20 major reasons to reject the Premillennial doctrine

Status
Not open for further replies.

Spiritual Jew

Amillennialist
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2020
7,394
2,496
MI
✟308,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
One key and well known distinction between dispensationalists and Covenant theologians is one uses literal and the other do not.

Dispensationalism is based upon the golden rule of interpretation: “When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise.”
Your golden rule of interpretation is nowhere found in scripture itself and surely is not something that Paul would have taught since it doesn't match up with what he said in 1 Corinthians 2:9-14.

In contrast, Covenant Theology uses the allegorical approach to passages of scripture that they find difficult to fit into their theological box.

If a person holds to the plain, normal principle of interpretation then they are probably a dispensationalist.

Covenant Theology Versus Dispensationalism

You being CT would naturally think its the wrong approach. The good thing about using spiritual discernment instead of literal, is that you can make scripture mean anything you want it to mean.
I don't recall saying I needed a lesson in the differences in the two approaches, so you wasted your time doing that. Thanks, anyway, though.
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,042
3,450
USA
Visit site
✟202,784.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I don't even agree with you that we are the House of Israel and Judah, so why ask whether I observe promises given to them?

Where (anywhere in Scripture) does it mention a rapture of the church, followed by a 7 years trib followed by a 3rd coming?
 
Upvote 0

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,042
3,450
USA
Visit site
✟202,784.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
One key and well known distinction between dispensationalists and Covenant theologians is one uses literal and the other do not.

Dispensationalism is based upon the golden rule of interpretation: “When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise.”

In contrast, Covenant Theology uses the allegorical approach to passages of scripture that they find difficult to fit into their theological box.

If a person holds to the plain, normal principle of interpretation then they are probably a dispensationalist.

Covenant Theology Versus Dispensationalism

You being CT would naturally think its the wrong approach. The good thing about using spiritual discernment instead of literal, is that you can make scripture mean anything you want it to mean.

Dispensationalists give lip service to their golden rule of literal interpretation but their theology totally contradicts it. There is no biblical evidence that teaches a rapture of the Church, followed by a 7-year tribulation, followed by 3rd coming. Where is it in Daniel 9? Where is it in 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17? Where is it in Revelation 3:10? Where is it in Revelation 4:1? Nowhere! Not a dot or tittle. There is simply nothing there.

You spiritualize the literal passages and literalize the spiritual passages. Basically, it seems, Revelation should be taken absolutely literal but the countless literal passages throughout Scripture do not mean what they say. What is literal? What is spiritual? The actual wording, the context and repeated teaching of Scripture show us what is so.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: jgr
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
11,845
1,311
sg
✟218,042.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Your golden rule of interpretation is nowhere found in scripture itself and surely is not something that Paul would have taught since it doesn't match up with what he said in 1 Corinthians 2:9-14.

I don't recall saying I needed a lesson in the differences in the two approaches, so you wasted your time doing that. Thanks, anyway, though.

You are welcome, let’s move on
 
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
11,845
1,311
sg
✟218,042.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Dispensationalists give lip service to their golden rule of literal interpretation but their theology totally contradicts it. There is no biblical evidence that teaches a rapture of the Church, followed by a 7-year tribulation, followed by 3rd coming. Where is it in Daniel 9? Where is it in 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17? Where is it in Revelation 3:10? Where is it in Revelation 4:1? Nowhere! Not a dot or tittle. There is simply nothing there.

You spiritualize the literal passages and literalize the spiritual passages. Basically, it seems, Revelation should be taken absolutely literal but the countless literal passages throughout Scripture do not mean what they say. What is literal? What is spiritual? The actual wording, the context and repeated teaching of Scripture show us what is so.

People can explain to you, but they cannot understand for you.

If you don’t want to understand, no one can force you to.
 
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
11,845
1,311
sg
✟218,042.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Romans 16:25-26: “Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith.”

Ephesians 3:1-9: “For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles, If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to youward: How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel: Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power. Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ; And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ.”

The Church itself was not a mystery (or secret) prior to Paul, neither was the Gospel, neither was God's great eternal plan of redemption, neither was the ingathering of the Gentiles. Passage after passage in the Old Testament predicted these events. What was a mystery was the Gentiles being “fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel.”

Dispensationalists typically present the New Testament Church as a brand-new spiritual innovation, which had no existence prior to Pentecost. They teach that the Church itself is “the mystery” and that it is a completely separate entity to God’s people in the Old Testament. They say that because the New Testament Church is expressly called ‘the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God’ that it is a brand new construction started at the Upper Room. They contend that the Apostle Paul was specifically and specially tasked with revealing this great mystery.

