Is there even an "..ism" known to Christians that's perfectly true?

[Zao is life]

Amilllennialism, Premillennialism, Post millennialism, Pre-Tribulationism, Post-Tribulationism, Preterism .. etc etc. All "..isms" negate scripture somehwere along the line, because the moment someone believes that (any) "..ism is perfectly true" ( instead of believing that only biblical scripture is perfectly true),

then he starts trying to ensure that the way all scripture MUST be interpreted, is so that it complies at all times with the "..ism" he believes in,

because in his mind all scripture MUST be upholding "..ism", since "..ism is perfectly true".

Almost every "..ist" does this without even realizing he's doing it, because he has stopped believing that biblical scripture is perfectly true, and every "..ism" a lie (because there isn't even one "..ism" that's perfectly true. Not one).

There are very few exceptions. Thankfully this board has at least one exception, one person who shows that he cares only about whether or not the scripture is teaching what the "..ism" is teaching.

Take "..ists (Premillennialists)" for example. Try and tell a Premillennialist that scripture does not paint the picture of a new heavens and new earth following only a thousand years AFTER the return of Christ, but a picture of a new heavens and new earth commencing immediately after the return of Christ. They won't have it. Why? It's because the "..ism (Premillennialism)" "is perfectly true", therefore all scripture MUST be teaching what Premillenialism teaches about it.

Amillennialists do the same, to an even greater extent (even more scriptures that don't paint an Amillenialist picture that need to be brought to comply with the "..ism", because the "..ism" "is perfectly true").

Almost all "..ists" do this, and it's because there is not one "..ism" that Christians have ever come up with that perfectly produces the one and only "..ism" that scripture produces, not one.

No one even knows what that one and only perfectly true "..ism" is that scripture produces, because Christianity and Christian theology has never produced it. Ever.

 

[DavidPT]

Before I got on the internet years ago, I didn't realize any of these isms even existed. And now that everyone is aware these isms exist, one then is labeled as this ism, that ism, so on and so on. Which then ultimately leads to everyone, at times, then forcing the Bible to fit their ism when there are clearly times it can't fit that ism to begin with. For example, your point in regards to the NHNE and the ism of Premil. I'm Premil, yet no way do I then think the NHNE is meaning a thousand years, a little season, and a great white throne judgment, post the 2nd coming. Clearly, the NHNE begin with the 2nd coming. Maybe not during it, yet not long afterwards. As in the same era of time. Whether or not that can actually fit at the beginning of the thousand years, obviously, that is debatable. What should not be debatable, the NHNE begins during the same era of time involving the 2nd coming. Whether that might be days, weeks, months later, who knows?

 

[Zao is life]

Before I got on the internet years ago, I didn't realize any of these isms even existed. And now that everyone is aware these isms exist, one then is labeled as this ism, that ism, so on and so on. Which then ultimately leads to everyone, at times, then forcing the Bible to fit their ism when there are clearly times it can't fit that ism to begin with. For example, your point in regards to the NHNE and the ism of Premil. I'm Premil, yet no way do I then think the NHNE is meaning a thousand years, a little season, and a great white throne judgment, post the 2nd coming. Clearly, the NHNE begin with the 2nd coming. Maybe not during it, yet not long afterwards. As in the same era of time. Whether or not that can actually fit at the beginning of the thousand years, obviously, that is debatable. What should not be debatable, the NHNE begins during the same era of time involving the 2nd coming. Whether that might be days, weeks, months later, who knows?

I agree. I can't add to what you say above either, except to say that it does not mean that the millennium can commence before the return of Christ, either - not according to what the scripture actually says about it, once the meaning of what the scripture says has been stripped of its modified "..ism" version.

 

[byword]

All "..isms"

I was just about to open a thread asking what would we believe if we disposed of everything that is tagged by theologians as an ism.

And then, one becomes an -ist when they accept an ism.

It’s personal for me, because Christians use these isms to be points of acceptance by doctrinally charged churchy people… and I’m not accepted because that’s all anyone ever wants to know is which pseudo-biblical philosophy I subscribe to, and I don’t wear ANY of these manmade monikers.

