The founding fathers of modern-day Premillennialism were heretics.

[WPM]

Ok I waited roughly 1 hr, no new post

I fully agree "This Generation" is a "Future" generation that will witness the second coming, they will also witness "All These Things" including Daniel's AOD and The Great Tribulation

4th Response And Still Not Answering My Claim, "Once Again In Bold Red"

Matthew 24:15 Daniel's AOD causes those to flee, and this causes Matthew 24:21 in the Great Tribulation that Paul believes was fulfilled in 66-70AD?

Paul you can't have a 66-70AD AOD and Great Tribulation, with Jesus returning immediately after a tribulation in 66-70AD when Matthew 24:29-30 is "Future" in the literal, visible, second coming of Jesus in the clouds of heaven being a "Future Event" unfulfilled?

"This Generation Shall Not Pass, Till All These Things Be Fulfilled"

Future Events Unfulfilled!

1.) Paul Matthew 24:15 is Daniel's Abomination of Desolation

2.) Paul Matthew 24:21 is the Great Tribulation

3.) Paul Matthew 24:29-30 Is the literal, visible, second coming of Jesus Christ in the clouds of heaven

They Shall See, Not You Shall See, A Future Generation That Will Witness The Literal, Visible, Second Coming

Matthew 24:29-30KJV
29 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:
30 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.

Paul the generation below is a "Future" generation that will be eye witnesses of (1. Daniel's AOD), the (2. Great Tribulation) and the literal, visible (3. Second Coming) of Jesus in the clouds of heaven, these events are future unfulfilled

Matthew 24:32-34KJV
32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:
33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

I refuted all your false Pretrib claims in 4 detailed posts. You have no viable answer to any of them. They forbid this teaching.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

This is the simplistic early overview of modern day Premilennialism. It is what they teach and preach. Little do many know, but, the ancient source of their teaching is the ancient Judaizing heretics. The cross does not seem satisfactory, efficacious and final enough for this founder of early Premillennialist. He wrongly and strongly promoted the full reinstitution of the redundant old covenant arrangement with its multiple additional sin offerings to atone for the sins of man in the future. The “sacrifices and Jewish solemnities” endorsed to arise in a future millennium refers to the full gamut of the Old Testament Mosaic sacrifice system. Cerinthus is the first promoter of a thousand years of blood-letting surrounding the abolished old covenant feasts and festivals.

I could care less what Cerinthius thought of the cross. His heresies are far less than Augustine who is the father of modern allegorical reinterpretation. Teh Catholics perfected it and passed it on to many protestant sects.

Well you can lie all you want about the founding of premillenialism, but we find it to be thoroughly rooted in a literal/historical/grammatical understanding of Scripture.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Listen to Tertullian, a well-known Chiliast, of Carthage, Africa, (now Tunisia), (160 – 220 AD) in Against Marcion Book III, Chapter XXI:

So you cannot get out of this notion of yours a basis for your difference between the two Christs, as if the Jewish Christ were ordained by the Creator for the restoration of the people alone from its dispersion, whilst yours was appointed by the supremely good God for the liberation of the whole human race. Because, after all, the earliest Christians are found on the side of the Creator, not of Marcion, all nations being called to His kingdom, from the fact that God set up that kingdom from the tree (of the cross).
Here you have the seeds of modern-day Premillennialism. To Marcion, the whole idea of the “restoration” of the “Jewish … people” to their land involved the full return of the old covenant scheme, something rejected by early Chiliasts but anticipated on the millennial earth by most Premils today. Marcion also believed that there were two peoples of God, a doctrine unknown to ancient Chiliasm, but prevalent with Dispensationalism today. He made a clear distinction between Israel and the Church, although this arch heretic imagined two different God’s and two different Messiahs overseeing each company.

Once again you should read premillenialists and not the vomit of your teachers about where and what the seeds of premillenialism are. Having gone to a dispensational bible college, having studied under the greats of dispensational theology, having studied so many different views of eschatology and having taught esachatology on a college, insititute and church level for over 30 years, I can confidently say you have been lied to about our roots.

 

[WPM]

The early8 church believed jesus was the only sacrifice that removed sin. They understood the OT sacrifices covered- not removed sin.

Can you support this by actual quotes? Or is this the usual pre-millennial habit of winging it?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

More avoidance. That sums up your engagement.

Is your real name cleopatra? for you truly are teh Queen of Denial!

 

[WPM]

I could care less what Cerinthius thought of the cross. His heresies are far less than Augustine who is the father of modern allegorical reinterpretation. Teh Catholics perfected it and passed it on to many protestant sects.

Well you can lie all you want about the founding of premillenialism, but we find it to be thoroughly rooted in a literal/historical/grammatical understanding of Scripture.

Not so. The only supporters you have for your teaching is the early heretics. Victorinus, was the first orthodox quasi Premillennialist who taught it 240 years after the cross. But he did not teach the rebuilding of temple and the restoration of blood sacrifice for sin. No others taught the populating of the millennium with the wicked and the release of Satan 1,000 years after the second coming. This is in stark contrast to modern-day Premillennialism. Victorinus is the first Chiliast to suggest that a significant amount of mortals would survive the return of Christ and then enter in to populate a future millennium.

