Is NOSAS compatible with Amil?

[Timtofly]

I asked Davy if he would like to discuss it. If he said yes then I was planning to go into it in more detail. Do you understand what I'm saying?

If it happens at the second coming as you claim, then explain to me how the following can happen at that time:

Zechariah 14:10 The whole land, from Geba to Rimmon, south of Jerusalem, will become like the Arabah. But Jerusalem will be raised up high from the Benjamin Gate to the site of the First Gate, to the Corner Gate, and from the Tower of Hananel to the royal winepresses, and will remain in its place. 11 It will be inhabited; never again will it be destroyed. Jerusalem will be secure.

If this is meant to be taken literally as saying earthly Jerusalem will be inhabited after Christ's second coming and never destroyed again then explain how that can be the case in light of what Peter taught here:

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything done in it will be laid bare. 11 Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives 12 as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming. That day will bring about the destruction of the heavens by fire, and the elements will melt in the heat. 13 But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells.

How do you interpret 2 Peter 3:10-13?

Now, let's look at another part of Zechariah 14 that can't possibly be fulfilled after the second coming of Christ:

Zechariah 14:16 Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the Lord Almighty, and to celebrate the Festival of Tabernacles. 17 If any of the peoples of the earth do not go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord Almighty, they will have no rain. 18 If the Egyptian people do not go up and take part, they will have no rain. The Lord will bring on them the plague he inflicts on the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Festival of Tabernacles. 19 This will be the punishment of Egypt and the punishment of all the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Festival of Tabernacles. 20 On that day holy to the Lord will be inscribed on the bells of the horses, and the cooking pots in the Lord’s house will be like the sacred bowls in front of the altar. 21 Every pot in Jerusalem and Judah will be holy to the Lord Almighty, and all who come to sacrifice will take some of the pots and cook in them. And on that day there will no longer be a Canaanite in the house of the Lord Almighty.

If this is meant to be taken literally and was fulfilled during a time period right after the second coming Christ then that would mean animal sacrifices would be reinstituted because it mentions celebrating the festival (feast) of tabernacles and talks about people coming to make sacrifices in Jerusalem.

That cannot be. Animal sacrifices were performed in Old Testament times for the purpose of foreshadowing (pointing forward to) Christ's once for all sacrifice.

Hebrews 10:1 The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. 2 Otherwise, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. 3 But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins. 4 It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. 5 Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: “Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me; 6 with burnt offerings and sin offerings you were not pleased. 7 Then I said, ‘Here I am—it is written about me in the scroll—I have come to do your will, my God.’” 8 First he said, “Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you pleased with them”—though they were offered in accordance with the law. 9 Then he said, “Here I am, I have come to do your will.” He sets aside the first to establish the second. 10 And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

This passage clearly teaches that the old covenant animal sacrifices were only a shadow of something better to come which was the Lord Jesus Christ's "once for all" sacrifice. They have already served their purpose and there will never be any need or desire for them ever again. Notice that it says "when Christ came into the world, He said: "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me; with burnt offerings and sin offerings you were not pleased".

Why would God ever want to have animal sacrifices again when He clearly was not pleased with them and did not desire them any longer? That's why He sent His Son Jesus Christ to make His "once for all" sacrifice so that animal sacrifices would never be needed again.

I believe Zechariah 14 contains a lot of figurative language just like the rest of the book. Premils think that Zechariah 12 and 13 will also be fulfilled at the second coming despite the fact that Zechariah 12:10 is quoted in John 19:37 as having a first coming fulfillment and Zechariah 13:7 is quoted in Matthew 26:31 (Mark 14:27) with a first coming fulfillment as well.

Zechariah 14:8 On that day living water will flow out from Jerusalem, half of it east to the Dead Sea and half of it west to the Mediterranean Sea, in summer and in winter. 9 The Lord will be king over the whole earth. On that day there will be one Lord, and his name the only name.

These verses had a first coming fulfillment. Verse 8 is figurative language, but the explanation for its fulfillment can be seen in this passage here which related to the last day of the festival (feast) of tabernacles:

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

What about where it says the Lord will be king over the whole earth? Here is the fulfillment of that:

Matthew 28:16 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

Ephesians 1:16 I keep asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you the Spirit of wisdom and revelation, so that you may know him better. 18 I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in his holy people, 19 and his incomparably great power for us who believe. That power is the same as the mighty strength 20 he exerted when he raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, 21 far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. 22 And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, 23 which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.

You need to forget about the old covenant and stop using that as a point to argue over for starters. Paul put an end to that in the NT, and arguing about it even if people claim otherwise is a strawman point.

How those sacrifices work out will never be explained until Christ sets up His 1000 year reign where it does say priest in Revelation 20:6

"they will be cohanim of God and of the Messiah"

I claim we are individually priest now, but we take care of ourselves individually, not as authority over others. That is why it cannot be the here and now. Do you not see that this is a family event. These resurrected souls are starting a family. Millions of families. Each set of parents will be the priest of their lineage. It is no different than Adam 6000 years ago. The whole earth since Noah are the family of Adam. No other families on earth. For the Lord's Day there will be millions of families, and hundreds of nations. It will be a family affair like now but many families not just the single Adamic family that is missing the priest Adam because he died.

