23 major reasons to reject the Premil doctrine!

[Timtofly]

Wrong! The millennium has run from the first resurrection. Multiple Scripture proves that the first resurrection occurred 2000 years ago. Jesus is "the first resurrection" (Acts 26:23 and Revelation 20:6), "the firstborn from the dead" (Colossians 1:18), "the firstfruits of them that slept" (1 Corinthians 15:20), "first begotten of the dead" (Revelation 1:5).

Amils believe in corroboration.

What Scripture do you have that support your opinion of Revelation 20 that the first resurrection will be in the future?

Wrong. I never claimed the first resurrection is future. Lazarus was given a first resurrection and called out of his grave to eternal life. Firstfruits is a plural word. Jesus was the firstfruits plural, meaning all the OT redeemed were removed from Abraham's bosom a first resurrection, which is physical, not chronological. You have been led to believe one resurrection singular (at the end of time), but the first resurrection is a type of resurrection, not a chronological resurrection in some order of happening. Paul claims an order to this redemption, but does not call everyone a resurrection. It is the redemption out of Adam's dead corruptible flesh, which is a physical change, not just spiritual. The order is when Jesus presents the firstfruits. Matthew 27:51-53 declares a first resurrection that is physical. Because those are the firstfruits of the resurrection of and in Christ. The veil of the temple was torn, and Abraham's bosom was emptied at the same moment of time, when Jesus declared the Atonement was finished. The redeemed would no longer experience the taste of death. The sacrifice of animals had come to an end. Now, one could enter the Holy of Holies on an individual basis.

The Cross was Jesus presenting the OT redeemed firstfruits. The Second Coming is the glorification of the church presented to God. At the end of the Millennium Christ, will present all of creation without spot or blemish. I don't deny the resurrection like Amil declare it. It is more than what you make it out to be. You place a limit on the resurrection and the life, not me. I use all the same Scripture that you use. John 3 gives us the physical and spiritual application of birth and death. A resurrection is out of death, and physical death to be exact. A new birth is to be placed spiritually into the family of God. This is the second birth, so a type of birth, not a chronological order of events.

 

[WPM]

Wrong. I never claimed the first resurrection is future. Lazarus was given a first resurrection and called out of his grave to eternal life. Firstfruits is a plural word. Jesus was the firstfruits plural, meaning all the OT redeemed were removed from Abraham's bosom a first resurrection, which is physical, not chronological. You have been led to believe one resurrection singular (at the end of time), but the first resurrection is a type of resurrection, not a chronological resurrection in some order of happening. Paul claims an order to this redemption, but does not call everyone a resurrection. It is the redemption out of Adam's dead corruptible flesh, which is a physical change, not just spiritual. The order is when Jesus presents the firstfruits. Matthew 27:51-53 declares a first resurrection that is physical. Because those are the firstfruits of the resurrection of and in Christ. The veil of the temple was torn, and Abraham's bosom was emptied at the same moment of time, when Jesus declared the Atonement was finished. The redeemed would no longer experience the taste of death. The sacrifice of animals had come to an end. Now, one could enter the Holy of Holies on an individual basis.

The Cross was Jesus presenting the OT redeemed firstfruits. The Second Coming is the glorification of the church presented to God. At the end of the Millennium Christ, will present all of creation without spot or blemish. I don't deny the resurrection like Amil declare it. It is more than what you make it out to be. You place a limit on the resurrection and the life, not me. I use all the same Scripture that you use. John 3 gives us the physical and spiritual application of birth and death. A resurrection is out of death, and physical death to be exact. A new birth is to be placed spiritually into the family of God. This is the second birth, so a type of birth, not a chronological order of events.

Ok. So we are in Rev 20 since Christ's resurrection.

 

[Timtofly]

Ok. So we are in Rev 20 since Christ's resurrection.

No, we are still in Acts 1.

 

[WPM]

No, we are still in Acts 1.

Both!

 

[Timtofly]

Both!

Where in Revelation 20 does it show Jesus just ascended into heaven?

 

[WPM]

Where in Revelation 20 does it show Jesus just ascended into heaven?

Rev 20 shows us the result of His conquering of the grave. It shows us the subjection of the enemy through His victorious work.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

The Lord employs the word parousia in reply to the disciples second question in Matthew 24:23-28, when He says, “if any man shall say unto you (before the one final future second coming of the Lord), Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before. Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not. For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming [Gr. parousia] of the Son be. Wheresoever is the carcase, there will be gathered together the eagles.”

Christ continues in Matthew 24:29-31, speaking of this one final future coming, “Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken. And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and ‘they shall gather together’ [Gr. episunago] his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.”