 

[WPM]

Is your real name cleopatra? for you truly are teh Queen of Denial!

Premils have a lovely way with words. Ad hominem is all they have.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

You reject the supporting corroboration because it exposes Premil. Christ is the first resurrection. Revelation 20:6 simply says, “Blessed and holy is he ‘that hath part’ (present active particle) in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power.”

The Greek word for "first" (as in first resurrection) is protos. It is a contracted superlative meaning foremost (in time, place, order and/or importance). So which is the "first" (or protos) resurrection - Christ's or the resurrection that occurs at the second coming? This is a pretty simply question.

Which is the foremost resurrection in time?
Which is the foremost resurrection in place?
Which is the foremost resurrection in order?
Which is the foremost resurrection in importance?

Christ's resurrection is the "first" or foremost resurrection in time.
Christ's resurrection is the "first" or foremost resurrection in place.
Christ's resurrection is the "first" or foremost resurrection in order.
Christ's resurrection is the "first" or foremost resurrection in importance.

Many overlook the phrase "hath part." Whatever that refers to will seal this debate. The unfortunate thing for Premils is that it is present tense. So whatever resurrection it is speaking of, believers currently have their "part" in it. Whatever “the first resurrection” is, participation in it qualifies humans’ to escape the horrors of eternal punishment (the second death). In this experience Christians identify with Christ’s victorious resurrection.

The Greek for “that hath part” is echo méros. The Greek verb echo correctly interpreted “that hath” in the King James Version is written in the present tense and in the active voice. Therefore, we can view the relevance and vitality of “the first resurrection” as being both current and ongoing. Christ’s victory over death is not simply a past event that has no active bearing upon what we are today; it is ongoing reality in the lives of God’s people. The Greek word translated “part” in the text is the word meros meaning share, allotment or portion. This reading tells us that all those that have come to the joy of saving faith in Christ have become partakers in the resurrection life, and through this will escape the horrors of the second death – eternal wrath.

This passage is describing the reality and result of our mystical union with Christ. The expression “in Christ” [Gr. en Christo] is found 216 times in the New Testament and refers to our federal and covenantal standing. It shows us that our spiritual status is totally derived from and dependent upon relationship with Christ. Upon salvation we are united to Christ. He is the head we are the body. The blessing, decisions and authority come through the head.

This matter is absolutely crucial to understanding Revelation 20 and conclusively damning for the Premil doctrine. That is why Premils duck round it.

When we get saved we become one with Jesus Christ spiritually. We identify with Christ and the victory He won over sin, death and the grave. As He died, was buried and conquered death, we also have our “part” in His success.

This is supported by Revelation 2:11, which similarly says: “He that overcometh (present active particle) shall not be hurt of the second
death.”

The word “overcometh” here is actually written in the present active particle meaning it relates to the here-and-now. It is an experience that is realized in life. When you have "eth" in the KJV it means it is a present reality.

All this bloviating and you are still wrong! You are so used to reinterpreting Scripture you no longer can see the forest for teh trees!

The first resurrection of REv. 20 is mens resurrections. there are two- the first in verse 6 and then teh second in 13! If you learned to keep things in their context you would not err so greatly. This "protos anastasis" is not the very first resurrection ever! It is the first in th e context it was written in. C'mon man have you forgotten how to read passages in context??

 

[WPM]

Once again you should read premillenialists and not the vomit of your teachers about where and what the seeds of premillenialism are. Having gone to a dispensational bible college, having studied under the greats of dispensational theology, having studied so many different views of eschatology and having taught esachatology on a college, insititute and church level for over 30 years, I can confidently say you have been lied to about our roots.

I honestly do not care whether you are the pope or not. Your boasting of your credentials is nothing else but pride, and is an admission you have lost the debate. Who cares! Dispensatanism is wrong. Your theology is grossly in error. The bottom line is, you have no answers to the truth. All you do is attack those who oppose you and avoid the inspired text.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Can you support this by actual quotes? Or is this the usual pre-millennial habit of winging it?

How about the book of Hebrews? How about half the epistles of Paul! Jesus became our sin so we would become His righteousness.

Heb. 10: 4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

Revelation 1:5
5 and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood,

I hope you believe that jesus blood wiped away our sin debt.

 

[WPM]

All this bloviating and you are still wrong! You are so used to reinterpreting Scripture you no longer can see the forest for teh trees!

The first resurrection of REv. 20 is mens resurrections. there are two- the first in verse 6 and then teh second in 13! If you learned to keep things in their context you would not err so greatly. This "protos anastasis" is not the very first resurrection ever! It is the first in th e context it was written in. C'mon man have you forgotten how to read passages in context??

There cannot be 2 first resurrections. That is absurd. That is classic Premil. It doesn't make sense. You have to let Scripture interpret Scripture. If you did, you would quickly abandon Premil. It has zero corroboration.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I refuted all your false Pretrib claims in 4 detailed posts. You have no viable answer to any of them. They forbid this teaching.