“Isms cause schisms.” (you can quote me on that.)

 

[Zao is life]

I was just about to open a thread asking what would we believe if we disposed of everything that is tagged by theologians as an ism.

And then, one becomes an -ist when they accept an ism.

It’s personal for me, because Christians use these isms to be points of acceptance by doctrinally charged churchy people… and I’m not accepted because that’s all anyone ever wants to know is which pseudo-biblical philosophy I subscribe to, and I don’t wear ANY of these manmade monikers.

“Isms cause schisms.” (you can quote me on that.)

That makes two people so far, + me = 3 people on this board (so far).

"For where two or three are gathered together in My name, there I am in their midst." Mat.18:20

 

[byword]

That makes two people so far, + me = 3 people on this board (so far).

"For where two or three are gathered together in My name, there I am in their midst." Mat.18:20

The ‘solidarity’ verse, love it!

 

[Clare73]

Amilllennialism, Premillennialism, Post millennialism, Pre-Tribulationism, Post-Tribulationism, Preterism .. etc etc. All "..isms" negate scripture somehwere along the line, because the moment someone believes that (any) "..ism is perfectly true" ( instead of believing that only biblical scripture is perfectly true),
then he starts trying to ensure that the way all scripture MUST be interpreted, is so that it complies at all times with the "..ism" he believes in,
because in his mind all scripture MUST be upholding "..ism", since "..ism is perfectly true".
Almost every "..ist" does this without even realizing he's doing it, because he has stopped believing that biblical scripture is perfectly true, and every "..ism" a lie (because there isn't even one "..ism" that's perfectly true. Not one).
There are very few exceptions. Thankfully this board has at least one exception, one person who shows that he cares only about whether or not the scripture is teaching what the "..ism" is teaching.
Take "..ists (Premillennialists)" for example. Try and tell a Premillennialist that scripture does not paint the picture of a new heavens and new earth following only a thousand years AFTER the return of Christ, but a picture of a new heavens and new earth commencing immediately after the return of Christ. They won't have it. Why? It's because the "..ism (Premillennialism)" "is perfectly true", therefore all scripture MUST be teaching what Premillenialism teaches about it.
Amillennialists do the same, to an even greater extent (even more scriptures that don't paint an Amillenialist picture that need to be brought to comply with the "..ism", because the "..ism" "is perfectly true").

Almost all "..ists" do this, and it's because there is not one "..ism" that Christians have ever come up with that perfectly produces the one and only "..ism" that scripture produces, not one.

No one even knows what that one and only perfectly true "..ism" is that scripture produces, because Christianity and Christian theology has never produced it. Ever.

Actually, we do, it's the one presented in the NT apostolic teaching of John, Paul and Matthew, which is authoritative to the church, following:

Jesus locates the resurrection in the last day (Jo 6:39),
Paul locates the resurrection with the rapture (1 Th 4:16).
Jesus locates the rapture with the second coming (Mt 24:39-41).
Jesus locates the second coming with the judgment of the sheep and goats (Mt 25:31-33).

So in terms of the time of their occurrence, the rapture is (occurs at the time of) the judgment:

The true "ism" is: the last day = resurrection = rapture = second coming = final judgment of sheep and goats (all mankind)

(and the resurrection being in the last day with the judgment of the sheep and goats--all mankind,
thereby making only one resurrection. . .of all mankind).

If one's personal interpretation of prophetic riddles does not locate the rapture with the judgment of the sheep and goats at the end of time, that interpretation is not in agreement with NT teaching, it is in error.

 

[Timtofly]

If one's personal interpretation of prophetic riddles does not locate the rapture with the judgment of the sheep and goats at the end of time, that interpretation is not in agreement with NT teaching, it is in error.

What do you mean by "the end of time" though. That is your personal error. You have added "end of time" prematurely.

Jesus is on the earth, judging living humans and separating them into sheep and goats. So time has not ended.

