Unlike Amillennialism, Premillennialism is based on assumptions and speculation rather than on any clear, straightforward scriptures

[Spiritual Israelite]

And now you accuse me of dishonesty. You're on a roll!

It has happened too many times. It's quite obvious that you would never say anything to another pre-trib about being dishonest with scripture even if you saw it happening. You won't even address another pre-trib turning temptation and testing into God's wrath. Is that how you interpret Revelation 3:10 as well or are you honest enough to acknowledge that temptation and testing are not the same thing as God's wrath?

And you keep digging in deeper, don't you see? I'm not playing your games.

I'm not playing games. I'm calling people out for their false doctrine and their dishonesty. If you want to think someone turning temptation and testing into God's wrath is an honest treatment of scripture, then that says something about you as well.

 

[Wish-it]

The foundation of the Premillennialism doctrine is based on some of the most highly debatable scriptures in the entire Bible and not on any clear, straightforward scriptures.

It seems that the two main pillars of Premillennialism are Revelation 20 and Zechariah 14. Any honest person will acknowledge that those are difficult passages to interpret.

Premills assume that what is described in Revelation 20 follows what is described in Revelation 19 chronologically. I believe that they manipulate the rest of the book and the rest of prophetic scripture to fit that assumption. I shouldn't have to convince anyone that the book of Revelation is not all chronological from beginning to end. Revelation 11 and 12 is the most obvious example where it is not written in chronological order. So, to make that assumption about Revelation 19 and 20 is not wise.

Not all Premills interpret Zechariah 14 the same way, but almost all of them use Zechariah 14 as one of their main support passages.

Interpreting Zechariah 14 as relating to a future thousand year earthly kingdom and interpreting it all literally, as many Premills do, creates contradictions with other scripture. These Premills believe in animal sacrifices being reinstated and taking place at a temple which currently does not even exist. This belief blatantly contradicts Hebrews 8-10 which teaches that Christ's once for all sacrifices made animal sacrifices obsolete forever. Animal sacrifices served the purpose of foreshadowing Christ's sacrifice (Hebrews 10:1) and that's it. These Premills typically also use Ezekiel 40-48 to support their view and some of them try to say the animal sacrifices would be done for the purpose of a memorial of Christ's sacrifice even though there is nothing written anywhere in scripture to support that theory. In Ezekiel 45:15-17 it very clearly talks about the animal sacrifices as being done as sin offerings for the atonement and reconciliation of sins. There is no longer any need for any animal sacrifices for that purpose because of Christ's sacrifice, so that can't possibly occur in the future.

Another problem with interpreting Zechariah 14 as relating to a future thousand year earthly millennial kingdom is that this means you believe that people will be required to go to Jerusalem to worship the Lord in the future despite Jesus saying long ago that people no longer had to go to worship God in Jerusalem, but instead were required to worship Him in spirit and in truth wherever they are (John 4:19-24). It makes no sense that God would no longer require that, but then require it again in the future. It makes just as little sense as thinking that animal sacrifices will be reinstated.

Some Premills try to say that the new heavens and new earth are ushered in at the beginning of the thousand years. That is a completely unsupportable position. When the new heavens and new earth are ushered in it will be a place "wherein dwelleth righteousness" (2 Peter 3:13) and where there will be no more sorrow, crying or pain (Revelation 21:4, Isaiah 65:19). And there will be no more death when the new heavens and earth are ushered in (Revelation 21:4). Some try to say there will be death in the new heavens and new earth because of what is written in Isaiah 65:20, but that contradicts what is written in Isaiah 65:19 and in Revelation 21:1-5. In Isaiah 65:19 it talks about no more weeping or crying at that point (just like Revelation 21:4), so to interpret Isaiah 65:20 as saying there would be death at that point would mean no one would cry after they experience extreme pain and no one would cry when a loved one dies and so on, which is obviously completely unreasonable.

So, Premillennialism is based on scriptures like I mentioned above that are highly debatable and are difficult to interpret. Premills often interpret those scriptures in such a way that contradicts other scriptures.

But, the question is, where are the clear, straightforward scriptures that support Premill? It seems that they are nowhere to be found. It makes for a very shaky doctrine when there are no clear scriptures to support it. It's based instead on assumptions, speculation and contradictions.

In the next post I will show how Amillennialism, unlike Premillennialism, is based on clear, straightforward scriptures.

I gather im a premill from your post. I see much of Rev being basically chronological and it certainly seems to fit my eschatology pretty well. Rev 11, 12 seem to possibly be inserted in a chronological order, tho may not be as they break away from the overall theme from Rev 6 to 16. I'd still consider them part of the same period of Rev 6 to 16.
Rev 12 inference of Satan plus getting thrown out of heaven, fits nicely with Dan 8.10 which recognizes the same event as Rev 12.4, 9, 10, 13.
Possibly the reason it appears confusing is because the Amill position doesn't fit as easily as to me the premill position does.

