20 major reasons to reject the Premillennial doctrine

[Jamdoc]

I think a big factor in play is the "mountains of prophecy" effect. When you look at mountains from a distance, they seem close together, all clumped up, you just see the peaks and not much in between, but as you get closer you realize there are miles between the peaks, and a lot more detail about each mountain becomes clear as you get closer.

In the old testament, they viewed all messianic prophecy as 1 singular event, compressed all of the prophecies into a single coming of the Messiah. This is a big reason why those who practice Judaism did not accept Jesus, because they don't see that there is more than one coming of the Messiah, and not all prophecy was fulfilled in the first coming of the Messiah. New Testament Christians accept the new testament as a revelation that the prophecy is being fulfilled, and will be completed in the return of Jesus at least one more time (depending on your rapture stance He comes in the clouds for His elect before He comes down on a white horse with His saints for the battle of Armageddon, which would be a second and third coming depending on whether you consider it a coming of the Lord if he never actually sets foot on earth but is just in the clouds)

But there is still a mountain of prophecy problem, as the "last days" have been going on for thousands of years now, and in the gospels, acts, and epistles, we're still looking at prophetic events from a far distance, and in some cases, the events of the future seem to be all compressed into a single event, the second coming. But as we get to the last book of the bible, Revelation, I believe we are shown a closer look at those events and see that it is not one singular day/hour event, but rather a series of events.spaced out. That is what I believe the purpose of Revelation 20 is, to show us a closer look and see the 1000 year valley between the peaks of the 2nd coming and the throne of judgement, that from a distance, look like they are right on top of each other.

I think that should be kept in perspective as we get closer to the tribulation and second coming, that the events are not sudden and all compressed into 1 day, but rather spread out over a period of time, we're given several figures of time like the 42 months, 1260 and 1335 days, time, times, and half a time, 1000 years, one hour, five months, etc. You have to understand it's not a single peak but a range of mountains with valleys of time between. You can find the peaks of prophecy in many books of the bible, but I think Revelation is intended to be our closest look to show us some of the valleys.

 

[sovereigngrace]

I think a big factor in play is the "mountains of prophecy" effect. When you look at mountains from a distance, they seem close together, all clumped up, you just see the peaks and not much in between, but as you get closer you realize there are miles between the peaks, and a lot more detail about each mountain becomes clear as you get closer.

In the old testament, they viewed all messianic prophecy as 1 singular event, compressed all of the prophecies into a single coming of the Messiah. This is a big reason why those who practice Judaism did not accept Jesus, because they don't see that there is more than one coming of the Messiah, and not all prophecy was fulfilled in the first coming of the Messiah. New Testament Christians accept the new testament as a revelation that the prophecy is being fulfilled, and will be completed in the return of Jesus at least one more time (depending on your rapture stance He comes in the clouds for His elect before He comes down on a white horse with His saints for the battle of Armageddon, which would be a second and third coming depending on whether you consider it a coming of the Lord if he never actually sets foot on earth but is just in the clouds)

But there is still a mountain of prophecy problem, as the "last days" have been going on for thousands of years now, and in the gospels, acts, and epistles, we're still looking at prophetic events from a far distance, and in some cases, the events of the future seem to be all compressed into a single event, the second coming. But as we get to the last book of the bible, Revelation, I believe we are shown a closer look at those events and see that it is not one singular day/hour event, but rather a series of events.spaced out. That is what I believe the purpose of Revelation 20 is, to show us a closer look and see the 1000 year valley between the peaks of the 2nd coming and the throne of judgement, that from a distance, look like they are right on top of each other.

I think that should be kept in perspective as we get closer to the tribulation and second coming, that the events are not sudden and all compressed into 1 day, but rather spread out over a period of time, we're given several figures of time like the 42 months, 1260 and 1335 days, time, times, and half a time, 1000 years, one hour, five months, etc. You have to understand it's not a single peak but a range of mountains with valleys of time between. You can find the peaks of prophecy in many books of the bible, but I think Revelation is intended to be our closest look to show us some of the valleys.

There is one major problem: Jesus destroys all the wicked and all corruption when He comes. There is no allowance for you to populate the new incorrupt earth with the corrupt or corruption. Multiple climactic Scripture forbids your interpretation of Revelation 20.

Ironically a plain straightforward literal reading of Revelation 19 forbids Premil. It also confirms that we are looking at a series of parallels describing the same intra-Advent period - as elsewhere in Scripture. Contrary to what you allege, Revelation does not reveal some new doctrine or age in between this age and the age to come. It fits in with all other Scripture which splits man's existence into time and eternity.

 

[rwb]

You can't have a 2nd advent without there being a first, no one is claiming you can. Do some of you think there is not a single thing in all of the OT that also involves the 2nd advent and beyond?

Take the following, for example.

Psalms 110:1 <<A Psalm of David.>> The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.


How can that possibly not involve 2 advents to fulfill that?

But until Jesus came, and that the NT shed light that two advents are going to be involved, who would have ever thought before that time that Psalms 110:1 would involve 2 advents to fulfill this? Psalms 110:1 is just one of many examples like this. It's not required that the texts in the OT have to come right and say two advents are involved to fulfill whatever. That's what we have the NT for, to help illuminate things that might have been hidden in some of the texts in the OT. The OT also illuminates things in the NT, otherwise, for example, why would Jesus, in the Discourse, tell the reader to consult the book of Daniel in order to better grasp what He was referring to?

Some Amils seem to make the same mistake unbelieving Jews do. Unbelieving Jews think they only need one testament to fully understand things, that being the OT. Some Amils as well, also think they only need one testament to fully understand things, that being the NT, in their case. We can see how that is working for unbelieving Jews, as in not very great, or better yet, not at all since the OT alone is not enough for them to believe that the Messiah they are waiting for, He has already come, and that He is coming again. My point is, both testaments have to be considered.

The Advent (first) of Christ fulfilled Psalms 110:1. But I'm not going to show you the verses from the New Testament that prove this. If you are ever going to understand the prophets of old all point to Christ, The Messiah, Who would come, it's time for you to use spiritual discernment, and see for yourself. Having discussions with you David on this topic over several years now, leads me to conclude that you are not going to believe truth unless you admit that the Kingdom Christ ushered in when He came is NOT physical, but spiritual. Look for cross references to Psalms 110:1 in the New Testament and see if you might see that Christ is seated on the throne in heaven and has been since He ascended to His Kingdom in heaven. Blessings David, rw

 

[Jamdoc]

There is one major problem: Jesus destroys all the wicked and all corruption when He comes. There is no allowance for you to populate the new incorrupt earth with the corrupt or corruption. Multiple climactic Scripture forbids your interpretation of Revelation 20.

Ironically a plain straightforward literal reading of Revelation 19 forbids Premil. It also confirms that we are looking at a series of parallels describing the same intra-Advent period - as elsewhere in Scripture. Contrary to what you allege, Revelation does not reveal some new doctrine or age in between this age and the age to come. It fits in with all other Scripture which splits man's existence into time and eternity.

Rev 19 does not have everyone on the earth going to the battle of Armageddon, just the beast and his armies.

You think wives and children are going to go try to fight Jesus?
Rev 20 only fits your view if you abstract it to being meaningless. It doesn't fit with history unless John is the biggest talker of hyperbole and exaggeration that this world has ever known.
Remember the single largest deception by Satan of the nations took place in the 7th century AD.

 

[DavidPT]

There is one major problem: Jesus destroys all the wicked and all corruption when He comes. There is no allowance for you to populate the new incorrupt earth with the corrupt or corruption. Multiple climactic Scripture forbids your interpretation of Revelation 20.