Matthew 24:35-41 continues: “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming [Gr. parousia] of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. Then shall two be in the field; the one ‘shall be taken’ [Gr. paralambano], and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one ‘shall be taken’ [Gr. paralambano], and the other left.”

After telling us that “heaven and earth shall pass away,” Jesus immediately tells us: “of that day and hour knoweth no man.” This final day that is approaching is coming unexpectedly. This fits in with the “thief in the night” scenario found elsewhere in Scripture.

The Lord uses the word parousia again in v 37 to equate the days preceding His coming to the days preceding Noah’s entry into the ark, saying, “as the days of Noe were, so shall also the parousia of the Son of man be.” In His reply, Christ confirmed, what the disciples already seem to have rightly comprehended, in their questioning, that His next Coming is His last and only future coming and that it ushers in “the end of the world (or age)”

Thus, the second coming of the Lord shall come in like manner, verse 39 confirms, “so shall also the parousia of the Son of man be.

1 Corinthians 15:22-24 confirms the finality of that day and its clear relation to the end, saying, “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming [Gr. parousia]. Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.”

This reading outlines in totally unambiguous language how the second coming of the Lord will be completely all-consummating in its nature. This final event expressly ushers in the end, and is the stage that Christ finally presents “up the kingdom to God” and “shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.” It is the concluding end for all mankind on this scene of time, now eternity and the general judgement. Notwithstanding, we cannot fail to note the stark contrast between God’s dealing with the kingdom of God and that of the kingdom of darkness at the end. One is finally presented “up,” the other is finally put “down.” All this coincides with the one final future coming (or ‘parousia’) of the Lord.

And once again you refuse to accept the fact that paruosia means a presence. It can mean a physical presence soemwhere or a proximate depending on context. You are just way to rigid with words that in the greek have flexibility

 

[Ronald Nolette]

1 Thessalonians 4:14-5:4 confirms this saying: “if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming [Gr. parousia] of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words. But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.”

The catching away is the second coming. Read the text. Stop defaulting to your teachers and outside websites.

Wrong- the rapture is the taking off earth the saints. Nowhere in the passage does it say the Lord descends to earth. And you need to stop making false accusations. Your lying is getting worse.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

You have to do your own research.

Check the Reformers. Study the development of Protestant theology and you will learn a lot about the importance of corroboration.

Nerxt step is to put you on ingnore. If you won't back your claims of "world wide acceptance of this fundamental doctrine of corroboration, you are disengenious at best and sin inster at worst.

Sorry I didn't answer sooner- I had hip replacement surgery Monday

 

[covenantee]

Nerxt step is to put you on ingnore. If you won't back your claims of "world wide acceptance of this fundamental doctrine of corroboration, you are disengenious at best and sin inster at worst.

When nothing else succeeds, there's always ignore.

You have to do your own research.

Check the Reformers. Study the development of Protestant theology and you will learn a lot about the importance of corroboration.

Apparently in his state of advanced grammatical sophistication, he cannot recognize that corroboration means interpreting Scripture using Scripture.

Or that there was something called the Protestant Reformation, whose prophetic Scriptural insights resulted in the deliverance of the True Church from the papal antichrist of spiritual bondage and tyranny.

Heaven forbid that a deceived and deluded dispensational futurist should ever exhibit such understanding.

 

[WPM]

Wrong- the rapture is the taking off earth the saints. Nowhere in the passage does it say the Lord descends to earth. And you need to stop making false accusations. Your lying is getting worse.

We are rescued to the sky as the destruction of this current earth, works that are therein, the elements occur. It does not say anywhere that He then takes us to heaven. Where is your Scripture? Give me a rapture passage that says He then takes us to heaven? You have nothing to support that apart from your own opinions. This earth is glorified when we are. What replaces this conflagration is a new perfect and eternal earth.

 

[WPM]

When nothing else succeeds, there's always ignore.

Apparently in his state of advanced grammatical sophistication, he cannot recognize that corroboration means interpreting Scripture using Scripture.

Or that there was something called the Protestant Reformation, whose prophetic Scriptural insights resulted in the deliverance of the True Church from the papal antichrist of spiritual bondage and tyranny.

Heaven forbid that a deceived and deluded dispensational futurist should ever exhibit such understanding.

I totally agree. He actually knows he has nothing. He just wants to divert the conversation away from the Book. He knows that he has no support for his private opinions of many texts. In fact, he has no proof-text for Pretrib anywhere. He wants a website to say something and then that makes it good. Christians should be satisfied with God's Word. If that is not enough then it is not enough.

 

[WPM]

Nerxt step is to put you on ingnore. If you won't back your claims of "world wide acceptance of this fundamental doctrine of corroboration, you are disengenious at best and sin inster at worst.

