Search results

I used to be a Premil. I know they are not there. I have spent 22 years on similar sites watching Premils duck around these simple issues.

I am not interested in outside links and unresponsive pages that also refuse to address the literal reading of Scripture. I will take this as an example that you have no rebuttals to this thread. Thanks for the conversation.

You have a lovely Christian attitude. Do you talk to Christians in real life like this? The age to come has no room for "mortals" (Luke 20:34-36, Romans 8:19-23, 1 Corinthians 15:50-55 and Revelation 21-22) or the unregenerate (Psalm 37:9-11, Luke 17:26-30, 1 Corinthians 6:9, I Thessalonians...

You have an obvious difficulty with addressing simple direct questions. I refer you back to the avoided enquiries.

No, you avoided my points. You did not address my point about others Scripture negating to mention this supposed future 1000 years. Again, you interprtet Rev 20 by your opinion of Rev 20.That is horrible hermeneutics. My point is (once again) unaddressed. I will repeat. Premil is always...

The burden of proof is actually with you. What other Scripture do you believe teaches a literal future thousand years after the second coming followed by Satan's little season where time, crying and dying, decay and disease, war and terror, Satan and his minions, mortals, the unregenerate and...

Premils have a lovely way with words - "Hogwash!," "Balderdash! or "more hot air!"" are the best that we can glean. This is obviously a smokescreen to conceal the fact that you have no corroborative Scripture. Where in Zechariah 14 is a thousand years mentioned? Where in Zechariah 14 is the...

Maybe that is just the way you engage with fellow believers, so it is normal to you. I understand. Notwithstanding, you failed to challenge one single point in the Op. Obviously you have nothing.

What has this to do with some supposed age to come full of sin and sinners, crying and dying, Satan and his demons? God can save Israelites in this age, as it is the day of salvation. The second coming brings a close to the day of salvation. Repeated Scripture shows that now is the only day of...

How about actually addressing it a point at a time. So far, no Premil has had a rebuttal.

So, what other NT text supposedly teaches a thousand years after the second coming?

You totally missed my point. You need to address it. P.S. No need for the nasty language.

Obviously, you have no rebuttal. There is much supporting Scripture that speaks of creation, the beginning and our first parents. The fact you are unaware of this may explain why you miss the thrust of what i am saying. The fact is: you have zero corroboration. Premil is a non-supported theory.

I totally agree. Well put!

Hello! Satan belongs in a spiritual prison not a physical brick prison. That is not hard to grasp.

(19) Premil has an unhealthy obsessive focus on natural Israel, wrongly believing her to be God’s chosen people today under the new covenant. As a result, they have a mistaken fixation with natural Jerusalem in the Middle East, as if it is the epicenter of God’s workings with mankind on this...

(12) The future earth that Amillennialists and Premillennialists expect after Jesus comes could not be more diverse. Amillennialists believe the coming of the Lord will usher in the eternal state and witness the full manifestation of the glorified kingdom on a renewed earth in all its eternal...

(7) Premillennialists ignore the tenses in the original Greek in order to sustain their teaching. That is because the tenses expose Premil. For example, Scripture shows that Jesus is reigning now over creation, His people and all His enemies. It is shown to be in the present ongoing tense. Most...

Since abandoning Premillennialism I have engaged in many debates/discussions on the matter of the second coming, end-times and the here-after. These are some of the major weaknesses I find in the Premillennialism doctrine, and are strong reasons why I believe the dogma should be rejected. I...

Not so. Quite the opposite. Your ongoing failure (along with countless others) to answer a simple request for a proof text shows us that you know what we know. It is not in the Word.