22 major reasons to abandon the Premil doctrine

[Randy Kluth]

I'm not exaggerating, I was actually going to joke, the next thing is, you are going to do is go to Wikipedia for justification for your theology. And guess what? You did!

It does not matter one iota what the world or Wikipedia believes "Christian" means. It is a sad indictment on your position that you have to go there in order to receive your justification. The fact is, our only argument on spiritual matters is Scripture. For that we need to go to the New Testament to establish what the word "Christian" actually means. Of course, this word only applies to the redeemed of Christ. The unregenerate are not Christians in God's eyes in any shape or form.

Dictionaries help us understand English words. The Bible helps us understand how to use those words. Both help. Wikipedia is compromised, but contains a lot of relevant information that is easy to reference.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Ok. I must give you the benefit of the doubt. I apologize if I misrepresented your motives.

Man, I respect that! I don't want to offend you either. Thank you!

 

[Randy Kluth]

Your claims on replacement theology and Israel becoming a Christian Nation are Randt's dreams and fantasy found no place in scripture

Only evil wishes to incite, and your constant theme of "Randy's dreams and fantasies" is a form of incitement that I have zero respect for. When you stop the incitement and argue reasonably, wishing to understand the views of others in a respectful way, I'll be happy to engage you. Until then, I have no interest in playing.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

We disagree on the subject of the word (Thousand Years) and it meaning nothing more than the Lord's eternal spiritual realm, not a literal time frame as you suggest 2 Peter 3:8

While we agree that the thousand years is figurative, it does clearly have a beginning and an ending. I'm not sure why you would deny that.

Revelation 20:3 He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.

Revelation 20:7 When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison

These verses couldn't be more clear that the thousand years come to an end at which point Satan is loosed for a short time (little season).

So, to say that the thousand years represents eternity just doesn't line up with these verses.

If a believer were to physically die(one earthly minute) before the second coming they enter into the non-literal thousand year reign

Hope that helps you understand my observation of scripture

What I don't understand is why you seemingly don't take into account that it says the thousand years will come to an end at which point Satan is loosed for a short amount of time (little season). Please address that.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Well yes, that's a great passage to quote in this regard. It doesn't set aside the passages about Israel's inheritance of the Millennial Kingdom, nor about the inheritance of Christian nations of the Millennial Kingdom. But it does point out that unless there is a true spiritual conversion, the fallen flesh will disqualify anybody in the Millennium from inheriting God's eternal Kingdom, even while it rules on the earth. They will die, and be only a temporary inhabitant of that Kingdom age, and will not inherit it for eternity.

Your view of Rev 11 seems strange, with all due respect. It is talking about the inception of the Messianic Kingdom, and not just the Kingdom of the Father! And if that's when Messiah's reign begins, then it must be a future Kingdom, not yet here.

My view of Rev 11 is not strange at all. And I backed it up by referencing 1 Corinthians 15:22-24, which you did not address. If Revelation 11:15 was talking about "inception of the Messianic Kingdom" then why does it mention it becoming the kingdom of the Father and of His Messiah? To me, that immediately brings to mind 1 Cor 15:24 where Jesus delivers the kingdom to the Father. I find it strange that you would see a reference to the kingdom of the Father and of His Messiah as being a reference to "the Messianic Kingdom".

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Premillennialists are constantly exalting the power and influence of Satan and diluting the sovereign power and influence of Christ. That is nowhere more evident than in their constant rubbishing of Christ’s current kingship over His enemies at the right hand of majesty on high. Whether they mean to or not, Premils are always highlighting what Satan is doing in our day instead of what Christ is doing. Premil portrays a BIG devil and a small god; Scripture presents a small devil and a BIG God. In Premil, Satan seems sovereign in this age and God is curtailed. Premils are always lauding the ability of Satan since the cross. In Scripture, Christ is sovereign and Satan is curtailed. Scripture is always lauding the ability of Christ since the cross. As a consequence, Premil portrays an impotent beat-down New Testament Church, whereas Scripture sees a victorious potent New Testament Church invading the nations with the good news of Christ and subjugating the powers of darkness as they do so. In Scripture Christ reigns over all creation as God and His new creation as Savior.

