20 major reasons to reject the Premillennial doctrine

Timtofly said:

God's Word is the only science. Do you reject that or avoid that fact?

Click to expand...

Electromagnetism is not mentioned in God's Word. Is electromagnetism therefore not scientific?

Timtofly said:

We are not talking about doctrine. We are talking about science. 1 Timothy 6:20

Oh, Timothy! Keep safe what has been entrusted to you. Turn away from the ungodly babblings and the argumentative opposition of what is falsely called “knowledge.”

Click to expand...

Timtofly said:

In the last days even the elect will be deceived. How would you describe how you are deceived? If not in doctrine, what then?

Click to expand...

jgr said:

Who's deceived?

1. Modernist futurist dispensationalism for less than 200 years.
2. Recognized historical defenders of the New Covenant faith for more than 1700 years.

Easy answer.

Click to expand...

jgr said:

Who's deceived?

1. Modernist futurist dispensationalism for less than 200 years.
2. Recognized historical defenders of the New Covenant faith for more than 1700 years.

Easy answer.

Click to expand...

So your 'easy answer' is to believe those people like Calvin, the ECF's and recent expositors like Dr Jeremiah and Hagee?
No wonder most Christians today are hopelessly confused and deceived!

Daniel 12:4 & 8 says it clearly; only at the time of the end, will the prophesies be understood and then just by a few.
Pray to be among them.

keras said:

So your 'easy answer' is to believe those people like Calvin, the ECF's and recent expositors like Dr Jeremiah and Hagee?
No wonder most Christians today are hopelessly confused and deceived!

Daniel 12:4 & 8 says it clearly; only at the time of the end, will the prophesies be understood and then just by a few.
Pray to be among them.

Click to expand...

Which of the two categories do you come closest to falling into?

Easy answer.

jgr said:

Electromagnetism is not mentioned in God's Word. Is electromagnetism therefore not scientific?

Click to expand...

If you are not sure, you could ask a scientist.

jgr said:

Who's deceived?

1. Modernist futurist dispensationalism for less than 200 years.
2. Recognized historical defenders of the New Covenant faith for more than 1700 years.

Easy answer.

Click to expand...

You?

Timtofly said:

If you are not sure, you could ask a scientist.

Click to expand...

You're the one claiming that it's not science if it's not in God's Word.

Since you don't think it's science, what do you think it is?

Voodoo?

Timtofly said:

You?

Click to expand...

Have you recanted #1?

jgr said:

You're the one claiming that it's not science if it's not in God's Word.

Since you don't think it's science, what do you think it is?

Voodoo?

Click to expand...

No just a deception from Satan, if it contradicts God's Word.

I am not claiming electromagnetism is unbiblical. If you cannot figure out what is science and what some people claim to be science, you still need to talk to a scientist. At least they know the difference between theory and science. Between philosophy of science and actual science.

jgr said:

Have you recanted #1?

Click to expand...

Your two types of nonsense has nothing to do with me.

Timtofly said:

I am not claiming electromagnetism is unbiblical.

Click to expand...

Where is electromagnetism in the Bible?

Timtofly said:

Your two types of nonsense has nothing to do with me.

Click to expand...

The historical defenders of the New Covenant faith are nonsense?

If you're not #1, and you're not #2, then what are you?

jgr said:

Where is electromagnetism in the Bible?

The historical defenders of the New Covenant faith are nonsense?

If you're not #1, and you're not #2, then what are you?

Click to expand...

The way you ask your questions does not make sense. Do you deny that Satan can deceive the elect, or trying to figure out how to make sense of how Satan can deceive the elect? It is not just about doctrine.

Timtofly said:

The way you ask your questions does not make sense. Do you deny that Satan can deceive the elect, or trying to figure out how to make sense of how Satan can deceive the elect? It is not just about doctrine.

Click to expand...

When the more than 1700 years of virtual unanimity of #2 is suddenly disputed and denied by the less than 200 years of #1, who is most likely to be deceived?

Are you #1, or are you #2?

If neither, then what are you?

jgr said:

When the more than 1700 years of virtual unanimity of #2 is suddenly disputed and denied by the less than 200 years of #1, who is most likely to be deceived?

Are you #1, or are you #2?

If neither, then what are you?

Click to expand...

I am not virtual unanimity. I am a witness, holding to God's Word.

While the last days have been virtual for 1990 years, now they are no longer virtual. You can defend or deny the last 1990 years, but I live in the present.

