20 major reasons to reject the Premillennial doctrine

Guojing · Jun 16, 2021

keras said:
You have a lot right, Guojing, but in sticking to an ethnic Israel, is where you are wrong.
The New Testament teaching about this is perfectly clear; ethnicity has no bearing on who are the Israelites of God. Faith and trust in Jesus is the ONLY criteria. Ephesians 2:11-18, John 10:1-27
It will be the Lord's faithful 'sheep', who will occupy all of the holy Land in the end times. Ezekiel 34:11-16

We have debated this before, so no point going thru all the points again. We can agree to disagree.

sovereigngrace · Jun 17, 2021

Guojing said:
The Old Covenant of Law only started for Israel at Exodus 24. Israel the nation needed to acknowledge that they would obey the conditions stipulated in that covenant.

7 And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient.

8 And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the Lord hath made with you concerning all these words.

So for the New Covenant, as stated clearly in Hebrews 8, the entire nation of Israel will similarly have to acknowledge the conditions stipulated in the New Covenant, that is to believe Jesus is the Christ, the promised Son of God (John 20:31), before that New Covenant could begin for them.

As far as Acts tells us, the nation's leaders, the Sanhedrin, prefer to stone Stephen, so they have rejected Christ. So currently, the New Covenant has not begun for the House of Israel.

And no, we in the Body of Christ do not get the opportunity to insert ourselves into Hebrews 8:8, and call ourselves Israel, in order to accept the New Covenant on their behalf.

The only way you can say this is by avoiding multiple Scriptures from various posters that forbids your beliefs.

Guojing · Jun 17, 2021

sovereigngrace said:
The only way you can say this is by avoiding multiple Scriptures from various posters that forbids your beliefs.

I simply take the Bible literally.

When Paul addressed Israel, I don't put myself inside that term.

sovereigngrace · Jun 17, 2021

Guojing said:
I simply take the Bible literally.

When Paul addressed Israel, I don't put myself inside that term.

I refer you back to multiple avoided posts, Scriptures and arguments that you have sidestepped to let you your beliefs survive.

Guojing · Jun 17, 2021

sovereigngrace said:
I refer you back to multiple avoided posts, Scriptures and arguments that you have sidestepped to let you your beliefs survive.

Just show me one where they actually understood what it literally says, instead of inserting their favorite doctrine into it.

sovereigngrace · Jun 17, 2021

Guojing said:
Just show me one where they actually understood what it literally says, instead of inserting their favorite doctrine into it.

You have obviously no answer. I will take your avoidance as an admission they are watertight.

ShineyDays2 · Jun 17, 2021

Guojing said:
I simply take the Bible literally.

Do you take these verses literally?

Mark 9:47 - And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into hell,

John 6:51 - I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh."

Luke 14:26 - "If any one comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.

Mark 9:45 - And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life lame than with two feet to be thrown into hell.

John 6:54 - he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.

Matt. 26:26-28 - Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, "Take, eat; this is my body."

Matt. 8:21-22 - Another of the disciples said to him, "Lord, let me first go and bury my father." But Jesus said to him, "Follow me, and leave the dead to bury their own dead."

The Bible uses hyperbole or exaggeration just as we do. When Jesus said "Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up" he was clearly using hyperbole and not speaking literally. He wants us to understand when to take something literally and when to seek the spiritual meaning of it. Context is also important because both hyperbole and the context must be taken into account or else you usually end up with a false interpretation.

Example: When I was a child of about 7-8 my pastor made this comment: 'If you have faith you can literally move mountains." So, I thought that was cool! Boy, I was going to impress my friends with that! So, I prayed to God to move the mountain near our house. I really, really prayed hard and it did not move one millimetre. So, the next Sunday I told him what happened and he chuckled and said; "Well, perhaps God liked it just where he put it when he created it."

Spiritual Jew · Jun 17, 2021

Guojing said:
You may not need, but would you say for the majority of the Christians, they actually read their Bibles?

Do you need a pastor to read your Bible for you and tell you what it's saying? I'm simply telling you that you don't need a pastor to teach you because we have the Holy Spirit in us and we have God's Word available to us. Do you disagree?

Spiritual Jew · Jun 17, 2021

Freedm said:
Your understanding of soul and spirit is fantasy. The Bible does not teach that we have a self conscious ghostly entity that lives inside our bodies and leaves our bodies when our bodies die. That is not scriptural. That's the stuff of Hollywood.

Revelation 6:9 and Revelation 20:4 is not fantasy. John said that he saw the souls of physically dead people in heaven. I'm going to side with John.

Of course angels have bodies. They have spiritual bodies.

As usual, you make a claim without offering any scriptural evidence. So, where is your evidence to support this?

How can fallen angels (demons) possess people if they have bodies?

Spiritual Jew · Jun 17, 2021

Freedm said:
The way you explain it, it makes me question why then Paul would mention it at all. If it was completely irrelevant, why would he bother to tell us that it would soon disappear?