Ironically a plain straightforward literal reading of Revelation 19 forbids Premil. It also confirms that we are looking at a series of parallels describing the same intra-Advent period - as elsewhere in Scripture. Contrary to what you allege, Revelation does not reveal some new doctrine or age in between this age and the age to come. It fits in with all other Scripture which splits man's existence into time and eternity.

If one is considering the NT alone, it's only natural one might come to those conclusions. But if one is considering both testaments, both testaments together prove things aren't always as clear cut as they seem to be. Scriptures have to be interpreted according to context. For example, wheat and tares. The tares don't represent all of the lost. The tares in it's early stages resemble wheat. That means the tares are meaning false Christians, wolves in sheep's clothing, false prophets, so on and so on.

 

[DavidPT]

If you cannot find your doctrine confirmed in the clear scriptures of the New Testament, then appealing to the less clear scriptures of the Old Testament is often the only way to make the doctrine work.

There are still no mortals left alive on the planet at the end of Matthew 25:31-46...

Christ still returns "in flaming fire" in 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10, as confirmed by the parable of the wheat and tares, and 2 Peter 3:10-13...

Wicked angels have still been bound in Jude 1:6...

The time of the judgment of the dead, with reward for some, and destruction for others is still found in Revelation 11:18...

Christ is still the final New Covenant sacrifice for sin in Hebrews 10:16-18...

None of the Apostles talked about Christ performing funeral services, long after His Second Coming...

.

.

As to the sheep and goats judgment, the way I interpret it is vastly different than how you or others interpret it, yet I'm not alone in how I interpret it. I use the context at the end of chapter 24 and the context at the beginning of chapter 25 leading up to this judgment, in order to interpret that judgment. I simply do not see the goats representing all of the wicked lost on the planet. In context they are referring to unprofitable servants of Christ. The goats do not go into the millennial period, yet mortals do go into that period, meaning the ones in Zechariah 14:16-19, and that none of these are the goats.

 

[DavidPT]

The Advent (first) of Christ fulfilled Psalms 110:1.

Let's get on the same page here. You are misunderstanding me. That prophecy is not entirely fulfilled. That prophecy requires that there had to first be a first advent, followed by a death and a resurrection, followed by an ascension. All of that has already been fulfilled and is being fulfilled since we are still in the time of His ascension. All of that is hidden in the text in Psalms 110. Yet it's there, because the NT proves it's there.

Psalms 110:1 <<A Psalm of David.>> The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.

The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand---this part involves the first advent.

until I make thine enemies thy footstool---this part involves the 2nd advent.

If you disagree, then that indicates you must think Christ is going to remain in heaven forever at the right hand of the Father, thus no 2nd coming ever.

And like I pointed out in the other post, this is just one of many examples like this.

 

[rwb]

Let's get on the same page here. You are misunderstanding me. That prophecy is not entirely fulfilled. That prophecy requires that there had to first be a first advent, followed by a death and a resurrection, followed by an ascension. All of that has already been fulfilled and is being fulfilled since we are still in the time of His ascension. All of that is hidden in the text in Psalms 110. Yet it's there, because the NT proves it's there.

Psalms 110:1 <<A Psalm of David.>> The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.

The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand---this part involves the first advent.

until I make thine enemies thy footstool---this part involves the 2nd advent.

If you disagree, then that indicates you must think Christ is going to remain in heaven forever at the right hand of the Father, thus no 2nd coming ever.

And like I pointed out in the other post, this is just one of many examples like this.

Christ will remain in His heavenly Kingdom until the Kingdom is complete. He is ruling OVER His creation from there. Then He will return the second time to gather His elect, given immortal and incorruptible bodies fit for the new earth. When Christ and His saints inhabit the new earth there will be no more sin or death. What part of Psalms 110:1 do you think is unfilled with the Advent of Christ?

 

[rwb]

As to the sheep and goats judgment, the way I interpret it is vastly different than how you or others interpret it, yet I'm not alone in how I interpret it. I use the context at the end of chapter 24 and the context at the beginning of chapter 25 leading up to this judgment, in order to interpret that judgment. I simply do not see the goats representing all of the wicked lost on the planet. In context they are referring to unprofitable servants of Christ. The goats do not go into the millennial period, yet mortals do go into that period, meaning the ones in Zechariah 14:16-19, and that none of these are the goats.

Where in Scripture can we find reference for "unprofitable servants of Christ"? One is either with Christ or against Him. If one who professes Christ, proves unprofitable for Him, does it not stand to reason that they cannot be unprofitable servants for Christ?

 

[DavidPT]

Christ will remain in His heavenly Kingdom until the Kingdom is complete. He is ruling OVER His creation from there. Then He will return the second time to gather His elect, given immortal and incorruptible bodies fit for the new earth. When Christ and His saints inhabit the new earth there will be no more sin or death. What part of Psalms 110:1 do you think is unfilled with the Advent of Christ?

Let me try and put it another way, as to Christ and His enemies, Christ is already ruling among them during His ascension, yet He doesn't remain in heaven forever. To complete the prophecy He has to return again, where it eventually leads to the time of the great white throne judgment. It is after the great white throne judgment that He is no longer sitting on the right hand of power since that involves judgments, etc, and that after the great white throne judgment there will never again be any more judgments. Even though Christ reigns forever and ever, 1 Cor 15 makes it clear that He doesn't reign on the right hand of power forever. That type of reigning has to do with enemies and judging, and that after the great white throne judgment there will no longer be either. So I'm just basically trying to point out that the prophecy requires two advents in order to fulfill it.

Per Premil, though not all Premils agree with me that Christ is already presently ruling in the midst of His enemies, He continues to rule in the midst of them during the thousand years as well.

 

[sovereigngrace]

There is no such thing as the battle of Armageddon. There is no battle. There is simply a gathering together, before the Lord intervenes on behalf of His elect. So, you have been taught wrong.

 

[DavidPT]

Where in Scripture can we find reference for "unprofitable servants of Christ"? One is either with Christ or against Him. If one who professes Christ, proves unprofitable for Him, does it not stand to reason that they cannot be unprofitable servants for Christ?

At the end of Matthew 24, for one. Such as the following.

Matthew 24:48 But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming;
49 And shall begin to smite his fellowservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken;
50 The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of,
51 And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

It is silly, for instance, that an atheist, or a satanist, for example, would be saying in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming. Only a professed servant of Christ would or could be saying something like that. And look what happens to that one according to verse 51. When?

Matthew 25:30 And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

As to Matthew 25:30, even though Jesus used another parable to describe this particular unprofitable servant of His, this is still meaning that unprofitable servants of His are meant in Matthew 24:48-51 as well, and that Jesus specifically deals and confronts them once Matthew 25:31-33 is being fulfilled.

Sometime ago I ran across a link where one poster pretty much summed up my understanding of the sheep and goats judgment, and expressed it better than I could. Here it is below.
---------------------------------------------------------

Goats and sheep are indistinguishable from a distance in the same way that wheat and tares are indistinguishable. Both sheep and goats are also "kosher" animals, which makes them similar. Thus this judgment is not between the righteous (believers) and wicked (unbelievers), but between the righteous (believers) and the apparent-righteous (unbelievers). In other words, the scope of this judgment is for the declared followers of the shepherd, who are ostensibly "kosher" creatures.

Ezekiel 20:33-44 appears to be the parallel account in the Hebrew Bible to this passage in Matthew, when the Lord God will one day regather his people from the nations of the world in order to be their king. That is, this regathering will be a mix of the righteous (believers) and the apparent-righteous (unbelievers). Thus he will judge his people in the "wilderness of the peoples" (Ezek 20:35). The comparison here is to the wilderness of the land of Egypt (Ezek 20:36), where the Lord had "purged" his people in order to prevent "rebels and transgressors" from entering the Promised Land. Thus the scope of judgment is limited to the declared followers of the Lord. As the shepherd he will make his people "pass under the rod" (Ezek 20:37). In this context, the goats will undergo the following.