 

[Wish-it]

And now you accuse me of dishonesty. You're on a roll!

And you keep digging in deeper, don't you see? I'm not playing your games.

Much love!

Play nicely boys.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I gather im a premill from your post.

A premillennialist is someone who believes that the thousand years occurs after Jesus returns. That is what you believe, right?

I see much of Rev being basically chronological and it certainly seems to fit my eschatology pretty well.

I think that's a mistake to see it that way. I believe there are several parallel sections in the book that cover the New Testament time period up until the second coming of Christ and ushering in of the new heavens and new earth. It's typical of apocalyptic literature or text such as the books of Daniel and Revelation, to not all be in chronological order.

Rev 11, 12 seem to possibly be inserted in a chronological order, tho may not be as they break away from the overall theme from Rev 6 to 16. I'd still consider them part of the same period of Rev 6 to 16.

Not sure what you mean by this. Very clearly, Revelation 11 and 12 are not in chronological order. Revelation 11 ends with a description of the seventh trumpet and then early in Revelation 12 it refers to the birth and ascension of Christ.

Rev 12 inference of Satan plus getting thrown out of heaven, fits nicely with Dan 8.10 which recognizes the same event as Rev 12.4, 9, 10, 13.
Possibly the reason it appears confusing is because the Amill position doesn't fit as easily as to me the premill position does.

Satan was cast out of heaven long ago. Notice what it says in relation to that event...

Revelation 12:7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, 8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. 9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. 10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.

First, notice that at that time it says "Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ:". When did salvation and the kingdom of God first come in power? Long ago.

Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Clearly, salvation through the power of the gospel of Christ came long ago already, so how can anyone say that Revelatoin 12:10 is referring to a future event?

Another thing to notice is that it says "the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night". That implies that after being cast out he can no longer accuse believers before God in heaven anymore, right? Well, long ago Paul wrote this...

Romans 8:31 What, then, shall we say in response to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? 32 He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things? 33 Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. 34 Who then is the one who condemns? No one. Christ Jesus who died—more than that, who was raised to life—is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us.

Paul asks 3 questions in this passage. If God is for us, who can be against us? Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? Who then is the one who condemns? And the answer to all 3 questions is "No one". That includes Satan. No one, including Satan, can bring any charge/accusation against believers anymore because Satan has been cast out of heaven and he has nothing to accuse us of since our sins have been forgiven and covered by the blood of Christ.

 

[Wish-it]

A premillennialist is someone who believes that the thousand years occurs after Jesus returns. That is what you believe, right?


I think that's a mistake to see it that way. I believe there are several parallel sections in the book that cover the New Testament time period up until the second coming of Christ and ushering in of the new heavens and new earth. It's typical of apocalyptic literature or text such as the books of Daniel and Revelation, to not all be in chronological order.


Not sure what you mean by this. Very clearly, Revelation 11 and 12 are not in chronological order. Revelation 11 ends with a description of the seventh trumpet and then early in Revelation 12 it refers to the birth and ascension of Christ.


Satan was cast out of heaven long ago. Notice what it says in relation to that event...

Revelation 12:7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, 8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. 9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. 10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.

First, notice that at that time it says "Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ:". When did salvation and the kingdom of God first come in power? Long ago.

Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Clearly, salvation through the power of the gospel of Christ came long ago already, so how can anyone say that Revelatoin 12:10 is referring to a future event?

Another thing to notice is that it says "the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night". That implies that after being cast out he can no longer accuse believers before God in heaven anymore, right? Well, long ago Paul wrote this...

Romans 8:31 What, then, shall we say in response to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? 32 He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things? 33 Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. 34 Who then is the one who condemns? No one. Christ Jesus who died—more than that, who was raised to life—is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us.

Paul asks 3 questions in this passage. If God is for us, who can be against us? Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? Who then is the one who condemns? And the answer to all 3 questions is "No one". That includes Satan. No one, including Satan, can bring any charge/accusation against believers anymore because Satan has been cast out of heaven and he has nothing to accuse us of since our sins have been forgiven and covered by the blood of Christ.

Yep, believe in 1000 year reign.

 

[Wish-it]

I think that's a mistake to see it that way. I believe there are several parallel sections in the book that cover the New Testament time period up until the second coming of Christ and ushering in of the new heavens and new earth. It's typical of apocalyptic literature or text such as the books of Daniel and Revelation, to not all be in chronological order.

So id say Rev 21,22 are the very end
I'd say Rev 6-16, 17-20 follow it, which seems chronological tho maybe some overlap. Rev 12 fits into Revs timline not history to me and Dan 8.10 is an confirmstion of that, unless of course like many, they see Daniel as history, to there downfall imo.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Yep, believe in 1000 year reign.

