Pre-Mil Fallacy

[Aaron]

Honestly it is to show the strength and might of God and his glory.

Do tell. How, specifically?

 

[Reformed1689]

Um....the genre, maybe?

To say that you have to say the entire book of Revelation is symbolic. Is that the position you hold? Will there be a new heaven and new earth? Will there be a lake of fire? What about the angels singing praises to the King? Is all of that symbolic as well?

 

[Reformed1689]

Do tell. How, specifically?

Read it. If you can't see how it shows his strength and glory just by what it says on the pages I really don't now how to help you.

 

[Aaron]

To say that you have to say the entire book of Revelation is symbolic. Is that the position you hold? Will there be a new heaven and new earth? Will there be a lake of fire? What about the angels singing praises to the King? Is all of that symbolic as well?

actually, I'm trying to get you to state your reasons for thinking the Millennium isn't symbolic other than general and nebulous notions you've formed from Darbyist Sunday School lessons.

 

[Aaron]

Read it. If you can't see how it shows his strength and glory just by what it says on the pages I really don't now how to help you.

This is a copout. You really haven't thought much about it, have you

 

[timtofly]

To publish more books!... CHA... CHING!... These authors laugh all the way to the bank... This was NEVER taught in my church, first started by a Jesuit Priest... Time for a history lesson

Manuel De Lacunza differed from the typical interpretation of the "Metal Man" of Daniel 2, which had been given in previous centuries by Ireneaus, Hippolytus and the Reformers, by stating that the kingdoms of Babylon and Persia constituted the head of gold, the Macedonian Empire as the chest and arms of silver, the bronze thighs as Roman, "but the ten toed legs, the Romano-Gothic professedly Christian kingdoms of 'divided' Western Europe."[31] Froom viewed Lacunza's explication of the four beasts of Daniel 7 as "novel and unsatisfactory. Noting the usual explanation of Daniel 7 as paralleling the kindgoms of Daniel 2, with the ten horns as the ten kingdoms, he proposes another explanation. They are construed as four religions—idolatry, Mohammedanism, pseudo-Christianity, and anti-Christian deism, which is already unfolding itself to the world in the French Revolution."[32] His perceptions of the second advent of Christ were largely responsible for the formation of British Premillennialism, which then formed the basis of Futurist Dispensationalism under Anglo-Irish theologian John Nelson Darby,who had access to Irving and further developed Irving's theology. Under Darby, Ben Ezra developed into a comprehensive hermeneutic, in which a literal interpretation is given to theology and eschatology.

"Lacunza's developed system was introduced to the European Protestant English world by a Presbyterian Pastor, Edward Irving. It was popularized by a former Anglican, John Nelson Darby. It was systematized by Cyrus Ingerson Scofield (1843–1921). Thus from one man, Lacunza, the system became the standard for Christian thought for many generations … The influence of the Plymouth Brethren (who adapted the system, c. 1830) upon Christianity after the late 1800s is readily apparent as one reads later Baptist creeds, confessions and messages … While many good, sincere people claim to be Christians of various stripes (Baptist, Presbyterian, Pentecostal &c.), in reality they cling tenaciously to a common system having deep roots in Ben-Ezra. Though the view had been offered several times before, the successful offering was a 1790 manuscript published by Rome in 1812. In 1827, it was translated and published in English by Edward Irving. To Lacunza's basic system, Irving added a 'pre-trib rapture,' an idea he may have obtained from a Scottish lass, Margaret Macdonald. However, it was under Darby's name (Darbyism) and skillful guidance that the system spread over the whole earth. It became the foundation for the Plymouth Brethrenism. In the early 1900s, it was codified by Scofield. Irving's system was adapted by various denominations with only minor differences among them."[33]

Manuel De Lacunza And Francisco Ribera, two Jesuit Priest introduced a lot of this end time doctrine some Baptist believe, you want to go on believing this?... Don't take my word for it, check it our for yourself!... Brother Glen

Or one could just read God's Word and see a millennium clearly. You do not have to listen to men at all.

 

[Reformed1689]

actually, I'm trying to get you to state your reasons for thinking the Millennium isn't symbolic other than general and nebulous notions you've formed from Darbyist Sunday School lessons.

First of all, Darby wasn't the first person to say the 1,000 years was literal. Pre-Millennialism is actually a classic view from early Christianity.

So more to the point, you actually need to show that it is clearly symbolic. You dodged the question I asked you. How do you decide what in Revelation is literal and what is not. You cannot honestly tell me you believe everything in Revelation is symbolic, or is that truly your position?

