Revelation cannot be a future-timeline because the world keeps ending in it!

[sovereigngrace]

I don't set dates, I have a blog devoted to the gathered information against the setting of dates in predicting when end time events will happen. In particular the topic of when the rapture is predicted by a variety of people to occur.

So I wholeheartedly agree that setting dates is man-made and faulty.

When the disciples asked Jesus "when shall be the time of your coming and the end of the age?" That question is based on their Jewish culture Covenant knowledge concerning end time events. Jesus didn't reply by setting dates. He replied by revelation of the Spirit of God and knowledge of God's word. He spoke prophecy that has proved itself in it's unfolding according to the times set for those things to occur. One of them is the blossoming of the fig tree., corresponding to Israel. Though Jesus never gave a date the newspapers of 1948 recorded the event of May 14 with the declaration "The state of Israel is born".

Jesus said that the generation that sees it will not pass away until all is fulfilled. That's like the kick off of a football game.

If you think that the seven thousand years is moveable according to any premil whim.. another football term "moving the goal posts"..
then you don't know your Bible and you haven't paid any attention to those who have no doubt patiently explained the Biblical foundations for the eschatological teachings to you.

There are plenty of websites you can do a search and take time to get familiar with the topic.. at least enough so that you can make an informed case of your objections to it and thereby be better equipped than just using mere opinions, that btw, are faulty.
(I'm basing my conclusions on your post here, but I have no doubt that otherwise you make a very good showing of your Bible knowledge when it comes to other topics.)

Your 7000 theory is date-setting. Premils are known for that. Amils never engage in that folly. Y2K ended up backfiring on Premil. Many of us questioned and abandoned Premil about that time.

 

[Timtofly]

Your 7000 theory is date-setting. Premils are known for that. Amils never engage in that folly. Y2K ended up backfiring on Premil. Many of us questioned and abandoned Premil about that time.

Refusing the biblical point of a finite 8000 year life span for the earth may as well be called theistic evolution. It is not date setting. It is pointing out the immovable set date for God's creation.

Y2k was a failure of pagan date setting. Weird you rely on pagans to turn you from God's Word.

 

[fwGod]

Your 7000 theory is date-setting.

In Genesis 2:12 is the precedent from which is derived the seven thousand years.
So one wonders why the Amils don't connect the above scripture in Genesis with the verses in Revelation 20.

Premils are known for that.

As a matter of theology, the Amils have a greater reason to be preaching catastrophe than the premils would.. we always preach that the Revelation events won't happen as long as it's the church age and the church is still on the earth.

And so, the Amils would be constantly preaching in error that this or that disaster is the fulfillment of a verse in Revelation. But they're also subject to making several false predictions or be embarrassed when their so called claims of fulfillment of Revelation end up fizzling out.

So I guess that you'd no doubt be used to hearing such words as "you've made a false statement" to make the premils in error.

Amils never engage in that folly.

That's merely another false statement even as you hope that I am not familiar with what the Amil believe. But you are only deceiving yourself.

The Amils believe that we are in the millennium now. But if so then much of the book of Revelation would be happening. But there's no scripture in the Revelation that coincides with any event that's been happening since I've been alive (over 50 years).. When does the Amil say that we entered into the millennium?

How old is the teaching? More than 1000 years. So that would be why you have disdain for the literal 1000 years. Because it doesn't fit with your theological doctrine.

And I think I'd like to find a thread where the Amil debates with the preterist. Definitely popcorn time.

Y2K ended up backfiring on Premil.

The rephrase of that is.. the y2k ended up disappointing the Amils who surely must of been among the crowd of prophecy teachers preaching that the y2k was the fulfillment of the Amil theology.

What a backfire to the Amils when none of those disasters happened.. that would have been a proof that your theology was correct.

But instead the Amils had made false predictions when the millennium bug disaster didn't happen.

So exactly where are you justified in saying that the premils engage in date setting while at the same time not admitting your own theological errors?

Many of us questioned and abandoned Premil about that time.

Well, you know, embracing the Amil would accurately put you in the category of "itching ears" when it comes to an erroneous interpretation eisogetically applied to whatever current disaster or catastrophe that comes .. so of course you'd abandon the premil because they have biblical verses that would call those disasters "false alarms" having no indication that we're now in the time for the Revelation catastrophes to be fulfilled.

 

[sovereigngrace]

In Genesis 2:12 is the precedent from which is derived the seven thousand years.
So one wonders why the Amils don't connect the above scripture in Genesis with the verses in Revelation 20.

As a matter of theology, the Amils have a greater reason to be preaching catastrophe than the premils would.. we always preach that the Revelation events won't happen as long as it's the church age and the church is still on the earth.

And so, the Amils would be constantly preaching in error that this or that disaster is the fulfillment of a verse in Revelation. But they're also subject to making several false predictions or be embarrassed when their so called claims of fulfillment of Revelation end up fizzling out.

So I guess that you'd no doubt be used to hearing such words as "you've made a false statement" to make the premils in error.
That's merely another false statement even as you hope that I am not familiar with what the Amil believe. But you are only deceiving yourself.

The Amils believe that we are in the millennium now. But if so then much of the book of Revelation would be happening. But there's no scripture in the Revelation that coincides with any event that's been happening since I've been alive (over 50 years).. When does the Amil say that we entered into the millennium?

How old is the teaching? More than 1000 years. So that would be why you have disdain for the literal 1000 years. Because it doesn't fit with your theological doctrine.

And I think I'd like to find a thread where the Amil debates with the preterist. Definitely popcorn time.
The rephrase of that is.. the y2k ended up disappointing the Amils who surely must of been among the crowd of prophecy teachers preaching that the y2k was the fulfillment of the Amil theology.

What a backfire to the Amils when none of those disasters happened.. that would have been a proof that your theology was correct.

But instead the Amils had made false predictions when the millennium bug disaster didn't happen.

So exactly where are you justified in saying that the premils engage in date setting while at the same time not admitting your own theological errors?
Well, you know, embracing the Amil would accurately put you in the category of "itching ears" when it comes to an erroneous interpretation eisogetically applied to whatever current disaster or catastrophe that comes .. so of course you'd abandon the premil because they have biblical verses that would call those disasters "false alarms" having no indication that we're now in the time for the Revelation catastrophes to be fulfilled.

You promote a man made theory that has no basis in scripture. You admit that in your post. 2+2=4, not 22

 

[fwGod]

You promote a man made theory that has no basis in scripture.

You continue to say the same invalid accusation. And you have ignored my use of scripture to base the premil on.

You admit that in your post.

More invalid accusation. You don't copy/paste from any quote of what I said to prove it. Which makes all that you say, a strawman.

2+2=4, not 22

You always provide the nonsense numbers and use it to erroneously imply that to the premil doctrine.
I can only conclude that you do because you're used to having that kind of nonsensical thinking because of your nonbiblical Amil theology. Which you haven't bothered to even defend. Which means that you know it isn't based on exegesis.

Therefore the true score on this discussion concerning your Amil and your invalid accusations against premil is.. nothing plus nothing equals nothing.

If you will not provide your Amil theology then I am of a mind to do so myself, then I will follow it up with a process of debunking it. Using either my own exegesis or by using a variety of other sources. Perhaps from a former Amil adherent who has seen it's errors and abandoned it for the biblical truth in premil.

The previous post is my introduction to that process. This preparation will take time to put together but it will not be lengthy, but still, don't expect to see any post results too quickly.

 

[sovereigngrace]

You continue to say the same invalid accusation. And you have ignored my use of scripture to base the premil on.
More invalid accusation. You don't copy/paste from any quote of what I said to prove it. Which makes all that you say, a strawman.
You always provide the nonsense numbers and use it to erroneously imply that to the premil doctrine.
I can only conclude that you do because you're used to having that kind of nonsensical thinking because of your nonbiblical Amil theology. Which you haven't bothered to even defend. Which means that you know it isn't based on exegesis.

Therefore the true score on this discussion concerning your Amil and your invalid accusations against premil is.. nothing plus nothing equals nothing.

If you will not provide your Amil theology then I am of a mind to do so myself, then I will follow it up with a process of debunking it. Using either my own exegesis or by using a variety of other sources. Perhaps from a former Amil adherent who has seen it's errors and abandoned it for the biblical truth in premil.

The previous post is my introduction to that process. This preparation will take time to put together but it will not be lengthy, but still, don't expect to see any post results too quickly.

Your posts lack substance. All I am seeing is a frustrated rant. That is because Premil has no corroboration for any of their main tenets. They cobble up Scripture and foist their theology upon the inspired text where it does not exist.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

So I guess that you'd no doubt be used to hearing such words as "you've made a false statement" to make the premils in error.
That's merely another false statement even as you hope that I am not familiar with what the Amil believe. But you are only deceiving yourself.