Yes Jerusalem will never be destroyed again. After the NHNE there will still be a Jerusalem. I am not sure why there would not be even if every thing started differently in the NHNE.

Your point is the physical one will be replaced and that is why it cannot be replaced twice. The issue is Revelation 20 would have to be dismissed and the New Jerusalem is immediate. That is not a changed Jerusalem as in your quote:


Zechariah 14:10-11
"The whole land, from Geba to Rimmon, south of Jerusalem, will become like the Arabah. But Jerusalem will be raised up high from the Benjamin Gate to the site of the First Gate, to the Corner Gate, and from the Tower of Hananel to the royal winepresses, and will remain in its place.
11 It will be inhabited; never again will it be destroyed. Jerusalem will be secure."

This is still physical and not the New Jerusalem coming down from heaven. So saying this happens but jumping the gun 1000 years cannot be the logical nor common sense result. David's Jerusalem was promised eternal status and it has gone through many destructions and rebuilding. And even in the NHNE still be in the same location it has always been. To say it is destroyed or to say the destruction happens all around it and it remains as is, is only speculation. All we know is the physical Jerusalem will be changed and changed again but still the eternal physical Jerusalem.

 

[Davy]

You didn't break them down. You just listed them. Break down at least one of them and then we can talk. Don't make me do all the work.

No, you break them down. Then we will know you actually read them first.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

No, you break them down. Then we will know you actually read them first.

I've read all of them multiple times. Look at post #311 and please tell me your thoughts on what I said there. Also, I broke down some passages on the new thread you created as well. Your turn.

 

[Davy]

I've read all of them multiple times. Look at post #311 and please tell me your thoughts on what I said there. Also, I broke down some passages on the new thread you created as well. Your turn.

OK, but it will have be divied up in multiple posts here. Don't know if the OP will accept that.

YOU SAID:
"If it happens at the second coming as you claim, then explain to me how the following can happen at that time:

Zechariah 14:10 The whole land, from Geba to Rimmon, south of Jerusalem, will become like the Arabah. But Jerusalem will be raised up high from the Benjamin Gate to the site of the First Gate, to the Corner Gate, and from the Tower of Hananel to the royal winepresses, and will remain in its place. 11 It will be inhabited; never again will it be destroyed. Jerusalem will be secure.

If this is meant to be taken literally as saying earthly Jerusalem will be inhabited after Christ's second coming and never destroyed again then explain how that can be the case in light of what Peter taught here:

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything done in it will be laid bare. 11 Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives 12 as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming. That day will bring about the destruction of the heavens by fire, and the elements will melt in the heat. 13 But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells.

How do you interpret 2 Peter 3:10-13? When do you believe it will be fulfilled? I believe it will be fulfilled at Christ's second coming which would mean that an earthly millennial kingdom would be impossible to occur after the earth is burned up. If the passage was fulfilled after the thousand years then how could Zech 14:11 be true since earthly Jerusalem would obviously would be destroyed when the earth is burned up?

Are you really that confused about those events of the "day of the Lord" when Jesus returns to gather His elect Church? That Zech.14 event of His coming with His feet touching down upon the Mount of Olives east of Jerusalem, bringing all His elect saints with Him, will be a literal event of the future. His disciples with Him when He ascended from the Mount of Olives were told about that return there also (Acts 1). There will be earth changes that will happen with that return, as described in the various Scripture examples about the "day of the Lord", including 2 Peter 3:10-13. Jerusalem will not be completely destroyed, as we are told in Rev.11 with the 7th Trumpet - 3rd Woe. Even there it says all the kingdoms of this world then become those of The Father and His Christ. If that were not so then how would Egypt and the nations at the end of Zech.14 still exist in that future time? Why won't you believe the Scripture as written? It's not that difficult to understand, but a fleshy mind will never fathom that as literal.

Now, let's look at another part of Zechariah 14 that can't possibly be fulfilled after the second coming of Christ:

Well, you failed to prove any of that first part of Zech.14 can't be fulfilled at Christ's second coming, when it is 'specifically' about Christ's future second coming!

If you won't admit that's what that first section of Zech.14 is about, which is written there beyond ALL DOUBT, then it has to mean you are not serious about what is actually written... in God's Word! I have no time for people like you, so welcome to my IGNORE LIST!


For Non-Doubting Brethren in Christ Jesus:

Zech 14:1-9
14:1 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.
2 For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.
3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when He fought in the day of battle.

That's the day of Christ's future return. Rev.19 speaks of His coming riding a white horse to do battle, with His army, and His carrying a sword that cuts both ways. The Rev.16 7th Vial event speaks of the battle of Armageddon which is the final battle He will fight against the armies out of the northern quarters gathered against Israel on the last day of this world. That "day of the Lord" is the 7th Trumpet, 7th Vial timing. So there is no doubting that this is about Christ's 2nd coming to end the "great tribulation" He warned of for the end of this present world.