Matthew 7:21-23 (NASB) 21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. 22 Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’”

At the end of Matthew 25:31-46 the announcement is made: “These (goats) will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous (sheep) into eternal life.” That is, the sheep are the righteous (believers) and the goats are the unrighteous (unbelievers) notwithstanding that both groups were the ostensible and therefore self-declared followers of the Lord.

The idea here is that those "believers" who love other "believers" through both their words and deeds are indeed the sheep (cf. Ja 2:15-17 and 1 Jn 3:18), whereas the remainder (the goats) are those whose spiritual gifts (which were prophesying, healing, miracles) were of no use or benefit to the sheep (hunger, thirst, nakedness, sickness, and their loneliness in incarceration) and therefore the goats were never "known" by the Lord.

Who are the Sheep and the Goats in Matthew 25?

 

[sovereigngrace]

If one is considering the NT alone, it's only natural one might come to those conclusions. But if one is considering both testaments, both testaments together prove things aren't always as clear cut as they seem to be. Scriptures have to be interpreted according to context. For example, wheat and tares. The tares don't represent all of the lost. The tares in it's early stages resemble wheat. That means the tares are meaning false Christians, wolves in sheep's clothing, false prophets, so on and so on.

You should write your own Bible that actually allows three different groups of humans (saved, lost and some unknown half and half believers) and three different ages (“this age, the age to come and another age to come after the age to come”). Amils believe in 2 of each. Jesus own words rebuke your error.

Jesus taught in the parable of the wheat and tares in Matthew 13:24-30, “The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, (1) Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but (2) gather the wheat into my barn.”

Verses 37-43 continues, “He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world (or aion or age); and the reapers are the angels. (1) As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world (or aion or age). The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. (2) Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father.”

Who are the wheat and who are the tares in this parable? And, is there anyone excluded from the scope of these two inclusive groupings? Or, put another way; are there any in-betweens or semi-tares / semi-wheat that are omitted in their description? Firstly, the wheat and tares are a symbolic collective inclusive representation of all mankind; the wheat representing “the children of the kingdom” (Matthew 13:38) – those saved by God’s wonderful grace; the tares representing “the children of the wicked one” (Matthew 13:38) – those outside of grace and of God. The righteous in this story are notably planted of God; the tares on the other hand are planted of the “enemy” – the devil. In fact, Matthew 13:39 states, “The enemy that sowed them is the devil.” This again corroborates the view that we are viewing the only two sole peoples that Scripture recognises. Plainly, if one isn’t of the Lord then there are of the devil. There are no hybrids.

Here we see the final separation of the righteous and the wicked including the burning of those who practice lawlessness, and reward of those who belonged to Christ. Christ interchanges the phrases “the end of the world/age” and “the end of this world/age,” showing that the coming of Christ is indeed the end. This is in contrast to the blessed future eternal “age to come.”

In the parable of the wheat and the tares, “the end of the world” is plainly identified with the coming of the “Son of man” with all “his angels” to gather together “the righteous” unto Himself in order that they will finally “shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father” in their glorified state. This event also (significantly) simultaneously sees the uprooting of the tares (in total) to be finally and completely destroyed by casting them “into a furnace of fire.” It is at the second coming therefore that Christ “shall send forth his angels” to reap that one final all-consummating harvest. The phrase “end of the world” is the end of the aioonos or age. Both wheat and tares are collectively and wholly judged together at the end of this present Gospel age.

