More biblical proof that supports Amillennialism

[Timtofly]

Does he or do you understand why God required animal sacrifices?

In type.

 

[covenantee]

Must have been the online spirits???

You'll be hearing from the online admin spirit.

 

[covenantee]

In type.

Exodus 29:36
And thou shalt offer every day a bullock for a sin offering for atonement: and thou shalt cleanse the altar, when thou hast made an atonement for it, and thou shalt anoint it, to sanctify it.

Was that a real live bullock and actual atonement?

Or just your premil avoidance imagination in type.

 

[covenantee]

Then you twisted my post and claimed the Cross happened twice.

Never did I claim that the Cross happened twice. That is another of your deliberate misrepresentations.

Or do you believe that the Lamb was slain before creation on a cross? You didn't tell us.

Rather, I used your illogic to show that the Lamb was slain twice. You claim that He was slain before creation. Ultimately He was also slain at Calvary.

Can you count to two?

Or don't you believe that He was slain at Calvary? If He was slain before creation, then there would have been no need for Him to be slain again.

Or don't you believe that there was a Calvary? Since Calvary is history, and futurists such as yourself must deny history, then perhaps that is your explanation. Regardless, if the Lamb had been slain before creation, there would have been no need for Calvary.

Or is it because Calvary, occurring as it did before 70 AD, complies with your definition of a preterist event, and all preterist events must be unconditionally and adamantly denied by futurists such as yourself?

Which is it?

Or is it something else?

 

[Rita]

Do not alter the words of other posters when you are adding quotes to your own posts.

 

[Carl Emerson]

The OT atonement was simply a temporal covering. The cross is an eternal covering.

Exactly and eternal is both eternal past and eternal future.

The Cross is a timeless event anchored in History.

The OT saints by faith are under the blood of Jesus as are all spiritual children of Abraham.

 

[Truth7t7]

Exactly and eternal is both eternal past and eternal future.

The Cross is a timeless event anchored in History.

The OT saints by faith are under the blood of Jesus as are all spiritual children of Abraham.

Hebrews 11:13-16KJV
13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.
14 For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.
15 And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned.
16 But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.

 

[rwb]

Did I say that no one was deceived? Was Eve a sinner prior to eating the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil when deceived by Satan?

Is being deceieved a sin, or disobedience to God?

That's the point! We find deception and sin in this age from creation, but in the age to come there shall be no deception, because there shall be no sin. Only two ages for human history, this age we are living in from the foundation of the world, and the glorious, perfect, sinless age to come when the Lord comes again.

 

[covenantee]

Exactly and eternal is both eternal past and eternal future.

The Cross is a timeless event anchored in History.

The OT saints by faith are under the blood of Jesus as are all spiritual children of Abraham.

Exodus 29:36
And thou shalt offer every day a bullock for a sin offering for atonement: and thou shalt cleanse the altar, when thou hast made an atonement for it, and thou shalt anoint it, to sanctify it.

Before the Cross, was that an actual bullock and actual atonement?

 

[Carl Emerson]

Exodus 29:36
And thou shalt offer every day a bullock for a sin offering for atonement: and thou shalt cleanse the altar, when thou hast made an atonement for it, and thou shalt anoint it, to sanctify it.

Before the Cross, was that an actual bullock and actual atonement?

Yes God required it to be done as a way of preparing mankind to understand the one true sacrifice when He arrived - an object lesson - like the blood on the doorposts - obedience honoured by God but not the ultimate atonement to come in Christs blood.

 

[covenantee]

Yes God required it to be done as a way of preparing mankind to understand the one true sacrifice when He arrived - an object lesson - like the blood on the doorposts - obedience honoured by God but not the ultimate atonement to come in Christs blood.

Of course they were not the One Ultimate Atonement. That goes without saying.

But they were nonetheless recurring actual atonements, until the One Ultimate Atonement.

Exodus 29:36 and numerous other OT Scriptures make this plain.