Perhaps a new label to place on certain poster's belief - end of timeism? Time does have a end. And time can be applied to a multitude of daily activities on earth. Each activity having their own attribute of time ending. A day's time ends every 24 hours. Cooking food has a time ending when the food is done. Some prophesied events involve time having a beginning and an end. Even the 4 different events given by John in Revelation, the Seals, Trumpets, Thunders, and Vials all involve a time period with a beginning and an end. Even the thousand years in Revelation 20, has a beginning and an end. People just disagree when that beginning and end occurs.

Time certainly does not end at the Second Coming. What ends at the Second Coming is the time of the church on this earth. If the church leaves at the Second Coming, then the judgment of the sheep is not about the church at all. Time for the church ended at the Second Coming. Time for the sheep started at the Second Coming. There is no overlap. None of the sheep are the church. None of the church are the sheep. Because declaring an end of time is declaring a dispensation, even if people hate that word. The church's time ended. The sheep's time just started. The Second Coming is the division of those two dispensations. Dispensation is not a bad word. It just means there is a beginning an an end to a certain period of how God deals with living humans on the earth. Not souls in general. A soul is never ending. A soul will either be eternally with God, or eternally separated from God. In this physical body, the soul is constantly making a choice one way or the other. Time is usually based on what happens on earth with physical humans.

When a person uses the term "end of time", they usually mean the end of physical reality itself, as time is part of physical reality. The end of time in Revelation 10:6-7 is not the end of physical reality. There is a qualifier in the next verse telling us what time has come to an end. Creation is not the mystery that was finished.

"And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:"

"But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets."

The angel likened this time to creation itself. But the mystery that has affected creation is what is ending, not creation, nor time. The longest event in the whole of human history is at an end. Along with the second longest event in history that has been put on hold and had more gaps than any event should.

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

The true "ism" is: the last day = resurrection = rapture = second coming = final judgment of sheep and goats (all mankind)

I'll go along with that.

 

[Clare73]

What do you mean by "the end of time" though. That is your personal error. You have added "end of time" prematurely.

Jesus is on the earth, judging living humans and separating them into sheep and goats. So time has not ended.

Biblical demonstration from apostolic teaching (not from personal interpretation of prophetic riddles)?

Perhaps a new label to place on certain poster's belief - end of timeism? Time does have a end. And time can be applied to a multitude of daily activities on earth. Each activity having their own attribute of time ending. A day's time ends every 24 hours. Cooking food has a time ending when the food is done. Some prophesied events involve time having a beginning and an end. Even the 4 different events given by John in Revelation, the Seals, Trumpets, Thunders, and Vials all involve a time period with a beginning and an end. Even the thousand years in Revelation 20, has a beginning and an end. People just disagree when that beginning and end occurs.

Time certainly does not end at the Second Coming. What ends at the Second Coming is the time of the church on this earth. If the church leaves at the Second Coming, then the judgment of the sheep is not about the church at all.

Previously Biblically demonstrated (post #7).

The NT presents no "time" after the resurrection, rapture, second coming, and judgment, all in the "last day" (post #7), where "forever" is eternity (1 Th 4:17).

 

[Timtofly]

Biblical demonstration from apostolic teaching (not from personal interpretation of prophetic riddles)?

Previously Biblically demonstrated (post #7).

The NT presents no "time" after the resurrection, rapture, second coming, and judgment, all in the "last day" (post #7), where "forever" is eternity (1 Th 4:17).

Jesus said an hour was coming. The Cross was the last day resurrection. Matthew 27:51-53.

 

[Clare73]

Jesus said an hour was coming. The Cross was the last day resurrection. Matthew 27:51-53.

Not in my Bible.

 

[Timtofly]

Not in my Bible.

Why did you remove the Cross from your Bible?

 

[Clare73]

Why did you remove the Cross from your Bible?

For the same reason you added to your Bible?

 

[Zao is life]

Actually, we do, it's the one presented in the NT apostolic teaching of John, Paul and Matthew, which is authoritative to the church, following:

Jesus locates the resurrection in the last day (Jo 6:39)n
Paul locates the resurrection with the rapture (1 Th 4:16).
Jesus locates the rapture with the second coming (Mt 24:39-41).
Jesus locates the second coming with the judgment of the sheep and goats (Mt 25:31-33).