4 And His feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.

The two angels in Acts 1 told His disciples that Lord Jesus would return in like manner how He ascended into Heaven in the clouds. That is how and 'where' He will return also, on the last day of this present world. That is what this is about, with the Mount of Olives literally splitting in two to form that valley.


5 And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with Thee.

On that "day of the Lord", man's works will burn off the surface of this earth, and the earth will tremble, all the hills and islands moving. Those alive on earth will be changed at the twinkling of an eye, and Christ's faithful elect on earth will be gathered to Him as He descends in their "spiritual body" that Apostle Paul taught in 1 Cor.15. The asleep saints that already died Jesus will bring with Him when He comes, as written. (see 1 Thess.4:13-17). These will be a LITERAL events, not make-believe.


6 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear, nor dark:
7 But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass, that at evening time it shall be light.

As Lord Jesus foretold in His Olivet discourse, no man knows the day or hour of His return, but only The Father (Matthew 24). Per Rev.1 as written, all eyes shall see Jesus coming in the clouds, even those who pierced Him. As per John 5:28-29 on that day, all in the graves will be resurrected, some to the "resurrection of life" and others to the "resurrection of damnation".


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

Ezekiel 47 and Revelation 22 speaks of those future "living waters" flowing out from Christ's future Millennial sanctuary. The tree of life is mentioned as the "many trees" bearing its fruits that will not be consumed, on each side of that River, per Ezekiel 47. That is the return of God's River of Genesis 2 which flowed out of His Garden on earth, and fed four other rivers upon this earth. This is LITERAL friends. That River is mentioned in Ezekiel 47 flowing in the areas of En-gedi and En-eglaim, which are area in the land of Israel in the middle east. Afterall, the end of Isaiah 19 foretold us that Assyria, Israel, and Egypt will each be one third in God's future Kingdom, and God's Highway will reach from Egypt all the way into Assyria.


9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and His name one.
KJV

That means only ONE King over the whole earth, one LORD, not many like the world tries to have today.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Are you really that confused about those events of the "day of the Lord" when Jesus returns to gather His elect Church?

Not at all. But you definitely are.

That Zech.14 event of His coming with His feet touching down upon the Mount of Olives east of Jerusalem, bringing all His elect saints with Him, will be a literal event of the future. His disciples with Him when He ascended from the Mount of Olives were told about that return there also (Acts 1).

What now? Where does it say anything about that in Acts 1? It doesn't.

There will be earth changes that will happen with that return, as described in the various Scripture examples about the "day of the Lord", including 2 Peter 3:10-13.

Yeah, there will be changes alright. The entire earth surface will be burned up. That's why in verse 13 Peter says we are looking forward to a new heaven and new earth instead of saying we are looking forward to a temporal earthly kingdom.

Jerusalem will not be completely destroyed, as we are told in Rev.11 with the 7th Trumpet - 3rd Woe.

Where are you seeing that? Please quote the part that you believe says that because I definitely am not seeing it.

Even there it says all the kingdoms of this world then become those of The Father and His Christ. If that were not so then how would Egypt and the nations at the end of Zech.14 still exist in that future time?

You are very badly misinterpreting what that means. It certainly isn't saying the He takes over worldly kingdoms with mortals still in them. That is not possible since all mortal unbelievers will be destroyed when He returns. What does scripture say He will do with the heathen that He inherits? Rule over them for 1000 years? No!

Psalm 2:8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. 9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.

He will break/destroy them! Just like 2 Peter 3:10-13, 1 Thess 5:1-4, Matt 24:35-39, 2 Thess 1:7-10, Rev 19:11-21 and other scripture teaches.

Why won't you believe the Scripture as written?

I do. Why won't you? I'm having to repeatedly correct your false interpretations. Frankly, that is getting tiring.

It's not that difficult to understand, but a fleshy mind will never fathom that as literal.

It's quite funny and ironic for a premil to criticize an amil for being too literal. You do realize that, right? The fact is that it doesn't even take much spiritual discernment to see that it couldn't possibly be more clear that 2 Peter 3:10-13 teaches that the entire earth (the surface) will be burned up when Christ returns. You can't ignore the fact that the scope of the destruction is compared directly to what happened in the flood. There is no way around that.

Well, you failed to prove any of that first part of Zech.14 can't be fulfilled at Christ's second coming, when it is 'specifically' about Christ's future second coming!

Considering that I showed that several of the verses in the chapter are not speaking of the second coming that should make you reconsider whether any of them are about His second coming, shouldn't it? I would think so.

If you won't admit that's what that first section of Zech.14 is about, which is written there beyond ALL DOUBT, then it has to mean you are not serious about what is actually written... in God's Word! I have no time for people like you, so welcome to my IGNORE LIST!

And here is the typical premil childish temper tantrum. I could say the same for you in regards to how you interpret 2 Peter 3:3-13, but I won't. Because I'm an adult and I can handle it when someone disagrees with me without having a meltdown.

As Lord Jesus foretold in His Olivet discourse, no man knows the day or hour of His return, but only The Father (Matthew 24). Per Rev.1 as written, all eyes shall see Jesus coming in the clouds, even those who pierced Him. As per John 5:28-29 on that day, all in the graves will be resurrected, some to the "resurrection of life" and others to the "resurrection of damnation".