No! all you did is continue with your obsession with the early church fathers writings as if they are the Scriptures. But they are not any more than the modern church fathers writings are scripture!

I spent my time with Spiritual Israelite giving her loads of Scripture.

All you have done and SI is give philosop0hical opinions of why the 1,000 years is not 1,000 years.

 

[WPM]

Is your real name cleopatra? for you truly are teh Queen of Denial!

Did they teach you to engage like this at your dispensatanism bible college?

 

[WPM]

No! all you did is continue with your obsession with the early church fathers writings as if they are the Scriptures. But they are not any more than the modern church fathers writings are scripture!

I spent my time with Spiritual Israelite giving her loads of Scripture.

All you have done and SI is give philosop0hical opinions of why the 1,000 years is not 1,000 years.

Spiritual Israelite totally demolished your thesis. Are you trying to rewrite history? This is fake news. Your MO is to avoid the issues because you have no biblical rebuttal. This is all Premils can do. They have nothing of biblical value to bring to the table.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I honestly do not care whether you are the pope or not. Your boasting of your credentials is nothing else but pride, and is an admission you have lost the debate. Who cares! Dispensatanism is wrong. Your theology is grossly in error. The bottom line is, you have no answers to the truth. All you do is avoid the inspired text. You repeat what you have been taught. Your ignorance of truth is palpable.

Wow. I should bow out and let you debate yourself! You pretend you know what I think and feel. But as with all others here who subtly practice divination- you SUCK AT IT!!!!!

And you repeat what you have been learned in! No one- upon reading the book of revelation would come up with yopurs, Spiritual Israelite or even worse, coveanatees reinterpretation of REv. 20. It takes open manipulation of the Word of God to come up with the New Scriptures you guys are writing.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Did they teach you to engage like this at your dispensatanism bible college?

Well I followed Prov. 20:4 at first, now I am following Prov. 20:5.

 

[WPM]

How about the book of Hebrews? How about half the epistles of Paul! Jesus became our sin so we would become His righteousness.

Heb. 10: 4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

Revelation 1:5
5 and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood,

I hope you believe that jesus blood wiped away our sin debt.

Where we not talking about the ECFs?

 

[WPM]

Wow. I should bow out and let you debate yourself! You pretend you know what I think and feel. But as with all others here who subtly practice divination- you SUCK AT IT!!!!!

And you repeat what you have been learned in! No one- upon reading the book of revelation would come up with yopurs, Spiritual Israelite or even worse, coveanatees reinterpretation of REv. 20. It takes open manipulation of the Word of God to come up with the New Scriptures you guys are writing.

Why are Premils so venomous?

Why not admit: your theology was invented by the heretics? I have presented the evidence. As usual, you avoided the facts. You then turn to ad hominem to support your argument. This is all Premils can do. History is damning on your doctrine. Why was there none of the ECFs teaching it until AD270? Hello!!!

 

[Ronald Nolette]

LOL. Spiritual Israelite totally demolished your thesis. Are you trying to rewrite history? This is fake news. Your MO is to avoid the issues because you have no biblical rebuttal. This is all Premils can do. They have nothing of biblical value to bring to the table.

You are cleopatra! I gave SI around 60 verses in just 2 posts! which is just part of what I will write to them if they ask! I have posted far more scriptures than you or them as for covanentee, they left the scriptures to go into JW like reinterpretations.

Not oneof you three like th eword of God as INpsaired and have rewritten it according to the RC agenda popularized in the fourth century.

YOu should recheck your posts and see you have a fixation on teh ECF's instead of Scripture. I have read teh 30 volume ante nicen fathers and other early church history book. And I know the rampant heresies that ran in the seocnd, third and fourth centuries The church was chaotic, dispersed, in hiding for most of the time and were open to the Grecian philosophy onslaught, Gther roman pagan onslaught and with teh vast number of gentiles coming in ,the many false teachers (allegorists) Paul warned about.

Simple fact is you are hung up in the writings of others, while I have spent most of myh time quoiting the Scriptures and then having to listen to you and others tryhing to rationalize that whjat God inspired is not what He meant! The hiding behind there are symbols in the Bible to give you license to to what Peter warned about in 2 Peter 3:16.

all you want is to tell people God actually spoke in a code of code and that they need you and others like you to tell them the truth of the Bible. Which is exactly opposite of what Paul taught.

No one in reading the Scriptures prayefully without som ete4xt of an allegorical heretic would come to eh eschatological understandning you do.


But even worse to deny Jesus is returning to earth in the flesh is what John said is the Spirit of Antichrist.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Where we not talking about the ECFs?

YOu were, I wasn't! I was talkin g Scripture with SI .

JOhn said 1,000 years.

JOhn said the first resurrection is those who had not received th e mark and were beheaded. they live and reign with jesus. You say that teh first resurrection in REv. 20 refers to jesus! So Jesus was beheaded for not taking the mark and Jesus will live and reign with Jesus for this ephemeral time frame (according to you) Sounds ot me like you have 2 Jesus'