The Amils believe that we are in the millennium now. But if so then much of the book of Revelation would be happening. But there's no scripture in the Revelation that coincides with any event that's been happening since I've been alive (over 50 years).. When does the Amil say that we entered into the millennium?

If you are so familiar with what amil teaches then why don't you already know the answer to this question?

How old is the teaching?

Infinite. It comes from God.

What a backfire to the Amils when none of those disasters happened.. that would have been a proof that your theology was correct.

Please explain what you mean here? What did the Y2K situation have to do with amil? Nothing. You're just randomly throwing out nonsense here.

But instead the Amils had made false predictions when the millennium bug disaster didn't happen.

Please explain in detail what in the world you are talking about here. Amil made no predictions about the Y2K situation. You're just being ridiculous.

 

[sovereigngrace]

If you are so familiar with what amil teaches then why don't you already know the answer to this question?

Infinite. It comes from God.

Please explain what you mean here? What did the Y2K situation have to do with amil? Nothing. You're just randomly throwing out nonsense here.

Please explain in detail what in the world you are talking about here. Amil made no predictions about the Y2K situation. You're just being ridiculous.

Exactly bro. Well put.

 

[fwGod]

If you are so familiar with what amil teaches then why don't you already know the answer to this question?

Well thank you for thinking that I do know what the amil teaches. But it's certainly not because s.g. offered any explanations or defense of the amil teachings.

As it happens, at the time that I asked I didn't know the answer. But afterwards I took the time to look it up since I decided that looking elsewhere would likely be the only way that I'd find out.

Infinite. It comes from God.

Well, finally an attempt to defend the amil theology.

But it's wrong according to the information that I found.

Amillennial theology actually began with a school of theology at Alexandria, Egypt in the beginning of the third century which proposed that scripture should be allegorized. Most of this theology was later rejected as heretical, but the allegorization of prophecy was retained by Augustine and incorporated into Catholic doctrine. The later reformed theology of the Protestants retained this teaching.

Augustine taught that the Church was living in the millennial period. For that reason many in the Church fully expected the second coming around 1000 AD.
​

There is the proof of what I said in my previous post that it's the amil that are date setters. While the premil are not.

The early fathers of the first two centuries of the Church were premillennial, meaning that they thought that Jesus would come back before the promised earthly kingdom actually started. Some included were, Pothinus, Justin Martyr, Melito, Hegesippus, Tatian, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus and Apollinaria.
{this and the above indented portion are excerpts from the article "amillennal theology is in error"}
Since yesterday it's the only one I've had time to find so forgive the lack of more thorough evidence.
​

Jesus Himself said "No one knows the day or hour" in regard of when He shall come, for He gave that answer in response to the question they had asked "What is the sign or your Coming?"

Therefore, no one can know when He will come back so the premil have nothing upon which to set a date.
However, I am aware of those few premil who still insist that they can know. But they violate the words of Jesus in doing it.

The majority of premil honor the words of Jesus, respect the truth of God's word and don't set dates, and also use scripture to show them and others that it's wrong to do it.

Please explain what you mean here? What did the Y2K situation have to do with amil? Nothing. You're just randomly throwing out nonsense here.

I don't mind explaining what I said but don't expect me to explain why you thought that I'd deny for you that the y2k has anything to do with the amil theology. Apparently the amils are so geared to deny everything that they distort what someone posted.

The case is that s.g. accused the premils of having something to do with the y2k. There's no proof that the premil ever used y2k to set dates of a coming doom.

At the most all that can be said is that according to technology the disaster would happen at the turnover of the new year.

Then conspiracy theories arose, when conspiracy theorists falsely called prophecy teachers used Bible scripture erroneously in the attempt to make it seem as though God had predicted the disaster ages ago. It was erroneously assumed that the premils were responsible.

But, the conspiracy theorists didn't, nor did the premil's predict or set that date, the scientific tech world did.

Please explain in detail what in the world you are talking about here. Amil made no predictions about the Y2K situation. You're just being ridiculous.

Wait. Are those the magic words that someone must use in order that you amils will explain in detail concerning your amil theology?

Well, anyway, when s.g. accused the premils of predicting the y2k disaster.. I'll just use your judgement and say that he or she is the ridiculous one.

The thing is.. that you haven't proved that the amil's had nothing to do with the y2k.. even if someone had accused you.. even at that you just think that your denial is sufficient.

So in that case, I could have shortened my post by just denying everything and told you that you were ridiculous or talking nonsense.. instead of taking the time to do as you asked and explaining my previous responses to s.g.. to you.