22 major reasons to abandon the Premil doctrine

[Spiritual Israelite]

Do you know what is really offensive is when someone presumes that my ideas can be dismissed because they are simply giving expression to an emotion. THAT my friend is offensive and presumptuous.

I have no idea of what you're talking about here.

Really? You believe a new earth is not an actual place? Wow.

I never said that. Where do you think I said that? Show me. Good luck finding it. I didn't come anywhere near saying that the new earth is not an actual place.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

No. There are a lot of other New Testament scriptures referring to a restored Nation of Israel.

Matthew 17:10-12.

10 And His disciples asked Him, “Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?” 11 And He answered and said, “Elijah is coming and will restore all things; 12 but I say to you that Elijah already came, and they did not recognize him, but did to him whatever they wished. So also the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.”​

His disciples asked him about the restoration of Israel, which will begin with the coming of Elijah.

You really need to learn to read scripture more carefully. Read verse 12. Jesus said "but I say to you that Elijah already came, and they did not recognize him". Did you somehow miss that? Do you know what He was talking about? For some reason you stopped at verse 12, but didn't include this verse:

Matthew 17:13 Then the disciples understood that he was talking to them about John the Baptist.

Elijah already came in the person of John the Baptist. That is what Jesus said. That goes along with what these passages teach:

Luke 1:13 But the angel said to him: “Do not be afraid, Zechariah; your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you are to call him John. 14 He will be a joy and delight to you, and many will rejoice because of his birth, 15 for he will be great in the sight of the Lord. He is never to take wine or other fermented drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even before he is born. 16 He will bring back many of the people of Israel to the Lord their God. 17 And he will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the parents to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous—to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.”

Matthew 11:11 Truly I tell you, among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet whoever is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. 12 From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence, and violent people have been raiding it. 13 For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John. 14 And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come. 15 Whoever has ears, let them hear.

Looks like you are not willing to accept that John the Baptist was the Elijah to come, as prophesied by the prophet Malachi. Just as Jesus knew would be the case. He knew some people (like you) wouldn't accept it because of how literal some people are ("it says Elijah, so it has to be Elijah himself"). But, you should accept it because Jesus said it.

You're 0 for 1 so far.

Acts 1:6-8

6 So when they had come together, they were asking Him, saying, “Lord, is it at this time You are restoring the kingdom to Israel?” 7 He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority; 8 but you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth.”​

Here we see what the disciples had on their minds as Jesus was about to leave. They ask whether this was the time when Jesus would restore the kingdom to Israel. Jesus did not disabuse them of this concept. He believes that the kingdom will be restored to Israel just as God has said. But he doesn't know when it will take place. Jesus' words here contradict the Amillennial teaching that Jesus is ruling "spiritual Israel" presently. When asked about the restoration of the kingdom to Israel, Jesus said he didn't know when that would take place. The Amillennial answer would be, "I am already ruling the kingdom right now." But he didn't say that. Jesus believed that God would bring about a literal, physical kingdom on earth ruled from a literal, physical Jerusalem.

You are completely ignoring verse 8 here. Jesus described how the kingdom would come in verse 8. He referred to the day of Pentecost when the kingdom came very powerfully in a spiritual way. That is how the kingdom was restored to Israel. Three thousand Jews were saved that day.

Now you're 0 for 2.

Acts 3:19-21

19 Therefore repent and return, so that your sins may be wiped away, in order that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord; 20 and that He may send Jesus, the Christ appointed for you, 21 whom heaven must receive until the period of restoration of all things about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient time. ​

Here Peter also anticipates a period of restoration for the kingdom of Israel. He teaches his fellow kinsmen that Jesus is the Christ, appointed for them and that he has been taken up to heaven until such time that God decides to restore the kingdom to Israel. Peter's argument rests on the holy prophets, which both he and his people agree are without error. The prophets speak about the restoration of all things and Peter agrees with the prophets. The missing piece of information is the fact that Jesus the Christ was taken up to heaven to await for that day. Until that time, the word is to "repent and return."

You don't believe in the restoration of all things when Christ returns like I do. You only believe in the restoration of some things. The restoration of all things will occur when the perfect, eternal new heavens and new earth are ushered in.

That brings the tally to 0 for 3. The idea of a temporal earthly kingdom being established on the earth when Christ returns is simply not taught in any way, shape or form in the New Testament (or the Old Testament for that matter).

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I agree with you. This is the ordinary and plain saying from the text. Either we have the simplicity of just what it says, or the complexity of convoluted arguments of why we should not accept such plainness and simplicity.

It's always funny when Premils talk like this. Do you accept "the ordinary and plain saying" from this text:

John 5:28 “Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice 29 and come out—those who have done what is good will rise to live, and those who have done what is evil will rise to be condemned.

Jesus very clearly indicated that a singular time (singular event - not two, but one) is coming during which all of the dead will be resurrected. Is that how you interpret this passage? Do you use your "ordinary and plain" text approach to this passage so that you interpret it for "just what it says"?

 

[marks]

Harmonize. Don't just deny the meanings of passages. Find the harmony that holds all the passages true. You will have to do it for yourself.

Much love!

 

[marks]

The picture of the kingdom of God you reject is taught in the Hebrew Bible. He has no reason to teach something that is already known and taught among his people. The absence of his explicit teaching on the subject is not evidence that the concept of a physical kingdom on earth is wrong.

Will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?

