20 major reasons to reject the Premillennial doctrine

Jamdoc · Jul 15, 2020

sovereigngrace said:
Christ’s first resurrection was the start of the evangelization of the Gentiles. Most people see that in the New Testament. The Gentiles are depicted in the OT as being outside of hope, blind, in gross darkness, rebellious, bound in chains and in a prison. That all changed after the resurrection of Christ. The NT is a picture of Gentile evangelizing. That is all Rev 20 is saying. There is zero corroboration for Premil scenario of the binding of Satan at the second coming and his release 1000 years later to deceive the millennial inhabitants as the sand of the sea. Amils have many passages that teaches the binding, curtailing, defeating and subjugation of Satan 2000 years ago. They also have many Scriptures that show Christ is the first resurrection.

Even though the Scriptures make many sweeping statements about the Gentiles been deceived in the Old Testament it did not mean that there was none that believed. Just like it makes sweeping statements about the Gentiles being enlightened in the New Testament, does not suggest that the most of them actually believed. These are just broad generalized. Scripture is full of them.
We need to remember that Satan had legal grounds before the cross to accuse the people of God because (1) man willfully transgressed the law of God and (2) the penalty for sin had not been paid for. Justice demanded that sin must be punished. When Jesus took our punishment upon Himself He paid the full and final penalty for sin. He took man’s place. He was man’s substitute. He died a vicarious death.
If the fall was the greatest tragedy that hit mankind, the cross was the biggest blessing. It confronted everything that was arrayed against us.

Justice demanded:

· Christ had to defeat sin – the source of man’s enslavement.
· He had to defeat Satan the instrument used to tempt man to sin.
· He had to defeat death (or the grave) the penalty of sin.
· He had to defeat Hades (or Abraham’s bosom) the prison of the righteous dead.
· He had to defeat eternal punishment – the just reward for unrepentant sinners.

This meant that none of these had any power over God’s people.

The fact that you say "that is all (sic) is saying" shows just how badly you water down promises of glory.
Then you defend your position by saying "the bible exaggerates all the time"

sovereigngrace · Jul 15, 2020

Jamdoc said:
You've taken something glorious and watered it down to being mundane.

You've taken a prophecy written in 90-95AD or somewhere around there.. and applied it to something that happened in 33AD.
That's not prophecy, that's history.
Revelation is not a historical book it's a prophetic book.

It is historic, ongoing and future. Revelation 1:19 records John being instructed, “Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter.”

1. The things which thou hast seen - past
2. The things which are - present
3. The things which shall be hereafter – future

sovereigngrace · Jul 15, 2020

Jamdoc said:
The fact that you say "that is all (sic) is saying" shows just how badly you water down promises of glory.
Then you defend your position by saying "the bible exaggerates all the time"

Until you address the rebuttals it is pointless engaging with you. Premils want to interact on the basis of personal opinion. That is totally inadmissible. Only Scripture matters. Until you present corroboration for your opinion of Rev 20 I will take that as an admission that you do not have it.

Timtofly · Jul 15, 2020

sovereigngrace said:
Until you address the rebuttals it is pointless engaging with you. Premils want to interact on the basis of personal opinion. That is totally inadmissible. Only Scripture matters. Until you present corroboration for your opinion of Rev 20 I will take that as an admission that you do not have it.

Premils do not interpret Revelation 20 at all. It is clearly written and stands as written.

Amils add their private interpretation of symbolism changing Revelation 20 to say something totally different. Amils should not use Revelation 20 for their purpose either as a point or to refute the original purpose of God's written Word.

There is plenty of proof of what the Day of the Lord entails. Peter says, only ignorant people refuse to see this scriptural truth. John then points out in Revelation 20, there is a literal 1000 years. John does not use the symbolism of the Day of the Lord. John is a witness. Peter points out the Day of the Lord in symbolic prophecy. Then amil theology twist both Peter and John to form a private theology never given in Scripture any where. Leave Revelation 20 and the books of Peter out of amil theology. At least leaving them out of amil theology would be more honest. Could you redo your 17 points in the OP and leave Revelation 20 out of them?