 

[Timtofly]

Exodus 29:36
And thou shalt offer every day a bullock for a sin offering for atonement: and thou shalt cleanse the altar, when thou hast made an atonement for it, and thou shalt anoint it, to sanctify it.

Was that a real live bullock and actual atonement?

Or just your premil avoidance imagination in type.

Was Jesus every single animal brought in the OT?

 

[Timtofly]

Never did I claim that the Cross happened twice. That is another of your deliberate misrepresentations.

Or do you believe that the Lamb was slain before creation on a cross? You didn't tell us.

Rather, I used your illogic to show that the Lamb was slain twice. You claim that He was slain before creation. Ultimately He was also slain at Calvary.

Can you count to two?

Or don't you believe that He was slain at Calvary? If He was slain before creation, then there would have been no need for Him to be slain again.

Or don't you believe that there was a Calvary? Since Calvary is history, and futurists such as yourself must deny history, then perhaps that is your explanation. Regardless, if the Lamb had been slain before creation, there would have been no need for Calvary.

Or is it because Calvary, occurring as it did before 70 AD, complies with your definition of a preterist event, and all preterist events must be unconditionally and adamantly denied by futurists such as yourself?

Which is it?

Or is it something else?

None of this post has anything to do with my post. This is all your imagination being speculative.

 

[Timtofly]

That's the point! We find deception and sin in this age from creation, but in the age to come there shall be no deception, because there shall be no sin. Only two ages for human history, this age we are living in from the foundation of the world, and the glorious, perfect, sinless age to come when the Lord comes again.

Deception is not sin. Sin is not deception. Two different words with different purposes. We are not talking about normal human laws like getting a speeding ticket. Driving on the wrong side of the road, which is dangerous because hitting an oncoming vehicle would cause a wreck. We are talking about disobedience to God. During the Millennium it will not be natural to disobey God. There will not be any sin. That is why there is a Day of the Lord after the Second Coming.

So the NT is the exact same way as the OT? Nothing changed after the Cross?

Then nothing will change after the Second Coming either, as all one age from Genesis 1 until Satan is loosed a thousand years after the Second Coming, in your nothing changes interpretation.

If the first coming of Jesus did not change anything, neither will the Second Coming.

You cannot move the Day of the Lord, just to prove that nothing has changed since Genesis 1. There was a major change when Adam disobeyed God. Sin entered the world and messed things up for all of humanity, not just Adam. There was a major change in 30AD. The veil of the temple was torn from top to bottom. God would work with individuals directly, not through a high priest.

It seems you see no differences in ages, as well as no distinct definition of the words: sin and deceived.

And you still have no answer to my question if Eve was a sinner before she was deceieved and before Adam disobeyed God when she claimed she was deceieved. Sin was not, since the foundation of the world. Sin was not part of creation, before Adam disobeyed God. Deception came first, not sin. Unless you claim Eve was not deceieved?

 

[WPM]

Deception is not sin. Sin is not deception. Two different words with different purposes. We are not talking about normal human laws like getting a speeding ticket. Driving on the wrong side of the road, which is dangerous because hitting an oncoming vehicle would cause a wreck. We are talking about disobedience to God. During the Millennium it will not be natural to disobey God. There will not be any sin. That is why there is a Day of the Lord after the Second Coming.

So the NT is the exact same way as the OT? Nothing changed after the Cross?

Then nothing will change after the Second Coming either, as all one age from Genesis 1 until Satan is loosed a thousand years after the Second Coming, in your nothing changes interpretation.

If the first coming of Jesus did not change anything, neither will the Second Coming.

You cannot move the Day of the Lord, just to prove that nothing has changed since Genesis 1. There was a major change when Adam disobeyed God. Sin entered the world and messed things up for all of humanity, not just Adam. There was a major change in 30AD. The veil of the temple was torn from top to bottom. God would work with individuals directly, not through a high priest.

It seems you see no differences in ages, as well as no distinct definition of the words: sin and deceived.