Do you believe that Jesus is your King right now and that you are in His kingdom right now?

Colossians 1:12 and giving joyful thanks to the Father, who has qualified you to share in the inheritance of his holy people in the kingdom of light. 13 For he has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves,

 

[Wish-it]

Not sure what you mean by this. Very clearly, Revelation 11 and 12 are not in chronological order. Revelation 11 ends with a description of the seventh trumpet and then early in Revelation 12 it refers to the birth and ascension of Christ.

Id say they are pretty well in chronological order, the two witnesses would begin at the start of the second 3.5 years. Tho the last few verses 11-14 especially 13 may apply to the period in Rev 16.18.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Id say they are pretty well in chronological order, the two witnesses would begin at the start of the second 3.5 years. Tho the last few verses 11-14 especially 13 may apply to the period in Rev 16.18.

So, we obviously greatly disagree on the format of the book. That makes it difficult to have a reasonable discussion about it.

 

[Wish-it]

Do you believe that Jesus is your King right now and that you are in His kingdom right now?

Colossians 1:12 and giving joyful thanks to the Father, who has qualified you to share in the inheritance of his holy people in the kingdom of light. 13 For he has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves,

I'd put it a bit differently. He's our King, we are part of his kingdom on earth. But once Rev 16.15 happens, then Rev 19 we join Him, He and we will reign with Him for a 1000 years, after we tidy up a few matters in Rev 19.11-21. Then the 7th day arrives and we reign with Him.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I'd put it a bit differently. He's our King, we are part of his kingdom on earth.

This answered my question. So, you agree with me that He is our King now and we are part of His kingdom now on earth.

But once Rev 16.15 happens, then Rev 19 we join Him, He and we will reign with Him for a 1000 years, after we tidy up a few matters in Rev 19.11-21. Then the 7th day arrives and we reign with Him.

But, you acknowledge that we reign with Him now. We don't have to wait until He returns to reign with Him. Why would Revelation 20 not be about Him reigning with His people now, both in heaven and on earth? According to Paul, He will deliver His kingdom that He reigns over now to the Father when He comes again (1 Corinthians 15:22-24).

Also, what is this "7th day" that you are talking about? Where does scripture ever refer to the thousand years as "the 7th day"?

 

[Wish-it]

So, we obviously greatly disagree on the format of the book. That makes it difficult to have a reasonable discussion about it.

Im happy to try and use scripture to work thru the different understandings each of us may have. Many premills, dont seem to read enough of scripture to get a decent understanding. They seem to be the pretribbers, and grasping for the Lords coming, when quite clearly they wrong and haven't read scripture enough to understand the timeline. Im not perfect and do like to consider other options, but I would like to see an alignment between pre, post and amill, which may happen as the time draws near. What sign do you consider will be next on the endtime horizon?

 

[Wish-it]

This answered my question. So, you agree with me that He is our King now and we are part of His kingdom now on earth.


But, you acknowledge that we reign with Him now. We don't have to wait until He returns to reign with Him. Why would Revelation 20 not be about Him reigning with His people now, both in heaven and on earth? According to Paul, He will deliver His kingdom that He reigns over now to the Father when He comes again (1 Corinthians 15:22-24).

Also, what is this "7th day" that you are talking about? Where does scripture ever refer to the thousand years as "the 7th day"?

The main reasons is I believe the chronological order is fairly correct. I base the thousands yrs on Genesis 1, He rested on the seventh day. He wanted the Israelites to enter the promised land, but they failed to obey. So now he has a body which will obey and we will help do the job the Israelites did do. He promised another day of rest. Heb chapter 4. Also this is the end of the sixth thousand years, so the expectation of another 1000, seems fitting. I've also wondered why the israelites were circumcised on the eighth day. It fits the pattern, The eight day, everyone will be circumcised, ie made righteous. When does the new heaven and new begin, in the eight millenium.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Im happy to try and use scripture to work thru the different understandings each of us may have. Many premills, dont seem to read enough of scripture to get a decent understanding.

But, where do we start when our perspectives are so different? You would probably want to start in Daniel and Revelation, but as I've told you, I establish the foundation of my doctrine on what I believe are more clear and straightforward scriptures that aren't found in the most highly symbolic book in scripture and then use that foundation to help interpret those more difficult scriptures that require discerning what is symbolic and what is literal within them.

They seem to be the pretribbers, and grasping for the Lords coming, when quite clearly they wrong and haven't read scripture enough to understand the timeline. Im not perfect and do like to consider other options, but I would like to see an alignment between pre, post and amill, which may happen as the time draws near. What sign do you consider will be next on the endtime horizon?

