Search results

Typical! Explain away the clear, explicit and fuller NT revelation with your faulty opinion of the Old. That just about sums up Premil.

The reader can see how each post he presents is bereft of any study or evidence. It is all noise. All he has is to falsely accuse. That is who he is and that is what he does.

You are full of hogwash and avoidance. Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief of Satan being cast down from heaven at the second coming? Where do any of the ancient Chiliasts before AD 270 teach the Premil belief of the binding of Satan at the second coming...

I know. Which results in them never talking about the cross or about the future return of Christ or the age to come.

Being obsessed about the coming of Titus in AD70 is certainly not one of those things they have right.

Why then are you calling people who hate Christ God's chosen people? I can't think of anything more erroneous.

But this is my point: I have been on forums like this since the year 2000. All Preterists want to talk about is AD70, Titus, judgment, Jerusalem and the Jews. It gets old after a while. They are obsessed with these. There is no discussions about the glorious climatic return of Jesus Christ...

I do not question that the Gnostic material was destroyed. There is strong historic evidence that supports that. But where is your evidence that the Chiliast material was burnt by the early Church (Amils)? I've never read that.

Romans 11:5-7 explains: “Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work. What then...

Again, you are presenting no historic evidence. That is the point of this thread. Where are your historic witnesses?

The Bible doesn't teach replacement theology, but it does teach expansion theology. The redeemed NT Church has been grafted into the believing remnant from the Jewish OT Church. Those who reject Christ are not God's chosen people, they are of their father the devil.

Really? Who do they believe they have replaced?

I put it to you: the Bible simply doesn't teach that. That might explain why the orthodox Chiliasts didn't believe it or teach it. It was taught exclusively within the heretical camp. See the hard evidence in the Op. So far you have brought no actual evidence to the table – biblical or historic...

I'm just curious, where is your historic proof for that?

You claim "Israel will be, I think, readmitted into the families of nations in covenant with Christ after Christ returns ... I think when Christ returns Israel will get politically saved as a nation." Where does Scripture teach this? Can you show us one early orthodox Chiliast that actually...

I agree with most of what you say here. You said: "If a heretic could hold this view in a corrupt way, an orthodox believer may have held this view in a pure way?" I agree. My only issue is, the evidence is not there. Saying that documents could've been burned is pure uncorroborated conjecture...

I have presented rock solid evidence in this thread. You have presented nothing but your own fanciful theories. You have zero evidence. The reader can see that for themselves. You're simply digging a hole for yourself.

He has nothing in Scripture and nothing in history to support erroneous speculations.

John F. Walvoord, long-time president of Dallas Theological Seminary? LOL. I need say no more. This is the grounds of your argument - sand. You have no historic evidence, like him. All we have from both of you is bias speculations and false statements. You have nothing.

I have a thread already going that shows the true origins of Premillennialism. It was the heretics that were the originators and promoters of this belief: The founding fathers of modern-day Premillennialism were heretics No Premil has been able to refute any of that thread. Check it out! That is...