20 major reasons to reject the Premillennial doctrine

Status
Not open for further replies.

jgr

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 25, 2008
9,692
5,007
✟784,067.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
My brother is a translation Consultant for Wycliffe Bible Translators. They do use the Revised English Bible, as it is the best English version of the Bible.

The REB is not included in Bible Gateway's list of over 60 English translations.

The NASB and YLT are regarded as the most accurate translations.

If Wycliffe uses the REB, there should be some evidence thereof on the Wycliffe website(s).

Link(s)?
 
Upvote 0

jgr

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 25, 2008
9,692
5,007
✟784,067.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
They do use the Revised English Bible, as it is the best English version of the Bible.

The REB is not included in Bible Gateway's list of over 60 English translations.

The NASB and YLT are regarded as the most accurate translations.

If Wycliffe uses the REB, there should be some evidence thereof on the Wycliffe website(s).

Link(s)?

I'll save you the trouble.

From the linked article:

"Actually, we don’t translate from an English translation, because that would be like making a copy of a copy! In order to achieve clear and accurate translations, we train our translators to look to the original biblical Hebrew and Greek texts."
 
Upvote 0

ShineyDays2

Well-Known Member
Nov 16, 2018
432
216
81
Murphy
✟50,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The Ministry of Jesus was superior to any previous ministry and He is the Mediator of another, better Covenant. To be established in the future.
I see you completely avoided my post of #2454.

Did it not refute your claim that the New Covenant "is not in effect now and instead it is to be established in the future???
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ShineyDays2

Well-Known Member
Nov 16, 2018
432
216
81
Murphy
✟50,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
My brother is a translation Consultant for Wycliffe Bible Translators. They do use the Revised English Bible, as it is the best English version of the Bible.

Quote: "The translation is intended to be somewhat gender-inclusive, though not to the same extent as translations such as the NRSV." Revised English Bible - Wikipedia

I would not touch any Bible that conformed to a "gender-inclusive" audience.


And which one of these would be your brother please?

Revision committee members
Chairman of the joint committee responsible for translation: Donald Coggan[7]
Director of revision: William Duff McHardy​

Revisers: G. W. Anderson; R. S. Barbour; I. P. M. Brayley; M. Brewster; S. P. Brock; G. B. Caird; P. Ellingworth; R. P. Gordon; M. D. Hooker; A. A. Macintosh; W. McKane; I. H. Marshall; R. A. Mason; I. Moir; R. Murray; E. W. Nicholson; C. H. Roberts; R. B. Salters; P. C. H. Wernberg-Moller; M. F. Wiles

Literary advisers: M. H. Black; M. Caird; J. K. Cordy, Baroness de Ward; I. Gray; P. Larkin; Doris Martin; C. H. Roberts; Sir Richard Southern; P. J. Spicer; J. I. M. Stewart; Mary Stewart
 
Upvote 0

keras

Writer of studies on Bible prophecy
Feb 7, 2013
13,711
2,493
82
Thames, New Zealand
Visit site
✟293,815.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Explain how a Covenant which is established (Hebrews 8:6)...

Is not established.
I am waiting for you or anyone to explain how Hebrews 8:10-12 are in effect now if, as you like to think; we are now in the NC.
All the actual evidence around us, points to the NC, not yet.
The REB is not included in Bible Gateway's list of over 60 English translations.

The NASB and YLT are regarded as the most accurate translations.

If Wycliffe uses the REB, there should be some evidence thereof on the Wycliffe website(s).

Link(s)?
For whatever reason, maybe Satanic?, the REB does not have good sales and is not well known. But I can confidently assert; it is the easiest to read and the most accurate version.
The evidence of the REB used by Wycliffe, as you demand; it is the reference Bible my brother and his fellow translators in the Pacific use.
I would not touch any Bible that conformed to a "gender-inclusive" audience.
The REB simply acknowledges and includes females. That's bad?
NOT to the extent of calling God 'it or her.'
 
Upvote 0

jgr

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 25, 2008
9,692
5,007
✟784,067.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I am waiting for you or anyone to explain how Hebrews 8:10-12 are in effect now if, as you like to think; we are now in the NC.
All the actual evidence around us, points to the NC, not yet.

The five passages of 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, Hebrews 8:6, Hebrews 9:14-17, Hebrews 12:22 & 24, and Hebrews 10:28-29 indisputably declare that the New Covenant was established.

You claim that, to this day, the single passage of Hebrews 8:10-12 nullifies and denies what these five passages indisputably declare.

Yes or no?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Jun 29, 2020
9,318
568
56
Mount Morris
✟125,159.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
There never was, nor will ever be, a "national covenant". That is a dispensational delusion, a fantasy and fallacy.