Just to note that not only was it already obsolete and no longer in effect, even the remaining traces of its previous existence would soon disappear.

The onus is on you to explain how the old covenant could possibly still be in effect after Christ established the new covenant with His blood. What possible use did the old covenant still have at that point? None. It was taken away and replaced by the superior new covenant.

Hebrews 10:8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; 9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. 10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Spiritual Jew · Jun 17, 2021

keras said:
I did not 'miss' your reply.
My point is that the old Covenant has gone, but the new Covenant is yet to be made between His faithful Christian people, after they have gone to live in the holy Land. Ezekiel 34:25, Isaiah 61:8, Isaiah 59:20-21, Ezekiel 37:26

I was talking to Freedm, not you. Why are you thinking that I was talking to you? Go back and look and you can see that my post was addressed to Freedm.

Paul was prophesying about the final Judgment, the GWT; after the Millennium. NOT about the Return of Jesus.
Proved by the fact that only then will Death be no more. Rev 21:4

The idea of a general resurrection at the Return, is not stated in other verses about the Return and is simply not possible before any Judgment.

We've already talked about this several times. There's no point in doing it again. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

Spiritual Jew · Jun 17, 2021

Guojing said:
I simply take the Bible literally.

When Paul addressed Israel, I don't put myself inside that term.

How do you interpret the following passage:

Romans 9:6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 8 In other words, it is not the children by physical descent who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring.

There are two Israels being contrasted here. I highlighted the description of one in blue and one in red. Can you tell me the difference between the two?

Spiritual Jew · Jun 17, 2021

Freedm said:
Take it up with Jesus. He said we will never die.

So, that's all there is to it? We don't need to determine the context of what He was saying? We just need to take everything written in the Bible in a wooden literal fashion without any regard for context?

Timtofly · Jun 17, 2021

Freedm said:
Cool analogy but it doesn't really work because the law was still being practiced up to 70 AD. A corpse can't do that. It may have been meaningless to God, but it was still the predominant religious system in Judaism. It didn't die at the cross. It died when the temple was destroyed.

The temple economy was not Judaism. The Law and the Covenant was not Judaism either. God does not institute religion. Humans institute religion.

visionary · Jun 17, 2021

When you place prophecies within the context of Feast order, the content of the events make more sense.

Freedm · Jun 17, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
Revelation 6:9 and Revelation 20:4 is not fantasy. John said that he saw the souls of physically dead people in heaven. I'm going to side with John.

You say you "side with John" but John is not contradicting me at all.

Spiritual Jew said:
As usual, you make a claim without offering any scriptural evidence. So, where is your evidence to support this?

No evidence really, just common sense. Why would they not have bodies? We know bodies can be earthly or spiritual (1 Cor 15), so why would you think an angel has no body? Do you have any evidence of that?

Spiritual Jew said:
How can fallen angels (demons) possess people if they have bodies?

I don't know how that works. Nobody does. Are demons the same as fallen angels? Can a spiritual body "possess" an earthly body? What does possession really mean? These are all questions we need to be able to answer in order to answer your question.

Freedm · Jun 17, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
Just to note that not only was it already obsolete and no longer in effect, even the remaining traces of its previous existence would soon disappear.

The onus is on you to explain how the old covenant could possibly still be in effect after Christ established the new covenant with His blood. What possible use did the old covenant still have at that point? None. It was taken away and replaced by the superior new covenant.

Hebrews 10:8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; 9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. 10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

The two covenants overlapped by 40 years.

Freedm · Jun 17, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
So, that's all there is to it? We don't need to determine the context of what He was saying? We just need to take everything written in the Bible in a wooden literal fashion without any regard for context?

Not sure how context would change the meaning of the words "you will never die". It's pretty clear, don't you think?

Freedm · Jun 17, 2021

Timtofly said:
The temple economy was not Judaism. The Law and the Covenant was not Judaism either. God does not institute religion. Humans institute religion.

Um...actually God did institute the religion of Judaism when he gave them the law. That was literally their religion.

Guojing · Jun 17, 2021

Spiritual Jew said:
How do you interpret the following passage:

Romans 9:6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 8 In other words, it is not the children by physical descent who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring.

There are two Israels being contrasted here. I highlighted the description of one in blue and one in red. Can you tell me the difference between the two?

True Israel/Israel of God (Galatians 6:16) refers to the little flock out of the nation Israel that believe Christ is their Messiah, those that are pastored by James the brother of Jesus, at the end of Acts.

They continue to stay zealous to the Law of Moses, even after they believed in Christ as their Messiah (Acts 21:18-25, James 2:24-26, 1 John 2:29, 1 John 3:7).

The rest of the nation Israel has fallen in disbelief (Acts 7:51, Romans 11:1-5)

That is the difference between the 2 Israels.

20 major reasons to reject the Premillennial doctrine

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Amillennialist

Amillennialist

Amillennialist

Amillennialist

Amillennialist

Amillennialist

Well-Known Member

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads