Premillennialism ignores the tenses in the original Greek in order to sustain its teaching

[Timtofly]

The kingdom you portray is overrun by billions of wicked at the end who surround the camp of the saints for a season led by their super-hero Satan.

I don't portray it that way. That is your strawman argument. And you all claim you don't misrepresent premil. You all do it all the time every time you use your cut and paste reply about billions of lost people.

You do realize that Adam and Eve died in their sin just not consumed by fire. Do you bring up that point every time you mention the sin nature? Do you point out they are still in sheol today? That is the gist of this nonsensical strawman argument.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Not a single pre-mil would argue against this point of the Gospel going out unhindered, after the Cross.

Not the point of Revelation 20 at all. Revelation 20 is the reality of Satan being bound after his 42 months mentioned in Revelation 13. Amil deny the simple truth that Revelation 20 is future and they fall into the preterist position, that Revelation 20 was already fulfilled in the first century.

Like David, you misrepresent Amil in an attempt to discredit it. Revelation 20 is ongoing, not just merely past. It will end at the second coming and the general resurrection/judgment.

 

[sovereigngrace]

I don't portray it that way. That is your strawman argument. And you all claim you don't misrepresent premil. You all do it all the time every time you use your cut and paste reply about billions of lost people.

You do realize that Adam and Eve died in their sin just not consumed by fire. Do you bring up that point every time you mention the sin nature? Do you point out they are still in sheol today? That is the gist of this nonsensical strawman argument.

So, who then are these billions of mortal rebels that overrun your millennium at the end as the sand of the sea? Where do they come from? Who are Gog and Magog?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

They are, I said the 5th Trumpet happens after the Second Coming. Those two chapters are the Second Coming at the 6th Seal. The 5th Trumpet is after Christ is already on the earth. The earth has been cleansed by fire. Now it is the nitty gritty between Christ and Satan. Matthew 13:37-42. It happens over a period of time, not that Christ snaps His fingers and it is all over.

Christ already on the earth before the 5th trumpet? That's complete nonsense. I can't take you seriously at all.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Not a single pre-mil would argue against this point of the Gospel going out unhindered, after the Cross.

Not the point of Revelation 20 at all. Revelation 20 is the reality of Satan being bound after his 42 months mentioned in Revelation 13. Amil deny the simple truth that Revelation 20 is future and they fall into the preterist position, that Revelation 20 was already fulfilled in the first century.

Amil does not claim that Revelation 20 was already fulfilled in the first century. You just make yourself look like a fool when you make statements like this.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Amil does not claim that Revelation 20 was already fulfilled in the first century. You just make yourself look like a fool when you make statements like this.

Exactly! This is the only way they have to tarnish Amil now. Because when it comes to the sacred text, Amil have a solid and well-corroborated answer.

 

[Timtofly]

Like David, you misrepresent Amil in an attempt to discredit it. Revelation 20 is ongoing, not just merely past. It will end at the second coming and the general resurrection/judgment.

According to you.

According to John it is after the events of Chapters 6-19.

Amil can claim it is ongoing since the Cross, but that is a human private opinion, and not God's Word. Explain how I misrepresent this human opinion of Amil. You opinion is not that hard to comprehend, it is just wrong.

 

[Timtofly]

So, who then are these billions of mortal rebels that overrun your millennium at the end as the sand of the sea? Where do they come from? Who are Gog and Magog?

People who listen to Satan instead of God.

Your question is like asking who are those one third of angels who rebelled, like rebellion is impossible. If it is impossible, why did the angels do it? This change of mind was after the 1000 years ended, not during the 1000 years. If 33% of the angels were allowed to rebel, what is so hard to understand, if 33% of perfect humanity could make the same choice?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Exactly! This is the only way they have tarnish Amil now. Because when it comes to the sacred text, Amil have a solid and well-corroborated answer.

Right. It's a clear sign of desperation on their part when you see them misrepresenting Amil every chance they get. It's all they have.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

According to you.

According to John it is after the events of Chapters 6-19.

Amil can claim it is ongoing since the Cross, but that is a human private opinion, and not God's Word. Explain how I misrepresent this human opinion of Amil. You opinion is not that hard to comprehend, it is just wrong.

You said we believe Revelation 20 was all fulfilled in the first century, which is a lie.

 

[Timtofly]

Christ already on the earth before the 5th trumpet? That's complete nonsense. I can't take you seriously at all.

Yet you have no proof to offer to the contrary. I pointed out what Revelation 6-8 claims. You offer no other Scripture to show John himself got it wrong. I can simply read, no other manufactured human timeline necessary.