 

[timtofly]

And so that's what I will argue about. I may not be able to convince you of the symbolic nature and parallelism of the Revelation, but I can sure rebut every argument for Premillennialism by showing how antithetical to the Gospel is the hope of an earthly kingdom.

So, maybe you'll answer the question that our blurbby friend is avoiding.

What is the point of the Millennium?

The Millennium is not the hope of the church. Forget that notion entirely. It is time for God to rule the earth Himself. It is after sin. It is a time set apart for God Himself.

God only punished Adam's flesh and blood for 6000 years. This last 1000 is set apart and holy. Also the only humans in the Millennium are Resurrected, sin free, with incorruptible bodies, free from the Second Death.

Their offspring for generations will be born knowing God. There will be no death and decay from the effects of sin. There will be the rule from the iron rod. No prisons nor rehabilitation. Rebellion will be instant Death. There will be true peace, not enforced peace.

There will be freedom of thought, but life will be unrecognizable from our sin nature blindness. If one cannot understand what life was like for Adam and all the sons of God prior to Adam's disobedience, without sin in the world, they will not understand the Millennium. Adam and Eve were not sinners. Disobedience like Adam's was not sin. Adam's choice caused sin to enter, before that, no sin nor sinners could exist. After the 7th Trumpet, sin will be eradicated. All of Daniel's conditions will be finalized and reality.

The point is that God promised it, and God will keep His Promise. The Millennium has nothing to do with the church one single bit. So the world is not going to keep getting better and better, because of the church. Nor can this time where the church is Steward of the vineyard be the Millennium set apart for God alone. You can look at this 1000 years as Christ’s Day Job. No one on this side of physical death will truly see the point, because sin has blinded us to much of reality. Relegating the majority of reality to symbolism is missing the whole point of being alive.

 

[timtofly]

There are 7 Visions in Revelation.

Each Vision includes a reference to Jesus' Ministry, prior to or at His Ascension.

Each Vision mentions The End of The World, in The Consummation, and The One and Only Return of Jesus Christ, referencing The End of Time, to Resurrect, Judge, and to Create The New Heavens and The New Earth.

The Seven Sections of Scripture which each contains,

A.) A Vision, B.) The Ascension, & C.) The End of The World is to be read and interpreted, as covering The SAME PERIOD of Time.

Each Vision covers the Period of Time between Jesus' Ascension and The One and Only Return of Jesus and The End of Time.

Once this pattern for interpretation is seen, it would make no more sense to read The Gospels straight through and try to reconcile 4 births and 4 deaths of 'a messiah'(?)

It would also determine that 'reading the Revelation straight through' and inventing 'mill' illusions is the work of a novice in The End Times.

Every time. There is no escaping what God Has actually Revealed, in opposition to pure rash speculation.

You realize that any elaborate parallel view is just an interpretation just as much as the claim Darby and some Jesuit came up with some private interpretation. It is not the Word of God.

Revelation claims Satan, an FP, and a beast work together for 42 months. They gather an army together at the end. They are defeated at Armageddon by Christ, all 3 of them at the same time. Two of these three are cast into the Lake of Fire. 1000 years later Satan joins them in the Lake of Fire. During that 1000 years Satan is bound in a pit. That is just reading comprehension, not some elaborate interpretation. There is no symbolism necessary to explain simple events and their results.

 

[Aaron]

First of all, Darby wasn't the first person to say the 1,000 years was literal. Pre-Millennialism is actually a classic view from early Christianity.

So more to the point, you actually need to show that it is clearly symbolic. You dodged the question I asked you. How do you decide what in Revelation is literal and what is not. You cannot honestly tell me you believe everything in Revelation is symbolic, or is that truly your position?

as I said, premillennialism contradicts the gospels and the epistles. The primary contradiction is the 'promise' of a temporal kingdom of this world.

 

[Aaron]

The Millennium is not the hope of the church. Forget that notion entirely. It is time for God to rule the earth Himself. It is after sin. It is a time set apart for God Himself.

God only punished Adam's flesh and blood for 6000 years. This last 1000 is set apart and holy. Also the only humans in the Millennium are Resurrected, sin free, with incorruptible bodies, free from the Second Death.

Their offspring for generations will be born knowing God. There will be no death and decay from the effects of sin. There will be the rule from the iron rod. No prisons nor rehabilitation. Rebellion will be instant Death. There will be true peace, not enforced peace.

There will be freedom of thought, but life will be unrecognizable from our sin nature blindness. If one cannot understand what life was like for Adam and all the sons of God prior to Adam's disobedience, without sin in the world, they will not understand the Millennium. Adam and Eve were not sinners. Disobedience like Adam's was not sin. Adam's choice caused sin to enter, before that, no sin nor sinners could exist. After the 7th Trumpet, sin will be eradicated. All of Daniel's conditions will be finalized and reality.