God's covenants have ever and always been, and will ever and always be, only with those of faith and obedience, in and to Him and His Son. In the Old Testament, they were His faithful and obedient remnant within the nation at large. In the New Testament, they are the same faithful and obedient remnant within the world at large, His Church.

Christ's "diatheke" New Testament/Covenant was confirmed at Calvary in His Blood of His Everlasting Covenant. (Hebrews 13:20).

Holy Scripture is identified as Old Testament and New Testament.

Those are not misnomers, notwithstanding the futile efforts of those who would attempt to decapitate and delay the latter, and to deny its reality and efficacy.

The Word of the Lord stands forever. (1 Peter 1:25)

And always has.
So the Nation of Israel was not present at Mount Sinai? Just Moses? I suppose you think calling Israel a nation is a dispensational delusion?

Well obviously they kept rejecting God's agreement thus never was a proper nation. How does that match up to your alledged non-existent excuse not to accept any dispensation where Israel thought it could make a name of herself with her own kings?
 
Upvote 0

jgr

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 25, 2008
9,692
5,007
✟784,067.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
So the Nation of Israel was not present at Mount Sinai? Just Moses? I suppose you think calling Israel a nation is a dispensational delusion?

Well obviously they kept rejecting God's agreement thus never was a proper nation. How does that match up to your alledged non-existent excuse not to accept any dispensation where Israel thought it could make a name of herself with her own kings?

I suppose you think that God didn't slay 3,000 unfaithful disobedient calf-worshippers?
 
Upvote 0

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Jun 29, 2020
9,318
568
56
Mount Morris
✟125,159.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
I suppose you think that God didn't slay 3,000 unfaithful disobedient calf-worshippers?
Dead people do not make a nation. Living people do. All died who were supposed to have been a testimony of the Covenant. Still does not refute the fact it was this particular nation that was being addressed.

Do you have the list of names of those who could only benefit or is that just a guess on the matter?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

keras

Writer of studies on Bible prophecy
Feb 7, 2013
13,711
2,493
82
Thames, New Zealand
Visit site
✟293,815.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Yes or no?
Yes.
Because the many other prophesies I have already presented, prove that the NC will be made between Jesus and His faithful people when they will become a nation in all of the holy Land. Isaiah 62:1-12
Note well verse 12...they will be called the holy people.....
 
Upvote 0

jgr

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 25, 2008
9,692
5,007
✟784,067.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Yes.
Because the many other prophesies I have already presented, prove that the NC will be made between Jesus and His faithful people when they will become a nation in all of the holy Land. Isaiah 62:1-12
Note well verse 12...they will be called the holy people.....

So you would consider the five passages to be either errors or lies.

There's no other possible conclusion.
 
Upvote 0

ShineyDays2

Well-Known Member
Nov 16, 2018
432
216
81
Murphy
✟50,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The REB simply acknowledges and includes females. That's bad?
You have side stepped the main point again. I said..."I would not touch any Bible that conformed to a "gender-inclusive" audience" because it is bending scripture to fit a persons lifestyle that is the most egregious of all abominations to the Lord in Corinthians list as it is an assault on his purpose for creation. That is all I was referring to.
 
Upvote 0

jgr

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 25, 2008
9,692
5,007
✟784,067.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Dead people do not make a nation. Living people do. All died who were supposed to have been a testimony of the Covenant. Still does not refute the fact it was this particular nation that was being addressed.

Do you have the list of names of those who could only benefit or is that just a guess on the matter?

So why did they end up dead?

Didn't God prefer that they live?
 
Upvote 0

ShineyDays2

Well-Known Member
Nov 16, 2018
432
216
81
Murphy
✟50,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Don't the four main points of Hebrews 8:10-12 mean what they say?
Only people with some kind of mental separation from reality, would think they all are fulfilled now.
Well, here are two out of three well-known theologians that seem to have a much better mental understanding of scriptural interpretation than you do in so many of your claims...

Adam Clarke Commentary:
"Who is set on the right hand of the throne... - This is what the apostle states to be the chief or most important point of all that he had yet discussed.

His sitting down at the right hand of the throne of God, proves,
1.) That he is higher than all the high priests that ever existed.
2.) That the sacrifice which he offered for the sins of the world was sufficient and effectual, and as such accepted by God.
3.) That he has all power in the heavens and in the earth, and is able to save and defend to the uttermost all that come to God through him.
4.) That he did not, like the Jewish high priest, depart out of the holy of holies, after having offered the atonement; but abides there at the throne of God, as a continual priest, in the permanent act of offering his crucified body unto God, in behalf of all the succeeding generations of mankind.​
==============================================
Growing in Christ Ministries:
DOCTRINAL POINT(S) Hebrews 8:4-14
1. Christ is superior to angels:
a. because Christ is the Son and angels are servants.
b. because Christ is the King and angels are subject.
c. because Christ is the creator and angels are creatures.
d. because Christ is now seated and the angels are standing.​
================================================
Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament:
(1) The better covenant, Hebrews 8:7-13.
(2) The better sanctuary, Hebrews 9:1-12.
(3) The better sacrifice, 9:13-10:18.
(4) The better promises, 10:19-12:3.​
One other point is that it says in 4:16-7:28 Jesus is the better high priest.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ShineyDays2

Well-Known Member
Nov 16, 2018
432
216
81
Murphy
✟50,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The Ministry of Jesus was superior to any previous ministry and He is the Mediator of another, better Covenant. To be established in the future.

