Another simple disproof of Amil: No more sea

[Spiritual Israelite]

In Zech 14, there is are living waters going out of Jerusalem, to become two rivers flowing into two different seas, one of which is the Dead Sea to be healed in Ezek 47:

And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.

Some teach that these living waters are the river of water of life on the new earth:

And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.

In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

That pure river does not go out of Jerusalem, nor from Jerusalem, but only from the throne of God and the Lamb onto the street of the New Jerusalem.

And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

There is no sea on the new earth, especially not two seas, where one of them is 'recreated' dead, and in need of healing from living waters.

The river of water of life on the new earth, cannot possibly be the living waters during Christ's earthly reign, that go out of Jeruslaem and flow into two seas.

There is always one or two Scriptures, that plainly expose all false doctrine, so that those Scriptures are plainly contradicted while teaching them.

I've often wondered why there is no sea on the new earth, and for now we at least sea one reason: God will have no sea on the new earth, nor any waters flowing out of New Jerusalem, just to make sure no one can teach the lie, that He will not being ruling on this earth for a thousand years.

The living waters of Zech 14 and Ezek 47 during Christ's earthly reign, are but a foreshadowing of the river of water of life in the street of New Jerusalem on the new earth.

That has no sea, nor seas, and especially not any dead sea in need of healing.

False doctrine results from not being able to differentiate between literal and figurative text. That is your problem. Why you would assume that any given text contained within highly symbolic books like Zechariah and Ezekiel are literal is beyond me.

When determining what the living waters are about, why would you not take a passage like the following into account?

John 7:37 On the last and greatest day of the festival, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice, “Let anyone who is thirsty come to me and drink. 38 Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them.” 39 By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified.

By believing that passages like Zechariah 14 and Ezekiel 47 will be fulfilled literally in the future requires you to believe that animal sacrifices will be reinstated in the future since both passages talk about animal sacrifices and things related to that (such as the reference to observing the feast of tabernacles in Zechariah 14).

Why would any Christian be comfortable with believing in the reinstating of animal sacrifices in light of the fact that Christ made His "once for all" sacrifice long ago which ended the need for the old covenant animal sacrifices? Can't you see that it's an insult to what Christ already accomplished long ago to believe that animal sacrifices will one day be reinstated?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Spiritualizing Scripture is not the problem, but rather the problem is denying the physical fulfillment of prophecy, while doing so.

Spiritualizing the Scripture, in order to disannul it's physical fulfillment, is purposeful false interpretation of prophecy of Scripture.

You're definitely not getting these ideas from scripture itself.

1 Corinthians 2:7 No, we declare God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. 8 None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9 However, as it is written: “What no eye has seen, what no ear has heard, and what no human mind has conceived” the things God has prepared for those who love him—10 these are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit. The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. 11 For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 12 What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us. 13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words.14 The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.

It seems to me that Paul did not share your perspective.

Acts 1:8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”

Tell me, did this prophecy of Jesus have a physical fulfillment? Did the Holy Spirit physically come upon the disciples to give them physical power or did He come to spiritually dwell in them while giving them spiritual power?

 

[robert derrick]

I don't have to have assumptions, God's Word like Isaiah 11, and Isaiah 65 & 66 make it plain what kind of existence that future new heavens and a new earth will be like. We will build houses and plant vineyards it says. And the wolf shall dwell with the lamb.

So I don't need your STUPID FALSE ACCUSATIONS of what you THINK... I believe, and what YOU THINK I don't believe! In order to have an intelligent Christian conversation with someone, they need to have studied their Bible about the matters they speak of first, but you obviously like to speak out on a Bible matter before you've studied it!

Oh boy. Now is touchy time.

Debate has descended into schoolyard fighting.

That's when adult disagreement is over for me.

Some people just cannot stand to be disagreed with.

 

[robert derrick]

You shouldn't have to ask. The word is in the dictionary.

They should mean something to you. They constitute the literal interpretation of "thy seed" of Genesis 3:15. Don't you believe the literal interpretation?

The part about biting and smiting yes, not about whacking little baby snakes on the head.