 

[Timtofly]

Amil does not claim that Revelation 20 was already fulfilled in the first century. You just make yourself look like a fool when you make statements like this.

You claim Revelation 20:4 was the Resurrection of Christ, thus fulfilled in the first century.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Yet you have no proof to offer to the contrary. I pointed out what Revelation 6-8 claims. You offer no other Scripture to show John himself got it wrong. I can simply read, no other manufactured human timeline necessary.

I don't need to waste my time refuting utter nonsense. Revelation 6-8 says nothing about Christ being on the earth before the fifth trumpet. Scripture teaches that He will descend from heaven once in the future at which point His people will meet Him in the air and He will destroy His enemies at that time. That will be at the seventh and last trumpet, so the idea that He would return any time before then can't be supposed by scripture whatsoever.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

You claim Revelation 20:4 was the Resurrection of Christ, thus fulfilled in the first century.

Yes, His resurrection obviously occurred in the first century, but not the entire thousand years. You said Amils believe that Revelation 20 was fulfilled in the first century which gives the impression that you were saying we believe all of Revelation 20 was fulfilled in the first century. That is not true.

 

[Timtofly]

Exactly! This is the only way they have tarnish Amil now. Because when it comes to the sacred text, Amil have a solid and well-corroborated answer.

So is the resurrection in Revelation 20:4 future or fulfilled as Preterist claim? You claim you have a solid preterist view, if this resurrection is not future.

What makes a premil? It is the point the whole of Revelation 20 is post the Second Coming.

If any part of Revelation 20 is in the past, that is a preterist view. It does not matter the 1,000 years. You have to acknowledge the resurrection before any time can pass. This resurrection is not ongoing for the whole 1000 years.

Calling Amil preterist is not tarnishing or polishing any alledged claims. It is pointing out the obvious.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

So is the resurrection in Revelation 20:4 future or fulfilled as Preterist claim? You claim you have a solid preterist view, if this resurrection is not future.

He is not a preterist and has never claimed to be one.

What makes a premil? It is the point the whole of Revelation 20 is post the Second Coming.

If any part of Revelation 20 is in the past, that is a preterist view. It does not matter the 1,000 years. You have to acknowledge the resurrection before any time can pass. This resurrection is not ongoing for the whole 1000 years.

Calling Amil preterist is not tarnishing or polishing any alledged claims. It is pointing out the obvious.

It can cause confusion to label all Amils as preterist because you have a different definition of the term "preterist" than everyone else.

Yes, an Amil can be a partial preterist (but not a full preterist), but not all Amils are partial preterists.

Partial preterists typically believe that all of the Olivet Discourse and all of Revelation up to at least Revelation 19 was fulfilled by 70 AD. They see Revelation 19 as describing Christ coming in judgment against the unbelieving Jews in 70 AD. Amils like sovereigngrace, jeffweedaman and I don't believe that. So, we are not partial preterists. If you use that label to describe all Amils then that can cause confusion and make people think that all Amils believe that passages like Matthew 24:29-31 and Revelation 19 were fulfilled in 70 AD even though that's not what I and others who share my view believe.

 

[Timtofly]

You said we believe Revelation 20 was all fulfilled in the first century, which is a lie.

You have that quote?

 

[Timtofly]

He is not a preterist and has never claimed to be one.

It can cause confusion to label all Amils as preterist because you have a different definition of the term "preterist" than everyone else.

Yes, an Amil can be a partial preterist (but not a full preterist), but not all Amils are partial preterists.

Partial preterists typically believe that all of the Olivet Discourse and all of Revelation up to at least Revelation 19 was fulfilled by 70 AD. They see Revelation 19 as describing Christ coming in judgment against the unbelieving Jews in 70 AD. Amils like sovereigngrace, jeffweedaman and I don't believe that. So, we are not partial preterists. If you use that label to describe all Amils then that can cause confusion and make people think that all Amils believe that passages like Matthew 24:29-31 and Revelation 19 were fulfilled in 70 AD even though that's not what I and others who share my view believe.

The confusion is the word partial. Either you are or not. Can one be a partial prophet? Can one be a partial Christian?

 

[sovereigngrace]

Right. It's a clear sign of desperation on their part when you see them misrepresenting Amil every chance they get. It's all they have.

I personally take it as a testimony as to the strength of the Amil position and a compliment to the potency of the arguments being presented. Where else can they go apart from avoidance? That is the 2 main Premil tactics here.

 

[sovereigngrace]

The confusion is the word partial. Either you are or not. Can one be a partial prophet? Can one be a partial Christian?

That is why many of us do not even read your posts. You are always twisting what Amils believe or else avoiding the obvious.