BABerean2 · Jul 15, 2020

Timtofly said:
Premils do not interpret Revelation 20 at all. It is clearly written and stands as written.

Amils add their private interpretation of symbolism changing Revelation 20 to say something totally different. Amils should not use Revelation 20 for their purpose either as a point or to refute the original purpose of God's written Word.

There is plenty of proof of what the Day of the Lord entails. Peter says, only ignorant people refuse to see this scriptural truth. John then points out in Revelation 20, there is a literal 1000 years. John does not use the symbolism of the Day of the Lord. John is a witness. Peter points out the Day of the Lord in symbolic prophecy. Then amil theology twist both Peter and John to form a private theology never given in Scripture any where. Leave Revelation 20 and the books of Peter out of amil theology. At least leaving them out of amil theology would be more honest. Could you redo your 17 points in the OP and leave Revelation 20 out of them?

Premill only works by claiming the Book of Revelation is in chronological order.

Christ returning as a thief at Armageddon in Revelation 16:15-16, and the time of the judgment of the dead in Revelation 11:18, prove the book is not in chronological order.

If you think the book does not contain symbolic language, then you need to cut Revelation 1:20, and Revelation 11:4 out of your Bible.

.

Timtofly · Jul 15, 2020

BABerean2 said:
Premill only works by claiming the Book of Revelation is in chronological order.

Christ returning as a thief at Armageddon in Revelation 16:15-16, and the time of the judgment of the dead in Revelation 11:18, prove the book is not in chronological order.

If you think the book does not contain symbolic language, then you need to cut Revelation 1:20, and Revelation 11:4 out of your Bible.

I never said Revelation did not contain symbolism. I stated your interpretation is just symbolic. It takes a literal chapter, and turns those words into your own private symbolism. I have no issue with some trying to figure out symbolism in Revelation. They may be wrong, they may be right. Making post in an online forum is only posters opinions. Not sure why some think their opinion is the gospel truth. We are in the middle of a great falling away from truth. The church is more apostate now, than the RCC ever was. I suspect all opinions, teachings, doctrine, and theology. Most here think my thoughts are crazy and only my imagination. I have been presented with most of the same evidence over the last 50 years, just like everyone else here. I just see different conclusions.

Revelation is in chronological order. Only the failure to heed the warnings John is giving to the church, messes up the order John gave us. Warnings have a purpose. Ignoring them is one's own peril.

Jamdoc · Jul 15, 2020

BABerean2 said:
Premill only works by claiming the Book of Revelation is in chronological order.

Christ returning as a thief at Armageddon in Revelation 16:15-16, and the time of the judgment of the dead in Revelation 11:18, prove the book is not in chronological order.

If you think the book does not contain symbolic language, then you need to cut Revelation 1:20, and Revelation 11:4 out of your Bible.

.

"the day of the Lord" is symbollic, it doesn't necessarily mean 1 24 hour period. "The day" and "the hour" are non specific times just meaning that that's the time that something is happening. A season is also a symbollic non specific time.
But 1000 years is specific. It means 1000 years, it's repeated over and over, that it is a literal thousand years
Revelation 18:8 specifies in one day, and Revelation 18:10, Revelation 18:17, and Revelation 18:19 further narrows it down to one hour. (Which btw, I've always thought of it as being John just witnessed a Nuclear war against possibly the US. ICBM's can definitely make a country desolate within an hour, they are "fire from heaven" and they do cause sickness.)
Revelation contains both non specific, symbollic times, and specific times, use discernment.

sovereigngrace · Jul 15, 2020

BABerean2 said:
Premill only works by claiming the Book of Revelation is in chronological order.

Christ returning as a thief at Armageddon in Revelation 16:15-16, and the time of the judgment of the dead in Revelation 11:18, prove the book is not in chronological order.