Nor is sin imputed to me, if one of the little buggars bites my heel.

While that serpent at the garden was a real beast on earth, the prophesied seed warfare is spiritual, not carnal with natural flesh.

For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:

(For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds)

Jesus was smitten bodily by man, but never by the devil who tempted Him to sin like man.

When He rose again from the grave, He smote Satan from his place in heaven. He did not step on the head of any snakelets.

 

[covenantee]

the prophesied seed warfare is spiritual, not carnal with natural flesh.

You are absolutely correct.

So in deciding if Genesis 3:15 is a spiritual or a literal prophecy, what would you say?

The answer is self-evident.

 

[Davy]

Oh boy. Now is touchy time.

Debate has descended into schoolyard fighting.

That's when adult disagreement is over for me.

Some people just cannot stand to be disagreed with.

No idiotic excuses like you are just disagreeing with me either, when you are actually DENYING WRITTEN SCRIPTURE THAT IS EASY TO UNDERSTAND.

You're just another that cannot be taught anything. Welcome to my IGNORE LIST.

 

[robert derrick]

False doctrine results from not being able to differentiate between literal and figurative text. That is your problem. Why you would assume that any given text contained within highly symbolic books like Zechariah and Ezekiel are literal is beyond me.

Not any, but only all.

Once again, you continue the childish game of implying, that those who do not over-symbolize like you, are against symbols at all.

When determining what the living waters are about, why would you not take a passage like the following into account?

John 7:37 On the last and greatest day of the festival, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice, “Let anyone who is thirsty come to me and drink. 38 Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them.” 39 By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified.

Once again, acting like I don't understand spiritual things now happening on earth, just because I reject your over spiritualizing of other things that will happen on earth.

By believing that passages like Zechariah 14 and Ezekiel 47 will be fulfilled literally in the future requires you to believe that animal sacrifices will be reinstated in the future since both passages talk about animal sacrifices and things related to that (such as the reference to observing the feast of tabernacles in Zechariah 14).

True.

Why would any Christian be comfortable with believing in the reinstating of animal sacrifices in light of the fact that Christ made His "once for all" sacrifice long ago which ended the need for the old covenant animal sacrifices? Can't you see that it's an insult to what Christ already accomplished long ago to believe that animal sacrifices will one day be reinstated?

Tell the Lord that, who will fulfill His land and natural priesthood promises to natural Israel, after He sits on the throne of David in jerusalem, and roars out of Zion, for all nations to now come and keep the feast of tabernacles yearly with Himself.

Once again, you try to answer if, based upon your own refusal of why.

We find out if first, then if we are confused about it, we ask why.

You personal opinion and desires about the things of the Lord, matters not to Him nor to me.

 

[robert derrick]

Tell me, did this prophecy of Jesus have a physical fulfillment? Did the Holy Spirit physically come upon the disciples to give them physical power or did He come to spiritually dwell in them while giving them spiritual power?

There were cloven flames of fire upon their heads in the upper room.

There weren't when they came outside speaking in tongues, for all to heart, and preaching the gospel of jesus Christ.

 

[WPM]

In Zech 14, there is are living waters going out of Jerusalem, to become two rivers flowing into two different seas, one of which is the Dead Sea to be healed in Ezek 47:

And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.

Some teach that these living waters are the river of water of life on the new earth:

And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.

In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

That pure river does not go out of Jerusalem, nor from Jerusalem, but only from the throne of God and the Lamb onto the street of the New Jerusalem.

And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

There is no sea on the new earth, especially not two seas, where one of them is 'recreated' dead, and in need of healing from living waters.

The river of water of life on the new earth, cannot possibly be the living waters during Christ's earthly reign, that go out of Jeruslaem and flow into two seas.

There is always one or two Scriptures, that plainly expose all false doctrine, so that those Scriptures are plainly contradicted while teaching them.

I've often wondered why there is no sea on the new earth, and for now we at least sea one reason: God will have no sea on the new earth, nor any waters flowing out of New Jerusalem, just to make sure no one can teach the lie, that He will not being ruling on this earth for a thousand years.