So in terms of the time of their occurrence, the rapture is (occurs at the time of) the judgment:

The true "ism" is: the last day = resurrection = rapture = second coming = final judgment of sheep and goats (all mankind)

(and the resurrection being in the last day with the judgment of the sheep and goats--all mankind,
thereby making only one resurrection. . .of all mankind).

If one's personal interpretation of prophetic riddles does not locate the rapture with the judgment of the sheep and goats at the end of time, that interpretation is not in agreement with NT teaching, it is in error.

What you say is in scripture. It doesn't have to and should not be defined using any title ending with ism. @Clare73 I would rephrase "end of time "with "end of the Age", though.

Time exists in Christ. Revelation 10:6 is translated by most modern translations as "There will be no more delay!" because that's what it's saying. It's not saying that time will cease to exist. Eternity is not "going to come after time". Eternity has existed in Christ from eternity.

Moment by moment, the only time that exists in the universe is the moment in which it exists. The future does not exist this moment, and neither does the past. But this moment is becoming the next because time is in Christ. There will never "no longer be time" as though eternity is still to come and has not existed in Christ from eternity.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Amilllennialism, Premillennialism, Post millennialism, Pre-Tribulationism, Post-Tribulationism, Preterism .. etc etc. All "..isms" negate scripture somehwere along the line, because the moment someone believes that (any) "..ism is perfectly true" ( instead of believing that only biblical scripture is perfectly true),

then he starts trying to ensure that the way all scripture MUST be interpreted, is so that it complies at all times with the "..ism" he believes in,

because in his mind all scripture MUST be upholding "..ism", since "..ism is perfectly true".

Almost every "..ist" does this without even realizing he's doing it, because he has stopped believing that biblical scripture is perfectly true, and every "..ism" a lie (because there isn't even one "..ism" that's perfectly true. Not one).

There are very few exceptions. Thankfully this board has at least one exception, one person who shows that he cares only about whether or not the scripture is teaching what the "..ism" is teaching.

Take "..ists (Premillennialists)" for example. Try and tell a Premillennialist that scripture does not paint the picture of a new heavens and new earth following only a thousand years AFTER the return of Christ, but a picture of a new heavens and new earth commencing immediately after the return of Christ. They won't have it. Why? It's because the "..ism (Premillennialism)" "is perfectly true", therefore all scripture MUST be teaching what Premillenialism teaches about it.

Amillennialists do the same, to an even greater extent (even more scriptures that don't paint an Amillenialist picture that need to be brought to comply with the "..ism", because the "..ism" "is perfectly true").

Almost all "..ists" do this, and it's because there is not one "..ism" that Christians have ever come up with that perfectly produces the one and only "..ism" that scripture produces, not one.

No one even knows what that one and only perfectly true "..ism" is that scripture produces, because Christianity and Christian theology has never produced it. Ever.

What is the point of this thread? That no one should identify as a premillennialist, an amillennialist, postmillennialist, etc.? If so, I think that's silly.

I am an amillennialist, but, to me, all that means is that I agree with the basic tenets of amillennialism and doesn't mean I agree with everything that other amillennialists believe. So, by the basic tenets, I mean that I believe that Christ began to reign and Satan was bound at His resurrection, which means the non-literal thousand years began back then. And it means that Satan's little season begins when the non-literal thousand years ends and ends at the second coming of Christ. That's it. It doesn't mean I agree with all other amillennialists about everything. Partial preterists are amillennialists, but I disagree with them on a number of things. There are some futurist amillennialists and I disagree with them on some things as well.

But, if a label like this helps to indicate the basics of what I believe, at least, then I don't see the problem with it. It's easier than having to explain what I believe every time someone asks me. If I say that I'm an amillennialist then they will immediately know that I don't believe the thousand years is literal, that it began long ago when Christ was resurrected, that I believe Satan was bound back then and that I believe Christ will return after the thousand years and Satan's little season. That's much easier than having to explain all those things every time someone wants to know what I believe. I can get into more detail later, but that at least gives someone an idea of what I believe.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Jesus said an hour was coming. The Cross was the last day resurrection. Matthew 27:51-53.

He said an hour was coming when ALL would be resurrected with some being resurrected unto life (eternal life) and some to condemnation/damnation. That is not what Matthew 27:51-53 is about. That was a resurrection only of believers and they were not resurrected unto eternal life with immortal bodies. And there is no mention there of anyone being resurrected unto damnation at that time.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Before I got on the internet years ago, I didn't realize any of these isms even existed. And now that everyone is aware these isms exist, one then is labeled as this ism, that ism, so on and so on. Which then ultimately leads to everyone, at times, then forcing the Bible to fit their ism when there are clearly times it can't fit that ism to begin with.

This depends on how you define the "ism". I would define them only by the basics of what they teach. I don't see how my agreeing with the basics of Amillennialism, for example, results in me "forcing the Bible to fit" my ism.

For example, your point in regards to the NHNE and the ism of Premil. I'm Premil, yet no way do I then think the NHNE is meaning a thousand years, a little season, and a great white throne judgment, post the 2nd coming. Clearly, the NHNE begin with the 2nd coming. Maybe not during it, yet not long afterwards. As in the same era of time. Whether or not that can actually fit at the beginning of the thousand years, obviously, that is debatable. What should not be debatable, the NHNE begins during the same era of time involving the 2nd coming. Whether that might be days, weeks, months later, who knows?

I'm sorry, but I can't make any sense of what you're saying here. The NHNE is said to be a place where there is no more death, mourning, crying or pain (Revelation 21:4). Why then do you conclude that there is more death, mourning, crying and pain after the NHNE is ushered in?

 

[Zao is life]

What is the point of this thread? That no one should identify as a premillennialist, an amillennialists, postmillennialist, etc.? If so, I think that's silly.

I am an amillennialist, but, to me, all that means is that I agree with the basic tenets of amillennialism and doesn't mean I agree with everything that other amillennialists believe. So, by the basic tenets, I mean that I believe that Christ began to reign and Satan was bound at His resurrection, which means the non-literal thousand years began back then. And it means that Satan's little season begins when the non-literal thousand years ends and ends at the second coming of Christ. That's it. It doesn't mean I agree with all other amillennialists about everything. Partial preterists are amillennialists, but I disagree with them on a number of things. There are some futurist amillennialists and I disagree with them on some things as well.

But, if a label like this helps to indicate the basics of what I believe, at least, then I don't see the problem with it. It's easier than having to explain what I believe every time someone asks me. If I say that I'm an amillennialist then they will immediately know that I don't believe the thousand years is literal, that it began long ago when Christ was resurrected, that I believe Satan was bound back then and that I believe Christ will return after the thousand years and Satan's little season. That's much easier than having to explain all those things every time someone wants to know what I believe. I can get into more detail later, but that at least gives someone an idea of what I believe.

All good.

The point of the OP is that once anyone believes that the tenets of any "..ism" are true, then (whether you or anyone agrees that this is true or not, or admits it or not) without even realizing it you (each person individually) does indeed wind up ensuring that the way you (each person individually) interpret each and every passage of scripture, has to / must comply with the "..ism" that you have subconsciously turned into is the "yardstick of truth" that you believe scripture should be interpreted by.

The "..ism" is placed above scripture, all too often.

I have seen you do this in your arguments against Premil, a number of times. Instead of letting the scripture mean what it's saying, you believe it means what it means in terms of the Amil premise.​

 

[Clare73]

Why did you remove the Cross from your Bible?

The cross is not the "last day" resurrection. That is a fiction of your personal eschatology.

Resurrection is to immortal, sinless bodies.
Those resurrected on the day of Jesus' death died again, they did not have immortal resurrection bodies, just as Lazarus did not.
Had they ascended to heaven, the NT would have testified to such.
We cannot assume they ascended into heaven apart from Biblical testimony to that effect.

The resurrection of the last day is at the end of time, with the judgment of the sheep and the goats (Mt 25:32).