Scripture regards all mankind as belonging to one or other of these two opposing spiritual groups – saved or lost. Those that are saved are described elsewhere in the New Testament as being “in Christ,” whereas, those that are lost are depicted as being “in Adam.” Those that are saved have been lifted from the hopeless state and eternal consequences of the first Adam – namely death and damnation and have been raised through the second Adam – Christ – into the eternal state of life and forgiveness. Whilst many unique descriptions are used in the New Testament to depict these two distinct spiritual companies, this parable uses the symbolism of wheat and tares to illustrate the same. The judgment described at the end of the age in this parable (as in every other) makes it abundantly clear that men belong to one or other group. Moreover, the sentences pronounced on either party is so diverse and final – one being damned for time and eternity in “a furnace of fire,” the other being rewarded with eternal rest “in the kingdom of their Father” – that we can safely assume that this is a climactic judgment on all mankind.

Despite what Premils would intimate, there are no in-betweens or semi-tares / semi wheat in this life. There are no exceptions to this scriptural rule. Sadly, and in order to fit their understanding of one highly debated chapter – Revelation 20, Premils try and create a third group that are manifestly too righteous to be included among the wicked and be destroyed but equally too wicked to be included among the righteous and be glorified; this supposed hybrid breed could probably be branded as ‘whares or teats’. It is these hybrids that supposedly populate their post-second-coming –millennium. Notwithstanding, there is no allowance made in Scripture for others, neutrals or don’t-knows, men are either “children of the kingdom” or “children of the wicked one.”

 

[DavidPT]

There is no such thing as the battle of Armageddon. There is no battle. There is simply a gathering together, before the Lord intervenes on behalf of His elect. So, you have been taught wrong.

Maybe you meant to post that to another poster since I don't recall bringing up the battle of Armageddon at all. As to being taught, no one has taught me anything when it comes to eschatology. I form my own opinions and understanding from my own readings of the Bible. If I'm incorrect about some things, and I'm sure I am, I can't blame that on teachers who were misleading me, I can only blame it on myself for not understanding something correctly.

As to what I have quoted by you above, it might come as a shock to you, but I tend to understand it somewhat similar to you. Yet I'm still Premil, though. Revelation 12, Revelation 13, and Revelation 20:4, for one, all prove Amil cannot work. So what other option do I have if not Premil?

 

[rwb]

Let me try and put it another way, as to Christ and His enemies, Christ is already ruling among them during His ascension, yet He doesn't remain in heaven forever. To complete the prophecy He has to return again, where it eventually leads to the time of the great white throne judgment. It is after the great white throne judgment that He is no longer sitting on the right hand of power since that involves judgments, etc, and that after the great white throne judgment there will never again be any more judgments. Even though Christ reigns forever and ever, 1 Cor 15 makes it clear that He doesn't reign on the right hand of power forever. That type of reigning has to do with enemies and judging, and that after the great white throne judgment there will no longer be either. So I'm just basically trying to point out that the prophecy requires two advents in order to fulfill it.

Per Premil, though not all Premils agree with me that Christ is already presently ruling in the midst of His enemies, He continues to rule in the midst of them during the thousand years as well.

Christ has fulfilled Psalms 110:1 by His first Advent. There are several NT references to this fact. His reign will not be forever in heaven, but it will be forever. When Christ returns again every human will be bodily raised, some for reward, and the rest for damnation. Then the reign of Christ continues ON the new earth after this earth has passed away. The prophecy of Ps 110:1 doesn't need a second coming to be fulfilled, it is fulfilled already. After the judgment there will be no more need for Christ to sit in judgment because the only ones remaining will be those resurrected to immortality and incorruptible.

Christ is ruling OVER His whole creation since He ascended to heaven. The enemies of Christ are being judged NOW, through the Gospel, for the Gospel brings life or death to all who hear it. The Word of God; Gospel, is the weapon used to battle against the enemies of Christ.

John 12:48 (KJV) He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

John 3:18 (KJV) He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

2Co 2:15 For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish:
2Co 2:16 To the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things?
2Co 2:17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

Since the battle is being waged now by His Word and Spirit in this Gospel age, the thousand symbolic years are also now, the whole Gospel age.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Rev 19 does not have everyone on the earth going to the battle of Armageddon, just the beast and his armies.