If you think the book does not contain symbolic language, then you need to cut Revelation 1:20, and Revelation 11:4 out of your Bible.

.

Exactly! Remove that and they have nothing.

sovereigngrace · Jul 15, 2020

Jamdoc said:
"the day of the Lord" is symbollic, it doesn't necessarily mean 1 24 hour period. "The day" and "the hour" are non specific times just meaning that that's the time that something is happening. A season is also a symbollic non specific time.
But 1000 years is specific. It means 1000 years, it's repeated over and over, that it is a literal thousand years
Revelation 18:8 specifies in one day, and Revelation 18:10, Revelation 18:17, and Revelation 18:19 further narrows it down to one hour. (Which btw, I've always thought of it as being John just witnessed a Nuclear war against possibly the US. ICBM's can definitely make a country desolate within an hour, they are "fire from heaven" and they do cause sickness.)
Revelation contains both non specific, symbollic times, and specific times, use discernment.

So, a non-specific general "thousand years" in Revelation is hyper-literal but a carefully defined specific "one hour" in Revelation is symbolic? This shows the duplicity of Premil. It simply does not add up. It is non-corroborative. It depends on a mistaken chronological approach and a hyper-literal interpretation to the most figurative book in the Bible. That is why it should be rejected by all sensible theologians.

Jamdoc · Jul 15, 2020

sovereigngrace said:
So, a non-specific general "thousand years" in Revelation is hyper-literal but a carefully defined specific "one hour" in Revelation is symbolic? This shows the duplicity of Premil. It simply does not add up. It is non-corroborative. It depends on a mistaken chronological approach and a hyper-literal interpretation to the most figurative book in the Bible. That is why it should be rejected by all sensible theologians.

No, I said the thousand years is specific, and "one day" and "one hour" are specific
I said "the day" or "the hour" is non specific.

sovereigngrace · Jul 15, 2020

Jamdoc said:
No, I said the thousand years is specific, and "one day" and "one hour" are specific
I said "the day" or "the hour" is non specific.

So antichrist is going to reign with the 10 kings for only 60 minutes? Hmmmm. Really?

I don't think we are going to need to worry much about that. Maybe we could sleep through it!

Jamdoc · Jul 15, 2020

sovereigngrace said:
So antichrist is going to reign with the 10 kings for only 60 minutes? Hmmmm. Really?

I don't think we are going to need to worry much about that. Maybe we could sleep through it!

Yeah you clearly didn't read it very carefully. It's 1 hour that the 10 kings SHARE power with the antichrist. In that hour they all unanimously agree to give sole power to the beast.

Revelation 17:12-13. Easy to apply. UN (or whatever replaces the UN as the world government) security council emergency meeting, 10 member nations at that time (or 11, if the beast is the leader of one of the security council nations), they unanimously vote for one leader in a time of crisis for the entire world. There, they had power for 1 hour with the beast, and gave him all their power. Now the beast begins his 42 month long reign.
another specific time.

Timtofly · Jul 15, 2020

sovereigngrace said:
So, a non-specific general "thousand years" in Revelation is hyper-literal but a carefully defined specific "one hour" in Revelation is symbolic? This shows the duplicity of Premil. It simply does not add up. It is non-corroborative. It depends on a mistaken chronological approach and a hyper-literal interpretation to the most figurative book in the Bible. That is why it should be rejected by all sensible theologians.

Revelation is more figurative than Psalms?

So now we just cut up and discard God’s Word because it is no longer relative?

GOD has decided He is no longer relative, or did you decide God is no longer relative?

Do you understand that the most sensible theologians today are athiest? At least they are honest.

Timtofly · Jul 15, 2020

sovereigngrace said:
So antichrist is going to reign with the 10 kings for only 60 minutes? Hmmmm. Really?

I don't think we are going to need to worry much about that. Maybe we could sleep through it!