Very well said. I couldn't agree more. And this illustrates why this is an important topic. It's a serious problem to have the wrong perspective of Christ and His church's current position of power and authority over Satan. It can result in people severely underestimating what is possible for Christ and His church to accomplish during this New Testament era.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Jesus did not forsake the hope of a restored physical Jerusalem and a restored physical Israel in the physical land of Israel. He did not "spiritualize" this! Focusing on spiritual qualities that are necessary in his Kingdom is not the same thing as "spiritualizing" his Kingdom! If you don't know the difference, you have a big problem.

Where did Jesus teach that there would be "a restored physical Jerusalem and a restored physical Israel in the physical land of Israel"? Abraham and other OT saints realized that "a restored physical Jerusalem and a restored physical Israel in the physical land of Israel" is not what they should be looking for. They realized that they should be looking instead for "the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God" and for "a better country, a heavenly one".

Hebrews 11:8 By faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went, even though he did not know where he was going. 9 By faith he made his home in the promised land like a stranger in a foreign country; he lived in tents, as did Isaac and Jacob, who were heirs with him of the same promise. 10 For he was looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God. 11 And by faith even Sarah, who was past childbearing age, was enabled to bear children because she considered him faithful who had made the promise. 12 And so from this one man, and he as good as dead, came descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as countless as the sand on the seashore. 13 All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance, admitting that they were foreigners and strangers on earth. 14 People who say such things show that they are looking for a country of their own. 15 If they had been thinking of the country they had left, they would have had opportunity to return. 16 Instead, they were longing for a better country—a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them.

Why are you looking for "a restored physical Jerusalem and a restored physical Israel in the physical land of Israel" when scripture indicates that we should be looking for "the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God" and for "a better country, a heavenly one"?

Again, we all agree that when Jesus came to Israel he brought the power of the heavenly Kingdom with him. He just didn't implement the full eschatological Kingdom.

The full eschatological kingdom will be the new heaven and new earth. That is what Peter said we are looking forward to.

2 Peter 3:13 But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

How many times must I answer this? It's not just you who deny there have been "Christian nations."

There seems to be a disconnect between those who identify nations as "Christian nations" simply because the political system adopts Christianity and those who believe that true Christianity must be measured individually by being 1) born again, 2) walking with the Lord in obedience, and 3) enduring in faith to the end.

I don't use as criteria the notion that every individual citizen must be a true Christian in order to assign to the nation the designation "Christian nation." They are a Christian nation if by their political system they adopt a Christian constitution. Period.

Where is the scripture which supports this "Christian nation" concept that you're describing?

 

[CadyandZoe]

Jesus did not forsake the hope of a restored physical Jerusalem and a restored physical Israel in the physical land of Israel.

Where did he teach against it?

He did not "spiritualize" this! Focusing on spiritual qualities that are necessary in his Kingdom is not the same thing as "spiritualizing" his Kingdom!

You and WPM use terms like "spiritual Zion", "spiritual Israel", "spiritual Jerusalem" in a manner customary to those who idealize the kingdom.

Abraham and other OT saints realized that "a restored physical Jerusalem and a restored physical Israel in the physical land of Israel" is not what they should be looking for. They realized that they should be looking instead for "the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God" and for "a better country, a heavenly one".

Both can be true at the same time. These are not mutually exclusive concepts. If God is the source of "a restored physical Jerusalem and a restored physical Israel in the physical land of Israel" then it is by definition a "heavenly" one.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Stop avoiding: where does the NT use "Christian" nominally as meaning the citizens of a "Christian State" that can be Christian in name only or a genuine Christian?

Let me just answer this for him. Nowhere.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

At the revelation of Christ, many Jews in Israel will repent. Those who repent in other nations will return from exile. Those who died in faith will be resurrected.

Can you show me where this is taught in scripture? You would think it would be mentioned in a passage like the following, but I don't see it there at all:

2 Thessalonians 1:7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, 8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: 9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; 10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.

This indicates that He will be taking vengeance on unbelievers when He returns from heaven, not leading them to repentance as you believe.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Where did he teach against it?

This is your whole argument. He didn't explicitly teach against it, so that somehow means He taught it? What He did teach is that His kingdom does not come with observation and is not of this world. So, He did implicitly teach against the idea of His kingdom being an earthly kingdom as you imagine.

You and WPM use terms like "spiritual Zion", "spiritual Israel", "spiritual Jerusalem" in a manner customary to those who idealize the kingdom.

Yeah, so? Again, Jesus Himself said that His kingdom does not come with observation and is not of this world. Do you not accept that?