Wait a minute here. You rightly conclude that all of the dead, saved and lost, will be raised when He returns, but are you forgetting something? Those whose names are not written in the book of life are clearly portrayed as being raised after the thousand years (Rev 20:11-15). So, how do you reconcile John 5:28-29 with your premil view? And how do you reconcile Matthew 25:31-46 with your premil view, for that matter?

9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and His name one.
KJV

That means only ONE King over the whole earth, one LORD, not many like the world tries to have today.

There is only one King and one LORD over the whole earth now and I showed you that already from passages like Matthew 28:16-18 and Ephesians 1:19-22. That verse is clearly talking about the LORD having authority over the earth, including all earthly kings on the earth. That is the case right now.

 

[BABerean2]

FUNNY!

Your long cut n' pasted post didn't work! Fullness of the Gentiles said you're next move would be, "why didn't you answer my question"! Your own joke's on you I guess.

He should know because he has not been able to answer the questions, either.

If you guys cannot answer the questions that caused myself and others to abandon the Premill doctrine, you have revealed the doctrine for what it really is.

Anyone who thinks Christ will be conducting funeral services for many years after His Second Coming, has revealed the "joke".


.

 

[Zao is life]

Well, this is the 2nd time you've asked that. How many times do you need to ask to make sure OTHERS see your belligerent question? because I gave Scripture references to support Christ's reign at His future return, and you were SILENT on all that.

You will find quite a few belligerent questions heading your way. I'm glad you spotted it so quickly for what it is.

 

[Timtofly]

He should know because he has not been able to answer the questions, either.

If you guys cannot answer the questions that caused myself and others to abandon the Premill doctrine, you have revealed the doctrine for what it really is.

Anyone who thinks Christ will be conducting funeral services for many years after His Second Coming, has revealed the "joke".

Jumping from the pot directly into the fire is your answer. Replacing bad theology with worse theology. 2 Peter 3-5

3 First, understand this: during the Last Days, scoffers will come, following their own desires
4 and asking, “Where is this promised ‘coming’ of his? For our fathers have died, and everything goes on just as it has since the beginning of creation.”
5 But, wanting so much to be right about this, they overlook the fact that it was by God’s Word that long ago there were heavens, and there was land which arose out of water and existed between the waters,"

You all reject the First Lord's Day. It seems natural that instead of correcting the error of one theology, you go to extremes with another theology. You change the Lord's Day purposely into a strawman, to defeat what does not happen. The Lord's Day will happen.

8 Moreover, dear friends, do not ignore this: with the Lord, one day is like a thousand years and a thousand years like one day
9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some people think of slowness; on the contrary, he is patient with you; for it is not his purpose that anyone should be destroyed, but that everyone should turn from his sins.
10 However, the Day of the Lord will come “like a thief.” On that Day the heavens will disappear with a roar, the elements will melt and disintegrate, and the earth and everything in it will be burned up.

Notice that he did not say humanity would be destroyed, just the physical. This time it will be angels and not an ark to save those who are the sheep and the wheat from themselves.


15 And think of our Lord’s patience as deliverance, just as our dear brother Sha’ul also wrote you, following the wisdom God gave him.
16 Indeed, he speaks about these things in all his letters. They contain some things that are hard to understand, things which the uninstructed and unstable distort, to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.

Peter did not even try to explain Paul. Peter just gave us the Lord's Day scenario. If you cannot link it any more, than Peter did, to the world prior to the Flood, because Peter was quoting Genesis 1, then human theology has failed you twice.

 

[Zao is life]

For those interested about my declaration of the Scriptures about Jesus' return on the "day of the Lord" as written, see my thread about The Day of The LORD.
Day of The Lord - Day of Jesus' Future Return

There are some things that you just can't get all Amils to acknowledge. Like the fact that Amil is incompatible with NOSAS.

 

[DavidPT]

There is only one King and one LORD over the whole earth now and I showed you that already from passages like Matthew 28:16-18 and Ephesians 1:19-22. That verse is clearly talking about the LORD having authority over the earth, including all earthly kings on the earth. That is the case right now.

Even so, you obviously fail to factor in a few things that prove you are interpreting Zechariah 14:9 incorrectly. Such as the following. Maybe none of the following proves it to you, but I'm guessing it proves it to some of the rest of us who are not trying in vain to somehow get Zechariah 14 to work with Amil.

Here's what Zechariah 14 says.

Zechariah 14:9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.

Here is what 2 Thessalonians 2:4 says.

2 Thessalonians 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.


Seriously, in light of 2 Thessalonians 2:4, and the fact that has to be fulfilled in this age prior to the 2nd coming, how does that equal Zechariah 14:9, that during what is recorded in 2 Thessalonians 2:4, the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one? Does that mean the one LORD meant in Zechariah 14:9 is really meaning the one who makes himself God over the earth in over 2 Thessalonians 2:4 instead?

