I referenced Daniel 2.

 

[WPM]

I referenced Daniel 2.

More avoidance. This has become the Premil MO.

 

[WPM]

The answer is there. Babylon, Iraq, the capital was Nineveh.
Gog is leader of Magog, a son of Japheth, who settle in literal Turkey, all good clues for us.

Mystery Babylon is not Iraq. Do you think Jerusalem is Sodom and Egypt?

 

[WPM]

I referenced Daniel 2.

Both Pretribs and Premils are incapable of biblically supporting their claims. That is because they contradict Bible scripture that proves the coming of the Lord is climatic.

 

[WPM]

The answer is there. Babylon, Iraq, the capital was Nineveh.
Gog is leader of Magog, a son of Japheth, who settle in literal Turkey, all good clues for us.

Mystery Babylon is not Iraq. Do you think Jerusalem is Sodom and Egypt?

Do you not get the symbolic nature of revelation?

1. Do you believe Satan and his minions are physical beings?
2. Is the dragon in Revelation 20:2 a literal physical dragon?
3. Is the serpent in Revelation 20:2 a literal physical serpent?
4. Is the key mentioned in Revelation 20:1 a literal metal door key?
5. Is the chain mentioned in Revelation 20:1 a literal metal chain?
6. Is the prison mentioned in Revelation 20:7 a literal brick prison?
7. Do you believe demons need to be detained in a literal physical prison with literal metal chains in order to be restrained?
8. Does imprisonment mean immobility?
9. Does it mean a prisoner cannot do harm?
10. Can a dog on a chain walk or roam about?
11. Can a prisoner in a prison walk or roam about?
12. Does a prisoner have the ability to kill, steal, destroy, rape and embezzle in prison?
13. Do you believe Satan has 7 literal heads and 7 literal necks (Revelation 12:3)?
14. Do you believe Satan has 10 literal horns poking out of his 7 literal heads (Revelation 12:3)?

 

[WPM]

Op Note!

I am still waiting on a rebuttal to the Op from Premils. It seems clear by now that there is none. The arguments I presented have been built up, and tested, over years, and accurately reflect the weakness and error of Premil.

 

[WPM]

Also Brethren in Christ...

Don't pay attention to any Amillennialist that tries to claim that all Premill believers are on man's FALSE Pre-trib Rapture theory. If Amillennialists are confused about the origins of the false Pre-trib Rapture theory and attribute that false idea to Premill, then it shows they don't understand what The Bible teaches about at all.

The 1st century Church fathers believed in a Premill idea, which is the actual order of the written Bible Scripture. It means on the day of Christ's future return AFTER the tribulation, at that point Christ's LITERAL "thousand years" reign with His elect begins. Premill means understanding that "thousand years" as a LITERAL period, not an allegory like Origen and occultists try to claim.

Since the 1st century Church fathers held to a Premil belief, then how could they believe in a false Pre-trib Rapture theory, simply because the Pre-trib Rapture theory was first preached in a Christian Church in 1830's Great Britain by John Nelson Darby?!?

I didn't know John Darby was around in the 1st century A.D. to preach that false Pre-trib Rapture Theory to the 1st century Church fathers; did you know that?? Yet that is exactly the STUPID idea that Amillennialist try to use against Premils, because they well know the 1st century Church fathers were all Premillennialists!

1. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described sin existing on a future millennial earth?
2. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described corruption existing on a future millennial earth?
3. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described the wicked existing on a future millennial earth?
4. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described mortals existing on a future millennial earth?
5. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described decay existing on a future millennial earth?
6. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described the curse existing on a future millennial earth?
7. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described Satan existing on a future earth?
8. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described an alleged future millennium which involved the elevation of natural Israel above all other ethnic groups as Premil does?
9. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described an alleged future millennium involving a renewal of the Jewish sacrifice system as Premil does?
10. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that described an alleged future millennium involving carnal pleasure like procreating in the age to come as Premil does?
11. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that advocated the binding of Satan for 1,000 years+ after the second coming as Premil does?
12. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that advocated the release of Satan 1,000 years+ after the second coming as Premil does?
13. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that advocated the revival of Satanism 1,000 years+ after the second coming as the wicked in their billions overrun the Premil millennium as Premil does?
14. Please quote any ECF in the first 210 years after the cross that taught that Christ would be reigning in earthly Jerusalem over His enemies for 1,000 years upon David’s throne as Premil does?

 

[WPM]

Why don't you take the time out of your busy hot air running mouth and look up the Greek for that KJV "elements" in 2 Peter 3:10 and tell me what it means per the Greekl?

Also, explain for us just HOW is it that Zechariah 14 shows Christ's feet touching down upon the Mount of Olives east of Jerusalem, bringing all His 'FAITHFUL' saints with Him there, if the earth is completely destroyed on that "day of the Lord."

And just how is it that Zechariah 14:16-19 reveals there will be LEFTOVERS of the NATIONS AFTER Jesus returns that will have come up against Israel on the last day of this world and were not destroyed at Christ's 2nd coming? And how is it that Zech.14 Scripture says those unsaved leftovers will be required to come up to Jerusalem to worship The KING, Jesus Christ from year to year, and keep the Feast of Tabernacles, and if they do not, there will be no rain upon their lands!

And just what does Zech.14:16 mean when it says "year to year"? What timing does that reveal it is then? CHRIST'S FUTURE THOUSAND YEARS REIGN OVER THE UNSAVED NATIONS, the very subject of the Revelation 20 Chapter!

When Premils are cornered they resort to 2 chapter (neither of which correlate) Zech 14 and Rev 20.