The living waters of Zech 14 and Ezek 47 during Christ's earthly reign, are but a foreshadowing of the river of water of life in the street of New Jerusalem on the new earth.

That has no sea, nor seas, and especially not any dead sea in need of healing.

It is becoming clearer by the moment that the issue is not any weakness in the Amil position but an ignorance on your part of what Amils believe. I would suggest you read up on Amil before inputting foreign beliefs upon that truth. The only thing you are exposing is your ignorance.

Amils believe Zechariah 14 relates to the intra-Advent period and Ezekiel 40-47 to the OT period. So why would Amil contradict Rev 21-22? It doesn't.

 

[WPM]

In Zech 14, there is are living waters going out of Jerusalem, to become two rivers flowing into two different seas, one of which is the Dead Sea to be healed in Ezek 47:

And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.

Some teach that these living waters are the river of water of life on the new earth:

And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.

In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

That pure river does not go out of Jerusalem, nor from Jerusalem, but only from the throne of God and the Lamb onto the street of the New Jerusalem.

And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

There is no sea on the new earth, especially not two seas, where one of them is 'recreated' dead, and in need of healing from living waters.

The river of water of life on the new earth, cannot possibly be the living waters during Christ's earthly reign, that go out of Jeruslaem and flow into two seas.

There is always one or two Scriptures, that plainly expose all false doctrine, so that those Scriptures are plainly contradicted while teaching them.

I've often wondered why there is no sea on the new earth, and for now we at least sea one reason: God will have no sea on the new earth, nor any waters flowing out of New Jerusalem, just to make sure no one can teach the lie, that He will not being ruling on this earth for a thousand years.

The living waters of Zech 14 and Ezek 47 during Christ's earthly reign, are but a foreshadowing of the river of water of life in the street of New Jerusalem on the new earth.

That has no sea, nor seas, and especially not any dead sea in need of healing.

It is becoming clearer by the moment that the issue is not any weakness in the Amil position but an ignorance on your part of what Amils believe. I would suggest you read up on Amil before inputing foreign beliefs upon that truth. The only thing you are exposing is your ignorance.

Amils believe Zechariah 14 relates to the intra-Advent period and Ezekiel 40-47 to the OT period. So why would Amil contradict Rev 21-22? It doesn't

 

[robert derrick]

It is becoming clearer by the moment that the issue is not any weakness in the Amil position but an ignorance on your part of what Amils believe.
I would suggest you read up on Amil before inputting foreign beliefs upon that truth.

Are you saying you're not an accurate teacher of your own doctrine? Unless you are, then I have plenty enough here to know what you teach.

The only thing you are exposing is your ignorance.

My ignorance about your doctrine is getting less and less by the day.

In fact, I only respond to your doctrine, when it's something new.

This way I avoid endless meaningless debates with anyone.

Amils believe Zechariah 14 relates to the intra-Advent period and

Such as here. This is new.

What is intra-Advent?

Ezekiel 40-47 to the OT period.

The temple measured there, was not built by the returning Jews.

Nor did the glory of the Lord come into that house, as in the tabernacle of the wilderness, and the temple of Solomon.

That temple will be built after His standing on Olivet, not before. The prophet of God wrote it's measurements, and it will be the people of God to build it.

No temple built by hands of unbelieving and wicked men, will ever be called by God, His temple on this earth, nor will He ever enter it with His glory.

He didn't with the Jews in Nehemiah's day, and He certainly won't with the unbelieving Jews in their own day.

The last great antichrist beast no doubt would, but not the Lord.

Any such temple built for that beast to sit in as God, will be destroyed during the Lord and His saints cleansing of Jerusalem.

 

[WPM]

Are you saying you're not an accurate teacher of your own doctrine? Unless you are, then I have plenty enough here to know what you teach.



My ignorance about your doctrine is getting less and less by the day.

In fact, I only respond to your doctrine, when it's something new.

This way I avoid endless meaningless debates with anyone.

Ok then, why do you not quote what Amils really believe? That would be fair and objective. But no, you present an invention of your own imagination which in fact is a Premil belief, and then attack Amil for believing that. That is ridiculous by any standard.