So, you are apparently post-trib? That's good. In my view, what happens just before Jesus returns is what Jesus talked about in Matthew 24:9-13 and what Paul wrote about in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12. I personally relate that time period to Satan's little season and it involves increased deception, apostasy, wickedness and persecution in the world just before Jesus returns. I think that time period very possibly has already begun. If not, then that's what I believe is next. Otherwise, I'd say what's next is just for that time period to continue up until Jesus returns.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The main reasons is I believe the chronological order is fairly correct. I base the thousands yrs on Genesis 1, He rested on the seventh day. He wanted the Israelites to enter the promised land, but they failed to obey. So now he has a body which will obey and we will help do the job the Israelites did do. He promised another day of rest. Heb chapter 4. Also this is the end of the sixth thousand years, so the expectation of another 1000, seems fitting. I've also wondered why the israelites were circumcised on the eighth day. It fits the pattern, The eight day, everyone will be circumcised, ie made righteous. When does the new heaven and new begin, in the eight millenium.

No offense, but that's all based on speculation and I'm not into speculation. I don't see anything to indicate that the thousand years is intended to occur after six thousand years of history have ended or that circumcision on the 8th day has anything to do with it.

 

[Wish-it]

But, where do we start when our perspectives are so different? You would probably want to start in Daniel and Revelation, but as I've told you, I establish the foundation of my doctrine on what I believe are more clear and straightforward scriptures that aren't found in the most highly symbolic book in scripture and then use that foundation to help interpret those more difficult scriptures that require discerning what is symbolic and what is literal within them

I read the scripture first as literal- what ever it says, it says, After that there may be a spiritual application either as an individual or corporately as to the body of Christ. I dont see Daniel or Revealtion as symbolic really. Obviously if it says beast it normally has a literal meaning of it somewhere in scripture to assist our understanding. I rely quite a bit on repeatative phrases within scripture to link the timings of them together, as in Dan 8.10 and Rev 12 examples already quoted. I also read all scripture as future, tho some obviously are history, but I am surprised at how much SHOULD be considered future.

 

[Wish-it]

No offense, but that's all based on speculation and I'm not into speculation. I don't see anything to indicate that the thousand years is intended to occur after six thousand years of history have ended or that circumcision on the 8th day has anything to do with it.

Its simply scripture confirming scripture. Most Amill tend to think Rev 20 is the only reference to the 1000 years, but that's not the case in my view.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I read the scripture first as literal- what ever it says, it says,

I don't believe that approach makes any sense when it comes to books like Daniel and Revelation that undeniably contain a good amount of symbolism.

After that there may be a spiritual application either as an individual or corporately as to the body of Christ. I dont see Daniel or Revealtion as symbolic really.

I can't even begin to comprehend anyone saying what you said here in the second sentence. What do you mean by that? Clearly, the beast with seven heads and ten horns is not meant to be taken literally, for example. And there is clearly other symbolism used in both books as well.

Obviously if it says beast it normally has a literal meaning of it somewhere in scripture to assist our understanding.

What does this mean? You've really lost me here. It's clearly not a literal beast, so please explain exactly what you mean here.

I rely quite a bit on repeatative phrases within scripture to link the timings of them together, as in Dan 8.10 and Rev 12 examples already quoted. I also read all scripture as future, tho some obviously are history, but I am surprised at how much SHOULD be considered future.

We are very far apart in how we look at Daniel and Revelation. Because of that, I don't think it's possible for us to have a fruitful discussion about them. We'll have to just agree to disagree.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Its simply scripture confirming scripture.

If we can say that the thousand years represents the 7th set of a thousand year time periods in history, then we can make scripture say just about anything because scripture itself says no such thing. Nowhere does scripture say anything about history being divided into seven thousand year time periods. An example of scripture confirming scripture (or using scripture to interpret scripture) would be using both 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17 and Matthew 24:29-31 to conclude that the rapture will be post-trib ("after the tribulation of those days"). What you're trying to do with scripture in relation to the thousand years is a major stretch and I would not call that scripture confirming scripture at all.

Most Amill tend to think Rev 20 is the only reference to the 1000 years, but that's not the case in my view.

That's not the case in my Amill view, either. I don't think you have much understanding of Amill at all or else you wouldn't say what you said here. In the Amill view, the thousand years basically symbolically represents the New Testament time period (the time between the first and second coming of Christ) minus a short time or little season at the end before Christ returns. Obviously, there is a lot of scripture that refers to the New Testament time period, so Amills definitely don't see Revelation 20 as the only reference to that time period.

 

[Wish-it]

I can't even begin to comprehend anyone saying what you said here in the second sentence. What do you mean by that? Clearly, the beast with seven heads and ten horns is not meant to be taken literally, for example. And there is clearly other symbolism used in both books as well.

Read it with my next sentence as an indication. Scripture always seems to explain itself, we just need to find it. With that knowledge those scripture become normally obvious.