And you still have no answer to my question if Eve was a sinner before she was deceieved and before Adam disobeyed God when she claimed she was deceieved. Sin was not, since the foundation of the world. Sin was not part of creation, before Adam disobeyed God. Deception came first, not sin. Unless you claim Eve was not deceieved?

There is a difference between the deceiver and the deceived. Sin kicked in when Eve embraced the lie of the devil and then acted upon it. She then became a sinner. The same happens to your billions of religious phonies who do the same in your supposed future millennium. They listen Satan, embrace his lie and then yield to his instruction. Sadly, billions do this in Satan's little season. This blows apart your theology.

Deu 11:16 Take heed to yourselves, that your heart be not deceived, and ye turn aside, and serve other gods, and worship them;

 

[Timtofly]

There is a difference between the deceiver and the deceived. Sin kicked in when Eve embraced the lie of the devil and then acted upon it. She then became a sinner. The same happens to your billions of religious phonies who do the same in your supposed future millennium. They listen Satan, embrace his lie and then yield to his instruction. Sadly, billions do this in Satan's little season. This blows apart your theology.

Deu 11:16 Take heed to yourselves, that your heart be not deceived, and ye turn aside, and serve other gods, and worship them;

So you are going to just throw the verse in the trash, where Paul says:

"For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."

Now it should read as:

"For as in Eve all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."

Or this one:

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:"

You say it should read:

"Wherefore, as by one woman (Eve) sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:"

 

[WPM]

So you are going to just throw the verse in the trash, where Paul says:

"For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."

Now it should read as:

"For as in Eve all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."

Or this one:

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:"

You say it should read:

"Wherefore, as by one woman (Eve) sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:"

More avoidance. There is a difference between the deceiver and the deceived. Sin kicked in when Adam and Eve embraced the lie of the devil and then acted upon it. They then became sinners. The same happens to your billions of religious phonies who do the same in your supposed future millennium. They listen Satan, embrace his lie and then yield to his instruction. Sadly, billions do this in Satan's little season. This blows apart your theology.

Deu 11:16 Take heed to yourselves, that your heart be not deceived, and ye turn aside, and serve other gods, and worship them;

 

[Carl Emerson]

Of course they were not the One Ultimate Atonement. That goes without saying.

But they were nonetheless recurring actual atonements, until the One Ultimate Atonement.

Exodus 29:36 and numerous other OT Scriptures make this plain.

How does that align with...

Heb 10
4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

 

[rwb]

There was a major change when Adam disobeyed God. Sin entered the world and messed things up for all of humanity, not just Adam.

But earlier you said deception is not sin, and now you say Adam disobeyed God, and sin entered the world and messed things us. The way they committed sin and disobeyed God was in heeding the voice of deception. IOW being deceived caused sin to enter into creation, and death came through this sin of deception. Not only is the one who deceived committing sin, but also the one listening to the deceiver's voice, or receiving deception as though it is truth. It's nonsense to argue deception is not sin. Saying it is not, you are actually attempting to deceive people into believing a lie. How does that make your doctrine any different than that of the serpent?

 

[rwb]

Exactly and eternal is both eternal past and eternal future.

The Cross is a timeless event anchored in History.

The OT saints by faith are under the blood of Jesus as are all spiritual children of Abraham.

I agree the OT saints by grace through faith were covered by Christ's atoning blood, according to Covenant promise. They believed the prophesy preached of the Messiah who would come to cleanse them of sin and redeem them from death. It is in this way the Old Covenant faithful saints were saved, and why in Rev 6 they are seen under the altar, representing the place of the atonement through the Messiah who was to come. They could not ascend to heaven after they died in faith, before Christ physically came to give His life an atonement for sin and then sealed by the Holy Spirit. Because it is the Spirit that gives life, for the flesh profits nothing.

Revelation 6:9-11 (KJV) And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.

Revelation 7:3-4 (KJV) Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads. And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel.

After being sealed they joined the great innumerable multitude in heaven, which is confirmed when they are seen again with the Lamb on the heavenly Mt Sion.

Revelation 14:1 (KJV) And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads.

Hebrews 12:22 (KJV) But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,