Timtofly said:

I am not virtual unanimity. I am a witness, holding to God's Word.

Click to expand...

As were all of #2.
Sacrificing themselves by the thousands over more than 1700 years to defend the New Covenant faith.

A whole lot more of them than #1 and yourself.

jgr said:

As were all of #2.
Sacrificing themselves by the thousands over more than 1700 years to defend the New Covenant faith.

A whole lot more of them than #1 and yourself.

Click to expand...

The proof that the New Covenant is yet to be made between God and His faithful people, is Isaiah 61:8, in the context of when they will all gather into the holy Land, soon after the Lord's Day of vengeance and fiery wrath.

Your reliance on so called experts of the past, is a very shaky basis to put your trust. They never had much consensus and even today, there is no real agreement from all the Doctors of Divinity, etc, about the Covenant issue and Bible prophecy.
Matthew 11:25-26 was the case then and is still now.

keras said:

The proof that the New Covenant is yet to be made between God and His faithful people, is Isaiah 61:8, in the context of when they will all gather into the holy Land, soon after the Lord's Day of vengeance and fiery wrath.

Your reliance on so called experts of the past, is a very shaky basis to put your trust. They never had much consensus and even today, there is no real agreement from all the Doctors of Divinity, etc, about the Covenant issue and Bible prophecy.
Matthew 11:25-26 was the case then and is still now.

Click to expand...

I invite you to provide the name of just one recognized historical defender of the true faith before the 19th century who did not believe that the New Covenant was fulfilled in and by Christ at His first coming.

Just one name.

Along with the quote and date.

Awaiting.

Modernist futurism's fantasies and fallacies are not just shaky.

They are a debris heap as of Calvary.

jgr said:

I invite you to provide the name of just one recognized historical defender of the true faith before the 19th century who did not believe that the New Covenant was fulfilled in and by Christ at His first coming.

Just one name.

Along with the quote and date.

Awaiting.

Modernist futurism's fantasies and fallacies are not just shaky.

They are a debris heap as of Calvary.

Click to expand...

What I am awaiting is an admission that the six tenets of the New Covenant are not yet happening. As is so glaringly obvious in todays world.
The NC is mentioned in Isaiah 61:8. Does our situation now relate to the context of that prophecy?

keras said:

What I am awaiting is an admission that the six tenets of the New Covenant are not yet happening. As is so glaringly obvious in todays world.
The NC is mentioned in Isaiah 61:8. Does our situation now relate to the context of that prophecy?

Click to expand...

Awaiting just one name.

jgr said:

As were all of #2.
Sacrificing themselves by the thousands over more than 1700 years to defend the New Covenant faith.

A whole lot more of them than #1 and yourself.

Click to expand...

And your #'s are still nonsense. All events were future to those alive in 90AD. There was not even a canon of Scripture, and very few if any had all the books to read. Paul declares dispensations. What is modernism? Indoor plumbing? Some did not have that 50 years ago. If you think people with more written commentary on the Bible, which means they have turned it into a 21st century work, that would include all of eschatology, know the truth and defend it today, that is modernism thinking.

What is this 1700 year view, you think needs defending? Your modernism is showing now. If you think it worth defending some Roman Catholic tainted view of western science, you miss the whole point of 2 Thessalonians 2. Paul said it was already working in "full swing" before his time. So the deception is turning one's knowledge away from the whole Torah. Christ already answered the part about the Law, on the Cross. The Atonement does not cover knowledge as science. So what part of the Torah had Satan already deceived and led people astray, and it happened in the prophecy of Daniel 11? It was not the church who was deceived. Paul warned the church to not even get involved. Yet looking back in history the church defended and fought for, and humans were killed on both sides, for the very deception that would blind the elect of today to the truth. Only the Holy Spirit can remove spiritual blindness. Conspiracy theorists cannot nor ever will, no matter how many Dan Browns there are.

So no, I am not part of any group defending any sides to a blindness no one can even understand today. No group even knows the truth to even defend it. The more commentaries people write, the further we get from the actual Word of God.

jgr said:

Awaiting just one name.

Click to expand...

I have read many of the ECF writings and more recent expositors. None of them had the truth of Bible prophecy and when the Covenant would be fulfilled.
Jesus said they wouldn't; Matthew 11:25, and 1 Corinthians 1:19-20

Your insistence that I provide proof, is a blatant way of avoiding how it is you who must show how the New Covenant is fulfilled today.