You think wives and children are going to go try to fight Jesus?
Rev 20 only fits your view if you abstract it to being meaningless. It doesn't fit with history unless John is the biggest talker of hyperbole and exaggeration that this world has ever known.
Remember the single largest deception by Satan of the nations took place in the 7th century AD.

There is no such thing as the battle of Armageddon. There is no battle. There is simply a gathering together, before the Lord intervenes on behalf of His elect. So, you have been taught wrong.

Revelation shows two spiritual armies - Christ's and the beast's. All men are in one or the other. Premils create groups and sub-groups within the wicked and righteous in order to facilitate the mass re-population of the wicked into the Premil millennium. Amils strongly reject this. They believe there are only 2 peoples on this earth – as there has always been - saved and lost. When Jesus comes the righteous will all be rescued, the wicked will all be destroyed. This is a repeated and clear truth throughout Scripture. In all Christ's teaching He only saw 2 peoples, not 3 or 4 as you submit. His parables are a case-in-point.

He described the wicked as goats or tares, the righteous as sheep and wheat. Rev 19 fits into this undoubted and repeated pattern.

The Lord encounters only types of people when He comes – saved or lost, sheep or goats. The sheep enter into their eternal inheritance; the goats receive their eternal punishment. Nothing could be simpler. Premils invent a third group in order to populate a supposed future millennium after the Coming of the Lord. They say they are a company of mortals too wicked to be sheep (and be raptured) but also too good to be goats. However, Scripture knows nothing of such half-breeds.

In Revelation the Lord describes two people and two marks. We see that both of these two spiritual marks are referred to in generous detail:

God’s Mark – Revelation 3:12, 7:3, 4 (x2), 5 (x3), 6 (x3), 7 (x3), 8 (x3), 9:4, 14:1, 22:4.

This favoured company are found in the heavenly Mount Zion.

Devil’s Mark – Revelation 13:16, 17, 14:9, 11, 15:2, 16:2, 19:20, 20:4.

This rebellious company are found shut out of that great heavenly city.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Maybe you meant to post that to another poster since I don't recall bringing up the battle of Armageddon at all. As to being taught, no one has taught me anything when it comes to eschatology. I form my own opinions and understanding from my own readings of the Bible. If I'm incorrect about some things, and I'm sure I am, I can't blame that on teachers who were misleading me, I can only blame it on myself for not understanding something correctly.

As to what I have quoted by you above, it might come as a shock to you, but I tend to understand it somewhat similar to you. Yet I'm still Premil, though. Revelation 12, Revelation 13, and Revelation 20:4, for one, all prove Amil cannot work. So what other option do I have if not Premil?

That was for Jamdoc! See post above to you.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Revelation 12, Revelation 13, and Revelation 20:4, for one, all prove Amil cannot work. So what other option do I have if not Premil?

You have been repeatedly shown the error of this contention, yet you stubbornly hold unto a non-corroborative theory. It is sad after all these years that you still do not comprehend Amillennialism.

 

[DavidPT]

You have been repeatedly shown the error of this contention, yet you stubbornly hold unto a non-corroborative theory. It is sad after all these years that you still do not comprehend Amillennialism.

It's not that I don't comprehend Amil, it's that Amil cannot logically work when testing it with a chronology of events. And I'm not meaning Revelation 19 and 20 in this case. I'm meaning the following chronology of events.


A) Initially satan is not bound, that meaning since the beginning of time until he bound a thousand years. B)Then he is bound a thousand years. C) Then he is loosed after the thousand years expires. That is the chronology of events that can't be changed.

According to Revelation 12, satan has access to heaven until a war breaks out in heaven, and that he is then cast unto the earth. Obviously, it is during A) when he still has access to heaven. We at least know from that that when he is initially bound, it is meaning after the war in heaven and after that he is cast to the earth.