And here we are back to simple math again. 1(Zechariah 14:9)+1(2 Thessalonians 2:4) does not equal 1 it equals 2. Yet Zechariah 14:9 only speaks of one LORD over ALL the earth at the time, and not two lords over all the earth at the time. Do you deny that the one recorded in 2 Thessalonians 2:4 makes himself to be the God over all the earth at the time, minus the ones that refuse to worship him?

Revelation 13:4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?

This verse says they worshiped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshiped the beast, and not that they worshiped the one LORD over all the earth per Zechariah 14:9 instead. This verse also says---Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? Why not the one LORD over the all the earth? Why don't they, at the time they raise this question, think He is able to make war with him? Instead we see the following.

Revelation 13:5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.
6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

Zechariah 14:9 is obviously meaning a time after these events recorded above in Revelation 13, and not during those events instead. And the following in Zechariah 14 proves it.

Zechariah 14:11 And men shall dwell in it, and there shall be no more utter destruction; but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited.

This cannot be referring to any Jerusalem in this age, in any sense, since there is only one Jerusalem where there shall be no more utter destruction, which I take to be meaning for forever, therefore it has to be a Jerusalem that can fit that era of time, eternity. What Jerusalem might that be? Would it not be the new Jerusalem that descends from God out of heaven in our future still? Would not that make what is recorded in Zechariah 14:16-19 to be meaning during the same time frame Zechariah 14:9-11 is meaning?

Getting back to Revelation 13:5 and this 42 months, that is what Zechariah 14:1-5 is dealing with. Zechariah 14:9-11 is dealing with a time post this 42 months.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Even so, you obviously fail to factor in a few things that prove you are interpreting Zechariah 14:9 incorrectly.

You never "prove" anything, so you should take that word out of your vocabulary.

Such as the following. Maybe none of the following proves it to you, but I'm guessing it proves it to some of the rest of us who are not trying in vain to somehow get Zechariah 14 to work with Amil.

In vain? I have brought up some issues with a premil interpretation of Zechariah 14 that no premil has yet been able to refute. Can you please read my post #311 and give me your thoughts on what I said there about Zechariah 14?

Here's what Zechariah 14 says.

Zechariah 14:9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.

Here is what 2 Thessalonians 2:4 says.

2 Thessalonians 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.


Seriously, in light of 2 Thessalonians 2:4, and the fact that has to be fulfilled in this age prior to the 2nd coming, how does that equal Zechariah 14:9, that during what is recorded in 2 Thessalonians 2:4, the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one? Does that mean the one LORD meant in Zechariah 14:9 is really meaning the one who makes himself God over the earth in over 2 Thessalonians 2:4 instead?

As usual, you are not making any sense. Where does 2 Thess 2 say that anyone will ever supplant the Lord as king over all the earth? It doesn't say that at all. There is one LORD according to Zechariah 14:9. In 2 Thess 2 it is talking about sinful people thinking that they are God but that doesn't mean they are.

Are the following passages not true in your mind?

Matthew 28:16 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

Are you trying to say that at some point what Jesus said here in Matthew 28 will no longer be true? If so, at what point would that be the case?

Ephesians 1:19 and his incomparably great power for us who believe. That power is the same as the mighty strength 20 he exerted when he raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, 21 far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. 22 And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, 23 which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.

Are you trying to say that at some point what Paul said here in Ephesians 1 will no longer be true? If so, at what point do you think that will be the case?

And here we are back to simple math again. 1(Zechariah 14:9)+1(2 Thessalonians 2:4) does not equal 1 it equals 2.

Are you actually believing that just because someone says they are God it means that they are? You are not thinking this through. No matter who else might claim to be God, the truth remains that there is only one Lord, one King, one Ruler of the earth and that is Jesus. No fake "God" would change that fact.

Revelation 1:5 and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth.

Yet Zechariah 14:9 only speaks of one LORD over ALL the earth at the time, and not two lords over all the earth at the time. Do you deny that the one recorded in 2 Thessalonians 2:4 makes himself to be the God over all the earth at the time, minus the ones that refuse to worship him?

Revelation 13:4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?

This verse says they worshiped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshiped the beast, and not that they worshiped the one LORD over all the earth per Zechariah 14:9 instead. This verse also says---Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? Why not the one LORD over the all the earth? Why don't they, at the time they raise this question, think He is able to make war with him? Instead we see the following.

Revelation 13:5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.
6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

Zechariah 14:9 is obviously meaning a time after these events recorded above in Revelation 13, and not during those events instead. And the following in Zechariah 14 proves it.

You are the one elevating others to the level of God. That is wrong. You don't even realize what you're doing here. None of these imposters are the actual one true God. None of this changes the fact that Jesus is the king of the whole earth and is the only LORD. No fake ruler, king or god can change that fact.

Zechariah 14:11 And men shall dwell in it, and there shall be no more utter destruction; but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited.

This cannot be referring to any Jerusalem in this age, in any sense, since there is only one Jerusalem where there shall be no more utter destruction, which I take to be meaning for forever, therefore it has to be a Jerusalem that can fit that era of time, eternity.

What Jerusalem might that be? Would it not be the new Jerusalem that descends from God out of heaven in our future still? Would not that make what is recorded in Zechariah 14:16-19 to be meaning during the same time frame Zechariah 14:9-10 is meaning?