What they miss is that the Church is not a New Testament novelty introduced by Christ but an ongoing spiritual organism that has contained the elect of God from the very beginning. The Church is not something entirely unique in God's plan and purposes but is an extension of Old Testament believing Israel. Whilst the Church has taken on a different form under the new covenant, in the same way as the development / change occurs between the caterpillar and the butterfly, the elect in the Old Testament and the elect in the New Testament are part of the same spiritual body.

Paul never says that the Church wasn’t about before Pentecost. In fact, he teaches the opposite. He identifies the mystery in a clear and unambiguous way in verse 6, namely: “That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel.” The Dispensational interpretation is the exact opposite to what the inspired text is actually saying. Paul is in fact talking about the joining of the old and new covenant saints together in Christ. The mystery is the mystical union of the people of God of all time in one spiritual body. He is talking about the parity that resulted from this merger in regard to the promises of God.

Thomas Croskery explains on this subject in his classic work from 1879 Plymouth-Brethrenism, a refutation of its principles and doctrines: “Though the prophets foretold that the Gentiles were to be blessed in Abraham, it was not made known to them in what manner the blessing was to be realized. This was the special revelation to which the apostle alludes when he speaks of the dispensation committed to himself as the apostle to the Gentiles.”

He adds: “we, of this dispensation, were to be incorporated into the ‘one commonwealth’, from which we were alienated, into the ‘one body’, the ‘one household’, the ‘one building fitly framed together’. The mystery was the admission of Gentiles to share on equal terms with the Jews all the blessings purchased by Christ.”


Are you answering with a yes?
 
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
11,845
1,311
sg
✟218,042.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Typical of you Quojing to focus on something not directly related to the question that was asked....

I know you don't agree with it but you ignored the rest of my post which was....

~ Do you observe this OT promised revision of the New Covenant that was fulfilled in Jeremiah 31:31? As you said above (speaking of the institution of communion)

Quote: "It's a simple question, yes or no?

But just WHY was this OT promise of a New Covenant made to begin with? I answered the question for you by referring to the reason that Jesus revised the Jeremiah 31 broken covenant. So back to the REAL question you avoided.

It was because God says in Jeremiah 11:10....
"They have gone after other gods to serve them; the house of Israel and the house of Judah have broken my covenant which I made with their fathers."

People answered no to your question, why you keep insisting they are avoiding?
 
Upvote 0

ShineyDays2

Well-Known Member
Nov 16, 2018
432
216
81
Murphy
✟50,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
One key and well known distinction between dispensationalists and Covenant theologians is one uses literal and the other do not.
That may have been what you were indoctrinated to believe but read the following, because that is not true of many dispensational interpretations of words in the Vine's Expository Dictionary that its foundation is largely dispensational in their notations that are at the bottom of the page concerning controversial thoughts.

A classical example of how a dispensationalists have been dishonestly flooding the Christian church with Endocrinol methods of interpretations can be found in this Dictionary that I have been using since the mid-80's with one eye open and one eye shut because Vine's personal opinions on certain words are what unsuspecting dispensationalists take for granted that they are getting the truth without questioning and researching to ensure they are not being deceived.

W. E. VINE'S Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words
with their precise meanings
from the version made by William Tyndale and Versions of 1611 and 1881-1885​

Here are two Greek words used for "temple":

- naos (Gk) meaning the Holies of Holies...the inner sanctuary where the High Priest goes only once a year. Jesus never entered the Most Holies of Holies as he was not yet the High Priest and would have genuinely been killed for doing so according to the laws of the sanctuary.

- hieron (Gk) for a literal building or the enclosure surrounding the temple building such as the area of the Courtyard of the Gentiles of which all people had access but the area for the Jews were only for Jews; each separated by columns. Hieron is NEVER used for the temples' inner sanctuary. This is where Jesus taught.​

In Vine's definitions area he writes: Hieron is never used figuratively. BUT.....I know from my research through lexicons that "hieron" (a literal building) is never used in Revelation nor in 2 Thess. 2:4 where it reads;

"...who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple (Greek = naos) of God, proclaiming himself to be God."

The vast majority of dispensationalists with adamantly proclaim that the word is meant to be a "literal" temple; not the inner sanctuary without questioning the truth of the word's meaning.

Vine's notes at the bottom of page 115 says: "The temple mentioned in 2 Thess 2:4 (naos) as the seat of the Man of Sin, has been regarded in different ways. The weight of Scripture evidence is in favor of the view that it refers to a literal temple." (Dispensational deception EXPOSED BY Moriah!!!!)