This reinforces how water-tight Amil is. You have nothing on that belief so you have to invent false beliefs to attack.

 

[robert derrick]

Ok then, why do you not quote what Amils really believe? That would be fair and objective. But no, you present an invention of your own imagination which in fact is a Premil belief, and then attack Amil for believing that. That is ridiculous by any standard.

This reinforces how water-tight Amil is. You have nothing on that belief so you have to invent false beliefs to attack.

You believe that the only reign of Christ on earth, is currently spiritual through His body of saints.

You do not believe that He will appear again on earth, to reign with His resurrected saints over all the earth.

You believe His coming again will only be to recieve His church unto Himself, and then will devour all flesh left on earth, by fire of God from heaven.

You also believe there is only one resurrection of the dead, when all the dead will be judged at that time, to be either found written in the Lamb's book of life, or cast into the LOF.

Simple.

And other than the first part of Christ's current spiritual reign on earth, in the lives of His saints, all the rest is simply wrong.

 

[jeffweeder]

You believe that the only reign of Christ on earth, is currently spiritual through His body of saints.

You do not believe that He will appear again on earth, to reign with His resurrected saints over all the earth.

You believe His coming again will only be to recieve His church unto Himself, and then will devour all flesh left on earth, by fire of God from heaven.

You also believe there is only one resurrection of the dead, when all the dead will be judged at that time, to be either found written in the Lamb's book of life, or cast into the LOF.

Simple.

And other than the first part of Christ's current spiritual reign on earth, in the lives of His saints, all the rest is simply wrong.

Correct Robert. We have provided multiple clear and explicit scriptural reasons for believing so.
The last 5 words of your post you need to provide clear scripture on why we are wrong to use the scriptures we do .

 

[WPM]

You believe that the only reign of Christ on earth, is currently spiritual through His body of saints.

You do not believe that He will appear again on earth, to reign with His resurrected saints over all the earth.

You believe His coming again will only be to recieve His church unto Himself, and then will devour all flesh left on earth, by fire of God from heaven.

You also believe there is only one resurrection of the dead, when all the dead will be judged at that time, to be either found written in the Lamb's book of life, or cast into the LOF.

Simple.

And other than the first part of Christ's current spiritual reign on earth, in the lives of His saints, all the rest is simply wrong.

Partially right. We believe Christ is coming back to reign on a glorified earth with glorified saints. There will be no bondage of corruption as blights the Premil future earth and no wicked to overrun the new earth as in Premil version.

 

[ewq1938]

Correct Robert. We have provided multiple clear and explicit scriptural reasons for believing so.
The last 5 words of your post you need to provide clear scripture on why we are wrong to use the scriptures we do .

Pick one and we will show you. Robert is correct that all the things listed as Amill beliefs are not scripturally supported.

 

[jeffweeder]

Pick one and we will show you. Robert is correct that all the things listed as Amill beliefs are not scripturally supported.

Why not address all of those scriptures alluded to in post 33?....with scripture.

 

[ewq1938]

Why not address all of those scriptures alluded to in post 33?....with scripture.

Read my last post.

 

[robert derrick]

Correct Robert. We have provided multiple clear and explicit scriptural reasons for believing so.
The last 5 words of your post you need to provide clear scripture on why we are wrong to use the scriptures we do .

Already have. One of which includes the thread you're on.

But since you symbolize anything you want, there's no point in it.

I argue what Scripture says, and you are argue it's only symbol, os that it doesn't really say it.

 

[robert derrick]

Partially right. We believe Christ is coming back to reign on a glorified earth with glorified saints. There will be no bondage of corruption as blights the Premil future earth and no wicked to overrun the new earth as in Premil version.

The only difference between the new earth and old earth, is the new earth has no more sea, New Jerusalem will be on the new earth, in which God and the Lamb will dwell with men.

Which is why the Lord reigning over them left of the slaughter at Armageddon cannot be the new earth, since the living waters running down from Jeruslaem flow into two seas, one of which the Dead Sea's waters will be healed.

There is no sea at all on the new earth.