Both can be true at the same time. These are not mutually exclusive concepts. If God is the source of "a restored physical Jerusalem and a restored physical Israel in the physical land of Israel" then it is by definition a "heavenly" one.

Where is this taught in scripture? Is that really what you think the OT saints described in Hebrews 11 were looking for? The heavenly country they were looking for was contrasted with the earthly country. Doesn't that tell you anything? Premils like yourself just continually make claims without providing any scriptural support. That is very telling. I can only assume the reason for that is because you have none.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I cannot take too seriously someone who believes that early Chiliasts were actually Amillennialists!

It's hard to take you seriously when you misrepresent what someone says, which you do often. I am pretty sure WPM never said that early Chiliasts were actually Amillennialists. What I have seen him say several times is that their beliefs had more in common with Amillennialists than Premillennialists. That is not the same as saying that they were Amillennialists.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Why don't you put this in context, brother? You suggested that I was here calling you an "idolater!" And I explained to you that I do not in this believe you are an actual idolater, but only guilty of putting your pet doctrine ahead of love for Christ and for his people.

What gives you the right to judge someone like this? How would you know how he spends all of his time apart from this forum? You don't. So, you have no right to judge him like this.

This is true and perfectly recognizable. Your hostility is palpable, and your insulting comments coloring nearly every response telltale of your veneration of the Amil position. You've spent more time on that than on trying to bring others to Christian understanding and edification.

How would you know something like this? Do you know what he does when he's not posting here? I highly doubt it. So, stop judging.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I'm not exaggerating, I was actually going to joke, the next thing is, you are going to do is go to Wikipedia for justification for your theology. And guess what? You did!

It does not matter one iota what the world or Wikipedia believes "Christian" means. It is a sad indictment on your position that you have to go there in order to receive your justification. The fact is, our only argument on spiritual matters is Scripture. For that we need to go to the New Testament to establish what the word "Christian" actually means. Of course, this word only applies to the redeemed of Christ. The unregenerate are not Christians in God's eyes in any shape or form.

I can't believe he expects to be taken seriously when his main source to back up his view is Wikipedia rather than scripture. Unbelievable.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I'll grant you that not all premils believe the same way. Bear in mind that WPS's arguments are critical of what HE conceives is a universal belief system. In other words, his arguments assume that all premils share a common set of tenets.

I am certain that he is well aware that not all premils believe the same. So, if any of his arguments don't apply to your particular view then just ignore it. No reason to be offended just because the argument doesn't address your particular view. He's making general arguments against premil.

Yes, I disagree with him on this point because I disagree with his implied premise that one must find evidence in the New Testament for a temporal visible kingdom.

Why should one expect to find a commentary from Jesus or the apostles on subjects with which he and his audience agree? If he and his audience both agree that the Father will establish a righteous kingdom on earth, then one would not expect to find any commentary on the subject.

This is a very weak argument. Did He and His audience not agree that He would come again? He still talked about it. Did He and His audience not agree that all of the dead would be resurrected one day and that all people would be judged one day? Yes, but He still talked about it. Jesus talked about a lot of things of which He and His audience agreed. So, why would He say nothing about a supposed earthly kingdom as well? Why in the world would He not even say a word about it if it was going to happen that way? That makes no sense. He touched on every other important subject but chose not to discuss that one for some unknown reason? I believe that is complete nonsense.

But we have hints about a coming kingdom of righteousness all through the gospel. I already mentioned the Lord's prayer, which Jesus taught to his disciples. This prayer is intended as a model prayer, helping us focus on the most important things. And first on the list is the "temporal visible earthly kingdom", which you claim will never exist.

Yes, but that is the new heavens and new earth "where righteousness dwells" (2 Peter 3:13). There is NOTHING in the NT hinting about some earthly kingdom where sin and death would continue on after His return.

Jesus commented on his culture whenever it deviated from the true teachings found in the revealed scriptures, and he often argued from the scriptures, knowing that he and his audience shared "Biblical inerrancy" in common.

Consider this passage from John's gospel.

John 10:34-36

Jesus answered them, “Has it not been written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?​

According to Jesus, the scripture cannot be broken, meaning, the entire Bible speaks truly and remains a valid source of God's revealed will. Jesus argued FROM the Old Testament. And neither did he come to put a new spin on them as he claims in the following passage.

Matthew 5:17-18
“Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished."