Revelation 12 records him persecuting the woman once he sees he has been cast unto the earth. Revelation 12 does not instead record him being cast into the pit once he is cast out of heaven.

If we compare to Revelation 20:1-3, first an angel comes down from heaven, then lays hold of satan and binds him a thousand years by casting him into the pit for the duration of the thousand years. Where does it show or even hint of anything like that in Revelation 12? It doesn't matter whether that is literal or not, there is still the imagery that has to be considered, and that nowhere in all of Revelation 12 is there even a hint of imagery matching this.

Revelation 12:12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.
13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.

Can you point out in these two verses where it is depicting an angel coming down from heaven, then laying hold of satan, thus binding him a thousand years by casting him into the pit? The fact an angel has to come down from heaven and do this is at least telling us that satan has to be on the earth at the time. And that's exactly where the text in Revelation 12 places him once he has been cast out of heaven.

Revelation 12:14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.
15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.
17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

What about in any of these verses? Can you point out in these verses where it is depicting an angel coming down from heaven, then laying hold of satan, thus binding him a thousand years by casting him into the pit?


If you can't show this imagery depicted in Revelation 20:1-3 among any of these verses, and that prior to these verses satan still had access to heaven, aren't you being unreasonable by insisting the thousand years fit the past 2000 years, even though you can't even show it in the texts per Revelation 12, where these texts involve the very same 2000 years you claim the 1000 years fit?

 

[sovereigngrace]

It's not that I don't comprehend Amil, it's that Amil cannot logically work when testing it with a chronology of events. And I'm not meaning Revelation 19 and 20 in this case. I'm meaning the following chronology of events.


A) Initially satan is not bound, that meaning since the beginning of time until he bound a thousand years. B)Then he is bound a thousand years. C) Then he is loosed after the thousand years expires. That is the chronology of events that can't be changed.

According to Revelation 12, satan has access to heaven until a war breaks out in heaven, and that he is then cast unto the earth. Obviously, it is during A) when he still has access to heaven. We at least know from that that when he is initially bound, it is meaning after the war in heaven and after that he is cast to the earth.

Revelation 12 records him persecuting the woman once he sees he has been cast unto the earth. Revelation 12 does not instead record him being cast into the pit once he is cast out of heaven.

If we compare to Revelation 20:1-3, first an angel comes down from heaven, then lays hold of satan and binds him a thousand years by casting him into the pit for the duration of the thousand years. Where does it show or even hint of anything like that in Revelation 12? It doesn't matter whether that is literal or not, there is still the imagery that has to be considered, and that nowhere in all of Revelation 12 is there even a hint of imagery matching this.

Revelation 12:12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.
13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.

Can you point out in these two verses where it is depicting an angel coming down from heaven, then laying hold of satan, thus binding him a thousand years by casting him into the pit? The fact an angel has to come down from heaven and do this is at least telling us that satan has to be on the earth at the time. And that's exactly where the text in Revelation 12 places him once he has been cast out of heaven.

Revelation 12:14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.
15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.
17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

What about in any of these verses? Can you point out in these verses where it is depicting an angel coming down from heaven, then laying hold of satan, thus binding him a thousand years by casting him into the pit?


If you can't show this imagery depicted in Revelation 20:1-3 among any these verses, and that prior to these verses satan still had access to heaven, aren't you being unreasonable by insisting the thousand years fit the past 2000 years, even though you can't even show it in the texts per Revelation 12, where these texts involve the very same 2000 years you claim the 1000 years fit?

I have already addressed this with you, and you’ve already ignored it. That is the way it works with you. You make inquiries, suitable answers are given, and then you just ignore them and hope the issue goes away. But these two passages correlate with each other and take us right back to Christ’s victory over sin, death, Hades and Satan at the first Advent. I’m not going to waste my time repeating previous arguments. You don’t seem to want to know the biblical view, but rather want to run with your own opinion.