Is that Biblical sleep as in death, or mockery? If you're dead at this time, will you be resurrected to reign with Christ, or wait, you do not accept that. So your prefer to just trust your gut?

sovereigngrace · Jul 15, 2020

Jamdoc said:
Yeah you clearly didn't read it very carefully. It's 1 hour that the 10 kings SHARE power with the antichrist. In that hour they all unanimously agree to give sole power to the beast.

Revelation 17:12-13. Easy to apply. UN (or whatever replaces the UN as the world government) security council emergency meeting, 10 member nations at that time (or 11, if the beast is the leader of one of the security council nations), they unanimously vote for one leader in a time of crisis for the entire world. There, they had power for 1 hour with the beast, and gave him all their power. Now the beast begins his 42 month long reign.
another specific time.

Really?

Rev 17:12 "And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast."

So the 10 kings receive power for 60 minutes? This is what so many people are abandoning Premil. It hyper-literal approach to all Scripture misses the spiritual meaning of the sacred text.

Jamdoc · Jul 15, 2020

sovereigngrace said:
Really?

Rev 17:12 "And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast."

So the 10 kings receive power for 60 minutes? This is what so many people are abandoning Premil. It hyper-literal approach to all Scripture misses the spiritual meaning of the sacred text.

Yes, there could be situations where that would happen, such as.. all the calamities happening during the first 4 seals where literally 1/4 of the world's population dies to war, famine, economic collapse, and a pandemic. This is a position in the world that has major major problems, world leadership may actually lose leaders and have to go through several people in a chain of succession, leaving power in the hands of someone who was unprepared for the role they were thrust into. What if we were to have a nuclear exchange, decimating the leadership of the world powers? What if we were to have a major country like the US collapse and balkanize into different sovereign states? There's a lot of ways where someone could suddenly have power they don't know what to do with, but there's a man in the room who seems composed, capable, and has offered solutions to the major problems facing the world. He has a plan for world peace under a one world government, a new economy to replace the failing world economy, and has been involved in funding and developing a cure to a deadly pandemic. The 10 world leaders are inexperienced and unable to handle the sudden responsibility thrust on them, so they will give their power to the antichrist.
It's the word of God, why don't you believe it? Why do you attempt to make it an abstraction? Disbelief?

sovereigngrace · Jul 16, 2020

Jamdoc said:
Yes, there could be situations where that would happen, such as.. all the calamities happening during the first 4 seals where literally 1/4 of the world's population dies to war, famine, economic collapse, and a pandemic. This is a position in the world that has major major problems, world leadership may actually lose leaders and have to go through several people in a chain of succession, leaving power in the hands of someone who was unprepared for the role they were thrust into. What if we were to have a nuclear exchange, decimating the leadership of the world powers? What if we were to have a major country like the US collapse and balkanize into different sovereign states? There's a lot of ways where someone could suddenly have power they don't know what to do with, but there's a man in the room who seems composed, capable, and has offered solutions to the major problems facing the world. He has a plan for world peace under a one world government, a new economy to replace the failing world economy, and has been involved in funding and developing a cure to a deadly pandemic. The 10 world leaders are inexperienced and unable to handle the sudden responsibility thrust on them, so they will give their power to the antichrist.
It's the word of God, why don't you believe it? Why do you attempt to make it an abstraction? Disbelief?

This is fanciful, and I think you know that. You are just winging it! I have never heard anyone (Premil or otherwise) try to justify a literal interpretation of the one hour. There is a reason for that!!!

Obviously, the one hour is figurative of a short period of time. A thousand years is figurative of a long period of time. Those who have eyes to see can grasp that.

Jamdoc · Jul 16, 2020

sovereigngrace said:
This is fanciful, and I think you know that. You are just winging it! I have never heard anyone (Premil or otherwise) try to justify a literal interpretation of the one hour. There is a reason for that!!!

Obviously, the one hour is figurative of a short period of time. A thousand years is figurative of a long period of time. Those who have eyes to see can grasp that.