The Lord makes it clear to his audience that his commentary on the Law is not a repudiation of the law. His disagreement is not with the law, but rather, his disagreement is with the incorrect interpretation promoted by the scribes and the Pharisees. In other words, our Lord has not adopted a new, "spiritual" interpretation of the law based on his unique eisegesis.

Is this all you have? It simply makes no sense to think that this earthly kingdom you believe in would not be taught or referenced anywhere in the New Testament. If you can't see that then I don't know what else I can say about it.

 

[Truth7t7]

Haven't you figured out yet that WPM is a "man on a mission?" That mission is not the Gospel Mission. It is the Amil Mission. Why do I say that--because I'm bitter, angry, and frustrated? No, it's because he puts doctrine above brotherly love. And quite frankly, you do too.

Nothing against you personally, however I will continue to expose your false Zionist teachings that you believe and promote

I don't fully agree with WPM on many things, namely his belief in 66-70AD preterist fullfillment of Daniel's AOD and Great Tribulation

Jesus returns after a future Great Tribulation in fire and final judgment, dissolving this earth by fire (The End)

Randy you falsely believe and teach that the Lord's fire at his return is "Localized" to places upon earth, and you falsely teach "Survivors" of the Lord's fire will populate a mortal Kingdom for 1,000 years on this earth in deception in my opinion, as you have been clearly shown several times

"The World, And All That Dwell Therein"

Nahum 1:5KJV
5 The mountains quake at him, and the hills melt, and the earth is burned at his presence, yea, the world, and all that dwell therein.

 

[Truth7t7]

While we agree that the thousand years is figurative, it does clearly have a beginning and an ending. I'm not sure why you would deny that.

Revelation 20:3 He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.

Revelation 20:7 When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison

These verses couldn't be more clear that the thousand years come to an end at which point Satan is loosed for a short time (little season).

So, to say that the thousand years represents eternity just doesn't line up with these verses.

What I don't understand is why you seemingly don't take into account that it says the thousand years will come to an end at which point Satan is loosed for a short amount of time (little season). Please address that.

Satan was bound for a 1,000 years in the spiritual realm, the "Non-Literal" thousand years ends when he is loosed into the earth realm to deceive

It could read Satan is bound, Satan is released, because thousand years is "Non Literal" it's that simple, it does nothing more than explain (This Is Spiritual Realm

The words (Thousand Years) is nothing more than a statement of the Lord's spiritual realm

2 Peter 3:8KJV
8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

 

[Truth7t7]

Only evil wishes to incite, and your constant theme of "Randy's dreams and fantasies" is a form of incitement that I have zero respect for. When you stop the incitement and argue reasonably, wishing to understand the views of others in a respectful way, I'll be happy to engage you. Until then, I have no interest in playing.

There is no scriptural support for Israel becoming a Christian Nation as you suggest, its your Zionist hope that is fictional

The words "Replacement Theology" is a Zionist buzzword in false propaganda, in distraction from the fact Jesus Christ removed the Kingdom from Israel and gave it to the Holy Nation the "Church"

Matthew 21:42-43KJV
42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.

You falsely teach and believe that the Lord's fire in wrath at his return is "Localized" and there will be survivors after this to populate a fictional Zionist Kingdom on this earth

Nahum 1:5KJV
5 The mountains quake at him, and the hills melt, and the earth is burned at his presence, yea, the world, and all that dwell therein.

Randy I fully understand your Zionist views, that are self willed in my opinion, and found no place in scripture

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Satan was bound for a 1,000 years in the spiritual realm, the "Non-Literal" thousand years ends when he is loosed into the earth realm to deceive

Okay, now you are acknowledging that the thousand years will end and then Satan will be loosed. But, haven't you said before that the last day when all of the dead are resurrected occurs at the end of the thousand years? But, that can't be the case since there is more time that goes by after that during which Satan is loosed. The last day instead has to be the last day of Satan's little season which occurs after the thousand years ends and leads up to the return of Christ on the last day.

It could read Satan is bound, Satan is released, because thousand years is "Non Literal" it's that simple, it does nothing more than explain (This Is Spiritual Realm

The words (Thousand Years) is nothing more than a statement of the Lord's spiritual realm

2 Peter 3:8KJV
8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

I don't understand what you're saying here. Yes, the thousand years is not a literal thousand years, but it does have a beginning and an end. When it ends, then Satan is loosed. Do you agree? Christ will return on the last day of Satan's little season, not the last day of the thousand years. I don't think you understand that at this point.