You made a claim but seem to ignore these scriptures that debunks your claim that "the better Covenant was not present now and that it is "to be established in the future." So I am waiting still for you to address these issues as you passed over.....

The New Covenant of Jeremiah 31 is the same as in Luke 22; both are for spiritual Israel according to Hebrews 8.
"Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD,
when I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah
with the seed of man [Jesus] and the seed of beast. (
Jer 31:27)
The prophesy of promise:

Jer 31:31 ~ "Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a New Covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah,"........
What part of are coming,... I will and New of God's promise do you not understand??

Jesus enacted/fulfilled his promise of the New Covenant:
Luke 22:20 ~ And likewise the cup after supper, [Jesus said], "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.".........
What part of is, and another is the NEW COVENANT in the sealed blood of Jesus' death on the cross do you not understand?

Paul preached it as a crucial part of the gospel and absolutely considered the promise in Jeremiah 31:31 to have been fulfilled when he uses the word "remembrance" in regards to the past enactment by Jesus:
1 Co 11:25 ~ "In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, "This cup is the New Covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me."......
What part of is used again and Do this [now/present tense] do you not understand?

Heb 8:6-9
~ But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry which is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion for a second [covenant]. For he finds fault with them when he says: "The days will come, says the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah; not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; for they did not continue in my covenant, and so I paid no heed to them, says the Lord.......
What part of the past tense of has, Is, will come, I will and a broken covenant do you not understand?
 
  • Winner
Reactions: jgr
Upvote 0

jgr

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 25, 2008
9,692
5,007
✟784,067.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The simple and correct conclusion is: the New Covenant is not yet made.
When it is, it will be everlasting.

The five passages declare that the New Covenant has been made.

Your simple and correct conclusion means therefore that you believe that the five passages are either errors or lies.

There is no other possible conclusion.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: ShineyDays2
Upvote 0

ShineyDays2

Well-Known Member
Nov 16, 2018
432
216
81
Murphy
✟50,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
[STAFF EDITED DELETED QUOTE]

Oh, I can guarantee you it is neither I nor the many others on this and other threads here are not the ones suffering from "cognitive dissonance" as you so rudely spoke. People here are trying to help you to see the light of the truth of God's Word by using as much scriptural verses in the NEW COVENANT/TESTAMENT to show that it was confirmed with none other than when our King, Priest, Prophet and Savior instituted at that very moment when the Roman soldier pierced his side and the blood of Jesus poured out onto the earth for you and I and all others here who feel very sorry for you and only wish that you could appreciate what we have found in the gospels by the most undeserving group of people that have ever walked upon this earth since the days of Adam and Eve!!!!!

Oh, and you still have not responded to my post that show without a doubt that the New Covenant that you deny was proved.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,042
3,450
USA
Visit site
✟202,584.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The simple and correct conclusion is: the New Covenant is not yet made.
When it is, it will be everlasting.

How does the truth of Jesus sitting at the Right Hand of God now, help to explain how the 4 tenet's of the New Covenant are in effect now?
We DO have better Promises; we await their fulfilment!

Or are you just demonstrating cognitive dissonance?

Because He is now mediating for His elect in glory after atoning for our sin, which is an integral part of the priestly ministry, and a necessary aspect of the new covenant, which He secured through His death.

When Jesus cried it is finished, the old covenant sacrifice system was finished. This was reinforced by the ripping of the temple curtain in two. Christ was the final sacrifice for sin.

Hebrews 7:27 says of Christ and His final atonement, “Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.”

Hebrews 9:28 explains that "Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many.”

Hebrews 10:10 says, “we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.”

Hebrews 10:12 says, “this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God.”

Hebrews 10:14 says, “For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.”

There it is! Clear and irrefutable! This is the sacrifice to end all sacrifices forever!!! "Forever" actually means "forever."

Romans 6:10 says, he died unto sin once.”

1 Peter 3:18 says, “For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit.”

Hebrews 9:12 explains, “by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.”

Christ put and end of sin by this final transaction for sin, thus making an end of sin forever for those who would believe. There will never again be a sacrifice for sin. Christ’s atonement satisfied heaven’s holy demands and ensured that there would never again be another sacrifice/offering for sin carrying God’s blessing.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Status
Not open for further replies.