20 major reasons to reject the Premillennial doctrine

[Timtofly]

Then Genesis 5:5 must be a lie.

Not any more than being dead without Christ. Is Adam in the fires of sheol, or in Christ?

 

[Timtofly]

Ruth was a Moabite, who married the son of Rahab the harlot.

Both were chosen by God.
.

Did she chose God?

 

[jgr]

Not any more than being dead without Christ. Is Adam in the fires of sheol, or in Christ?

Where are disobedient unfaithful Jews, such as Korah and his followers, that God slew?

Their chosen Jewish DNA didn't prevent their demise.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Did she chose God?

God chose her.

 

[Timtofly]

Where are disobedient unfaithful Jews, such as Korah and his followers, that God slew?

Their chosen Jewish DNA didn't prevent their demise.

I Peter 4:17-18
17 For the time has come for the judgment to begin. It begins with the household of God; and if it starts with us, what will the outcome be for those who are disobeying God’s Good News? —

18 “If the righteous is barely delivered,
where will the ungodly and sinful end up?”

 

[sovereigngrace]

I Peter 4:17-18
17 For the time has come for the judgment to begin. It begins with the household of God; and if it starts with us, what will the outcome be for those who are disobeying God’s Good News? —

18 “If the righteous is barely delivered,
where will the ungodly and sinful end up?”

Once again, you are avoiding the question.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Op Note

I have added 3 more major reasons to reject the Premillennial doctrine. I did not add them to the end. I placed them where they best fitted.

Submitted for your favorable consideration.

 

[Timtofly]

Op Note

I have added 3 more major reasons to reject the Premillennial doctrine. I did not add them to the end. I placed them where they best fitted.

Submitted for your favorable consideration.

You are the only premillennialists I know who holds all 20 points of premillennialism. You seem pretty firm in your premillennial beliefs.

 

[sovereigngrace]

You are the only premillennialists I know who holds all 20 points of premillennialism. You seem pretty firm in your premillennial beliefs.

Like many, these are some of the reasons why I abandoned Premil 20 years ago. No one who held the belief could answer my concerns. They still cannot. I let the Bible speak and embraced Amil truth instead. It enjoys multiple scriptural support for all of its main tenets.

 

[sovereigngrace]

You are the only premillennialists I know who holds all 20 points of premillennialism. You seem pretty firm in your premillennial beliefs.

Which do you not agree with and why?

 

[Timtofly]

Which do you not agree with and why?

All of them for being contrived. Most are pure myth, I have never even heard of. They are objections made up in the mind of the one objecting, not basic tenants of a theology.

The most basic tenant of pre-mill is that it happens right after the battle of Armageddon.

Kind of easy to say, "no way". Then claim "My proof is to move heaven and earth and then stomp my feet". Because the words of Revelation 20 immediately follow the last words of Revelation 19. Perhaps by changing reality people will forget that simple fact?

That is the only reason I am pre-mill. The Second Coming has already happened prior to the 1st verse of Revelation 20. That is all I need to know to claim a pre-mill status. None of your points moves heaven and earth and changes reality.

 

[sovereigngrace]

All of them for being contrived. Most are pure myth, I have never even heard of. They are objections made up in the mind of the one objecting, not basic tenants of a theology.

The most basic tenant of pre-mill is that it happens right after the battle of Armageddon.

Kind of easy to say, "no way". Then claim "My proof is to move heaven and earth and then stomp my feet". Because the words of Revelation 20 immediately follow the last words of Revelation 19. Perhaps by changing reality people will forget that simple fact?

That is the only reason I am pre-mill. The Second Coming has already happened prior to the 1st verse of Revelation 20. That is all I need to know to claim a pre-mill status. None of your points moves heaven and earth and changes reality.

This was the reply I expected. You have nothing to bring to the table.

 

[Timtofly]

This was the reply I expected. You have nothing to bring to the table.

And you have nothing to prove pre-mill wrong.

Does it feel like you are just arguing with yourself some times?

I just gave you the proof, and you did nothing to prove me wrong. You just brushed me off as expected.

 

[sovereigngrace]

And you have nothing to prove pre-mill wrong.

My charges remain totally unchallenged, as your avoidance confirms.

 

[Timtofly]

My charges remain totally unchallenged, as your avoidance confirms.

Sounds like some one holding idiosyncratic beliefs or impressions that are contradicted by reality or rational argument. You convinced yourself you accepted pre-mill for all the wrong reasons. Your treatise sounds more like a confession than an accusation of others. I have yet to meet a single pre-mill claimant with any of your 20 objections. You cannot even prove that I object to your objections, can you?