That is pure indoctrination with the intent to mislead readers in regards to the word "naos" and it is all because of his pre-conceived dispensationalist views.

In regards to "hermeneutics" honest scholars, as well as students in the Bible, engaged in exegetical study should come to conclusions based on careful, objective analysis of a text, while those who engages in eisegesis approaches the text with preconceived ideas and attempts to find passages and interpret the text in a way that will support those claims.

This is what Vine does often in his 'Notes', W. Graham Scroggie writes in the FORWARD: "Unless such expressions as "man's day" "day of the Lord," and "day of Christ", are distinguished, one cannot understand the dispensational teaching of the New Testament."

These two Greek words are in my two Lexicons of the New Testament. One is titled 'A GREEK-ENGLISH LEXICON of the NEW TESTAMENT' by Zondervan. The other is titled 'A GREEK-ENGLISH LEXICON of the NEW TESTAMENT and OTHER EARLY CHRISTIAN LITERATURE BY WALTER BAUER. Both of the two lexicons NEVER implied that 2 Thessalonians 2:4 should be translated as anything but "naos" the inner sanctuary of the sacred temple of which we too are the "naos/God's temple".
 
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
People answered no to your question, why you keep insisting they are avoiding?
I do not agree. List the posts then.

Meanwhile, ...Is your answer "a yes or a no" to my previous post about "taking communion" based on the fulfillment of Jeremiah 31:31 and in Matthew 26:27-28.. And he took a cup and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, "Drink of it, ALL of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for MANY for the forgiveness of sins." (compared to: 1Co 11:25)

Notice Jesus uses the words ALL and MANY which means not just the twelve Jews who are at the table with him.
 
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
11,845
1,311
sg
✟218,042.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I do not agree. List the posts then.

Meanwhile, ...Is your answer "a yes or a no" to my previous post about "taking communion" based on the fulfillment of Jeremiah 31:31 and in Matthew 26:27-28.. And he took a cup and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, "Drink of it, ALL of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for MANY for the forgiveness of sins." (compared to: 1Co 11:25)

Notice Jesus uses the words ALL and MANY which means not just the twelve Jews who are at the table with him.

In Matthew 26, there was still the middle wall of partition up, we gentiles were still excluded from Christ's ministry, as stated in Ephesians 2:11-12 and Matthew 15:24, the latter by Jesus himself.

I am sure you are aware there are MANY Jews scattered abroad from Jerusalem since post Solomon? Why do you automatically assume Jesus was talking about us gentiles in that verse?

Jesus's death on the cross to save Israel from their sins was not a mystery (Isaiah 53), even Satan knew about it.

And my answer is no, in case you are still wondering.
 
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

sovereigngrace

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2019
9,042
3,450
USA
Visit site
✟202,784.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
there is no yes or no in that post, do you expect others to be mind readers?

Please answer (if you can): Where in Scripture does it mention a rapture of the church, followed by a 7 years trib followed by a 3rd coming?
 
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

jeffweedaman

Well-Known Member
Nov 22, 2020
778
558
60
PROSPECT
✟82,293.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
People can explain to you, but they cannot understand for you.

If you don’t want to understand, no one can force you to.


If you want people to understand what God is saying then quote the scriptures.
That should force you into a well founded position.
Sov Grace has exceled in doing that through out this this whole thread.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: jgr
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
11,845
1,311
sg
✟218,042.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If you want people to understand what God is saying then quote the scriptures.
That should force you into a well founded position.
Sov Grace has exceled in doing that through out this this whole thread.

You don't agree that one cannot understand for another, if the other choose not to?
 
Upvote 0

Douggg

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
May 28, 2009
28,783
3,422
Non-dispensationalist
✟360,105.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
I put it to you: there is none that exist.
Because you put together a strawman question.

The rapture is in the bible, Jesus coming in a hour people think not, to receive Christians unto Himself.
.
The Second coming is in the bible, the return of Jesus, at the end of the 7yrs.

The 7 year 70th week of Daniel 9 is in the bible.

There was never any need for your strawman question, which was intentionally framed with erroneous terms.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Guojing
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

jeffweedaman

Well-Known Member
Nov 22, 2020
778
558
60
PROSPECT
✟82,293.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You don't agree that one cannot understand for another, if the other choose not to?

Scripture makes all the difference regarding how we choose to choose . Add more of that in your responses and you will do well.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.