Sorry I didn't answer sooner- I had hip replacement surgery Monday

Of course you want to ignore Amils. You have to. That is because you are not comfortable with Amils keeping you to the Book and what it teaches about corroboration. It is this biblical principle that exposes your speculations. Where is your Pretrib proof-text that teaches a rapture of the Church, followed by seven-year tribulation, followed by a third coming of the Lord? Also, where is your rapture in Revelation? Until you provide that we can only conclude that you know what we know: it is a false man-made Jesuit doctrine.

Sorry to hear about your surgery. I trust you heal quick.

 

[WPM]

And once again you refuse to accept the fact that paruosia means a presence. It can mean a physical presence soemwhere or a proximate depending on context. You are just way to rigid with words that in the greek have flexibility

Hello! Then, contrary to what you have previously said, you do believe in 2 future physical comings of Christ.

 

[Timtofly]

Rev 20 shows us the result of His conquering of the grave. It shows us the subjection of the enemy through His victorious work.

You don't even accept Jesus is on the earth in this chapter. I agree that Revelation 20 is a triumphant work. 1,000 years of a subdued earth that will be presented to God per Paul in 1 Corinthians 15. You don't agree on the length, nor that Christ is on earth.

 

[WPM]

You don't even accept Jesus is on the earth in this chapter. I agree that Revelation 20 is a triumphant work. 1,000 years of a subdued earth that will be presented to God per Paul in 1 Corinthians 15. You don't agree on the length, nor that Christ is on earth.

Where is Rev 20 does it show Christ on earth for 1000 years?

 

[Timtofly]

Where is Rev 20 does it show Christ on earth for 1000 years?

Where in Revelation 20 does it say Jesus resurrected from the grave? Is the grave He resurrected from on earth? The question should be, "Where does it say He left earth, after coming to the earth in Revelation 20?"

Your own argument has Jesus on the earth, resurrected. You just assume He left earth. I don't have to assume Jesus left earth, after the Second Coming.

 

[WPM]

Where in Revelation 20 does it say Jesus resurrected from the grave? Is the grave He resurrected from on earth? The question should be, "Where does it say He left earth, after coning to the earth in Revelation 20?"

Your own argument has Jesus on the earth, resurrected. You just assume He left earth. I don't have to assume Jesus left earth, after the Second Coming.

LOL. You are the one claiming that. Hello! The burden of proof is with you. Obviously you are forcing that into the text where it does not belong, like you do with a multitude of other things.

 

[David in NJ]

Wrong. I never claimed the first resurrection is future. Lazarus was given a first resurrection and called out of his grave to eternal life. Firstfruits is a plural word. Jesus was the firstfruits plural, meaning all the OT redeemed were removed from Abraham's bosom a first resurrection, which is physical, not chronological. You have been led to believe one resurrection singular (at the end of time), but the first resurrection is a type of resurrection, not a chronological resurrection in some order of happening. Paul claims an order to this redemption, but does not call everyone a resurrection. It is the redemption out of Adam's dead corruptible flesh, which is a physical change, not just spiritual. The order is when Jesus presents the firstfruits. Matthew 27:51-53 declares a first resurrection that is physical. Because those are the firstfruits of the resurrection of and in Christ. The veil of the temple was torn, and Abraham's bosom was emptied at the same moment of time, when Jesus declared the Atonement was finished. The redeemed would no longer experience the taste of death. The sacrifice of animals had come to an end. Now, one could enter the Holy of Holies on an individual basis.

The Cross was Jesus presenting the OT redeemed firstfruits. The Second Coming is the glorification of the church presented to God. At the end of the Millennium Christ, will present all of creation without spot or blemish. I don't deny the resurrection like Amil declare it. It is more than what you make it out to be. You place a limit on the resurrection and the life, not me. I use all the same Scripture that you use. John 3 gives us the physical and spiritual application of birth and death. A resurrection is out of death, and physical death to be exact. A new birth is to be placed spiritually into the family of God. This is the second birth, so a type of birth, not a chronological order of events.

Lazarus was resurrected = he did not attain unto the First Resurrection that only occurs at His Second Coming.

Please read more carefully 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 and 1 Corinthians ch15

Peace

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Where in Revelation 20 does it say Jesus resurrected from the grave? Is the grave He resurrected from on earth? The question should be, "Where does it say He left earth, after coming to the earth in Revelation 20?"

Your own argument has Jesus on the earth, resurrected. You just assume He left earth. I don't have to assume Jesus left earth, after the Second Coming.

Don't get involved with this one. He said a doctrine is worldwide accepted and fundamental to Christian doctrine and cannot cite one source other than him saying so.