Isn't it your view that Zechariah 14 speaks of the thousand years of Christ allegedly ruling on the earth? The earthly millennial kingdom is not eternity. You're not even thinking carefully about what you're saying here. Please make up your mind. Do you think Zechariah 14 is related to the thousand years or to eternity when the new heaven and new earth are ushered in and where there will be no more death?

I do agree with you about the identity of the Jerusalem mentioned there, though. But, did you know that we have already come to the heavenly Jerusalem by way of belonging to Christ?

Hebrews 12:18 You have not come to a mountain that can be touched and that is burning with fire; to darkness, gloom and storm; 19 to a trumpet blast or to such a voice speaking words that those who heard it begged that no further word be spoken to them, 20 because they could not bear what was commanded: “If even an animal touches the mountain, it must be stoned to death.” 21 The sight was so terrifying that Moses said, “I am trembling with fear.”
22 But you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, 23 to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the Judge of all, to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, 24 to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.

Can you see here that even now we are already citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem because of belonging to Christ's church? This is how Zechariah 14:11 should be understood. The dead in Christ are part of the heavenly Jerusalem right now as well. When Christ returns, we all, as the new Jerusalem, as the bride of the Lamb, will come down to the new earth and dwell there forever with God (Rev 21:1-8).

 

[BABerean2]

You all reject the First Lord's Day. It seems natural that instead of correcting the error of one theology, you go to extremes with another theology. You change the Lord's Day purposely into a strawman, to defeat what does not happen. The Lord's Day will happen.

8 Moreover, dear friends, do not ignore this: with the Lord, one day is like a thousand years and a thousand years like one day
9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some people think of slowness; on the contrary, he is patient with you; for it is not his purpose that anyone should be destroyed, but that everyone should turn from his sins.
10 However, the Day of the Lord will come “like a thief.” On that Day the heavens will disappear with a roar, the elements will melt and disintegrate, and the earth and everything in it will be burned up.

Notice that he did not say humanity would be destroyed, just the physical. This time it will be angels and not an ark to save those who are the sheep and the wheat from themselves.

Is there a reason you ignored the rest of the passage, which kills your doctrine?


2Pe 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
2Pe 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
2Pe 3:11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
2Pe 3:12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
2Pe 3:13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.


.

 

[DavidPT]

You never "prove" anything, so you should take that word out of your vocabulary.

Years ago I used to debate Arnold Murray students and their serpent seed doctrine. And guess what, they told me the same thing at the time, that I never proved anything. And I have also debated JWs as well, and they too claimed I never proved anything. Using your logic here, the fact you claim I never prove anything, therefore I should just take this out of my vocabulary altogether, this apparently means that you agree with these Arnold Murray students, and these JWs, I was referring to, that I never proved anything whatsoever, in any way shape or form. Maybe I was wrong about you this entire time, where I felt you are at least a reasonable person. To be reasonable doesn't mean that someone always has to agree with someone else, but means one needs to at least be reasonable about things. And claiming someone never proves anything, as you are claiming about me here, that is not a person being reasonable, that is a person being unreasonable instead.

I only had to time to address this portion of your post for the time being. I have some things around the house I need to do. Maybe after that I will focus on some of the rest of your post.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Years ago I used to debate Arnold Murray students and their serpent seed doctrine. And guess what, they told me the same thing at the time, that I never proved anything.

In regards to premil, you truly haven't. But, guess what? I haven't proven anything regarding Amil, either. That is my point. None of us should act like we've proven anything here. We are sharing our OPINIONS and INTERPRETATIONS of scripture. We are confident about our opinions, but they are still opinions and not 100% proven facts. Do you understand what I'm saying?

And I have also debated JWs as well, and they too claimed I never proved anything. Using your logic here, the fact you claim I never prove anything, therefore I should just take this out of my vocabulary altogether, this apparently means that you agree with these Arnold Murray students, and these JWs, I was referring to, that I never proved anything whatsoever, in any way shape or form.

You should have known I was only talking in terms of proving anything about premil. Do you always have to be so literal? In terms of obvious things like proving that Jesus is God and such, yes, we can prove that and it's not just opinions.

Maybe I was wrong about you this entire time, where I felt you are at least a reasonable person. To be reasonable doesn't mean that someone always has to agree with someone else, but means one needs to at least be reasonable about things. And claiming someone never proves anything, as you are claiming about me here, that is not a person being reasonable, that is a person being unreasonable instead.

I am reasonable. I haven't changed in that regard at all. I was not intending to say you never prove anything at all, so I apologize that it came across that way. It's not what I meant, so I should have been more clear about that. I was only meaning in relation to premil.

 

[DavidPT]

As usual, you are not making any sense. Where does 2 Thess 2 say that anyone will ever supplant the Lord as king over all the earth? It doesn't say that at all. There is one LORD according to Zechariah 14:9. In 2 Thess 2 it is talking about sinful people thinking that they are God but that doesn't mean they are.

You don't take the one in 2 Thessalonians 2:4 to be meaning the beast in Revelation 13, the AC?

BTW, just because I might think the AC is meant here, this doesn't mean I think it involves a literal temple nor the literal city of Jerusalem. As to the latter, Jerusalem is not mentioned one single time in this passage to begin with, yet there are some, but not me though, that think this is meaning in a literal temple, therefore it must be meaning in Jerusalem.

To be honest with you, I dread reading your posts addressed to me sometimes. But not because you disagree with me, I already know that you do, but it's mainly because of things you oftentimes say to me in particular, such as--You never "prove" anything, so you should take that word out of your vocabulary---or---As usual, you are not making any sense.--to name a few. Where the latter gives the impression---As usual, you are not making any sense---that I'm just retarded beyond belief, and that I simply make no sense. And while I'm being honest here, some of your posts that you have addressed to me in the past, I never even read some of them yet, which might be why they never got addressed by me, because I dread reading things like in the examples above. But I am thick skinned, though, so I'm not losing any sleep over these things, I'm just trying to explain that I dread reading some of your posts addressed to me at times, for some of the reasons I stated.

 

[DavidPT]

Are the following passages not true in your mind?

Matthew 28:16 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

Are you trying to say that at some point what Jesus said here in Matthew 28 will no longer be true? If so, at what point would that be the case?

Ephesians 1:19 and his incomparably great power for us who believe. That power is the same as the mighty strength 20 he exerted when he raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, 21 far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. 22 And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, 23 which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.

No one is disputing the verses you brought up here. Those verses have nothing to do with Zechariah 14:8 at this point in time, no more than Revelation 11:15---The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever---has anything to do at this time, with that of these verses you brought up. Revelation 11:15 hasn't even been fulfilled yet, and neither has Zechariah 14:8. And speaking of these two passages, once Revelation 11:15 is fulfilled, then it will lead to the fulfillment of Zechariah 14:8.

Are you trying to say that at some point what Paul said here in Ephesians 1 will no longer be true? If so, at what point do you think that will be the case?

Are you actually believing that just because someone says they are God it means that they are? You are not thinking this through. No matter who else might claim to be God, the truth remains that there is only one Lord, one King, one Ruler of the earth and that is Jesus. No fake "God" would change that fact.

Revelation 1:5 and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth.

You are the one elevating others to the level of God. That is wrong. You don't even realize what you're doing here. None of these imposters are the actual one true God. None of this changes the fact that Jesus is the king of the whole earth and is the only LORD. No fake ruler, king or god can change that fact.

I'm not the one elevating anyone to the level of God, Paul, in 2 Thessalanians 2:4 , indicates that the person meant in that verse is. I simply believe what he says. And still, what Zechariah 14:8 says is not the case at this point in time, no more than Revelation 11:15 is the case at this point in time, yet none of that contradicts anything you brought up in Matthew 28 or Ephesians 1, unless you want to argue that, since Zechariah 14:8 is already the case right now, then so must Revelation 11:15 also be the case right now as well, the fact they appear to be speaking of pretty much the same things.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

You don't take the one in 2 Thessalonians 2:4 to be meaning the beast in Revelation 13, the AC?

No, I do not. I believe the reference to "the man of sin" as being a reference to sinful man in general trying to claim that they have no need for God, thereby each of them making themselves their own God in that sense. It's assumed that a reference to "the man of sin" has to be an individual because of the assumption that it's speaking of a physical temple of God, but I disagree with that. We (the church) are the temple of God as scripture teaches in several places (let me know if you need references, but I think you know this).

Also, the fact that it says "the man of sin" can give the impression that it's speaking of an individual, but that would mean "the man of God" in this passage would have to be an individual as well, but it obviously is not (note that I'm not comparing these passages directly, but am rather just showing what "the man of..." can mean besides referring to an individual man).

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

In this passage "the man of God" is not an individual man, but is rather referring to the people of God in general being made "perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works" by way of "all scripture" that "is given by inspiration of God".

Also, I see what Paul described in 2 Thess 2 as occurring during a time just before Christ's return because it speaks of a mass falling away (rebellion, apostasy) occurring just before then which corresponds to the revealing of the man of sin. Paul indicates that while wickedness was happening even back then, it was restrained to an extent. That restraint will be removed during this future time (unless that time started already). I equate that time to Satan's little season. Notice in 2 Thess 2:9-10 what is says about the man of sin:

2 Thess 2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

I see the beast as not referring to an individual (he was, is not and will ascend out of the pit - Rev 17:8 - how can that be a man?) referring to the world anti-God, anti-Christ system at any given point in history. Sometimes, it has been led by different heads/kingdoms like the old Babylonian, Medo-Persian, Greek and Roman empires.

If it helps you understand, I would equate the beast basically to "the world" as Jesus described it in this passage:

John 15:18 If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. 19 If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. 20 Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also.

Scripture indicates that all whose names are not written in the book of life worship the beast. Similarly, all unbelievers love the world and its ways and are loved by the world as its own.

BTW, just because I might think the AC is meant here, this doesn't mean I think it involves a literal temple nor the literal city of Jerusalem. As to the latter, Jerusalem is not mentioned one single time in this passage to begin with, yet there are some, but not me though, that think this is meaning in a literal temple, therefore it must be meaning in Jerusalem.

Okay, that's good to know that you don't believe it's a physical temple. So, we agree on that.

To be honest with you, I dread reading your posts addressed to me sometimes. But not because you disagree with me, I already know that you do, but it's mainly because of things you oftentimes say to me in particular, such as--You never "prove" anything, so you should take that word out of your vocabulary---or---As usual, you are not making any sense.--to name a few. Where the latter gives the impression---As usual, you are not making any sense---that I'm just retarded beyond belief, and that I simply make no sense.

No, I don't believe that about you. I apologize for using those words and exaggerating like that. I do think you shouldn't use the word "prove" as if you've proven something 100% like proving 1+1 = 2 or something. That's how it comes across, at least. But, that's not an excuse for going overboard with my response to that. I will try not to do that going forward.

You do frustrate me at times when you misrepresent my view or when you try to say that two doctrines that I strongly hold to are incompatible. I hope you can understand why I would take offense to those things. No one likes to have their view misrepresented and no one wants to be told that they basically have to pick between 2 doctrines they believe in because only one of them can be true. You may have noticed that I strongly object to that. I don't apologize for being upset at you for making that claim, but I do apologize for the insults.

And while I'm being honest here, some of your posts that you have addressed to me in the past, I never even read some of them yet, which might be why they never got addressed by me, because I dread reading things like in the examples above. But I am thick skinned, though, so I'm not losing any sleep over these things, I'm just trying to explain that I dread reading some of your posts addressed to me at times, for some of the reasons I stated.

I didn't realize this. I mean, you can be fairly insulting at times yourself, so I guess that made me think that you can take it just as much as you can dish it out. And maybe you can according to what you said here, but I can see that it does bother you. Not enough to lose sleep, but it does to some extent.

But the fact is that we should return to discussing these things in a civilized manner and stop the insults. If you remember, when I first came here I saw a lot of insults hurled back and forth and I tried to get people to stop, and they did for awhile but then it started back up again. I really do want to avoid that. So, if you're willing to forgive me for my insults, I'd like to start over and I want you to not dread it when I respond to you from now on.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

No one is disputing the verses you brought up here. Those verses have nothing to do with Zechariah 14:8 at this point in time, no more than Revelation 11:15---The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever---has anything to do at this time, with that of these verses you brought up. Revelation 11:15 hasn't even been fulfilled yet, and neither has Zechariah 14:8. And speaking of these two passages, once Revelation 11:15 is fulfilled, then it will lead to the fulfillment of Zechariah 14:8.

Not surprisingly, I disagree with you on this and you already knew that I would.

Have you ever considered that the fulfillment of Zechariah 14:8 could be related to John 7:37-39?

Zechariah 14:8 On that day living water will flow out from Jerusalem, half of it east to the Dead Sea and half of it west to the Mediterranean Sea, in summer and in winter.

John 7:37 In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. 38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. 39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

I know it's very difficult for you to interpret things in a non-literal way, but surely you know that some of the book of Zechariah contains figurative language, right? What if Zechariah 14:8 is as well?

I'm not the one elevating anyone to the level of God, Paul, in 2 Thessalanians 2:4 , indicates that the person meant in that verse is. I simply believe what he says. And still, what Zechariah 14:8 says is not the case at this point in time, no more than Revelation 11:15 is the case at this point in time, yet none of that contradicts anything you brought up in Matthew 28 or Ephesians 1, unless you want to argue that, since Zechariah 14:8 is already the case right now, then so must Revelation 11:15 also be the case right now as well, the fact they appear to be speaking of pretty much the same things.

Scripture can sometimes appear to be speaking of the same things when it actually is not. Spiritual discernment is required on our part when it comes to those things. I think you're referring to Zechariah 14:9 here instead of Zech 14:8, though, right?

Again, just because someone claims to be God doesn't mean they are. Zechariah 14:9 is talking about who is the one true God, not who is claiming to be God. It says "the LORD will be king over the whole earth". Is that not true of Jesus right now?

Revelation 1:5 and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth.

I know you tend to think very literally most of the time, so in your mind, in order for Jesus to be king and ruling the earth He has to be actively ordering people around and giving them commands or something along those lines. But, that isn't what it means for Him to be reigning and ruling over the earth. It means He has authority over all the earth. Nothing happens here without Him allowing it to happen and no one has any authority over Him. And He rules His church on the earth as well. He is our King right now.

 

[Timtofly]

Is there a reason you ignored the rest of the passage, which kills your doctrine?


2Pe 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
2Pe 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
2Pe 3:11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
2Pe 3:12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
2Pe 3:13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.


.

You have killed God’s Word. Nice job.

 

[Timtofly]

I am reasonable. I haven't changed in that regard at all. I was not intending to say you never prove anything at all, so I apologize that it came across that way. It's not what I meant, so I should have been more clear about that. I was only meaning in relation to premil.

This is what I do not understand. We do not have to prove Revelation 20 says 1000 years. You have to prove the text does not say 1000 years.