What a great opportunity for Jesus to set them (and us) straight on this subject! No! No earthly kingdom! Got it? But that wasn't what He said, as you know. "When" is up to the Father.

Much love!

 

[Timtofly]

That would be quite a short reign for the ten kings. Only 60 minutes? How could that be? That makes no sense. What would they even be able to do in only 60 minutes?

The length of the battle of Armageddon.

 

[WPM]

Will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?

What a great opportunity for Jesus to set them (and us) straight on this subject! No! No earthly kingdom! Got it? But that wasn't what He said, as you know. "When" is up to the Father.

Much love!

He did! He took their eyes away from natural earthly temporal matters and put it onto the supernatural. You don't want to acknowledge that because it would expose your position.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The length of the battle of Armageddon.

Oh, it will last exactly 60 minutes? Not 57 minutes and 27 seconds or 63 minutes and 39 seconds? Exactly 60 minutes? Wow, that's amazing.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?

What a great opportunity for Jesus to set them (and us) straight on this subject! No! No earthly kingdom! Got it? But that wasn't what He said, as you know. "When" is up to the Father.

You are the one who thinks it was necessary for Him to tell them their understanding of the kingdom was wrong first before describing the real nature of the kingdom the way He did in verse 8. But, that comes from your own imagination. He clearly was not intending to explain everything to them at that time. He knew they would begin to understand the reality and true nature of the kingdom of God once the kingdom came in power on the day of Pentecost. At that point the Holy Spirit came to dwell in them and started to help them understand the things that Jesus had been teaching them about the kingdom of God. That is what Jesus said the Holy Spirit would do.

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

 

[marks]

Acts 1:6-7 KJV
6) When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?
7) And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

The straightfoward understanding.

Much love!

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

He did! He took their eyes away from natural earthly temporal matters and put it onto the supernatural. You don't want to acknowledge that because it would expose your position.

All they have is passages like that which they think imply a future earthly kingdom. But, they take it completely out of context by ignoring verse 8. This is all they have! They have no passages which clearly teach anything about an earthly kingdom being established at the return of Christ. But we have many passages which explicitly teach that Christ reigns now and that we are in His kingdom now, and that all of the dead will be resurrected, all people will be judged, all believers will be changed to have immortal bodies and all unbelievers will be destroyed when He returns.

They try to say we spiritualize everything, yet our doctrine is primarily based on literal, straightforward texts which teach the things I listed.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Acts 1:6-7 KJV
6) When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?
7) And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

The straightfoward understanding.

Why do you leave verse 8 out where Jesus describes the nature of the kingdom? Verse 8 is a part of His answer to their question.

 

[marks]

Why do you leave verse 8 out where Jesus describes the nature of the kingdom? Verse 8 is a part of His answer to their question.

That's in the meantime, and does not negate the coming kingdom.

Much love!

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

That's in the meantime, and does not negate the coming kingdom.

According to scripture the coming kingdom (the kingdom in its fullness) will be such that there will be no mortal flesh and blood there (1 Corinthians 15:50) and that it is eternal (Matthew 25:31-46). How does your understanding of a future temporal earthly kingdom filled with mortals line up with passages like those?

 

[Timtofly]

Are you saying that you disagree that this is an argument against your particular view? Do you think Paul or any of the other NT writers taught a 1,000 year temporal visible earthly kingdom after the second coming before the ushering in of the new heaven and new earth? If so, where? I know you might say Revelation 20, but that passage says nothing about an earthly kingdom. So, where else?

1 Corinthians 15:24-28

This was the Millennium, before John put a length to this rule. Paul does not give any time frames. Not even until the Second Coming. Obviously they thought they would be alive to see the Second Coming.

I guess if you don't think you will be alive at the Second Coming, it may be a hope for your great grandchildren.

 

[Timtofly]

You corroborate your faulty opinion of Revelation 20 by your faulty opinion of Revelation 20. Lol. That is not corroboration.

You corroborate 17 of your faulty reasons with your own faulty opinion.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

1 Corinthians 15:24-28

This was the Millennium, before John put a length to this rule. Paul does not give any time frames. Not even until the Second Coming. Obviously they thought they would be alive to see the Second Coming.

Where does 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 say anything about "the Millennium"? I'm not asking where those words are used, but where the concept of it is referenced there. That passage is talking about the end when Jesus destroys all of His enemies and delivers the kingdom over to the Father. I see nothing about the thousand years there whatsoever.

I guess if you don't think you will be alive at the Second Coming, it may be a hope for your great grandchildren.

I don't know if I will be alive when He comes or not. We will see. But, what does this have to do with what we're discussing?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You corroborate 17 of your faulty reasons with your own faulty opinion.

Another useless and pointless post from Timtofly. There's too many of those to count at this point.

 

[Timtofly]

The number of times a term is mentioned has NOTHING to do with whether it is literal or not. The beast is referred to over 30 times in the book of Revelation. Does that make it a literal beast?

The beast is a literal character doing literal earthly things. Just like 1,000 years is a literal time with literal people doing literal earthly things.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The beast is a literal character doing literal earthly things.

So, do you think the literal beast has seven literal heads and ten literal horns as well?

Just like 1,000 years is a literal time with literal people doing literal earthly things.

You're not able to support your interpretation of Revelation 20 with other scripture. You've made that very clear. So, what do you do? Change the rest of scripture to fit your interpretation of Revelation 20.