The point is that God promised it, and God will keep His Promise. The Millennium has nothing to do with the church one single bit. So the world is not going to keep getting better and better, because of the church. Nor can this time where the church is Steward of the vineyard be the Millennium set apart for God alone. You can look at this 1000 years as Christ’s Day Job. No one on this side of physical death will truly see the point, because sin has blinded us to much of reality. Relegating the majority of reality to symbolism is missing the whole point of being alive.

when the interpretation you prefer contradicts the straight forward maxims of the gospels and epistles, then it's invalid.

 

[1689Dave]

The Premillennial position is what the Pharisees taught and expected when Daniel said God would set up his forever kingdom in the time of the ancient Roman Empire. He did, but it is spiritual and only the born-again can see it. So the Pharisees, as many calling themselves Christians rejected the gospel of the kingdom. And still, wait for the Pharisee's Premillennial kingdom. My question is; how can anyone claim to follow Christ while siding with the wicked Pharisees in rejecting Christ's kingdom?

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

Adam and Eve were not sinners. Disobedience like Adam's was not sin.

This is a blatant denial of the Bible. When Adam disobeyed God, he sinned and was punished for his sin.

Romans 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. 15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. 16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. 17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

1 Timothy 2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

Both Adam and Eve sinned against God and became sinners when they did so.

 

[Scripture More Accurately]

The Premillennial position is what the Pharisees taught and expected when Daniel said God would set up his forever kingdom in the time of the ancient Roman Empire. He did, but it is spiritual and only the born-again can see it. So the Pharisees, as many calling themselves Christians rejected the gospel of the kingdom. And still, wait for the Pharisee's Premillennial kingdom. My question is; how can anyone claim to follow Christ while siding with the wicked Pharisees in rejecting Christ's kingdom?

Many believers who hold the premillennial position do so because they have intensely studied the whole Bible for themselves, including the NT, which the Pharisees never had. Your claim that we learned what we believe from the Pharisees is utter nonsense.

 

[1689Dave]

Many believers who hold the premillennial position do so because they have intensely studied the whole Bible for themselves, including the NT, which the Pharisees never had. Your claim that we learned what we believe from the Pharisees is utter nonsense.

Jesus said only the born-again can see the kingdom. That it arrived on schedule as Daniel said. I was born-again but didn't see the kingdom being led astray by false teachers. Then I studied it for myself in the four gospels. If you are born-again, it's easy to see if you know what to look for.

 

[Jerome]

The Premillennial position is what the Pharisees taught....My question is; how can anyone claim to follow Christ while siding with the wicked Pharisees

Charles Spurgeon, "The Necessity of Increased Faith":

"I find that many....it is not until after years that they believe the entire gospel. Some of you, my hearers, and a great many that are not my hearers, are miserable little cramped souls....I do not think I differ from any of my Hyper-Calvinistic brethren in what I do believe; but I differ from them in what they do not believe....I could not, for a long time, see anything like the Millennium in the Scriptures; I could not much rejoice in the Second Coming of Christ, though I did believe it; but gradually my faith began to open to that subject, and I find it now a part of my food and drink, to be looking for, as well as hastening to, the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ."

 

[1689Dave]

Charles Spurgeon, "The Necessity of Increased Faith":

"I find that many....it is not until after years that they believe the entire gospel. Some of you, my hearers, and a great many that are not my hearers, are miserable little cramped souls....I do not think I differ from any of my Hyper-Calvinistic brethren in what I do believe; but I differ from them in what they do not believe....I could not, for a long time, see anything like the Millennium in the Scriptures; I could not much rejoice in the Second Coming of Christ, though I did believe it; but gradually my faith began to open to that subject, and I find it now a part of my food and drink, to be looking for, as well as hastening to, the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ."

It was not obvious to the disciples for a while. But Peter preached Amillennialism at Pentecost. And Paul basically the same. I steer clear of any Premillennial group since I found the Kingdom in the gospels.

 

[Reformed1689]

I think people are confusing the Kingdom of God (final) with the millennial earthly reign. They are related, but not the same.

 

[1689Dave]

I think people are confusing the Kingdom of God (final) with the millennial earthly reign. They are related, but not the same.

There's only one Spiritual, Not a Physical Kingdom that remains forever. It reaches fruition and becomes headquartered in the New Heavens and earth.

 

[Reformed1689]

There's only one Spiritual, Not a Physical Kingdom that remains forever. It reaches fruition and becomes headquartered in the New Heavens and earth.

And the millennial kingdom doesn't contradict that. You just proved my point.