A-millennialism still reigns supreme -

I have already explained the gnosticism in amill theology in the other thread. If you really care, look it up.

Basically, it boils down to seeing the material as evil and the unseen as spiritual. Therefore the kingdom can't be a visible one.

It is thinking like that that moved the heretic Origen and then Augustine to invent amill theology.

 

I ask you to point out one item in my post on amillennialism that was gnostic. You fail to do therefore you have no basis for calling amillennialism a gnostic heresy. You are simply behaving true to Darbyite form.

Before you tag anyone with the name of heretic you should consider the possible heresy of a doctrine which claims that Jesus Christ failed in His appointed task at His first appearing.

 

sorry oldreg, your little post is hardly the whole of amillenial theology. Whether your post has it or not, I couldn't care less. I was simply pointing out the historical development of amillenial theology.

Further, I am not a "darbyite". For one, I believe in one people of God. That alone severs me from that connection, so your continued usage of that term toward me demonstrates a cowardice on your part to actually deal with the issues.

As to Christ failing, I find this to be one of the most laughable aspects of non-premillers. Please point out just ONE legitimate premiller who actually believes Christ failed. A legitimate offer of the kingdom to ethnic Israel followed by their rejection of the offer only was part of Christ's coming. That was always Plan A. Again, stop with the insane remarks, or I will be forced to call the paddy wagon on you.

Trailblazer, I am not done yet. You will know when I am done.

Just to give you a heads up, Justin Martyr in AD 160 said that all right minded people believe that Christ will reign in Jerusalem for 1000 years.

That trumps your little theory. Snicker snicker.

 

The argument is made in dispensational theology that Jesus Christ came to establish an ‘earthly’ Messianic Kingdom for the Jews. Dispensationalists further claim that the Jews rejected their Messiah, and that He established the Church instead [Hermon Hoyt in The Millennium, Four Viewpoints by Clouse, pages 84-90]. The claim of the Jewish rejection of the ‘earthly’ Messianic Kingdom and the establishment of a parenthesis church if pursued logically has grave implications for the doctrines of the sovereignty and trustworthiness of God. This doctrine is in direct conflict with the explicit teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ as recorded in John 17:4: I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

If Jesus Christ finished the work that God the Father gave Him to to He obviously did not come to establish the Messianic Kingdom but the Church in its New Testament form.

Dispensational theology, therefore, takes issue with the declaration of Jesus Christ in John 17:4. Following are some declarations by prominent dispensational theologians giving their views on the Church.

Lewis Sperry Chafer writes: “In fact, hitherto unrevealed purpose of God in the outcalling of a heavenly people from Jews and Gentiles is so divergent with respect to the divine purpose toward Israel, which purpose preceded it and will yet follow it, that the term parenthetical, commonly employed to describe the new age-purpose, is inacurate. A parenthetical portion sustains some direct or indirect relation to that which goes before or that which follows; but the present age-purpose is not thus related and therefore is more properly termed an intercalculation.” [ Systematic Theology, 4:41]

John F Walvoord writes: “the evidence if interpreted literally leads inevitably to the parenthesis doctrine.” [Millennial Kingdom, 230]

J Dwight Pentecost writes: “The church is manifestly an interruption of God’s program for Israel.” [Things to Come, 201]

Charles C. Ryrie writes: “The Church age is not seen in God’s program for Israel. It is an intercalculation.” [Basis of Premillennial Faith, 136]

The Apostle Paul tells us:

Acts 20:28, KJV
28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.[/b]

Dispensational theology teaches that the Church, the Bride of the Jesus Christ, for which He died, is simply an insertion, a parenthesis, in God’s plan for Israel.

 

Psalm 2
1Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
2The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,
3Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.
4He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh : the LORD shall have them in derision.
5Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.
6Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.
7I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
8Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
9Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.
10Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.
11Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.
12Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

Doesn't sound like a little Jewish rejection is going to stop anything.


Secondly, Did Jesus know that the 70 weeks of Daniel had a gap in it when He offered His legitimate earthly kingdom?

 

I would really be interested in seeing Scripture detailing Jesus Christ's offer of an earthly kingdom.

 

Grasshopper, there are at least 40 years between the 69th week and the 70th week. Consider the destruction of Jerusalem (in Daniel's 70th week) and when the Christ came. You have at least 40 years.

Sigh, those who do not see, do not want to see.

 

So would I.

It seems if Jesus wanted to be an earthly King He had His chance.

John 6:15When Jesus therefore perceived that they would come and take him by force, to make him a king, he departed again into a mountain himself alone.

 

Grasshopper is a, snicker, preterist.

Grasshopper, please point out to me where Jesus made a 7 year covenant with anyone. When you do, I will recant everything premillenial. Thanks.

 

As soon as you tell me why Jesus refused to be King in John 6. And as soon as you tell me who the fourth Kingdom is in Dan 2 and if God would establish His Kingdom at that time.

And as soon as you answer the question, "did Jesus know there was a 2000 year gap in Daniel 9 when He offered the Kingdom".

 

The New Covenant of Jesus Christ-No Time Limit, Not 7 Years, Not 1000 Years, But Eternal.

Hebrews 8:6-13
6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:
11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.
12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

 

Grasshopper, you had your chance. I was willing to completely remove all premill ideas from my mind. I was ready to be a preterist. You failed worse than the French.

If you can't answer the question, just say so. Stop with the cultic answer of but what about, but what about, but what about, whine, whine, whine. We will let you play if you don't take your ball home.

Btw, I believe the kingdom came in the fouth empire. I believe Christ is the king (now). Again, a legitimate offer doesn't change the fact that Israel was always going to reject it. I don't doubt God's sovereignty at all.

Oldreg, I am quite aware the New Covenant is eternal. Daniel 9 though specifically says that the prince to come will make a covenant for 7 years with Israel. Now, if the prince is Christ, I expect to know when he made a covenant for 7 years.

Time to put up Oldreg and Grasshopper. Man up or back down.

 

I would be interested in knowing what translation you used that said the prince will make a covenant with Israel for seven years. I looked at 21 English translations and did not find Israel once.

 

Trailblazer says;
To deny the New Covenant of Grace is a very serious thing.

.....Heb 10:29 “Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy of punishment, the one who has trampled the Son of God, and who has counted the blood of the covenant with which he was sanctified an unholy thing, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?”
____________________________________________

Brother, you are in error here in your application of this verse. Paul is preaching about the reward of entrance into the Millenial Kingdom, not "denying" the New Covenant. Rather the warning is to they who would disobey Christ and do those things that Paul talks about in the entire chapter. It is all about the Kingdom. So you see, your "cherry-picking" has gotten you into trouble!

DRIVE BY!...VROOOM!

In HIS service;
Jim

 

Heb. 10:29 says nothing about 'a thousand years'.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

Oldreg, the many are still referring to Daniel's people. The prophecy concerned Jerusalem and the Jews. So, tell me when Christ made a 7 year covenant. Like I said, time to put up or back down.

Trailblazer, I am not done yet. I told you the book where I get most (but not all) of my info. Did you check into it yet? I didn't think so. Truth isn't important in your life yet.

Btw, please explain to me how in the same text, 69 weeks can all be literal, but the last week has to mean timelessness, or eternality. How absurd. The lengths you quacks go to to defend your catholic/gnostic theology is quite amazing.