 

[sovereigngrace]

Sounds like some one is delusional. You convinced yourself you accepted pre-mill for all the wrong reasons. Your treatise sounds more like a confession than an accusation of others. I have yet to meet a single pre-mill claimant with any of your 20 objections. You cannot even prove that I object to your objections, can you?

I would advise you to remove that "delusional" accusation.

 

[sovereigngrace]

Sounds like some one holding idiosyncratic beliefs or impressions that are contradicted by reality or rational argument. You convinced yourself you accepted pre-mill for all the wrong reasons. Your treatise sounds more like a confession than an accusation of others. I have yet to meet a single pre-mill claimant with any of your 20 objections. You cannot even prove that I object to your objections, can you?

Let's take these one by one.

(1) Premil is totally preoccupied with, and dependent upon, Revelation 20. It interprets the rest of Scripture in the light of its opinion of one lone highly-debated chapter located in the most figurative and obscure book in the Bible. All end-time Scripture is viewed through the lens of Revelation 20. This is not a very wise way to establish any truth or doctrine. Take this passage out of the equation and Premillennialism has nothing in the inspired pages to support their main tenets. Amils have a problem with, and very much disagree with this form of hermeneutics and exegesis of many Scriptures.

Show me where this is wrong?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

All of them for being contrived. Most are pure myth, I have never even heard of. They are objections made up in the mind of the one objecting, not basic tenants of a theology.

The most basic tenant of pre-mill is that it happens right after the battle of Armageddon.

Kind of easy to say, "no way". Then claim "My proof is to move heaven and earth and then stomp my feet". Because the words of Revelation 20 immediately follow the last words of Revelation 19. Perhaps by changing reality people will forget that simple fact?

That is the only reason I am pre-mill. The Second Coming has already happened prior to the 1st verse of Revelation 20. That is all I need to know to claim a pre-mill status. None of your points moves heaven and earth and changes reality.

Do you believe that what is described in Revelation 12, which includes the birth of Christ and His ascension to heaven, follows what is described at the end of Revelation 11, which is events related to the sounding of the seventh trumpet including the judging of the dead and destroying those who destroy the earth?

The events written about in the book of Revelation are clearly not chronological from beginning to end, as can be seen most clearly when comparing Revelation 12 to Revelation 11, so why do you read it that way?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Let's take these one by one.

(1) Premil is totally preoccupied with, and dependent upon, Revelation 20. It interprets the rest of Scripture in the light of its opinion of one lone highly-debated chapter located in the most figurative and obscure book in the Bible. All end-time Scripture is viewed through the lens of Revelation 20. This is not a very wise way to establish any truth or doctrine. Take this passage out of the equation and Premillennialism has nothing in the inspired pages to support their main tenets. Amils have a problem with, and very much disagree with this form of hermeneutics and exegesis of many Scriptures.

Show me where this is wrong?

I would think that he wouldn't even try to do that since he already admitted as such when he said this in post #1891:

That is the only reason I am pre-mill. The Second Coming has already happened prior to the 1st verse of Revelation 20. That is all I need to know to claim a pre-mill status. None of your points moves heaven and earth and changes reality.

He admits that "the only reason" he is premil is because Revelation 20 follows Revelation 19 in the book. He only assumes that what is described in Revelation 20 chronologically follows what is described in Revelation 19. This is typical of many premils. I believed premil in the past for only that reason as well.

Then I took a closer look at all of scripture related to the second coming and realized that what is described in Rev 20 could not possibly follow what is described in Rev 19.

This, despite the fact that the book is clearly not in chronological order throughout. The events of Revelation 12 clearly do not follow the events of Revelation 11 chronologically. The time of the final "wrath of the Lamb" has come already after the opening of the sixth seal in Rev 6:12-17. Clearly, not everything written after that follows the final wrath of the Lamb. And so on.

 

[sovereigngrace]

I would think that he wouldn't even try to do that since he already admitted as such when he said this in post #1891:

He admits that "the only reason" he is premil is because Revelation 20 follows Revelation 19 in the book. He only assumes that what is described in Revelation 20 chronologically follows what is described in Revelation 19. This is typical of many premils. I believed premil in the past for only that reason as well.

Then I took a closer look at all of scripture related to the second coming and realized that what is described in Rev 20 could not possibly follow what is described in Rev 19.

This, despite the fact that the book is clearly not in chronological order throughout. The events of Revelation 12 clearly do not follow the events of Revelation 11 chronologically. The time of the final "wrath of the Lamb" has come already after the opening of the sixth seal in Rev 6:12-17. Clearly, not everything written after that follows the final wrath of the Lamb. And so on.

Absolutely, well put again.