It's not winging it, it's believing what the bible says when the bible is specific. I don't know how it will manifest but I do know that there are very literal ways for these scenarios to take place, even through human means. How much more possible are they if God is involved? 2 Thessalonians 2 goes into this, that we'll have a great falling away, not Jesus reigning the world in this current church age/intradvent period as you call it in a non physical 1000 years where the gospel being spread is the evidence that Satan is powerless in this world. Paul says that things are getting worse, not better, and that when the tribulations come, when the antichrist is revealed, he's gonna claim to be God, and people will believe him, because God will give them over to a delusion, because they rejected the truth.

I just named a scenario where it's very possible that you can suddenly have 10 brand new world leaders that give their power over to someone who will rule a one world government, using no supernatural means.
Nuclear war takes out leadership of the US, Russia, China, UK, France, and a few other powerful countries, chain of succession finds a new leader amoung surviving government, it could be the HUD secretary or something like that, someone totally unprepared for the office of POTUS.
So again I ask, if humans can set up this scenario through their own means, why don't you believe God can do it?

sovereigngrace · Jul 16, 2020

Jamdoc said:
It's not winging it, it's believing what the bible says when the bible is specific. I don't know how it will manifest but I do know that there are very literal ways for these scenarios to take place, even through human means. How much more possible are they if God is involved? 2 Thessalonians 2 goes into this, that we'll have a great falling away, not Jesus reigning the world in this current church age/intradvent period as you call it in a non physical 1000 years where the gospel being spread is the evidence that Satan is powerless in this world. Paul says that things are getting worse, not better, and that when the tribulations come, when the antichrist is revealed, he's gonna claim to be God, and people will believe him, because God will give them over to a delusion, because they rejected the truth.

I just named a scenario where it's very possible that you can suddenly have 10 brand new world leaders that give their power over to someone who will rule a one world government, using no supernatural means.
Nuclear war takes out leadership of the US, Russia, China, UK, France, and a few other powerful countries, chain of succession finds a new leader amoung surviving government, it could be the HUD secretary or something like that, someone totally unprepared for the office of POTUS.
So again I ask, if humans can set up this scenario through their own means, why don't you believe God can do it?

I have been on this earth long enough, I held to Premil long enough, to know it is driven by current affairs, and not explicit Scripture. When the Premil speculations come to nought, as they doubtless always do, they invent another new speculation. This is not the way biblical interpretation works. That is why Premil is waning. Y2K was the last straw for man of us.

Jamdoc · Jul 16, 2020

sovereigngrace said:
I have been on this earth long enough, I held to Premil long enough, to know it is driven by current affairs, and not explicit Scripture. When the Premil speculations come to nought, as they doubtless always do, they invent another new speculation. This is not the way biblical interpretation works. That is why Premil is waning. Y2K was the last straw for man of us.

In other words your faith was broken and you have abstracted it as a means of hiding your unbelief, just like I thought. I hate to say this but your faith has become superficial at that point. You WANT to believe in something but because you're afraid of believing in something that never happens you walk back on it and twist scripture into being something that cannot be proven to not ever happen, because you don't believe it can ever happen and want to spare yourself the crushing disappointment and "lose your faith", even though I'll tell you, that has already happened if you have resorted to doing this. You expect for God to not deliver on His promises, so you look and think maybe prophecy has already been fulfilled just not in a tangible way.
The logic makes sense to you, but what has actually happened is you stop believing that the bible is a prophetic book, in order to preserve any belief that the bible is the word of God at all. I recognize a coping mechanism when I see it.
I'm sorry Y2K shook your faith and made you reevaluate your theology to make you not drop your faith entirely. I'm sorry that you don't believe that the word of God is prophetic.

20 major reasons to reject the Premillennial doctrine

Watching and Praying Always

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Watching and Praying Always

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Watching and Praying Always

Well-Known Member

Watching and Praying Always

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Watching and Praying Always

Well-Known Member

Watching and Praying Always

Well-Known Member

Watching and Praying Always

Similar threads